1. #1
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    19

    Default Draft Exemption??

    Hello all,
    Just curious if anyone knows the answer...I was told awhile ago that if you are a Career Firefighter you will be exempt in the event of a draft instatement because you are a member of Homeland Defense. Anyone know if this is true??

  2. #2
    Forum Member
    SafetyPro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    486

    Default

    Below are the list of draft deferments and exemptions from the Selective Service website. Don't see anything about FFs.

    "A high school student may have his induction postponed until he graduates or reaches age 20, whichever occurs first. College students may be postponed until the end of the semester. If they are in their last academic year, they may be postponed until the end of that academic year.

    A registrant automatically gets his induction delayed if he files a claim for reclassification. He is also entitled to file for a postponement if he is a student or if he has an emergency beyond his control, such as a serious illness or death in his immediate family.

    Under emergency mobilization procedures, all registrants are considered to be classified 1-A "available for service" unless they are given a different status by Selective Service. If a registrant believes that for some reason he cannot or should not report for examination and induction as directed, he may request a postponement or reclassification by filing a claim and sending it to the Selective Service office in his area. Receipt of such a claim delays the registrant’s induction until his claim has been fully processed and adjudicated.

    A registrant can file a claim only after receipt of an order to report for induction and before the day he is scheduled to report. Only in the case of an extreme emergency, under circumstances beyond his control, would a registrant be allowed to file a claim on the day he is scheduled to report for induction.

    It will not be necessary for the registrant to submit supporting evidence of his claim at the time he files the request form. He will be contacted and given instructions on what information is needed, where to send it, and when it should be sent.

    The following classification categories would be available under present operating procedures:

    — Conscientious objectors perform service to the nation in a manner consistent with their moral, ethical or religious opposition to participation in war in any form. Depending upon the nature of his beliefs, a conscientious objector serves either in a noncombatant capacity in the armed forces or in a civilian job contributing to the national interest.

    — Surviving sons or brothers in a family where the parent or sibling died as a result of U.S. military service, or is in a captured or missing in action status, are exempt from service in peacetime.

    — Hardship deferments are available for men whose induction would result in hardship to persons who depend upon them for support.

    — Members of Reserve components (including the National Guard and advanced level ROTC cadets who have already signed a Reserve contract) are eligible for a separate classification and perform their military service in the National Guard or the Reserves.

    — Ministers are exempted from service.

    — Ministerial students are deferred from service until they complete their studies.

    — Certain elected officials are exempt from service as long as they continue to hold office.

    — Veterans generally are exempt from service in peacetime.

    — Aliens and dual nationals in some cases may be exempt from U.S. military service depending upon their place of residence and country of citizenship."


    In fact, EMTs could be specifically drafted under the
    Health Care Personnel Delivery System as follows:

    "The Health Care Personnel Delivery System (HCPDS) is a standby plan developed for the Selective Service System at the request of Congress. If needed it would be used to draft health care personnel in a crisis. It is designed to be implemented in connection with a national mobilization in an emergency, and then only if Congress and the President approve the plan and pass and sign legislation to enact it. No portion of the plan is designed for implementation in peacetime. If implemented, HCPDS would:

    Provide a fair and equitable draft of doctors, nurses, medical technicians and those with certain other health care skills if, in some future emergency, the military’s existing medical capability proved insufficient and there is a shortage of volunteers."
    Chris Gaylord
    Emergency Planner / Fire Captain, UC Santa Cruz FD

  3. #3
    Early Adopter
    cozmosis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,925

    Default

    Career... volunteer... I don't think you have anything to worry about. I don't think the country would stand for a draft -- at least not the generation that would be drafted.

  4. #4
    MembersZone Subscriber
    CFD Hazards's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Cranston, RI, USA
    Posts
    381

    Default Jury Duty

    As a career firefighter, at least in my state, I am exempt from Jury Duty but not the draft. I heard yesterday that they are re-activating selected veterans with certain specialties. I have no idea how they can tell someone that has retired that they must report for duty but I was never in the military and assume that there is something in the retirement papers that stipulates they can do this.

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    SafetyPro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    486

    Default Re: Jury Duty

    Originally posted by cfdeng3
    As a career firefighter, at least in my state, I am exempt from Jury Duty but not the draft. I heard yesterday that they are re-activating selected veterans with certain specialties. I have no idea how they can tell someone that has retired that they must report for duty but I was never in the military and assume that there is something in the retirement papers that stipulates they can do this.
    Its specifically the Army they were talking about yesterday, and its the Ready Reserve program. All Army enlistees incur an 8 year service obligation upon enlisting. However, many soldiers don't serve the full 8 years on active duty...instead, after the first 2-6 years, they become part of the Ready Reserve. Unlike the regular Reserve program, Ready Reserve members don't participate in monthly/annual service but are instead essentially released to civilian life with the caveat that they can be called back to active duty at any time by Presidential order to complete the remainder of their 8 years of service.
    Chris Gaylord
    Emergency Planner / Fire Captain, UC Santa Cruz FD

  6. #6
    MembersZone Subscriber
    SamsonFCDES's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,708

    Default

    IIRC up til 5 years after you leave the Military you can be called back up, its in the paper so to speak.

    The military HATES the draft. Right now they get people who WANT to be in the military, who are for the most part average or better intelegence/fitness, and who are motivated by whatever force to serve the country and kick ***. The quality of todays military is at an all time high. While maybe not as strong overall as during the Cold War era, the US military has trimed the fat and is one lean mean fighting machine. The draft would ROYALY SCREW THIS UP!!!

    When the draft ensues they get friggin low lifes that some hick judge decided to "punish" by making them the militaries problem. They would NOT have taken those people if they had went to the recruiter to sign up by free will, but since a "wise" judge sent them they are stuck with them. Drafties like that only slow the military down. They are not worth their weight in ammo.

    Even average drafties are not that apealing. Drafties are NOT motivated like those who volunteer to serve, generaly are NOT of high intelegence (or they would have been doing something usefull in life elsewhere), and are NOT motivated to be in the military and kick ***. They basicaly are just bodies to fill BDUs. They are much less efective then the volunteer soldiers. 20 80 rule kicks in here.

    In combat the 20 80 rule has been found to apply. 20% do the shooting and kicking *** while 80% just hide behind cover. The current military has worked hard to get MORE trigger pullers in the ranks, and they have succeded for the most part. The 20% has grown and by some reports has been reversed, with 80% effective personel and only 20% dead weight. Throwing drafties into the mix would probly swing things back the other way.

    The military does not need the draft, they dont want the draft.

    The draft is a romantic falicy which some old senile politicians cling to with the hopes of makeing "men" out of generation XYZ...

    Old men start the wars, young men fight them.
    -Brotherhood: I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
    -Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of you life is to serve as a warning to others.

    -Adversity: That which does not kill me postpones the inevitable.

    -Despair: Its always darkest before it goes Pitch Black.

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber
    jthomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Cortlandt Manor, NY
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Originally posted by SamsonFCDES
    When the draft ensues they get friggin low lifes that some hick judge decided to "punish" by making them the militaries problem. They would NOT have taken those people if they had went to the recruiter to sign up by free will, but since a "wise" judge sent them they are stuck with them. Drafties like that only slow the military down. They are not worth their weight in ammo.
    Samson- While I agree with 90% of what you said, it should be made clear (at least on this board) that the practice of judges offering military service in lieu of jail time is illegal now. Has been for about 20 years. Just about any prior conviction would make one ineligble for service. That said, I don't suppose there is anything to keep the occasional back-country "Boss Hog"-type from making these kind of arrangements in isolated cases.

  8. #8
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Sitting in my chair, listening to the scanner while the young kids respond
    Posts
    375

    Cool Officers treated different

    My commission says "to serve at the pleasure of the President". I don't have a discharge but rather a "release from active duty". That being said, I don't think the Army needs a 60 year old MP officer who trained on the M-14 rifle and the trusty .45 cal. If they call me back we are in deep trouble.

    We will not see a draft again. The education requirements and the level of training required in today's military would not make it work. We need the motivation of the volunteer militay members.

    In the 1960's I worked with both draftees and regular army and their was a big difference. We won't go back to that.

    God bless our troops.

    Pete
    Pete Sinclair
    Hartford, MI
    IACOJ (Retired Division)

  9. #9
    Forum Member
    ThNozzleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Jefferson City, TN
    Posts
    4,334

    Default

    We will not see a draft again.
    Sure...just try starting a real war. I'm tired of hearing how today's "all volunteer" military is so much better than any of the past. Just because you do not volunteer for the military does not mean you are stupid or that you would be a lousy soldier. Just taking on a third world nation like Iraq has stretched our present military to the max. The draft would be needed if we were to fight any extended war with another powerful nation.
    One Tennessee boy I remember reading about (Alvin York) was drafted; I sure would like to see someone label HIM as a low quality soldier.
    We will not see a draft again. The education requirements and the level of training required in today's military would not make it work.
    That is untrue. In fact, there are more educated people outside the military, than there are in the military.

  10. #10
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Sitting in my chair, listening to the scanner while the young kids respond
    Posts
    375

    Lightbulb For Nozzleman

    Maybe you should try training draftees classified as 1Y-Mental. I have and it was not fun nor productive in providing good combat soldiers. Skill is important, not numbers. We are not going to fight WWII again.

    Stay safe,

    Pete
    Pete Sinclair
    Hartford, MI
    IACOJ (Retired Division)

  11. #11
    the 4-1-4
    Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,784

    Default

    I'm tired of hearing liberals spin about how this is not a real war, or that this is not the war on terror. What a ridiculous statement, "this is not a real war". What an insult to those who have lost their lives, or lost their limbs. Like them or not, they ARE out there so you can hurl insults in their face with no worry of repurcussions or sanctions from the government. In fact, you can even hurl these insults from the comfort of your home, beer in hand if you like. Thanks to them (the men and women of our armed forces) the people of Iraq can now do the same, without having to worry about their tongues being cut out. Or is it just that the liberal sense of values only applies here at home?

  12. #12
    MembersZone Subscriber
    SamsonFCDES's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,708

    Default

    Originally posted by ThNozzleman

    Sure...just try starting a real war.




    That would be funny if it wasnt so asinine.

    WTF are our boys doing over there??? Playing PAINTBALL!!!

    911 wasnt are "real" attack by your defintion.

    I have the suspecion you get your perception of war from watching movies...much like some people get their perception of the fire service from watching Backdraft.

    I'm tired of hearing how today's "all volunteer" military is so much better than any of the past.


    You must hear that a lot, to be tired of it.

    Just because you do not volunteer for the military does not mean you are stupid or that you would be a lousy soldier.


    Perhaps, but it does mean that you dont realy WANT to be in the Military.

    Just taking on a third world nation like Iraq has stretched our present military to the max.




    Try reading up on current events.

    We are fighting 2 wars on 2 seperate fronts, we are maintianing a record level of readiness on the Korean Penesila, we are pushing our National Gaurd hard on homeland security/border patrol/CAP. We are not streatched to the Max.

    People are still joining up for all of the right reasons.

    And of course there is the budget building politics. The military is not going to say "No Mr. Congressman, we dont need any more stuff, keep your money."

    They are going to say (just like many FDs) "We are broke, we need more resources/equipment, help us out."

    The draft would be needed if we were to fight any extended war with another powerful nation.


    "I am quite confident that in the foreseeable future armed conflict will not take the form of huge land armies facing each other across extended battle lines, as they did in World War I and World War II or, for that matter, as they would have if NATO had faced the Warsaw Pact on the field of battle."
    - General H. Norman Schwarzkopf

    If we got it on with another "powerful" nation there would be no punches pulled. We are being gentle in the current conflicts, we are capable of far greater application of force.
    -Brotherhood: I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
    -Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of you life is to serve as a warning to others.

    -Adversity: That which does not kill me postpones the inevitable.

    -Despair: Its always darkest before it goes Pitch Black.

  13. #13
    former FH.com member

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    860

    Thumbs up

    Amen Samson.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Dalmatian90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    3,120

    Default

    Sure...just try starting a real war. I'm tired of hearing how today's "all volunteer" military is so much better than any of the past

    ??? I got to call you on that too, Noz.

    Do you think any other single military in the world could've made it to Baghdad in three weeks?

    Do you think even, say, NATO if was without U.S. forces could've made it to Baghdad in three weeks? Three months?

    This was a real war. It was simply one with the U.S. having commanding & overwhelming force.

    What we're seeing, clearly, is the only way to function against the U.S. at the moment is either WMD or wide-scale guerilla operations. I'm not sure on the long term viability of guerilla ops either, since they can be defeated, 'cause if you try and nail jello to the wall long enough, eventually it's all gone. If, say, China was to throw human waves at use like the did in Korea the cluster munitions of today would savage them. And as air superiority was quickly established unlike the relative equaility in Korea as the U.S. and Russians went at it with roughly equal training & quality of planes, the lines of communication to field a large army would be cut off.

    The superiority of U.S. forces is almost incapable of comprehension right now -- Full Size (i.e. not "helicopter) Aircraft Carriers: U.S. has 12. Rest of the World has 1 (France's Charles de Gaulle).

    I don't like, and would prefer we didn't have to be the policeman of the world maintaining stability. Europe can't field a significant size army -- they don't have the troops, they don't have the equipment, they don't have the logistics. They're limited to over-sized police actions (Bosnia) and to assisting U.S. forces.

    The the last 60 years have been one of remarkable peace & prosperiety globally compared to the previous three hundred years of continental & global wars. At first that was maintained by the tense relationship of two superpowers; now the question is whether it's being maintained by the dominance of a single hyperpower. I don't think I'd want to see us downsize the military and find out if the world would return to a bickering place of near-equals pummeling it out -- and drawing us again in global conflict like 1917 or 1941. I'd be quite happy if Europe would step up to the plate and build up their staffing, training, and mobility so that they could be a legitimate alternative to the U.S. action in places like Iraq, so that they could be a partner instead of merely an aid.

    Maybe the world is a happy happy joy joy place where people don't go to war anymore. All these little conflicts around that people go, "Well, if you intervened there, why not here too!" make me think not. It may not be the right guess, but I think the best guess that U.S. strength right now keeps China from invading Taiwan, which would make South Korea nervous, which would give North Korea the incentive to plunge south, which would awaken fear in Japan that they best strike first before someone decides to take revenge for WWII atrocities. Many situations like this exist around the world, and the biggest threats are kept in check, it seems, by the big stick behind Uncle Sam's back.

    The U.S. military circa 1990 was setup to fight two large scale conflicts -- a Korea/Europe situation. The draw-down in the 90s, to save money on payroll and support for other technology, reduce the deficit, etc cut the military to one "Well, yeah, it's still just enough manpower to fight on two fronts..." and you see what we have today -- one major theater of operation, and a bunch of smaller theater of operations having those forces pretty well stretched.

    U.S. Active Duty Military Strength
    Branch -- 1990 -- 2002
    Army -- 730k -- 486k
    Navy -- 579k -- 385k
    Marine -- 196k -- 173k
    Air Force -- 535k -- 368k

    For those who run the "draft" word up the flagpole for political purposes, add up those numbers above. Active duty in 12 years cut 628,000 men. The Reserves saw a similiar reduction. I'm kinda thinking have another 600,000 on active duty, you would've seen few Army Reserve/National Guard units getting deployed, and the units active & reserve that did deploy would've been on a strict one year plan.

    If you could get that many in the volunteer military of 1990, I don't see why you couldn't bring it back to those levels today. We would probably see a longer ramp-up time to fill the material needs than we would to get recruitment up to speed.

    It's still been a remarkable military operation. We're not even near Vietnam-like casualties. Our death rates are on the level of the Phillipines Insurrection (which is a pretty close parrallel overall), although that is skewed somewhat my modern medicine. Hell, our fatal casualty rate in Afghanistan is less than 1/10th that of what the Soviets saw for what appears to have established much firmer control; while in Iraq we're still at about 1/3 the rate of the Soviet experience in Afghanistan fighting in a location more urbanized and more sophisticated -- and again, with better control over more areas than the Soviets had established.

    It's been a remarkable operation; it's been an expected operation falling at the downside of what could've hoped for but certainly not as bad as things could've turned out; it was a right operation in my opinion, and it's how this will all fall out is something that still can not be judged for another six months or a year before you start to know what the final shape of Iraq will be.
    IACOJ Canine Officer
    20/50

  15. #15
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    KC,MO
    Posts
    103

    Default ahhhhh,...we all agree

    underneath all the jingoism (look it up), it seems we all agree: the draft would be a bad idea. let's work together to make sure the screaming children in washington understand that and make the word "conscription" disappear from our language.
    if not, maybe toronto fd will take applications...

  16. #16
    the 4-1-4
    Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,784

    Default

    Why wait for the draft to leave chingon? Feel free to leave now. That statement is the greatest show of disrespect you can have for anyone who has sacrificed for you. I guess your life is more valueable than others who have served, or even those who were drafted and did their duty.

  17. #17
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ullrichk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Deleted by the forum gremlins
    Posts
    1,663

    Default

    Originally posted by jasper45
    That statement is the greatest show of disrespect you can have for anyone who has sacrificed for you. I guess your life is more valueable than others who have served
    Chingon's life is no more valuable than someone else's just as his opinion is no less valuable than yours or mine. Do not disrespect those who served by qualifying the rights that those who served made their sacrifice for . . .
    ullrichk
    a.k.a.
    perfesser

    a ship in a harbor is safe. . . but that's not what ships are for

  18. #18
    the 4-1-4
    Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,784

    Default

    Originally posted by ullrichk


    Chingon's life is no more valuable than someone else's just as his opinion is no less valuable than yours or mine. Do not disrespect those who served by qualifying the rights that those who served made their sacrifice for . . .
    You do not have the right to break the law. You do not have the right to run to Canada if you are afraid of military service. Running to canada in the face of a draft is not a freedom of speach issue. It is a federal law violation, deserving of punishment in a federal prison. The selective service along with the Federal government has provided other ways you can serve your Nation if you object to a military draft. Running to canada is nothing more than disrespecting all who have served, and anyone who will disrespect this nation in such a way should maybe look into excersizing their freedoms by renouncing their citizenship here. There is no law against that. In fact, if you cease your citizenship here you don't have to worry about a draft.I am in no way showing any kind of disrespect to our service men and women with this view point. I am placing their service on a pedestal. With out their service and dedication we have nothing. The greatest show of disrespect you CAN show, is to take all that this country gives you, and then run like a coward when they ask for something in return. Like I said they have alternate means of service.
    Last edited by jasper45; 07-01-2004 at 12:38 PM.

  19. #19
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    KC,MO
    Posts
    103

    Default respect

    jasper, don't get personal. disrespect is not a word made for you to hurl at everyone who disagrees with you, or with decisions made by our government. i have, and will continue to put my life on the line every 3rd day for complete strangers. i will not, however, put it on the line for dick cheney's business associates. that is called concientiousness, or ethics, or morals, or bravery.
    i was born here, love this country and its people, always show respect to those who serve because the choose to in any capacity, but i will not hand over my right to live and speak as i choose because a government i didn't elect decides to occupy a 3rd world nation for the financial gain of a few political and economic. if you want to, sign up for the marines. i applaud your sense of honor, and respectfully think it is misplaced. but my children will not grow up fatherless so that some yuppy can drive his suv in dallas while he ships american jobs to sweat-shop he just built in iraq staffed with the widows of iraqi civilians killed during the occupation (10,000 and counting).
    duty is a strange word. my first and foremost duty is to my family. i take that seriously. my second is to freedom, personal and political. when the government steps on those duties, my duty to that government ceases. which brings me to my original point: we all agree that conscription is, at best, not good for the strength and capabilities of our military, and, at worst, unethical. let's concentrate on the fact that we share a unifying desire to not see the draft instated (or even discussed) by a bunch of beaurocrats who to whom you and i are just expendable bodies. that way, we can both continue living here...

  20. #20
    the 4-1-4
    Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,784

    Default chingon

    It's still a violation of federal law to run to canad in the face of a draft. Like I said previously, they offer alternative service to your country rather than the military. To openly brag about running away, is an isult to those who chose not to. Lots of men disagreed with the Vietnam War, and you know what? Lots of them had enough respect for those who gave them their freedoms before to still serve; even though they may disagree with the decision to go there in the first place.If you notice, I did NOT attack your view points on Iraq. I DID disagree with your thought about it being your right to break federal law. There is a differance there. I only attacked your viewpoint on your life being more valueable than someone who would not run to canada. That is after all what you are essentially saying. That is disrespectfull to any one who has given an arm, leg or their life so you can hurl insults at our President and Vice-President with no fear of sanctions by the government. Make sure you understand what it was I said before you get all worked up. I DID NOT hurl it for your political viewpoints. As I said before, breaking the law is not a view point. Running from the draft is not a demonstration of "freedom of speach".
    Last edited by jasper45; 07-01-2004 at 01:00 PM.

  21. #21
    MembersZone Subscriber
    SamsonFCDES's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,708

    Default

    Chigon, it sounds like you view the US goverment as some giant and ungainly machine out to spoil the lives of good and moral people...

    The US government IS the People.

    By the people, for the people.

    I can never relate to the anti government crowd. If you dont like it, work to change it, that is how a democracy is supposed to work.

    Anybody can run for office, anybody can voice their opinion, and you still have your vote, and that is what makes the USA so great.

    As a people we hold freedom first and foremost, to be defended at any cost.

    I would not want to live any other way.
    -Brotherhood: I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
    -Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of you life is to serve as a warning to others.

    -Adversity: That which does not kill me postpones the inevitable.

    -Despair: Its always darkest before it goes Pitch Black.

  22. #22
    former FH.com member

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    860

    Lightbulb This is just my opinion..

    ... and it will probably **** some people off, so be it. I think skipping the country to flee military service is tantamount to cowardice. If you really object to whatever the conflict is, that is acceptable. But do the right thing and file as a concientious objector, that way you can still give back if needed but will not serve in a dangerous combat role. If you still would rather run for Canada go ahead, just don't be in a rush to come back when the fighting's done. Just one Vet's opinion, that's all. -46

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Dalmatian90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    3,120

    Default

    but i will not hand over my right to live and speak as i choose because a government i didn't elect decides

    Just because you didn't vote that way, doesn't mean that isn't the result of the election. And yes, that was the result -- using the system we have in place, a system that's worked for some 200 years.

    Things like Country, society, community do sometimes have to be put before family -- because it is nation as a whole that allows your family to enjoy their safe, comfortable lives. Laws establish the structure of stability necessary for society to function, and function in a way the we move forward. We may disagree on some of the laws, we may disagree on some policies; but without any we fall back to tribes and isolated city-states. Some may see that as a Utopia; when we did have a world like that it was one of regular warfare and slavery.

    Attitudes that place the individual or even a family's desires above the needs of the nation, of society, of the community are a dangerous thing, for it leaves that nation an empty, hollow shell unable to withstand stress.
    IACOJ Canine Officer
    20/50

  24. #24
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ullrichk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Deleted by the forum gremlins
    Posts
    1,663

    Default

    Originally posted by jasper45
    You do not have the right to break the law. You do not have the right to run to Canada if you are afraid of military service.
    I was writing about chingon's right to freedom of speech. No one has gone to Canada, ergo, no law has been broken.
    ullrichk
    a.k.a.
    perfesser

    a ship in a harbor is safe. . . but that's not what ships are for

  25. #25
    the 4-1-4
    Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,784

    Default

    Originally posted by ullrichk


    I was writing about chingon's right to freedom of speech. No one has gone to Canada, ergo, no law has been broken.
    Then please explain to me where it was I infringed on his free speach rights? I thought I made it explicitly clear I was referencing his running to canada were a draft to be initiated. It was purely hypothetical. Yes no law has been broken. However, I was excersizing my right to free speach, or is that not allowed? Never once did I go after his viewpoints on the Iraq war. In fact, he was the only one who happened to bring it up. I was strictly speaking about how disrespectfull it is for any person; of draft age eligibility, to shirk their civic responsibilty and serve their nation if called upon. I thought it then, and I still think it now. Were he to "dodge" the draft it is a federal crime. Running to canada, in time of war to avoid military service is not an act of "free speach".

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register