Welcome to PatsFans.com

Violation of Posse Comitatus...

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by DarrylS, Oct 24, 2009.

  1. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,756
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +359 / 11 / -27

    Interesting story, guess in the quest to be a "good neighbour".. did not know about Posse Comitatus.. where were the Oath Keepers and 3%'ers????


    Troop use After Ala. Shootings Illegal

  2. efin98

    efin98 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Wasn't only the Army that goofed...locals didn't know the Army couldn't send help legally:

    And the reference to their use after Katrina is misleading and misunderstood by the MP, when they acted in Katrina they were either deputized by the state or they were deployed under the Insurrection Act.
  3. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,742
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    If the law requires someone be punished for this act of assistance, the law is wrong.

    Its not 1780 anymore. The Army isn't going to rise up against us.
  4. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,756
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +359 / 11 / -27

    Can never agree to overturn this, it could be our worse fear... the Posse Comitatus is as valid now as it was then.
  5. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I agree with this.
  6. efin98

    efin98 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Law is from 1870s during the end of Reconstruction used as a crutch to force the feds to stop making the south allow the former slaves their rights to vote and represent them in Congress...the racist reasons why the law was put in place originally is lost on so many unfortunately.
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2009
  7. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,756
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +359 / 11 / -27

    The separation of the civilians from the military role, is about as sacred as the separation of church and state... the national guard is available and a whole right wing movement emerging over the fear of this changing..

    If you have the military coming in to patrol our streets in a time of need, bad things can happen..
  8. efin98

    efin98 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Read the history behind the law then continue to cry foul over it. You would be horrified if you really understood the real reasons why.

    Funny that they invoked the law that was existing 70 years before that law to stop violence and secure freedom and rights for a race of people that were denied their rights as a direct result of this law getting put in place in the first place :rolleyes:
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2009
  9. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,756
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +359 / 11 / -27

    Not crying foul, no need to rolleyes and the rest of the crap...

    Using the military for law enforcement functions is not a wise thing to do, first of all they are not trained to do so and second of all it can lead to a whole bunch of unintended consequences... consider Abu Ghraib, they sent over a bunch of National Guardsman who knew nothing about prison operations and look what happened... In Waco they sent in all kinds of troops look what happened.. Kent State,nuf said.. Soldiers are trained to fight wars and enemies, not patrol civilian streets and take up arms against civilians and their neighbors... it minmizes and devalues law enforcement professionals and their training...

    It is not about history, just think it is a bad idea... that may change, but right now do not think there is any value to change this law.. can you imagine if it was, some crackpot politician saying there is a need to call in the Army and then there is not...

    Personally it is a very clear boundary, that should never get muddled except in the most extreme situation... cannot imagine what that might be, but would have to be a biggie...
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2009
  10. Patsfanin Philly

    Patsfanin Philly Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    6,756
    Likes Received:
    26
    Ratings:
    +68 / 0 / -0

    #95 Jersey

    Absolutely. Even if the law enacted for a nefarious purpose it has served this country well in the last 140 years, minimizing the risk of a coup d'etat or a military that would infringe on our constitutional rights. I can think of only one time when the Army was used for law enforcement against the National Guard and that was Little Rock 1957 when Ike federalized the Arkansas National Guard to ensure integration of the high school and compliance with a court order. When you have to go back 50 plus years to find an example, you know the law is working.
    FWIW, in Waco I think it was ATF and FBI Hostage Rescue Team and not the military
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2009
  11. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,756
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +359 / 11 / -27

    The FBI and ATF have tanks??? Did not know that... without regard for the details, it is a very good law and is a very good boundary.
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2009
  12. Patsfanin Philly

    Patsfanin Philly Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    6,756
    Likes Received:
    26
    Ratings:
    +68 / 0 / -0

    #95 Jersey

    They don't but in this case, they 'borrowed' them from Fort Hood. I had forgotten that part of the history.Here's a link that surmises that even if the military didn't have actual notice that Posse Comitatus was being violated at Waco, they should have inquired what their tanks were being used for.......

    Waco Watch



    Waco Watch
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2009
  13. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,742
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    T/Y I always assumed it came from a less odious source.

    I'm ready to see this law on the scrap heap. Obviously there needs to be some separation, but any law that says MP's can't help out directing traffic during a serious crisis is stupid.
  14. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,756
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +359 / 11 / -27

    Do not agree, once you violate the basic limits...then what is next?? If they are directing traffic and a crime happens, they will have to respond.. in reality they do not have the specific training on how to handle this specific situation.. if the military guy is shot at, how do they respond?? It opens a huge can of worms.. and goes places that we do not need to go... once it is used for traffic, then can it be used in civil unrest??
  15. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,742
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Not every change puts you on a slippery slope, in fact that's most often a canard.
  16. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,756
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +359 / 11 / -27

    We can agree to disagree... time to move on.

    Do not think that anything like this will ever be overturned, can you imagine the shytstorm if it was suggested by this administration??? Imagine if Bush tried to do it?? Either way it has little chance of ever changing, as paranoia will strike deep in both sides of the aisle with the collateral media hysteria from both sides..
  17. efin98

    efin98 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    They borrowed equipment in Waco from the military, if they were indeed there it was as advisers and not active enforcement thus not in violation of the act.

    Little Rock Nine situation was an invocation of the Insurrection Act as the governor intentionally allowed riots to be created to prevent the students from enrolling...this is often confused with Posse Committus but is a different act entirely. Read up on the invocation of the Insurrection Act here: Testimony
  18. efin98

    efin98 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    It is good in intent but needs to be rewritten and redone as a new law...
  19. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Clearly that if MP's help out with traffic in an emergency, then the next step is just an all out military dictatorship and a coup d'etat. One day we have Private Smith directing traffic on Comm. Ave., and the next day we're all goose stepping down Beacon Hill pledging to serve our military overloards.

    :rolleyes:
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2009

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>