Should we have a compulsory national service requirement?

[TonyNorCal]

Should we have a compulsory national service requirement? This could include both military and non-military (public works, social service) style requirements.

Let's say a yes means all 18 year olds are included (no college deferment, no daddy knows so and so exemptions). Only severe disabilities/medical conditions exempted. Since there's a non-military choice even those with minor to moderate medical issues could participate with less taxing work.

Say service would be 2 years or so. College could wait.

Edited to emphasize: as originally said above this wouldn't all be military service. There would be service commitment with a military option for those so inclined and a number of public/social options for those inclined in other areas.

[SemiAutoSam]

Hell No

[762cavalier]

I say yes.Maybe if we instituted some sort of compulsory service(doesn't have to be military) then we would get a lot of the loser entitlement crowd to to actually give a damn about something other than themselves. Maybe more people would actually care about this country and what direction it is going in and maybe VOTE with an informed opinion.Most of what is wrong with our society is the people that believe they are entitled to something from the government and see any kind of service work as something only suckers would do.

[The Soup Nazi]

I disagree. You can't force anyone to do anything. If you force them onto responsibility, more often than not, they'll probably half *** it and be more detrimental than helpful. I wouldn't be so averse to applying the Starship Troopers style meritocracy to our society. (Though not to the point where you deny the vote to non serving members of society, maybe rewards such as certain tax exemptions for willing public service)

[M. Sage]

I'd say yes, but with the way politicians are, we'd just end up with something like Hitler Jungend.

[461]

I think it's a great idea. Two years doing your choice of either military or public service wouldn't hurt anybody and I can't see where there's anybody it wouldn't help. Give kids some training and give them a respect for working for a living and an appreciation for how good they have it. Plenty of countries around the world have it and I've yet to hear how it's been a problem.

[SemiAutoSam]

For one thing it does not fit into the way of life with our so called freedoms.
But if the gov were to instigate this plan more and more people would see that its not really the free country they are always hearing it is.

See film: THEY LIVE

The veil would fall. the truth would be revealed.

Oh and its against the constitution see Conscription and Involuntary Servitude

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment13/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_servitude

[taloft]

I say yes. With a few exceptions, most of the kids I see these days could stand the discipline. Say what you want about the military, but they have a knack for getting young people's heads on straight. Besides, it teaches skills and experience that you otherwise might not get. Respect for self and others is always a good thing to learn. It seems to work well for other countries.

Public service could be an option for the anti-war crowd. Go dig ditches for the peace corp. is some foreign hell hole, that should help build an appreciation for the U.S. and some character at the same time.

Edit: I hear what you are saying Sam, but people serve on jury duty. To me this is a similar kind of duty to your country, just a lot more intense.

[PanzerAce]

I say yes, but make it similar to the national guard, so that while you are still serving your country, you do not actually have to push you plans back by a few years.

[FatKatMatt]

Hell no, you make them serve they'll just resent it, it won't "make them more respectful" or "give them an appreciation for their freedoms". It will not work, the soldiers will be of lesser quality than volunteers and more people will get killed. It is an infringement on absolute freedom.

[SemiAutoSam]

Yes that's true and I love jury duty I'm the first one that tells the other jurors about their power. http://fija.org/ Ive been on 4 juries this year alone I pass out fliers and talk to people in the courthouse I do my best to educate the courthouse staff.

I say yes. With a few exceptions, most of the kids I see these days could stand the discipline. Say what you want about the military, but they have a knack for getting young people's heads on straight. Besides, it teaches skills and experience that you otherwise might not get. Respect for self and others is always a good thing to learn. It seems to work well for other countries.

Public service could be an option for the anti-war crowd. Go dig ditches for the peace corp. is some foreign hell hole, that should help build an appreciation for the U.S. and some character at the same time.

Edit: I hear what you are saying Sam, but people serve on jury duty. To me this is a similar kind of duty to your country, just a lot more intense.

[461]

I see where you're coming from Sam but I have to respond that freedom isn't free, we all need to pay a part of the price of it. Do those that are unwilling to expend any effort toward freedom deserve any?

As to being against the constitution, I'd point to the Militia. I hate to cut and paste but the statement below is pretty clear to me.

George Mason, one of the
Framers of the U.S. Constitution, said, "Who are the Militia? They
consist now of the whole people, except for a few public officers."
Yet we also see statutes like 10 USC 311, which defines it as "all
able- bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided
in section 13 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or have
made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United
States." Some state statutes define it as "able-bodied males" of
different age ranges, such as 16 through 59.

[SemiAutoSam]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_the_United_States

I see where you're coming from Sam but I have to respond that freedom isn't free, we all need to pay a part of the price of it. Do those that are unwilling to expend any effort toward freedom deserve any?

As to being against the constitution, I'd point to the Militia. I hate to cut and paste but the statement below is pretty clear to me.

George Mason, one of the
Framers of the U.S. Constitution, said, "Who are the Militia? They
consist now of the whole people, except for a few public officers."
Yet we also see statutes like 10 USC 311, which defines it as "all
able- bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided
in section 13 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or have
made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United
States." Some state statutes define it as "able-bodied males" of
different age ranges, such as 16 through 59.

[TonyNorCal]

I also want to re-emphasize the public/social works option. The suggestion isn't that if you don't choose the military you get some punitive type of other duty. Quite the contrary, the idea would be to generate a number of diverse public service options that would be meaningful and help society. Obviously nobody wants a solider who is so against being there that he becomes a miscreant or liability. There could also be Great Depression style public works endeavors. Perhaps some could serve as auxillary support for border security. Some good work with the homeless, at battered womens shelters, and doing outreach. People could also serve overseas in non-military roles like food services and other such things we contract out now.

I really haven't given this much thought, so a lot of it is just off the top of my head. Another possibility is that some could work in their communities and live at home...treating the requirement as a 40 hour a week job. These people might serve 3 years instead of the 2 people who live away do. Who knows.

Point is it's not all about the military. I was thinking of many possible options.

[461]

My personal opinion is that paying taxes is not paying the costs of freedom, taxes are simply paying the costs of management. Poor managemnt at that.

I agree that conscription would be a tough pill to swallow but I truly feel that the generation affected would be better for it as would this country.

I hold no illusion that it will ever happen as the time for such programs is long past so this is really a futile conversation. I do feel it could be a positive thing for both the people and the country though.