I've done a little more reading and thinking and have decided that I will not sign up, at least not now.
The only reason I am not yet signing the Oath Keepers pledge is that it goes further than the first two items on the list. I have not had sufficient time to study and think about many of the items on the list.
But the first two items:
"1. We will NOT obey any order to disarm the American people."
and
"2. We will NOT obey any order to conduct warrantless searches of the American people, their homes, vehicles, papers, or effects -- such as warrantless house-to house searches for weapons or persons."
... have been on my mind ever since Katrina. Being concerned about the government going door to door and confiscating weapons from lawful citizens is no longer something that can be dismissed as something that only a conspiracy theorist kook should worry about. It has happened.
The second Amendment states that "the right
of the people to keep and bear Arms,
shall not be infringed". This has always been understood to be an individual right and this was confirmed again with the Heller case of 2008.
Individuals have a right to weapons to use to defend themselves (or any other pupose) and
that right shall not be infringed. If ever there is a time when it is important for an individual to have a weapon to use for self defense, it is during a state of "emergency" when law and order have broken down.
I will not participate in any effort to disarm the lawful American public.
I am still curious about your opinion that this group is "radical".
In this post:
Purchase health insurance or pay a $1,000+ fine
you state that you are an advocate of freedom which "allows us to live our lives without the government spying or dictating our every move in private."
So the Patriot Act was very bad because the government might spy on your phone call to Iran.
But if the president declares an "emergency" and orders US troops to disarm you, round you up and put you in a camp, that's OK.
Bob
