Is it illegal to start your own private military on private land?

Obamanism

Is it illegal to have a back-up army to defend your land in case Obama screws up and lets in terrorism and anarchy? Is if it is ok, will there be moral or ethical issues against recruiting illegal immigrants who will be forced to pledge loyality to the militia?

Cereal_KillR

O___O

flying_moose

Ok, I'll bite.
<!--quoteo(post=1740999:date=Nov 27 2009, 03:18 PM:name=Obamanism)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Obamanism @ Nov 27 2009, 03:18 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1740999"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Is it illegal to have a back-up army to defend your land in case Obama screws up and lets in terrorism and anarchy?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes/No. You're allowed to hire 'security personal'. However many items available to the US Army are not available legally (read: still obtainable). However unless your land is more than 100 acres in size, its more economically efficient to protect your choice of dwelling in any number of other ways.

<!--quoteo(post=1740999:date=Nov 27 2009, 03:18 PM:name=Obamanism)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Obamanism @ Nov 27 2009, 03:18 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1740999"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Is if it is ok...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
LOLS WTF

<!--quoteo(post=1740999:date=Nov 27 2009, 03:18 PM:name=Obamanism)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Obamanism @ Nov 27 2009, 03:18 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1740999"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->...will there be moral or ethical issues against ...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No.

<!--quoteo(post=1740999:date=Nov 27 2009, 03:18 PM:name=Obamanism)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Obamanism @ Nov 27 2009, 03:18 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1740999"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->...against recruiting illegal immigrants who will be forced to pledge loyality to the militia?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If their being forced to pledge loyalty then it could be considered a form of oppression/slavery and would be illegal. Not that it doesn't happen in the US anyway. A militia is a group independent local citizens trained in the ready. Training the illegal immigrants in combat, then forcing them to fight for you... well... obvious flaw is obvious and ends with them defending their land that happens to have your body buried in it.

TychoCelchuuu

It's illegal to employ illegal immigrants and it's illegal to force people to pledge loyalty to anything (unless they're children).

Temphage

"Lets in terrorism and anarchy"?

Like what, he forgets to close the god damn window?

Seeing as how by this point in his term, Bush had already known about and failed to act on 19 terrorists and ended up getting almost 3,000 people killed, I'd say Obama is doing pretty good on the terrorist thing.

X_Stickman

Largely useless though since the US military would stomp all over any privately hired militia. All it'd do is make them more likely to use overtly lethal tactics.

PhiXX

Is it illegal to start your own private terror cell :O

Talesin

<!--quoteo(post=1741212:date=Nov 28 2009, 06:30 AM:name=PhiXX)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PhiXX @ Nov 28 2009, 06:30 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741212"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Is it illegal to start your own private terror cell :O<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not so long as you call it a newspaper or television station.

Seriously, I dream of a day when we aren't bombarded with the day's 'terror level' along with chance of rain and expected UV levels. And I could do without the last of those too, while we're at it. If there's any part of the Obama administration that particularly disappoints me, it's the continuation of endless fearmongering. Hell, I could even live with the lack of the promised executive transparency if they'd dissolve the DHS and let us carry pocketknives onto airplanes freely again.

TychoCelchuuu

<!--quoteo(post=1741850:date=Dec 1 2009, 02:17 AM:name=Talesin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Talesin @ Dec 1 2009, 02:17 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741850"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Not so long as you call it a newspaper or television station.

Seriously, I dream of a day when we aren't bombarded with the day's 'terror level' along with chance of rain and expected UV levels. And I could do without the last of those too, while we're at it. If there's any part of the Obama administration that particularly disappoints me, it's the continuation of endless fearmongering. Hell, I could even live with the lack of the promised executive transparency if they'd dissolve the DHS and let us carry pocketknives onto airplanes freely again.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nobody's forcing you to watch TV.

lolfighter

Nobody even forces you to go outside your door, so if you DO and something unpleasant happens it's entirely your fault for not staying in bed that day.

puzl

A free press is vital for a healthy democracy. I think what Talesin is saying is that he longs for objective journalism that produces more than 'terror alerts' and regurgitated political spin.

Talesin

And actually, I gave up on watching TV. Then listening to the radio. At this point I can choose between stagnating in my backlog of media, living effectively in a bubble and only visiting sites which have been proven to sanitize themselves (for the most part) against the raging fear-control idiocy that the vast majority of our populace is allowing to continue out of sheer laziness and dislike of individual thought... or weather the TERROR ALERT UPDATEs and treat them as if they meant anything other than the same message repeated over and over by every other government that ruled by fear rather than free choice. Obey or The Enemy will kill you. We'll get them soon, and go back to life as-it-was. Which will never happen. Too profitable, and too easy to control people in a state of perpetual fear.

I've gone to protests, I've written my elected officials. The latter got the best response... form letters thanking me for my concern.
Seriously, now that our government has seen how effective fear is at controlling a large group of slack-jawed, mouth-breathing, Britney Montana-following retards can be, is there any hope that we could someday return to a world where people would GET THE F**K OVER IT and settle the hell down?

lolfighter

There's always the hope that we end up so desensitized to fear-mongering that it simply stops working. Honestly, without the occasional actual terrorist attack (a false flag will do in a pinch), I don't see how we WON'T eventually end up there. Every day the news media erode their own credibility a little more.

puzl

<!--quoteo(post=1741954:date=Dec 1 2009, 09:26 PM:name=Talesin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Talesin @ Dec 1 2009, 09:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741954"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Seriously, now that our government has seen how effective fear is at controlling a large group of slack-jawed, mouth-breathing, Britney Montana-following retards can be, is there any hope that we could someday return to a world where people would GET THE F**K OVER IT and settle the hell down?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You make it sound like a recent discovery. Demonising the enemy, false flag incidents, manufacturing states of alert - none of these are new. Broadcast media and a sedentary populace has made it more effective, but this has been part of politics and culture for aeons.

Talesin

True, I'm mostly just insulted that they've made it so blatant; it'd be outright insulting, if I didn't realize that a good chunk of the US population is dim enough to actually buy into it. We now have a 'you should be THIS afraid' meter, for those too busy to pay attention to the manufactured scare stories about anthrax from China. I mean, they don't even need to put any EFFORT into faking up stuff any more, just 'due to credible sources' and slide 'er up. And all of the added powers handed to the DHS to invade privacy at a whim. Almost as annoying as the old 'think of the children' goose-egg, that still gets tossed around to support ****ing retarded laws.

Tesseract

This is why I'm thankful that the BBC is legally bound to be impartial and as such just reports the news, explains the complex stuff in simple terms and then rarely tries to talk politics. Technically they've stepped in the mire due to apparently having a little left-leaning tendencies, but hey, that's a plus in my book.

edit: and if I want to really get down to policies and politics and the like, it's The Guardian all the way. Biased lefties I choose you.

locallyunscene

I don't watch tv news any more either.

politifact and factcheck are my usual sources for what the idiots are saying and why they're wrong.

If they don't have anything a combination of wikipedia, the various university mirrors of federal and state code, and opencongress archives usually work.

TychoCelchuuu

You could always just read The New York Times.