Oklahoma to form Militia to Combat the US Government

[sunnyside]

Lynch mobs are a direct violation of law... interestingly enough, they still occurred.

Correct, and they formed without anything resembling a state supported or sponsored militia. Just a bunch of angry people with a dangerous mentality.

People COULD form a lynch mob or vigialante group right now. They even have solid access to weapons. But they aren't.


If anything forming organized militias out of these folks would reduce the odds of problems, as they likely are a mixed bunch in regards to the sort of issues you're mentioning because their rallying point seems to be deprevation of personal and/or state rights as opposed to having issues with skin color or somesuch. The larger size and state sponsorship of the group should also increase the odds there are enough reasonable people in the organization to keep the screws from coming loose.

If you have disenfranchised wackos forming mini militias than you can have problems.

[Mikey]

The only mitigating factor in there with which I sort of agree is "state-sponsored." Other than that, the disenfranchised wackos or really the only ones trying to form militias. Even in this case, I'd lay dollars to doughnuts that disenfranchised wackos comprise the majority of the enlistment pool.

[Deepcrush]

I'd rather they spend more of this time and effort on Boy Scouts then militias. Most of the things you'll pick up in these groups is the same that you'll pick up in Scouts. The major difference being that in Scouting, you're part of an international organization that is dedicated to improving life through education, understanding and experience.

[sunnyside]

The only mitigating factor in there with which I sort of agree is "state-sponsored." Other than that, the disenfranchised wackos or really the only ones trying to form militias. Even in this case, I'd lay dollars to doughnuts that disenfranchised wackos comprise the majority of the enlistment pool.

First of all, what the heck does "lay dollars to doughnuts" even mean?

And part of the whole deal with the tea party business is this sort of thing is spreading to the edges of the mainstream. Though if you're going to consider the armed forces disenfranchised wackos, you're getting into "everybody is crazy but me" territory and there isn't so much to discuss at that point. Especially since while "wacko" would be debatable they're a pretty well enfranchised bunch.


I do like the Scouts. But since they won't take "God" out of their pledge there are plenty of people going after them and any attempt by a politician to assist with funds or support would probably not go well.

Of course we should keep in mind that we're talking about something at it's purely speculative stages from a shard of commentary.

[Deepcrush]

I do like the Scouts. But since they won't take "God" out of their pledge there are plenty of people going after them and any attempt by a politician to assist with funds or support would probably not go well.

You mean the Oath...

"On my honor, I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country;
To obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight."

A scout is reverent, its a part of who and what a scout is expected to be. To believe in and serve for something greater then themselves. Most scouts are sponsored by religious groups. Most scouts are also active members within their religious communities. Though, I'm not sure why believing in God is going to hurt an American politician.

As to funding, Scouting doesn't take funds from the Government. Government aid may come in the form of vocal support or locations for activities but not money.

[Mikey]

Though if you're going to consider the armed forces disenfranchised wackos, you're getting into "everybody is crazy but me" territory and there isn't so much to discuss at that point. Especially since while "wacko" would be debatable they're a pretty well enfranchised bunch.

What now? We're talking about the militia of a state aimed at that state's independence from federal regulation, not about the armed forces of our country. Are you seriously trying to tell me that the "troops" raised against the eventuality of an Oklahoma vs. US conflict are mainstream armed forces?

[sunnyside]

Though if you're going to consider the armed forces disenfranchised wackos, you're getting into "everybody is crazy but me" territory and there isn't so much to discuss at that point. Especially since while "wacko" would be debatable they're a pretty well enfranchised bunch.

What now? We're talking about the militia of a state aimed at that state's independence from federal regulation, not about the armed forces of our country. Are you seriously trying to tell me that the "troops" raised against the eventuality of an Oklahoma vs. US conflict are mainstream armed forces?

Ah. I was thinking of the regular armed forces when you mentioned enlistment.

I'm guessing from this context you meant the people who might sign up for this theoretical militia. And I don't think they're even saying this is for some kind of armed conflict against the government. Though I don't think they've figured out how a militia would help.

[Mikey]

Though I don't think they've figured out how a militia would help.

That's the problem. It starts with, "Let's make our own damn army!" Then it proceeds to, "OK, Jeb, Billy Bob, and Bubba are all loaded for bear, now what?" From there, you slowly get to, "F*ck the feds and their damn taxes!" Not too long after, you find yourself at, "Hey, Billy's got a few cases of Pabst in the truck," and that leads directly into, "Hey! Isn't that a Jew/gay/black man/Mexican over there? Get 'im!"