Ask the expert

Florida's Guardian Training is actual training and psychological screening educators have to go through to carry on campus in the state.
Also, I'm on a military base right now, I live and work here.
Also, he's not the one talking shit about what he doesn't know. An NCO should know better.

Does the program take 6 years tho, she was in for 6 years his 'accomplishment' was completing training for a Florida program

Trust me, that's immaterial to her argument.

Well if you wanna go by that then:
Untrained teachers shouldn't have firearms

I'm sorry. I love arguing but I'm fucked up

And I am now very confused. Fucked up like drunk or some other reason to be considered fucked up

Catamount Ball motherfucker! 16th forever!

Googling tells me that’s a basketball team, maybe? @famousone, at 19 years old, is inconsistent with which US laws he’s willing to respect. If they work in his favor, like rights to firearms, they are sacrosanct. But, if they inconvenience him, like drinking age, they are disposable.

Your research skills suck. And when the fucking Sergeant Major says everyone drinks, everyone fucking drinks.

You have stated previously that if a commanding officer gives you an illegal order you will relieve him of duty. By force if necessary.

Nope, that's for immoral and unconstitutional orders

You don’t think giving alcohol to underage kids is immoral?

Old enough to fuck. Old enough to vote. Old enough to kill. Old enough to die. Nothing immoral about letting adults partake in a celebration with their brothers and sisters.

But not, according to state law, old enough to drink alcohol. For the record, how does one tell which laws are ok to ignore morally?

Legality is the sorriest way to tell right from wrong. So I usually make that call based on whether the act is inherently harmful, infringes on others, and whether local authorities give a damn.
So I won't steal or murder, won't restrict another's acts or movements without due cause (ACP, secure perimeter, suspicious persons, etc), and will read the room before partaking in drink.
Basically, my own values and morals first, followed by other's willingness to tolerate, with enforcement being the last hard pass. Depending. Legality is distant last on whether I consider something good or bad. Prohibition was legal once. Slavery. Genocide. Pedophilia. Am I making sense?

Sure. If I don’t believe slavery, genocide, or pedophilia are immoral I should participate in them as long as I read the room first. Despite the fact that laws are enacted by duly elected officials in a democratic society each citizen has the power to pick and choose which ones they have to follow and an authority figure can compel them to do so at their leisure.

Practically? Yeah. That's how the world works. People who do believe slavery, genocide, and pedophilia to not be immoral ARE carrying those acts out every day. It's even legal in a lot of the world.
MY moral standard is based on inherent harm. And all I care about regarding my actions is whether I can sleep at night. Sometimes I want to have a shot with my brothers in arms. Sometimes I want to drive 70 in a 65. And if Trump were to make it so that Mexicans were legally rounded up and exterminated, reinstated slavery, enacted the Purge, or ordered soldiers to take child brides, I'd take my service rifle and gear, and disappear to find or found the insurgency.
My morals are above any earthly law, and for the sake of my immortal soul I will do what I know is right, laws be damned.

@scatmandingo it would get that sgt major at least an article 15 for giving an order like that and the person drinking underage could also have repercussions. No one can force you to drink if you don't want to so even if it was an order you can refuse. And famousone can go on his lawless rampage of whatever so long as it doesn't hurt others. If he decides fuck the rules and wants to drink underage and have a triblade (its a knife illegal in war stuff its a whole thing but basically it's hella deadly) and wants to stab his leg to see what happens let him. If he can't handle his liquor and hurts someone else then it doesn't matter if he agrees or not his ass in jail or fucked up. But if hurts no other human or animal then whatev ya know.
A sgt can't give an order like that tho like my Sgt as a joke told me to eat a crayon but he can't actually force me ya know it was just to have fun and shit, if I genuinely was uncomfortable or didn't want to what's he gonna do?

Someone doesn't know enlisted rank structure, CLS, ACE training, unit celebrations, combat soldier's attitudes, barracks culture, or Army things in general. Something's fucky about you, "Battle Buddy".

Who are you talking about? What are you talk- dude what? Most of those things weren't even mentioned bud are you okay?

I'm writing this as a girlfriend of an infantry marine, so I wouldn't know nearly as much about rank, culture, and structure in the military as someone who's in it would, but I can at least confirm it wouldn't be abnormal for a Sgt or another superior to "order" his men to drink. I wouldn't interpret it as an actual order. I think when famousone said that when his sgt "ordered" them to drink, he wasn't forcing it on anyone. It's a cultural thing, at least in my (limited) opinion, that when a superior gives a fun order, even if it can't be an actual order, they treat it as such because it's fun. whether they get hit with an NJP would probably hinge on someone on the stricter side being present. As for the conversation on morality and gun control, I don't have anything I feel like adding for the moment.

I was mostly replying for the other person to see yes it would be illegal if it was forced but if it was in good fun its fine. They asked if it would be wrong or stuff so I just wanted to clarify and go insight ya know