The following wording can be found in the “Oath of Allegiance form,” section A-2 in the “New Jersey Law Revision Commission” Final Report relating to Oaths and Affidavits published in March, 1999:
“I, ____________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey, and that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and to the Governments established in the United States and in this State, under the authority of the people, so help me God - (optional).”
Suffice it so say that the oath required for military service is similar. On a side note, I recently attended the GT school board’s 2013 re-org meeting and the same oath, word for word, with the optional phrase was used to swear in the new members.
Looking at the “Oath of Allegiance,” the following phrases are worthy of our attention: “Constitution of the United States”, “Constitution of the State of New Jersey”, and “Governments established…under the authority of the people”. The question then arises as to what is it our law enforcement and military personnel are pledging to do when they swear to uphold the Constitution (federal or state) and pledge allegiance to Governments established under the authority of the people?
Let us be crystal clear about something; our military and our local law enforcement personnel do not serve at the pleasure of any president, senator or representative, governor, or mayor. Our armed forces and law enforcement personnel serve “under the authority of the people” as do our president, senators and representatives, governors, mayors, and all other elected or hired police and governmental entities. Additionally, all of those named along with our military and law enforcement personnel are sworn to uphold the Constitution which was established, along with the Bill of Rights, not to empower the federal or state government but to delineate the restrictions that our government must operate under and to protect the rights of the people who put that government in place.
On a local level there seems to be more and more concern amongst citizens about how business is being conducted in Gloucester Township. It seems that anybody who raises any voice of concern or criticism about such things in our town is instantly labeled a malcontent and looked at with an evil eye. In fact, there is a contingent (one or more) of commenters who seem to serve no other useful purpose than to be set free onto the pages of the GT Patch to denigrate anybody who raises a voice of concern about political shenanigans in Gloucester Township.
The time has now come when there is more and more talk respecting “us versus them” in relation to the people and our duly elected government. As citizens become more apprehensive about the ever-encroaching stance of the government, it becomes more and more of a concern for the people that the very ones they have empowered to protect them should do otherwise.
Enter the organization known as “The Oath Keepers.” Just who are the Oath Keepers and what is it they stand for?
Oath Keepers is comprised mainly of law-enforcement and military personnel and firefighters, both active and retired, who have pledged to honor the oath that they swore to uphold when pledging to obey the Constitution and serve “under the authority of the people.” The Oath Keepers clearly understand the most basic premise of life and liberty in the United States as it is worded in the “Oath of Allegiance.” Oath Keepers have thus pledged to refuse any order to disarm or raise arms against the American people regardless of who issues that order for they are aware that they serve at the pleasure of the citizens of the United States and their local communities.
I, for one, would be interested in knowing if there is any Oath Keepers’ presence amongst the leadership and/or law-enforcement personnel of Gloucester Township. I think it’s time for more transparency and cooperation between “us and them.”
That said, the following style of commentary in criticism of those questioning township activities (from Coffee Mom in the Patch) serves no useful purpose in this dialog:
“You are all a bunch of judgemental hypocrites, who obviously have nothing better to do than to mock the people who you will undoubtably EXPECT to be there to save your sorry behinds, should someone break into your house, threaten your life, or deface your property.”
A kind word of response to Coffee Mom is in order: I do not expect our local police to save my “sorry behind” in the event of a break-in at my home or an eminent threat to my life or the lives of my loved ones. The police have their hands full protecting themselves as was evidenced recently by the shooting at the Gloucester Township Municipal Building. How in God’s name would the police ever respond in time to protect me from imminent danger? That falls to me and the clean-up to our local law enforcement. If you think otherwise you are naive.
I call for a response by our township and law-enforcement leadership as to their understanding concerning the oath they swore and their understanding of what it means to serve in Government established under the authority of the people…by the people…and for the people. We can make it better here but everyone has to be involved and I’m wondering why I so often feel like I am on the outside looking in.
Consider that in the current atmosphere following the Aurora, CO, theater and Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings, local people and politicians are verbalizing this kind of rhetoric:
“Ban the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer and possession of both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.”
“Don’t let people who already have them keep them. Don’t let ones that have already been manufactured stay on the market. I don’t care whether it’s called gun control or a gun ban. I’m for it.”
“There is just no reason civilians need to own assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Gun enthusiasts can still have their venison chili, shoot for sport and competition, and make a home invader flee for his life without pretending they are a part of the SEAL team that took out Osama bin Laden.”
I would question what is going on when it is suggested that we, the people, are not to be trusted with anything more than a single-shot BB-gun but our law- enforcement agencies are arming themselves to the teeth with the likes of “tactical armored security vehicles.”