You know this because of your years of experience in/working with military organizations ... or just what you've seen in movies?

The military doesn't segregate.  They discriminate ... usually based on physical fitness and mental aptitude.  You do not have a civil right to join the military.  There is separation of the ranks, just like civilian organizations:  management (officers) vs. labor (hourly workers).  Different perks for different levels of responsibilities.

There are unisex bathrooms.  Vaccinations are invasive. Apples and oranges.

Your analogies suck out loud.

Military also removes rights. Such as the 1A. You're not allowed to criticize the CIC (POTUS) when in uniform (IDK about out of uniform).  They all sign a contract giving up their rights prior to entering service.

Military also removes rights. Such as the 1A. You're not allowed to criticize the CIC (POTUS) when in uniform (IDK about out of uniform).  They all sign a contract giving up their rights prior to entering service.

Not really.  You still have those rights.  You just have consequences if you choose to exercise them without permission or in a way that's against regs or paints the service in a negative way.

I never signed anything that said I no longer have any specific Constitutional rights.  But, you are signing a contract, and you take an oath that you will obey the orders of the President and the officers appointed over you.  If they order you to not talk to the press, you agreed to follow that order over and above any rights or privileges you had as a civilian.  Same thing happens in businesses.  If you violate a Non-Disclosure agreement you signed or bad-mouth the company's leadership in public, you can be terminated.  Depending on what you divulge in that statement, you might also face civil and criminal legal problems, too.

The only real rights you waive are the ability to choose where to live, what specific job you will perform, and negotiating how much your skills and work performed are worth.  But, even so, you can request where to be stationed, position yourself for a specific job by volunteering for ones that prepare you, and do what you can to be promoted on time or early as well as apply for jobs that include salary supplements or hazardous duty pay, which equates to higher income.

And in your post you said law.  So I'm waiting for the HRS that applies to covid that you follow.

The emergency governor orders, I consider that law.

*Milley

When you get above the rank of O-4, it's all politics.

Point is if they can violate their oaths and ignore chain of command why should the military think boot soldiers won't want to do the same.

Not really.  You still have those rights.  You just have consequences if you choose to exercise them without permission or in a way that's against regs or paints the service in a negative way.

I never signed anything that said I no longer have any specific Constitutional rights.  But, you are signing a contract, and you take an oath that you will obey the orders of the President and the officers appointed over you.  If they order you to not talk to the press, you agreed to follow that order over and above any rights or privileges you had as a civilian.  Same thing happens in businesses.  If you violate a Non-Disclosure agreement you signed or bad-mouth the company's leadership in public, you can be terminated.  Depending on what you divulge in that statement, you might also face civil and criminal legal problems, too.

The only real rights you waive are the ability to choose where to live, what specific job you will perform, and negotiating how much your skills and work performed are worth.  But, even so, you can request where to be stationed, position yourself for a specific job by volunteering for ones that prepare you, and do what you can to be promoted on time or early as well as apply for jobs that include salary supplements or hazardous duty pay, which equates to higher income.

Protesting in uniform?

Breaking "rules" do not equate to criminal conduct.

You said:
"People CHOOSE to be a criminal..."

Pesky goal posts.  Can't seem to stay still.

Breaking laws makes you a criminal.   People choose to break laws which makes them a criminal...

The emergency governor orders, I consider that law.

I consider a 1970 Ford Pinto a 2021 BMW, but that doesn't make it true.

Fortunately for you a judge doesn't consider the proclamation law. That is why back when it was first implemented, 96% of thousands of citations were dismissed.  Tickets for gathering, lack of social distancing, leaving the home for non-essential business, things like that.

So in your way of thinking, since it was proven in court that it's not law, you can now not consider the proc's law.

Are you going to now argue how the proc is law?  BRB, stretching my legs and back. Need to prepare to move goal post.

Breaking laws makes you a criminal.   People choose to break laws which makes them a criminal...

You said "laws".

You could not post WHICH LAWS you refer to.

Then you said "breaking laws and rules makes you a criminal."

Now you're back to just laws.

Still haven't posted which laws.

But, we all know why ...

You said "laws".

You could not post WHICH LAWS you refer to.

Then you said "breaking laws and rules makes you a criminal."

Now you're back to just laws.

Still haven't posted which laws.

But, we all know why ...

Shhhhhhh. I'm trying to afford a 3rd F15 from my goal post moving business.

The emergency governor orders, I consider that law.

BY LAW, the governor had 60 days of time in which to enact emergency orders.  After that, the Legislature was required to pass laws if the orders were to continue.

More than one state has had their governor's emergency orders struck down as unconstitutional after exceeding the legal time limit.

I CONSIDER any emergency orders that exceed the legal time limits to be UNLAWFUL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL and UNENFORCEABLE.

I think I have more of a legal basis for my opinion than you do. 

Prove me wrong.

BY LAW, the governor had 60 days of time in which to enact emergency orders.  After that, the Legislature was required to pass laws if the orders were to continue.

More than one state has had their governor's emergency orders struck down as unconstitutional after exceeding the legal time limit.

I CONSIDER any emergency orders that exceed the legal time limits to be UNLAWFUL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL and UNENFORCEABLE.

I think I have more of a legal basis for my opinion than you do. 

Prove me wrong.

Prove it in court.   Neither of us has any standing to decide.  I will follow until it's proven otherwise. 

You said "laws".

You could not post WHICH LAWS you refer to.

Then you said "breaking laws and rules makes you a criminal."

Now you're back to just laws.

Still haven't posted which laws.

But, we all know why ...

Breaking any laws.... will make you a criminal. At this point we are wayyy off on a tangent.

Prove it in court.   Neither of us has any standing to decide.  I will follow until it's proven otherwise.

OR was decided in court. Feel free to google that.

I didn't read the opinion for the HI ruling, so IDK the reason why the citations were dismissed.  Feel free to read it on your own time.  Maybe thousands of citations were missing the officers signature? 

So HI's ruling against the proc was decided in court.

Breaking any laws.... will make you a criminal. At this point we are wayyy off on a tangent.

You lead us here.....  and now you want to head back to the railing because you can't skate with the big boys?

LOL!!!

Nearly 60,000 citations issued for violating
emergency orders thrown out

HONOLULU, Hawaii (HawaiiNewsNow) - Less than one in 50 citations issued on Oahu
since March for violating COVID-19 emergency orders resulted in a conviction, newly-
released statistics show.

Of the more than 60,000 criminal charges issued by Honolulu police since March that have
already gone through the court system, the city Prosecutor’s Office declined to prosecute
more than 43,000.

Another 15,700 charges were dismissed by a judge or prosecutor, leaving just 962 convictions.

The Prosecutor’s Office said it declines or dismisses case when there is insufficient evidence.

Investigative reporter and blogger Ian Lind said the numbers are astounding.

Lind said a recent HPD audit shows that there’s a financial incentive for some officers to write as
many citations as possible.

“The results of their overtime audit really tell you that a small group of officers were being rewarded
for passing out as many useless citations as they could,” he said.

One of the officers cited in the report issued criminal citations to US Surgeon General Jerome Adams,
his assistant and a tour guide at Kualoa Beach Park in August.

Adams was in town then to help the city and state’s response to the COVID crisis.

Tour guide Kelly Beck said prosecutors dismissed his criminal misdemeanor charge and that he pleaded
no contest a minor trespassing violation.

Adams was offered a similar deal but turned it down.

https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2020/11/23/more-than-citations-issued-violating-emergency-orders-have-been-thrown-out/


THIS is the government we are supposed to blindly "TRUST".

BY LAW, the governor had 60 days of time in which to enact emergency orders.  After that, the Legislature was required to pass laws if the orders were to continue.

So you ADMIT that for at least 60 days the emergency orders were LAW. With the powers defined by LAW.
Hence the citations.

(Yeah after 60 days that shit don’t fly. Can’t legally re-up them without legislative action for a year or more IMO.
But hard to believe you folks ask him to provide the law then FlappJack backs him up that it WAS enforceable by LAW for at least 60 days.
OG didn’t recognize it but I thought was funny.)

I think the citations were dismissed because they issued so many it would clog the courts and no officers would show up to testify or there would be no cops on the street because half are in court or there would have been 8 million more in overtime. (Figurative number. I just made up the 8 million. Don’t ask me to cite it.)
They already spent the COVID money on ATVs and trailers and a robot dog.

So you ADMIT that for at least 60 days the emergency orders were LAW. With the powers defined by LAW.
Hence the citations.

(Yeah after 60 days that shit don’t fly. Can’t legally re-up them without legislative action for a year or more IMO.
But hard to believe you folks ask him to provide the law then FlappJack backs him up that it WAS enforceable by LAW for at least 60 days.)

I think the citations were dismissed because they issued so many it would clog the courts and no officers would show up to testify or there would be no cops on the street or there would have been 8 million in overtime.
They already spent the COVID money on ATVs and trailers and a robot dog.

Idk if even during the 60 days the proc is actual law or backed by the law. If im making sense. Could be splitting hairs.

But none the less, we were discussing going to a LGS and not knowing the vaxx status of people inside there. Which implies currently, thus the 60 days has expired long ago. So when omni said he obeys the laws with regards to covid, there is no HRS. But instead he mentioned the proc, which is not law.

We can dive into this and it will be a very long portion, but pretty much the point was shown when asked what law he is obeying, and unable to post the link to said law. Like post HI's law on suppressors or HI law on daggers.

Iirc the proc was discussed when the 60 days have expired. But that would be over 1 year ago.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Yeah after the 60 days that discussion was moot. IMO.

But funny FlappJacks acknowledged it was backed by law.

D. Force and Effect of Law
Pursuant to section 127A-25, HRS, all provisions set forth in Section III of this Proclamation are hereby adopted as rules that shall have the force and effect of law. In the event of any inconsistency, conflict or ambiguity between this Proclamation and any county emergency order, rule, directive or proclamation, the relevant documents shall be read to allow a county maximum flexibility to exercise its respective emergency management authority.
Pursuant to section 127A-29, HRS, any person who intentionally, knowingly or recklessly engages in conduct that violates any provision set forth in Section III of this Proclamation shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction, the person shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, unless noncompliance is designated as an emergency period infraction with penalties adopted as provided by section 127A- 29, HRS.

https://governor.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/2106080-ATG_21st-Emergency-Proclamation-for-COVID-19-distribution-signed.pdf

That’s from Kermit’s 21’st “supplementary” proclamation of emergency.
21’st 

Do they still carry the force and effect of law ? That’s the arguable part.
Apparently HRS 127 is the reference. I didn’t read it.
I don’t really care.

#Troll’sInControl
#WhyFourUserNames

Idk if even during the 60 days the proc is actual law or backed by the law. If im making sense. Could be splitting hairs.

But none the less, we were discussing going to a LGS and not knowing the vaxx status of people inside there. Which implies currently, thus the 60 days has expired long ago. So when omni said he obeys the laws with regards to covid, there is no HRS. But instead he mentioned the proc, which is not law.

We can dive into this and it will be a very long portion, but pretty much the point was shown when asked what law he is obeying, and unable to post the link to said law. Like post HI's law on suppressors or HI law on daggers.

Iirc the proc was discussed when the 60 days have expired. But that would be over 1 year ago.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

There's an entire post explaining everything.   If its not a law then its a rule.  Laws > Rules > government recommendations > not following any.  Until contested successfully in court, I will follow the governments "laws"  even if apparently not applicable.  I don't have the time or effort, nor am I a lawyer to make double sure I am within my legal rights.  I'll just comply, unless I am willing to personally fight it in court. 

There's an entire post explaining everything.   If its not a law then its a rule.  Laws > Rules > government recommendations > not following any.  Until contested successfully in court, I will follow the governments "laws"  even if apparently not applicable.  I don't have the time or effort, nor am I a lawyer to make double sure I am within my legal rights.  I'll just comply, unless I am willing to personally fight it in court.

Goalpost moved to "laws".

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Goalpost moved to "laws".

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

goalposts moved from "IT'S THE LAW" to "I'll just comply"
but still not wrong...