There are several reasons to take the oath of office. I have taken it once for a Sheriffs Commission and once for an elected office. The meat and potatoes of the oath is the pledge is to UPHOLD AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION FROM ENEMIES BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC. There has been much disturbing talk coming out of Washington for several years in including our president who views the Constitution as a hindrance and a negative document.
I would agree with the leader but in an opposite meaning. The Constitution is a hindrance to those in Government who would be restrained by a document that foresaw their tyranny. It is a negative document to the bloating of a government to control the lives of its people and restrain those in authority to lord their will over the people.
With most of the pretenses now abandoned for the protection of the individual and placing the state first, we now see how wise the fore-fathers who created this unheard of form of government.
"DEMOCRACY IS THE WORST FORM OF GOVERNMENT EXCEPT FOR ALL THE REST" Winston Churchill.
It has been a question that has gone around many times about the choice that sworn officials will make when ordered to enforce unconstitutional laws. Will those sworn to uphold the Constitution actually break down doors of law abiding citizens to confiscate their arms if ordered? Would the military fire on U.S. citizens if ordered to? An interesting question. Some believe that this question has been asked of the leadership and the turn over of officers reflects the outcome. I don't know, but I have not been comfortable with the retirements in the last few years of upper military command staff.
With reported orders of equipment and ammunition for Homeland Security and other agencies being greater than the military there is a wonder what it is all for? It is hard to sort stories of fact and fiction but the numbers turn up so often in such varied palaces there is some merit here.
I know people in local law enforcement spread out around the country and I know some of them will not follow and illegal order by a federal agency. I have heard positions from elected and non elected I will not go into. This is because that the advantage of a concealed weapon in the citizenry increases the uncertainty of a perpetrator. Just as much the opinion of those who intend to stand for the Constitution need the same advantage to raise the increase the uncertainty of the domestic enemy who would move to ignore the Constitution and the individual.
After World War II Japanese Generals and Admirals were asked why they did not press the invasion of the US Mainland. The answer was that "there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass". After the Cold War Russian Field Marshal's were asked the same question and the answer was the same.
The only way that we can be defeated is from the inside. I hope there is someone smart enough to recognise when that time is here.