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 ...
This guy is a disgrace to the US Army. If you read the comments section to his article, Bateman occasionally responds to other comments like all snarky, arrogant liberals do. He thinks he is better than everyone else and only certain trusted people, like himself, should ever be armed. He is a total Stalinist, Obamabot suck-up. MOLON LABE.
“Officers on active duty are generally forbidden from doing this sort of thing, so one wonders if he received special dispensation to publish this article. As he is stationed in D.C., the natural speculation is that he is doing so with the blessings of the administration.”
He’s figured out the fast track to general in today’s America.
Definitely a jagoff.
Only an idiot would think that the Bill of Rights exists to protect the governments ability to be armed.
Another name on the list.
Bateman and Robbin`
////////////////////////////
How about you show a little respect?
That would be “Master” Bateman (and Robbin) to you, Sir. /sarc
I've got a better topic for "Bateman": It's time to talk about Ft. Hood, the Justice Dept., Eric Holder, and why that bastard Hasan is still soaking up building heat.
Better interpretation of the 2nd Amendment:
A standing military being needed for a viable nation, this country will have one; notwithstanding, the people retain the right to own and responsibly use the same weapons as that military.
Unfortunately, many do. Far more than you'd think.
So now we are seeing zampolits in our military.
At least Benedict Arnold was a general.
Concur.
He just violated his Oath of Office.
What a dirtbag (with apologies to all the dirtbags out there).
A disgrace to the uniform.
f-ing JAGs , the great curse of our modern military
their best deploy is for IED detection detail .
out in front of the K-9’s
Planting the seeds of progressive gun control into the Pentagon mindset now will make it easier to justify “any means necessary” confiscation using military resources when the time comes.
Seems so. The officers being purged need to have a meeting.
Is it even known who wrote the Second Amdnedment? The Framers didn’t author the Bill of Rights it is a collection of what what the states threw back at them to add to the Consitution before they’d consider signing it.
Wow. I just completed book three yesterday myself! Matt did an amazing job of forecasting a lot of what is now actual fact, rather than just a fictional account. Here's hoping we can avert going all the way down that road.
Dear God, NO! The Founders were extremely suspicious of standing armies and the potential for tyranny they represent. That is why the concept of the citizens' militia (the whole of the armed people) was written into the Bill of Rights.
Standing armies, whether federal, state, or local police, have gotten us to where we are now.
BUMP!
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.