Military

'Selective' Service Refuseniks Are Still Punished, Just Not Prosecuted

USA Today investigation finds that over 1 million men have faced the consequences of not applying to Jimmy Carter's sham draft.

|

End it, don't mend it ||| C-SPAN
C-SPAN

You cannot legally drive an automobile in the United States without asking the government for permission, though only the hardest core of anarchist types spend much time complaining about it. You can no longer obtain a student loan without Washington's fingerprints on it, and OK, more people think that's unsound, though the policy survived unified Republican control of the executive and legislative branches from 2017 to 2018.

And 18-year-old males are still required, under theoretical penalty of five years imprisonment, to register for a military draft that will never be used, which pretty much nobody defends on the merits anymore, but because of the myriad other ways government encroaches on our basic existence, this relic from the Carter era has combined with all of the above to needlessly degrade and complicate the lives of hundreds and thousands of men.

So concludes (minus the judgmental language) this useful USA Today investigation into the fates of my fellow Selective Service refuseniks. Sure, nobody has been prosecuted for the crime since 1986 (only 20 men were ever charged, with 14 convicted), but the agency still refers non-registrants to the Justice Department—112,000 last year, the paper found. And because Leviathan has us by the short and curlies in all sorts of ways that aren't immediately apparent between the ages of 18 and 26, the punishment arrives later, often by rude surprise.

The most common moment of discovery is when draft-scofflaws get rejected for student loans (this, for what it's worth, was the one unavoidable consequence I was fully cognizant of back in 1986). Refuseniks are also barred from working for the federal government, and for most state governments as well. It doesn't stop there:

Forty states and the District of Columbia link Selective Service to a driver's license. […]

In eight states, men are not allowed men to register at a state college or university – even without financial aid – if they aren't registered for Selective Service. […]

In Alaska, men who fail to register for the draft can't receive an annual dividend from the Alaska Permanent Fund, which gave Alaska residents $1,600 from state oil revenue in 2018.

And around one out of every six people who write letters to the Selective Service asking for a formal declaration of their draft status—as more than 1 million men have done over the past quarter century—do so because the subject came up during their application to become a U.S. citizen.

I for one enjoyed the woke language in the justifications offered by Selective Service spokesman Matthew Tittman: "If there were no penalties for failing to register, the rates would plummet, and fairness and equity would go out the window."

The shadow draft is currently in legal and legislative limbo after a federal district court ruled in February that its male-only feature is unconstitutional. Congress now has to decide whether to subject the ladies to the same punitive exercise in mandatory loyalty or do like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) wants and blow the whole disgrace clean out of the water.

Regardless of its fate, let this USA Today article be a reminder: Government can and will find the most symbolic and indefensible requirement to stick into the ribs of its subjects, and then even in the absence of formal enforcement will find ways to make non-adherents suffer through the ever-advancing accumulation of mandates it imposes on the behavior of allegedly free men.

The Selective Service is a pile of leftover authoritarian garbage from a century no current would-be draftee was even born in. It's long since past time to stick it on a barge and set it on fire.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

105 responses to “'Selective' Service Refuseniks Are Still Punished, Just Not Prosecuted

  1. Hashtag Male Privilege.

    1. on Saturday I got a gorgeous Ariel Atom after earning $6292 this ? four weeks past, after lot of struggels Google, Yahoo, Facebook proffessionals have been revealed the way and cope with gape for increase home income in suffcient free time.You can make $9o an hour working from home easily??. VIST THIS SITE RIGHT HERE
      >>=====>>>> http://www.Aprocoin.com

      1. Shoulda saved more and got a Nomad.

        1. Youd think he made enough to buy a spell checker.

    2. “USA Today investigation finds that over 1 million men have faced the consequences of not applying to Jimmy Carter’s sham draft.”

      Strange how Welch failed to mention all the women who have faced dire consequences.
      I’m sure The Patriarchy made sure that women suffered at least 10 times as much.

    3. Google paid for every week online work from home 8000 to 10000 dollars.i have received first month $24961 and $35274 in my last month paycheck from Google and i work 3 to 5 hours a day in my spare time easily from home. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it..go to this site for more details…

      So I started ========>>>>>>>> http://www.payshd.com

  2. My best friend from high school burned his. I turned mine in like a dutiful citizen. He’s now stuck with 3 unwanted children and a bitch wife and I am not. Make of it what you will.

    1. Nothing whatever can be “made of” it. Look up the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

    2. Honest question: are you attempting to signal your own vapid stupidity or is it coming out naturally here? This was bad, even for me (you’re usually very ignorable).

  3. You cannot legally drive an automobile in the United States without asking the government for permission,

    You can drive without a license on private property. On public roads, you need a driver’s license. Postal roads are mentioned in the Constitution, which is where the enumerated power and regulatory power comes from.

    The Common Defense is also specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

    A volunteer military works well for the USA and even when the USA was attacked by Imperial Japan, most men volunteered early for military service rather than wait for some draft.

    1. Yes, you may not drive without a license but you may use your property (automobile) on public highways without a license.
      Driving is a commercial activity for which a license may be required.

      1. Let us know if you can get a court to see it that way.

        1. I’m not driving in my car! I’m traveling in my vessel!

      2. And how do you figure you get to a public highway? Don’t give me any of that sovereign citizen nonsense either.

  4. I don’t remember ever applying for it or having it. I was later a draft dodger and even later a volunteer sailor. So I suppose I must have had the dang thing.

    1. No. I received a notice to register for the draft despite being a veteran. I figured that it would have been included somehow.

    2. You probably did it when you were a freshman in college or maybe a senior in high school and don’t remember it. I’m pretty sure I’m signed up, but for the life of me I can’t remember when. I think I applied for some financial aid to go to college and that’s when, maybe.

  5. “”And 18-year-old males are still required, under theoretical penalty of five years imprisonment, to register for a military draft that will never be used, “”

    You mean never used again?

    1. Let the Islamofools set off a big enough bomb (how big is big enough? Who knows!) and that ‘never be used’ may get tested. The official Narrative is that theremwas a Draft in WWII as a way of imposing order on the chaos of volunteers after Pearl Harbor. Believe as much of that as you like, FDR lied a lot, especially to himself.

      1. I’m in the middle of reading Catch-22, and it makes it pretty clear that lots of people in the military in WWII didn’t want to be there. My favorite line (so far) is about how one’s “enemy” is anyone that will get you killed, whether it’s the Germans, or your own side’s generals.

        1. Heard a speech a while back where the claim was that far more men reused/dodged the draft in WW2 than in Vietnam.
          Also that there were, proportionately, far more atrocities committed during combat operations in Europe and the Pacific, than in Indo-China..

        2. Great book.

          Heller knew what he was talking about. Bomber crews in WWII are the perfect example. You were statistically going to die.

          Others have their own take on what the catch means. To me it is that in an insane situation beyond your control your own sanity or lack therof is no defense. There is no defense. You can only put one foot in front of the other.

          Somehow I have found that comforting at times. Glad I read it back when.

  6. Agreed, it is a useless and abusive application of government power and force.
    However, Selective Service registration has never, and does not now, obligate anyone to serve in our military.
    It does allow the federal gov’t to call a Selective Service registrant (a man) to an induction center but the gov’t may never force a citizen to involuntarily relinquish any rights protected by the Constitution.
    At the induction center, the registrant is asked to enter military service and swear to an oath of allegiance. By doing so, the registrant (man) has, in most cases unwittingly, suspended certain rights while in military service. This action may not be forced upon any citizen.
    Refusing to take the oath disqualifies one from military service. Refusal is lawful and has no negative consequences. It has always been this way and will remain so as long as we have the current Constitution.
    The “draft” is legal, conscription is not.
    Bottom line: Selective Service registration, though abusive, has no overtly negative consequences. Just do it, go on with your life and become active in reigning in our gov’t servants.

    1. Like getting a picture ID to register to vote, selective service registration has a chilling effect on men who don’t wan’t to die in combat, and is therefore illegal.

      1. I doubt that getting a picture ID to register to vote has a chilling effect on men who don’t want to die in combat.

    2. re: “The “draft” is legal, conscription is not.”

      That logic was attempted and rejected repeatedly during several wars. It was not true then and there is no evidence that any court would find it true now.

      re: “Refusing to take the oath disqualifies one from military service.”

      True in a volunteer army. Untrue in any army that uses conscription. Lots of young men were conscripted and compelled to military service despite refusing to take the oath.

      In short, while your diatribe perhaps describes what the rules should be, they are a very wrong description of what the rules actually are.

      Finally, pet peeve alert. You “reign” as a monarch. You “rein in” horses (or government bureaucrats).

      1. Pedantic Squared; as this is a Representative government we ALL reign, as Sovereign Citizens.

        (Is that hair split finely enough for you?)

      2. A lot of conscientious objectors spent time in federal prisons post WW2. A lot of those were Jahovah’s Witnesses and I guarantee none of them swore an oath of allegiance. It is forbidden by church dogma.

  7. I enlisted in the Marine Corps when I was 17. When I turned 18 I did not sign up for the draft and joked about what are they going to, draft me into the military?

    In 2004 I registered for college. The Selective Service had me down as non-compliant and I had to write them a letter to explain why I didn’t register. I receive a letter from them, not really excusing me but the letter stated that no one could hold it against me under penalty of law.

    So interestingly, if you are in the service you do not have to register. But if you leave the service before your 26th birthday, you are required to register thus the reason I’m non-compliant. Who knew?

    1. I always figured that if the shit hit the fan, the DoD would find me to reinstate my enlistment.

      1. That’s ’cause former military in the US aren’t drafted, they’re recalled.

        1. Non-retired veterans cannot be recalled if they have completed their 8 year obligation.

          1. LOL, you mean under the current rules they can’t be. Obviously if it’s a big enough issue that they need to start drafting people at that scale, then the US government will change the rules.

      2. Most people who enlisted dont realize that they are signing up for an 8 year obligation no matter what.

        Your active duty time is subtracted from that 8 years and the remainder is “inactive reserve” time.

        1. Six years for me. Two years active duty, two years active reserve, two years inactive reserve,

    2. I also joined at 17. The Army included registration at basic training. They also had me register to vote.

  8. Jimmy’s Carter reinstated the draft AND poisoned the nation’s marijuana supply. Living up to his moniker of “History’s Greatest Monster”.

    1. How did “Jimmy’s Carter” “poison the marijuana supply.” And is Carter a greater monster than Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc?

      1. I assuming he means the spraying of Paraquat on pot plants.

        1. Which was believed at the time, and actually promoted by the government, as potentially deadly to smokers

          1. I remember a guy who died from paraquot poisining, late 70’s/early 80’s. It was in the news a lot because everyone assumed he was growing pot.

    2. Jimmy Carter is History’s Greatest Monster?!?

      Oh, please. Yes, he was a gawdawful President. Yes, he has been a consistently neurotic mess since. That goddamned Austrian with the toothbrush moustache wasn’t History’s Greatest Monster, and HE had ten million people murdered. The Austrian has been outdone by Stalin (at least 9 million, plus deliberate famine deaths of up to 30 million), Mao (45 million or more) and arguably Rachel Carson, whose vendetta against DDT (and lousy science) has lead to at least half a million unnecessary deaths per year since the DDT ban in 1972.

      Get a freaking grip.

      1. Jesus. Watch the Simpsons episode on “Whacking Day”, season 4.

      2. Give Ghengis Khan some props, he’s credited with eliminating 10% of the world’s population, about 40 million!

  9. Everyone’s favorite “great” President, Lincoln, instituted the first American draft. New Yorkers rioted for THREE WEEKS over it. We’re all sheep today.

    I’ve always enjoyed the irony that Lincoln resorted to slavery in order to win the war against those who supported slavery. Didn’t get a good reaction in class with that one back in high school… but it’s true.

    1. Please give full credit. Lincoln also suspended haebeus corpus, and approved the concept of ‘total war’, meaning inflicting military damage on civilian infrastructure and on civilians.

      1. He thought he faced a unique situation and hence he wouldn’t be setting a bad precedent. I mean, how often will a country face a proslavery secessionist threat to its very integrity? It’s not as if this would serve as a precedent for every other kind of emergency in the future, that would just be paranoid thinking.

        1. +1 slippery slope fallacy

      2. Uhhhhh … inflicting damage on civilians was part of war from the very beginning. Stealing from farmers was part of the very reason for war, and raping and pillaging in general has always been one of the perks.

        Lincoln did a lot of dam fool things. No need to gin up nonsense.

        1. Not to nitpick but ‘total war’ is a very different concept from foraging or even from rape and pillage. The latter were consequences meted out only to those civilians who forcibly resisted an attacking force. It was seen more as a form of “compensation” for the soldiers than a punishment of the civilians.

          ‘Total War’ is the intentional attack of civilian targets with emphasis on infrastructure and population. It was an attempt to eliminate the opponent’s ability to wage war at all by using up or destroying the resources needed to support the opponent’s military. It was vastly more destructive and permanent than the rape and pillage that happened after the capture of a city. Remember that in the latter scenario, the attacking army has already won. They are willing to tolerate some damage to their new property but also have an incentive to keep it intact and productive again soon. Not only is there no such incentive in a Total War scenario, the incentives are reversed.

          1. The original wars were all total. If it weren’t for total war, a nation could win a war by disarming. No military, nothing to be attacked, right?

            What’s the point of war if it can’t be total?

            I don’t even see the point of attacking the military if you can attack civilians instead. Attacking the military is like robbing a police stn., which AFAIK only Dillinger did.

            1. There’s this whole thing called “honor” you seem to be missing. Which is fine enough, no one’s education is complete, but I think if you explore the concept (particularly in relation to military history) you may understand (even if you don’t agree with) why most formal militaries in the history of the world have avoided intentionally attacking civilian targets.

              1. most formal militaries in the history of the world have avoided intentionally attacking civilian targets.

                I deny this. I’d really like to see some solid citation for such a bold claim. Every war I have ever read about involved militaries attacking civilians.

                Merchant ships? No need for convoys or escorts if navies avoided them.

                Knights were famous for attacking civilians. There’d have been no need for chivalric legends if knights had been famous for not attacking civilians.

                Please, name one war where armies did not attack civilians as a matter of course.

                1. You may have heard of this guy called Ghengis Khan. And hundreds of warlords before him.

                  The entire history of human armed conflict is an attack on “civilians”

  10. Sadly, just getting rid of the selective service cannot be permitted, as that would be eliminating government jobs.

    We are well past the point where sweeping up a whole bunch of civilians, regardless of real or perceived sex/gender, and ‘training’ them for combat in 90 days and throwing them into combat is even practical.
    Wars are not fought by massed armies on battle fields anymore. But the selective service continues, incapable of fulfilling it’s theoretical mission. I suspect that somewhere deep within the Department of Commerce, there is a unit still inspecting buggy whips.

    1. Yeah, but not for use on buggies. #kinky

  11. So many penalties imposed without a jury trial – disqualification from government employment, denial of driving privileges, denial of the (dubious) privileges of a student loan…

    No wonder they don’t bother to file charges against the refuseniks. Jury trials (which these people would probably demand) are expensive and a hassle, why not skip that step altogether?

    1. Not to mention weeding out all the annoying potential jurors with libertarian or constitutional scruples about enforcing a law like this. If you blink for just one second, such an annoying person could get on the jury and hang it.

  12. Well – count me as someone who actually thinks that selective service should mainly be reformed rather than eliminated. And reformed in the direction of restoring militia in order to either get rid of or greatly reduce the standing army and to eliminate the profound danger of the current permawar state that a purely volunteer army enables because 95+% of the population simply doesn’t give a shit cuz they will never have anything at stake.

    And redefining militia more broadly to include national/volunteer service is perfectly reasonable too – and would massively reduce govt spending. There’s even ways it doesn’t even have to be truly mandatory beyond the 1 day intro/sales pitch (which can easily take place as part of HS – so there is absolutely nothing incrementally mandatory about it)

    1. count me as someone who actually thinks that selective service should mainly be reformed rather than eliminated

      Let me fix that for you:

      count me as another fucking statist slaver

      Fuck off, slaver.

      1. Oh golly. Isn’t this precious. The only true scotsman has now stood up – and has nothing meaningful to say.

        1. To be fair everything in your initial comment was antithetical to even the most passable libertarian. sorry.

          1. Superficially – yes.

            Except at least three things:
            1. There is NO way of getting rid of the permawar culture unless the American population once again has a stake in ending that. It was the OPPOSITION to the draft and the randomness of those deaths that morphed into opposition to the war that actually ENDED the war. Today – crickets re opposition to anything, ‘thank you for your service’ that is as meaningful as ‘nice weather isn’t it’, genuflection to pervasive militarism in society, strip searches at airports because we are ok with being a nation of sheep protected by professional shepherds, and going on two decades of permawar with no end in sight. Not to mention a few extra trillion in debt as a highly coercive ‘gift’ to that generation now registering.

            2. A spirit of voluntary civic association (that de Toqueville marvelled at) does not arise from flouridation of the drinking water or from reading Rothbard. It arises from a sense of obligation to others and an awareness of how such activities can be organized. I’m open to listening to other ways of doing that. But until that actually happens, libertarian ideas have ZERO possibility of changing the mindset of ‘let gummint do that’.

            3. Must’ve missed the entirety of the subcomments about how to make it less mandatory. It’s not like that age group has many options beyond mandatory school attendance, a shitty meaningless job at McD’s, and go into debt up your eyeballs for college.

            1. “Voluntary”? You think you can reform government coercion into something voluntary?

              Fuck off, slaver.

              1. Obviously YOU can’t think of ways it can be incentivized cuz you are a dipshit AND a moron.

                Govt currently incentivizes homeownership – or driving cars – and a ton of other things so that you believe those decisions are completely up to you.

                1. Government incentives always involve coercion. If you can’t grasp that, it just shows you’ve been a statist way too long.

                2. “Obviously YOU can’t think of ways it can be incentivized”

                  If you mean some sort of payment or reward for service, that just re-locates the coercion. Now the government is taking someone else’s stuff and giving it to you.

            2. I’ve always wrestled with Plato’s idea of civic duty and libertarianism. As is, liberarianism comes off like a petulant child demanding the protection of the state while offering nothing in return. Conscription? No obligation towards mutual defense. Taxes? Slavery by any other name. Abiding by the laws of the land? I never agreed to not masturbate openly in public.

              At the other end, you have Heinlein “libertarians” using Starship Troopers as a blueprint for a just state. Sure, there is no conscription, but it is essentially creating an underclass with a unique means of silencing any unwanted ideas/reform.

              At the end of the day however, militaries are highly specialized to where I doubt ending/reducing significantly a standing army is feasible. Sure, bases across the world could be closed, but the knowhow of how to operate a nuclear sub isn’t going to be covered in basic training.

              I don’t see a good way out of this.

              1. Sure, bases across the world could be closed, but the knowhow of how to operate a nuclear sub isn’t going to be covered in basic training.

                ‘course not. You go back for another couple of weeks and get a small pay-bump for that.

              2. I doubt we can get rid of a standing army either. But most anything done by privates (maybe even some corporals) can also be done by militia-level (basic/unit/1stspec) training and organizationally we have Natl Guard where they can be seconded to do that. Combine that with an expanded idea of the militia (incl FEMA, DHS, CBP, NPS, TSA, VA/medical) and the tons of state/muni level functions (all chosen ultimately by the teen) and its hard to see where someone will be forced into combat. With a huge advantage that moving those operations back to the US and a large part of the non-deployed reserve into the state-level will force Congress to declare war when we dick around overseas.

                Far more important – a population with those skills is no longer a soft target. Flight 93 is no longer a flight with a few passengers who used to be team-sport athletes. It becomes a group that can self-organize more quickly to deal with a range of emergencies. No guarantees re outcomes EXCEPT that the entire post-militia-duty population becomes far more resistant to fearmongering. And that sort of threat is actually the modern threat – where militia is far more ‘there’ than military can ever be.

                1. There is something to your idea.
                  Given that the two years after high school, whether in college, or not, are pretty much pissed away and there is zero national cohesion, some kind of national military service would be a benefit. Those who choose to remain could become the standing armed forces.
                  It could be where citizens learn the basics of what might be needed, if a couple of billion Chinese are sent to take us over. Then they are sent on their merry way with a sense of discipline and team-work.
                  Of course the “conscientious objectors” – AKA cowards – could be allowed less-than military service, maybe in VA hospitals, but I think most 18 year-olds would be fine with learning how to shoot and play with explosives.
                  No exemptions, though, unless profoundly disabled, especially for the wealthy and well connected. In this, we shall have no “betters”.

  13. “…from a century no current would-be draftee was even born in.” The U.S. Constitution was drafted and approved in a century “no current benefactor of constitutional rights was even born in.” And the relevance?

    1. I should have said “…beneficiary of constitutional rights…”

  14. Income tax refuseniks are punished and prosecuted.

  15. sooooo…you want to work for the government, but you don’t want to sign up for some government thing a jig…does anyone else get the ironicity of that stance? that mathz hurts my brain

    1. There’s a minor difference between pushing some paper around in a government office and killing and dying for said government.

  16. Selective Service is doomed the day women are required to be included. It won’t last ten years after that.

  17. A few weeks ago I received a letter from selective service telling me they updated my information for my new address.

    I am 51.

    1. They are preparing for the coming generational warfare. A Boomer-Mellennial cage match.

  18. as far as I knew, I had never registered. never thought I needed to, having enlisted out of high school. recently, while filling out my periodic review paperwork for my background investigation, finally online, I saw a link to a selective service site to find your registration number. on a whim, I tried it, and lo and behold, I was registered. no idea when I did so. the real kicker was that I then needed to file an additional statement as part of my investigation package to the effect that I had erroneously reported not having registered for the previous 3 decades or so, and I had made the error with no intent to mislead. heh.

    1. How old were you at end of enlistment?

  19. My current job requires a security clearance. When I was applying for the clearance they asked for my Selective Service number. If I’d neglected to sign up 32 years ago I would have been denied my clearance and lost my job. I actually enlisted in the Air Force after high school, but was still required to sign up for the draft. Insane.

    1. Suppose you do neglect to register. After you turn 35 if the issue comes up, can you correct it or are you fucked for life because SS will no longer take your registr’n?

      1. My understanding is that it remains on your record and makes one ineligible for many federal opportunities for the rest of their life.

        1. How’s that for due process?

    2. they asked for my Selective Service number

      How the fuck am I supposed to know? It’s YOUR (the government’s) number, not mine.

      1. There’s a website that will give it to you if you enter your name and/or other info.

        1. I just did and was told they have no records for a DOB from before 1960.
          Mine is 1956.

  20. If you don’t think selective service or the draft will ever happen again, I’d invite you to examine how many Chinese there are vs. how many American/European’s there are. Hell, even if you add in the Russians any ground war involving China will necessitate either nuclear warfare or a draft (RE: actual conscription), probably both.

    And just blithely assuming China will never be a threat, well, that assumes much.

    Now, any of that happening soon is pretty damn unlikely but as soon as China decides we’re no longer needed to pirate technology from…well all bets are probably off.

    1. Ground war with China: where? Their place or ours? Either requires an invasion.

      Oh, some third party place? Where? What are we doing there in the first place?

      1. “”Ground war with China: where?”‘

        Could be on a number of smaller islands much like WW2 with Japan. It does not need to be China proper, or the US proper.

        1. And what were we doing there in the first place?

          Same as in WW II. If we had not conquered and kept imperial outposts, Japan would not have been able to attack us there. Oh, but we needed those outposts to protect us in case the Japanese attacked us. Oh wait …..

          1. Question: Should the United States come to the aid of Japan if China decides to invade and/or pull another Tibet?

            Follow Up Question: If the United States went to war with China, how long do you think military satellites that allow modern warfare would last?

            Note that I’m not trying to say war with China is imminent or unavoidable, neither of those things are true. Since this is the internet, I guess I have to point that out. However, it very well could happen for at least a few obvious reasons and probably hundreds of smaller ones. Either way, if that happened you’re going to need a ground invasion. Doubtful it would look anything like Normandy though, and you’d need an actual conscription so bitching about selective service is…first world problems at it’s finest.

            Frankly, a draft might be a preferable way to wage war. If the public actually had skin in the game, maybe we’d see more Vietnam styled protests over military adventurism. It would need a rule where Congressional and Senator sons are drafted first though, just in case.

    2. Even if we go to war with China, a ground war isn’t that likely. It’ll more likely be a sea and air war.

      1. There will not be another superpower war in at least the next 100 years. Mark it.

        1. Agree with you there, but if you include proxy-wars we’ve been at war with each other for…a hundred years or so?

          Those little wars are probably preferable either way, so thanks MAD theory. This is probably one of the inevitable results of nuclear armament, although I’m not so sure what happens when every crap heap nation has them.

          By then, we might be more worried about fusion powered energy weapon installations on the moon though. Who knows.

        2. China’s population is aging and will begin shrinking the near future. Some projections put their population as low a 560,000,000 in 2100, while the US is projected to have 450,000,000, with a much younger population.

          In fact, most of the world will soon have declining populations, two exceptions being the US and Canada, because of our immigration policies. So the relative strength of the US to the rest of the world will only increase.

          I know everybody has a hard-on for China to supersede the US, but it ain’t gonna happen.

    3. And just blithely assuming China will ever be a match for the US, well, that assumes much.

  21. Paul Jacob is Free! (So is Kathy Richman AFAIK.)

    Who’d’ve thought 40 yrs. ago that not only would SS resistance go out w a whimper (Paul Jacob quietly negotiated a return to above-ground), but so, probably, will SS? I remember the sex discrimination aspect was litigated back then, went all the way to the Sups. IIRC Willis Carto’s Liberty Lobby was one of the litigants against.

  22. Matt wrote “The Selective Service is a pile of leftover authoritarian garbage from a century no current would-be draftee was even born in. It’s long since past time to stick it on a barge and set it on fire.”

    Not so. The ancient regulations permit drafting up to the age of 35, although even at the height of the Viet Nam buildup, they weren’t drafting anyone over 26. Today’s 25-year-olds, still eligible, would have been born in 1994.

    Larry
    (Inducted into the US Army in 1971 at the age of 25 years, 7 months)

  23. When I was in college you filled out a form. This was 80s it was no big deal. I am certain mine is long since lost. Never heard anything about it since.

    No draft then, no heel spurs.

    I would have gone up if it were needed it was not. When I had a valuable skill the military did try to recruit me. I chose another path but not because I had any opposition to the military offer.

    No problems there. I grew up on army bases.

    If the registration system is outdated then no need to spend on it. Recruitment is a valuable thing.

  24. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $30h ? $72h?how? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance? on something new? after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.
    Heres what I’ve been doing? ,,,
    CLICK HERE? http://xurl.es/reasonn

  25. may as well scrap the entire thing. I imagine if a war wasn’t popular enough to generate sufficient voluntary enlistments, the population wouldn’t stand for a draft at all.

  26. A sham that the Congress has refused to do anything about lo these 40-years.

  27. Yes it’s stupid and arbitrary but what is the real cost?

    I like many assumed The probability that anything comes from it are 0. And for all those who filled the paperwork we were right.

    This is a crybaby high schooler libertarian argument.
    Living in the real world this was a ridiculously small and easy thing to do at the post office.

    You can strive for more libertarian living but acknowledge we don’t live in libertopia

    I hope this was an April fools article-what a bunch of wasted research and whining. Now we should get rid of it don’t get me wrong but this is hardly some grand cause or massive “leviathan ” intrusion on our lives

    It’s idioic paper shuffling and a minor nuisance.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.