Time: Sun Aug 17 20:58:42 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA17095;
	Sun, 17 Aug 1997 20:58:01 -0700 (MST)
	by usr01.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA27285;
	Sun, 17 Aug 1997 20:56:11 -0700 (MST)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 20:54:54 -0700
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: SURVEY: (US) Army Times: To Shoot or Not? A Vexing Issue

>Discussed also in the Army Times 09-25-95 issue in an article called "TO
>SHOOT OR NOT? A VEXING ISSUE" by Margaret Roth.
>   <<  WASHINGTON -- The question given to the Marines was hypothetical:
>Would you shoot at U.S. citizens who have disobeyed a federal order to
>surrender banned firearms? But Navy Lt. Cmdr. Ernest G. Cunningham found the
>answers seriously disturbing.
>     More than one-quarter, or 26 percent, of the 300 Marines Cunningham
>surveyed for his master's thesis said yes, they would shoot. Sixty-one
>percent said they would not. The rest had no opinion on the question, which
>ignited a firestorm when the survey, done in May 1994, leaked to the news
>     The purpose of Cunningham's thesis, approved by his advisers at the
>Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif., and the survey was to find out
>whether service members' opinions of nontraditional missions could affect
>their ability to stick together during a mission. Cunningham felt that ``the
>overwhelming majority should have said flatly, `No'.''
>     He said the 79 Marines who said they would shoot showed an ignorance of
>the Posse Comitatus Act, a law that bars use of the military for domestic law
>     Unlawful order?
>     The order to shoot would be unlawful, Cunningham said, because it would
>violate the constitutional right to bear arms.
>     The question was inspired by the Bush administration's decisio992, said
>Cunningham, who disagreed with that decision.
>     Troublesome what-ifs >>
>The article goes on to outline:
>     ---Almost two-thirds, or 63.8 percent, favored taking part in more than
>five of 10 hypothetical missions conducted by U.S. forces under U.S. command.
>The 10 included such efforts as drug enforcement, border patrol, and
>     ---Approximately one-third, or 33.1 percent, of those surveyed favored
>taking part in at least four of seven hypothetical U.N. missions under U.S.
>authority. Peacekeeping was the most acceptable, nation building the least.
>     ---Little more than one-tenth -- 11.2 percent -- favored participating
>in at least four of seven hypothetical U.N. missions under U.N. operational
>control. An equal percentage had no opinion. Almost two-thirds, or 64
>percent, did not want U.S. combat troops to take part in any of the seven
>   ~What missions for US Forces?  (And surely someone has something to say
>about posse comitatus)
>   ~What would your response be to the question posed to Marines:  "Would you
>shoot at U.S. citizens who have disobeyed a federal order to surrender banned
>   ~What happens when ROE falls short of the situation?
>   ~How will unit morale and cohesion be impacted by a range of missions?
>   ~Where should the line be drawn for U.S. Armed Forces activity?
>P.O.BOX # 115; BLACKLICK, OH 43004-0115;Ph.(614) 476-6773,Pager (614)
>      " When you make peaceful revolution impossible, you make violent
>                   revolution inevitable" - John F. Kennedy, Sr.

Paul Andrew Mitchell                 : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA;  M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine

tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com   : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this

As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail