[steve50]

I believe it was related to the confiscation of firearms.

It was more detailed than that. IIRC, it asked if under UN control they would be willing to fire on us. At the time I think something like 74% said no, be interesting to see what the numbers are now.

[theDentist]

I'd like to see a new one also. I remember this, and I always wondered if it were the Military either trying to weed out potential misfits and nuts, or grazing the ranks for dependable troops if they found it necessary for a coup against Bill Clinton.

[FreePaul]

...be interesting to see what the numbers are now.

Be more interesting to see if we got rid of the twenty six percent who said yes.

[jim_trent]

> Consider the following statement:
>
> "I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of
> firearms banned by the United States government."

The police are nearer to doing that than the US military. What do you think the answers to that question would be if asked of the police? After all, they do it already in many parts of the US. My guess is 90% or more of the police would fire on civilians who would not give up their guns.

A few might take early retirement. Fewer still might refuse their orders and get fired. But most would do what the police in New York, Washington DC, Chicago, much of California and other places do right now. Fire on gunowners.

[inquest]

...be interesting to see what the numbers are now.

Indeed, especially given the increasing number of non-citizens serving in the armed forces.

[philetus]

13 % said they would fire on their own. There was talk of the 13% from each group being put together in units.