Oath Keepers

Posted by: FreedomBeforeEquality

What do you think of their credo? http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03/oath-keepers-declaration-of-orders-we.html

  • Positive

  • Negative

69% 9 votes
31% 4 votes
  • The Oath Keepers are awesome. I agree with what they stand for.

  • I agree. Their beliefs uphold constitutional values. They are all dead on, almost to the point of not needing to be said ... the constitution guarantees all of those things ... except they do need to be said in this day and age because the government has been known to do those very things. I wonder what their ROE is though. They say they wont obey them ... but at what point do you pull the trigger over it? When you see it happening to someone else? Not obeying sounds like nonviolent protest, not allowing them to happen involves force.

  • I like the idea hopefully they do not go overboard with their right to bear arms.

  • I agree with the premise of disobeying unconstitutional laws. However, they should not go around acting like an armed militia. They should practice nonviolent protest. Also, @Roodvlees, who said "Why do they get to walk around with huge guns while black people get killed the smallest offense? If the police is not doing a good job, you need to improve the police, not give random people the same power, so they can also abuse it." Please refrain from polluting the social atmosphere of this website with prefabricated, asinine drivel. I could refute your words point by point, but instead I will draw attention to the fact that nothing you said is relevant in any way to the topic of discussion.

  • Just more armed thugs.

    Posted by: TBR
  • Why do they get to walk around with huge guns while black people get killed the smallest offense? If the police is not doing a good job, you need to improve the police, not give random people the same power, so they can also abuse it.

  • Their is are courts designed to keep things constitutional, if they have a problem with how things are being done then they can bring them to the court. Only in situations where their are major moral issues involved, should anyone take the law in their own hands. (whether to do something or not to do something) And without anything keeping them in check, they can become a danger to public order, and the effective policing of the laws.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
tajshar2k says2015-08-12T19:14:02.6249481Z
@TBR Ya and?
tajshar2k says2015-08-12T19:15:49.2360315Z
I personally have lost alot of hope in our law enforcement to do the right thing. These guys did not actually escalate the situation in Ferguson, they were responsible gun owners.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-12T19:19:09.7285167Z
It was already escalated to burning buildings and such over the anniversary before these guys showed up. I would even call them an after effect of what protesters were doing. They didnt escalate it ... They were a solution to it.
TBR says2015-08-12T19:20:42.5491117Z
You just like this brand of armed thugs. The description is completely accurate.
Teaparty1 says2015-08-12T19:31:12.3330140Z
They're thugs? I don't see any oath keepers looting or fighting.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-12T19:34:48.4645342Z
They arent violent or criminal ... How are they thugs? Everything they do has been under the constitutional guidelines and in cases where they were ordered by police to stand down, they have. Specifically when operating on the tops of buildings where normal citizens should not be regularly.
NewLifeChristian says2015-08-12T19:35:41.6764753Z
The Oath Keepers are not thugs. They are law abiding citizens who respect and believe in the Constitution.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-12T19:35:49.9601284Z
I think having the means to resist right there in your hands and still complying with law enforcement must show something about their nature.
TBR says2015-08-12T20:49:19.3439935Z
If they are not preparing for violence what do they need all the guns for?
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-12T21:11:47.1302331Z
Well they certainly must have known violence was already there ... That doesnt mean that makes them themselves violent, being prepared. Theres a good chance without them they would be mobbed up on and ripped apart in the streets by a bunch of fanatical racists that the government cant seem to control. Im picturing something like off of Blackhawk Down where the pilot gets ripped from his helicopter by an angry mob. Theyre animals down there ... But someone needs to be protecting those businesses and reporters if the gov't wont.
TBR says2015-08-12T21:15:57.3714372Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality - Did they go there with the intent of using their guns? Are the guns only props?
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-12T21:18:25.6971880Z
Im pretty sure they are only props, since Missouri law states they can only possess them out in the open in a non threatening manner. It must only be there for defense. If they were provoking people with them ... Trying to find a reason to use them ... I think that would put them outside the law and the cops would step in.
Haroush says2015-08-12T22:06:15.8114513Z
TBR wants to live in some foreign European country, right TBR?
TBR says2015-08-12T22:21:30.1254470Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality - Are you saying, yes they are meant as props?
tajshar2k says2015-08-12T23:00:03.3516889Z
@TBR They went there with to keep the situation under control, which they actually did. They were shown talking to African-Americans, and all went well.
TBR says2015-08-12T23:01:39.7603069Z
@tajshar2k - That does not make them non-thugs.
TBR says2015-08-12T23:03:10.2096867Z
Carrying around weapons looking for "action" is vigilantism. Thugs with guns are thugs with guns. You just like these ones better.
tajshar2k says2015-08-12T23:06:55.8963334Z
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/thug They do not fit the description.
DavidMGold says2015-08-12T23:18:32.3159976Z
@TBR - your brand of armed thugs..The Department of Education swat team?
TBR says2015-08-12T23:21:16.2886487Z
@DavidMGold - I have never seen them armed, and would never support that.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-13T01:18:48.4230544Z
Yes meant as props. For visual reinforcement of what they were there standing for. None of them seemed to be itching for a fight. There surely would have been at least one outbreak of gunfire on their part if they had truly gone there looking for blood. Not even one physical altercation to note. This is actually doing wonders for the open carry community I'm sure ... Proof that open carry deters crime without need for actually shooting anything. I hope other places don't catch on to this and think it normal. Ferguson is a special circumstance. This shouldn't happen except in emergencies like this, with civil unrest and such.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-13T01:23:18.0863830Z
Roodvlees - The protests are happening over the police force having done a good job. There is no improvement to be made there, regarding the case they all were commemorating. Maybe this is a better way to do it? Have normal people woven into the fold instead of having a wall of riot geared police officers making it an 'us vs. Them' situation. Don't give them a body of cops to attack, while still keeping the vandalism to a low ... That seems like a good goal.
TBR says2015-08-13T01:23:28.5228499Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality - Its not setting good president. This is not much different than pictures of the Black Panthers in the 70's carrying around rifles.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-13T01:29:40.0704316Z
Well save for the fact that they were obviously inclined to side against the cops. These guys of the Oath Keepers stand by some fairly anti-authority type rules ... No disarming citizens, no herding them, no infringing on free speech and protest. In many ways they actually stand on the side of those people protesting, in ideals at least. I kinda like to think of them as a third, and neutral party, that is capable of keeping both sides honest. Since they relate to both sides ... They want order and peace without police infringing on rights. The only altercations I heard they even had with anyone were actually with the cops ...
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-13T01:33:09.3145729Z
Black panthers were non neutral in the sense that these guys are. The cops have guns regardless ... The other side takes up arms ... That looks hostile. A few neutral guys pick up arms ... That doesn't look bad on either side in particular really. If they were pro-cop, they added a few extra weapons to an already overwhelming force of armed guys ... Not much a change. Pro-protester, looks hostile when they are supposed to be peaceably protesting but coming into frequent altercations with the cops.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-13T01:33:55.1788669Z
The Black Panthers were not neutral*
TBR says2015-08-13T01:38:14.0930091Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality - You seriously think these guys have no preconceived notions?
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-13T01:43:39.6366134Z
I mean ... I haven't personally interviewed each one ... So I cant say each persons intent. But based on the tenets they unite under ... No I don't think they were there to kill or restrict American citizens in any unlawful (better yet ... In any unconstitutional!) way.
TBR says2015-08-13T02:25:13.4529993Z
@FreedomBeforeEquality - Being honest and blunt. To me these guys look like vigilantes who like to dress up like soldiers and intimidate. They are not part of a healthy society to me.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-13T02:37:23.4440787Z
They probably do like to dress up as soldiers ... Most of them are former military or law enforcement. You don't lose that lifestyle very easily.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.