Although I’m doubtful of this being an outright directive, there are some underlying issues that should be discussed. Several years ago a higher ranking military member did his thesis on what types of orders toward the American public the “troops” would follow if they were given. One of his orders (which were all anti-constitution based) was for them to “disarm the public and fire upon those who refused to disarm” during a certain scenario. Unbelievably, out of the 1500 or more lower ranking (E5/O3 and below) members that he asked this of an alarming over 65% were “okay” with receiving these orders and would follow them if they were given. Only when they were reminded that this order would be an unlawful order and against the Constitution did they then change their mind and that was only about 20% of the 65% who had agreed to follow the order.
Of course, this would probably change as the younger generation saw what was really happening and then dissented, but this is something that must be kept in mind during any initial actions on a certain location – your location.
Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property... mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.
- Thomas Paine