Posted on 12/05/2013 5:34:33 PM PST by marktwain
A firestorm has been started on Esquire’s The Politics Blog with a Tuesday opinion piece by Lt. Col. Robert Bateman titled “It’s time to talk about guns and the Supreme Court.” He not only takes SCOTUS and Justice Antonin Scalia to task for their Heller decision interpretation of the Second Amendment, but goes on to propose citizen disarmament edicts that dispense with false assurances given by some in the gun ban camp that nobody wants to take our guns away.
Bateman does, big time, and makes no bones about it. In a way, he’s done us a service by giving a glimpse of the end game less candid incrementalists are inching toward.
Per his profile at Small Wars Journal, he “is an infantryman, historian and prolific writer. Bateman was a Military Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and has taught Military History at the U.S. Military Academy.”
That he can boast these achievements brings an assumed gravitas to the discussion he wants to start simply with his credentials. When such a man speaks out, there is a natural presumption of authority.
The problem is, his arguments don’t live up to that expectation, and rather quickly fall apart with just a superficial analysis.
The Second Amendment only protects a well regulated militia, he argues. “As of 1903,” he maintains, “the ‘militia’ has been known as the National Guard.”
Actually, the resulting United States Code also recognized the “unorganized militia” to include “members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia,” but Bateman dismisses that responding to a comment poster that “they are not ‘well regulated’ [and] are therefore not the body considered in the 2nd Amendment as protected.”
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Come on then.
bateman needs to be strung up from the highest yardarm available.
Yes, he has the makings of a proper jack-booted thug.
yup, he wants a little star’on his shoulder.
I just finished The ‘Enemies’ trilogy written by our own Travis McGee (Matt Bracken).
I think Boone & Phil Carson might have a thing or two to explain to traitor Bateman.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2258358/posts
Yep, I guess a question needs to be asked...who approved his using his official status in writing an editorial? He uses his rank, capacity, status, etc. to justify what he’s saying. Essentially he’s speaking on behalf of the DoD and the last time I checked, one had better have prior approval by some pretty high ranking folks to do that.
The military has always been real careful about allowing individual active duty personnel to “represent” the views of the DoD. Specifically, only PR type folks were permitted to present views based on official capacity.
I could opine as a citizen, but I cannot recall ever being permitted to use my status/rank as some kind of means to legitimize my position because it was my position, not the military’s.
Anyway, this pos can go eff himself.
He swore to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, no change, destroy or ignore the Constitution. Another Obama officer who puts his career well being ahead of his country’s well being. So typical these days. And so disgraceful. Go home LTC, get out of that uniform and don’t tell anyone you represented this country. (From a fellow Army Officer, Ret)
He should hang. What would be his defense? Oh, I shouldn’t have my First Amendment right taken away from me?
BTW, I have guns at my house. Please stop here first on the way to confiscating them.
“Who fought the Battles, of Lexington, Bunker Hill and Saratoga?
“Who saved Baltimore?
Who obtained the victory at New Orleans?
These militia, trained and disciplined in their own houses; not practised in the field, but BRINGING THEIR GUNS WHICH THEY WERE TAUGHT TO USE WHEN CHILDREN..”.111
viz [all above from p.168 are sourced from”Proceedings and Debates of the Convention of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania”, Vol. 4, by the Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention, 1837-8]
This buttman is dead wrong-
“Sounds like this guy would jump at the chance.”
I think that there’s an “army” of civilians who would likewise “jump at the chance” to oppose him. The way that FUBO is winnowing down the military, they would not stand a chance against the armed populous.
Molon lave, Master Bateman. Let’s see what you’ve got.
I will provide some personal observations, take them for what they are worth. First, a few disclaimers. I was a career infantry officer, serving for 25 years with command experience at the Lieutenant, Captain, Lieutenant Colonel, and Colonel level. I am a combat veteran, and I was an Assistant Professor at West Point. In 1994, shortly after I retired, I went to Bosnia as part of a White House study to determine what to do to train and equip the Bosnian and Croatian forces to bring a military stalemate to the Balkans. Myself, and the other retired officers on this mission were sent because the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs would not agree to a military team given the upcoming military mission of IFOR that might compromise our neutral stance.
I have run across a number of Bateman’s ilk over the years. They are well educated, smart, and masters of their craft at the theoretical level. They are not, generally, very good soldiers primarily because they do not really like soldiering at the retail level. It’s pretty nasty down there, cold nights, wet days, miserable food, and people shoot at you. They prefer the more lofty perch of academia and they peddle their limited military experience as augmentations to their CV. But, they are academics, and pose academic solutions to military problems. Liberals in Battle Dress is the best way to describe them.
I mention my experiences in Bosnia because it was there that I saw first hand the efforts of the Yugoslav Army to disarm the populace. They were quite familiar with how the Nazis had done this, and simply implemented the Nazi plan. The Croats and the Bosniacs would have done the same thing, but they didn’t control the Army, so were held powerless to counter what happened. Thousands were safely rounded up and slaughtered once the populace was disarmed. World history is replete with similar examples.
Bateman would have done well in the Yugoslav Army. He would have known quite well what the Nazis had done, and we would have been eager to carry out the plan. After all, people usually voluntarily comply, so no shooting is required and when the day is done you can have a nice meal with a good wine, sleep in a warm bed, and have your pick of the comely local women. That’s Bateman’s kind of military operations.
I don’t care much for these types.
For those who care, the traitor can be reached at R_Bateman_LTC@hotmail.com (somehow it is not displaying right, so use cut and paste).
I don’t plan to contact him. There is no point in using words with those who have sold their souls; all we can do is prepare to deal with their actions. I do not want to see what will happen to the free world if he gets his way and only criminals and the government (will there even be a difference in a disarmed liberal country?) are armed.
“Try to take the illegal guns first. Start with Chicago.”
Mega dittos to that.
He’ll get an eagle by being a vocal gun grabber but if he wants to be a general, he’ll need to stop sucking **** as a hobby and go full time homo.
Despite our best efforts, liberals still manage to infiltrate an otherwise honorable profession.
Beware...when CW-II starts, we all know on which side they will be.
Well Benedict Arnold was in the military too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.