| Author | Post |
|---|
suntzu
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 899 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 19th, 2009 01:49 am |
|
double post, sorry
Last edited on Thu Mar 19th, 2009 01:52 am by suntzu
|
SFCRetired
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 29th, 2008 |
| Location: | Alabama USA |
| Posts: | 286 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 19th, 2009 01:50 am |
|
cvickers wrote: SFCRetired wrote: jmlefler wrote: Another report, but with Reuter's photo
http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=45206
After having read that, I would suspect that a commander is, at the least, going to be relieved of his command. I would expect that an officer would know better; especially a military police officer.
I would really like to know who requested the troops.
All that said, I can well imagine that those tiny police departments were completely overwhelmed in the aftermath of those shootings and were desperate for any type of assistance.
What is strange to me is why a local sheriff or police chief cannot deputize law-abiding citizens to help in that sort of situation.
Local Law Enforcement & Sheriff Departments can require civilians to assist with law enforcement activities. But think about it. Just from the traffic stand point; would you want to be sitting in a traffic jam (this didn't happen in Samson) caused by a civilian who had never had any training in traffic enforcement/directing. Then think about it from the point of view of the family of the victim. Would you want an 'amature' directing who could or could not access a crime scene. When would you start complaining if the investigation got messed up-- and whose fault would you think it would be. You certainly wouldn't cut Law Enforcement a break because thay had 'civilians' working at the scenes. I think they did the best they could with what they could get their hands on. You did notice that Ft. Rucker was only thirty-five miles away. While I am of the opinion that a commander messed up, I am also of the opinion that the presence of trained military police was a godsend to those police departments at that time.
|
suntzu
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 899 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 19th, 2009 01:54 am |
|
SFCRetired wrote: cvickers wrote: SFCRetired wrote: jmlefler wrote: Another report, but with Reuter's photo
http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=45206
After having read that, I would suspect that a commander is, at the least, going to be relieved of his command. I would expect that an officer would know better; especially a military police officer.
I would really like to know who requested the troops.
All that said, I can well imagine that those tiny police departments were completely overwhelmed in the aftermath of those shootings and were desperate for any type of assistance.
What is strange to me is why a local sheriff or police chief cannot deputize law-abiding citizens to help in that sort of situation.
Local Law Enforcement & Sheriff Departments can require civilians to assist with law enforcement activities. But think about it. Just from the traffic stand point; would you want to be sitting in a traffic jam (this didn't happen in Samson) caused by a civilian who had never had any training in traffic enforcement/directing. Then think about it from the point of view of the family of the victim. Would you want an 'amature' directing who could or could not access a crime scene. When would you start complaining if the investigation got messed up-- and whose fault would you think it would be. You certainly wouldn't cut Law Enforcement a break because thay had 'civilians' working at the scenes. I think they did the best they could with what they could get their hands on. You did notice that Ft. Rucker was only thirty-five miles away. While I am of the opinion that a commander messed up, I am also of the opinion that the presence of trained military police was a godsend to those police departments at that time.
I fully disagree. The US military is not meant, nor was it intended to police the population of the United States. The purpose of the US military is to wage war and kill the enemy. The troops used in that town, the commander involved, and the people who sent them should all be put in Leavenworth for violation of Posse Comitatus.
Last edited on Thu Mar 19th, 2009 01:56 am by suntzu
|
cvickers
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | Orlando, Fl., USA |
| Posts: | 42 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 19th, 2009 04:40 pm |
|
suntzu wrote: SFCRetired wrote: cvickers wrote: SFCRetired wrote: jmlefler wrote: Another report, but with Reuter's photo
http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=45206
After having read that, I would suspect that a commander is, at the least, going to be relieved of his command. I would expect that an officer would know better; especially a military police officer.
I would really like to know who requested the troops.
All that said, I can well imagine that those tiny police departments were completely overwhelmed in the aftermath of those shootings and were desperate for any type of assistance.
What is strange to me is why a local sheriff or police chief cannot deputize law-abiding citizens to help in that sort of situation.
Local Law Enforcement & Sheriff Departments can require civilians to assist with law enforcement activities. But think about it. Just from the traffic stand point; would you want to be sitting in a traffic jam (this didn't happen in Samson) caused by a civilian who had never had any training in traffic enforcement/directing. Then think about it from the point of view of the family of the victim. Would you want an 'amature' directing who could or could not access a crime scene. When would you start complaining if the investigation got messed up-- and whose fault would you think it would be. You certainly wouldn't cut Law Enforcement a break because thay had 'civilians' working at the scenes. I think they did the best they could with what they could get their hands on. You did notice that Ft. Rucker was only thirty-five miles away. While I am of the opinion that a commander messed up, I am also of the opinion that the presence of trained military police was a godsend to those police departments at that time.
I fully disagree. The US military is not meant, nor was it intended to police the population of the United States. The purpose of the US military is to wage war and kill the enemy. The troops used in that town, the commander involved, and the people who sent them should all be put in Leavenworth for violation of Posse Comitatus.
And YOU would be the first one to bitch if you thought a death investigation was botched by untrained personnel.
|
suntzu
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 899 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 19th, 2009 04:56 pm |
|
cvickers wrote: suntzu wrote: SFCRetired wrote: cvickers wrote: SFCRetired wrote: jmlefler wrote: Another report, but with Reuter's photo
http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=45206
After having read that, I would suspect that a commander is, at the least, going to be relieved of his command. I would expect that an officer would know better; especially a military police officer.
I would really like to know who requested the troops.
All that said, I can well imagine that those tiny police departments were completely overwhelmed in the aftermath of those shootings and were desperate for any type of assistance.
What is strange to me is why a local sheriff or police chief cannot deputize law-abiding citizens to help in that sort of situation.
Local Law Enforcement & Sheriff Departments can require civilians to assist with law enforcement activities. But think about it. Just from the traffic stand point; would you want to be sitting in a traffic jam (this didn't happen in Samson) caused by a civilian who had never had any training in traffic enforcement/directing. Then think about it from the point of view of the family of the victim. Would you want an 'amature' directing who could or could not access a crime scene. When would you start complaining if the investigation got messed up-- and whose fault would you think it would be. You certainly wouldn't cut Law Enforcement a break because thay had 'civilians' working at the scenes. I think they did the best they could with what they could get their hands on. You did notice that Ft. Rucker was only thirty-five miles away. While I am of the opinion that a commander messed up, I am also of the opinion that the presence of trained military police was a godsend to those police departments at that time.
I fully disagree. The US military is not meant, nor was it intended to police the population of the United States. The purpose of the US military is to wage war and kill the enemy. The troops used in that town, the commander involved, and the people who sent them should all be put in Leavenworth for violation of Posse Comitatus.
And YOU would be the first one to bitch if you thought a death investigation was botched by untrained personnel. this whole thing was fouled up from the get go. They take a shooting carried out in a small town and turn it into a need for military on the streets? BS. The Army was not needed to conduct this investigation. Laws were broken and heads should roll in that town. I have NO sympathy for the person who called the army in, regardless of the reason they used to do so. Whoever requested them to come, the soldiers and their commanding officer should all be in jail. The shooting is a tragedy, I admit that, but there are bigger issues at stake here than a death investigation.
The army is not meant to, nor should it be conducting civilian law enforcement activities--their job is to wage war and kill the enemy...NEITHER of which was located in Samson, Alabama.
Last edited on Thu Mar 19th, 2009 04:57 pm by suntzu
|
SFCRetired
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 29th, 2008 |
| Location: | Alabama USA |
| Posts: | 286 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 19th, 2009 06:42 pm |
|
suntzu wrote: cvickers wrote: suntzu wrote: SFCRetired wrote: cvickers wrote: SFCRetired wrote: jmlefler wrote: Another report, but with Reuter's photo
http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=45206
After having read that, I would suspect that a commander is, at the least, going to be relieved of his command. I would expect that an officer would know better; especially a military police officer.
I would really like to know who requested the troops.
All that said, I can well imagine that those tiny police departments were completely overwhelmed in the aftermath of those shootings and were desperate for any type of assistance.
What is strange to me is why a local sheriff or police chief cannot deputize law-abiding citizens to help in that sort of situation.
Local Law Enforcement & Sheriff Departments can require civilians to assist with law enforcement activities. But think about it. Just from the traffic stand point; would you want to be sitting in a traffic jam (this didn't happen in Samson) caused by a civilian who had never had any training in traffic enforcement/directing. Then think about it from the point of view of the family of the victim. Would you want an 'amature' directing who could or could not access a crime scene. When would you start complaining if the investigation got messed up-- and whose fault would you think it would be. You certainly wouldn't cut Law Enforcement a break because thay had 'civilians' working at the scenes. I think they did the best they could with what they could get their hands on. You did notice that Ft. Rucker was only thirty-five miles away. While I am of the opinion that a commander messed up, I am also of the opinion that the presence of trained military police was a godsend to those police departments at that time.
I fully disagree. The US military is not meant, nor was it intended to police the population of the United States. The purpose of the US military is to wage war and kill the enemy. The troops used in that town, the commander involved, and the people who sent them should all be put in Leavenworth for violation of Posse Comitatus.
And YOU would be the first one to bitch if you thought a death investigation was botched by untrained personnel. this whole thing was fouled up from the get go. They take a shooting carried out in a small town and turn it into a need for military on the streets? BS. The Army was not needed to conduct this investigation. Laws were broken and heads should roll in that town. I have NO sympathy for the person who called the army in, regardless of the reason they used to do so. Whoever requested them to come, the soldiers and their commanding officer should all be in jail. The shooting is a tragedy, I admit that, but there are bigger issues at stake here than a death investigation.
The army is not meant to, nor should it be conducting civilian law enforcement activities--their job is to wage war and kill the enemy...NEITHER of which was located in Samson, Alabama.
As someone else said, if the investigation were fouled up because the sheriff or police chiefs involved had to use untrained personnel to secure the crime scenes, you, sir, would be the first to gripe about it.
I am very much against the use of military for law enforcement. That said, I would suggest that the police departments involved were very happy to get that help. In this particular case, I believe I would give all involved a pass. There were no ulterior motives; just a desire on the part of some young men and women to help their neighbors. Had they not been in uniform, there would have been nothing said here or elsewhere.
One question to you, suntzu; are you now or have you ever been a part of the United States Armed Forces?
|
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Thu Mar 19th, 2009 06:48 pm |
|
This is just a drive-by post. Not sure if anyone has expressed this yet.
I wonder if there is a non-publicized plan to deploy troops to mass shootings as a terror response since the Mumbai incident?
|
suntzu
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 899 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 19th, 2009 09:17 pm |
|
SFCRetired wrote: suntzu wrote: cvickers wrote: suntzu wrote: SFCRetired wrote: cvickers wrote: SFCRetired wrote: jmlefler wrote: Another report, but with Reuter's photo
http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=45206
After having read that, I would suspect that a commander is, at the least, going to be relieved of his command. I would expect that an officer would know better; especially a military police officer.
I would really like to know who requested the troops.
All that said, I can well imagine that those tiny police departments were completely overwhelmed in the aftermath of those shootings and were desperate for any type of assistance.
What is strange to me is why a local sheriff or police chief cannot deputize law-abiding citizens to help in that sort of situation.
Local Law Enforcement & Sheriff Departments can require civilians to assist with law enforcement activities. But think about it. Just from the traffic stand point; would you want to be sitting in a traffic jam (this didn't happen in Samson) caused by a civilian who had never had any training in traffic enforcement/directing. Then think about it from the point of view of the family of the victim. Would you want an 'amature' directing who could or could not access a crime scene. When would you start complaining if the investigation got messed up-- and whose fault would you think it would be. You certainly wouldn't cut Law Enforcement a break because thay had 'civilians' working at the scenes. I think they did the best they could with what they could get their hands on. You did notice that Ft. Rucker was only thirty-five miles away. While I am of the opinion that a commander messed up, I am also of the opinion that the presence of trained military police was a godsend to those police departments at that time.
I fully disagree. The US military is not meant, nor was it intended to police the population of the United States. The purpose of the US military is to wage war and kill the enemy. The troops used in that town, the commander involved, and the people who sent them should all be put in Leavenworth for violation of Posse Comitatus.
And YOU would be the first one to bitch if you thought a death investigation was botched by untrained personnel. this whole thing was fouled up from the get go. They take a shooting carried out in a small town and turn it into a need for military on the streets? BS. The Army was not needed to conduct this investigation. Laws were broken and heads should roll in that town. I have NO sympathy for the person who called the army in, regardless of the reason they used to do so. Whoever requested them to come, the soldiers and their commanding officer should all be in jail. The shooting is a tragedy, I admit that, but there are bigger issues at stake here than a death investigation.
The army is not meant to, nor should it be conducting civilian law enforcement activities--their job is to wage war and kill the enemy...NEITHER of which was located in Samson, Alabama.
As someone else said, if the investigation were fouled up because the sheriff or police chiefs involved had to use untrained personnel to secure the crime scenes, you, sir, would be the first to gripe about it.
I am very much against the use of military for law enforcement. That said, I would suggest that the police departments involved were very happy to get that help. In this particular case, I believe I would give all involved a pass. There were no ulterior motives; just a desire on the part of some young men and women to help their neighbors. Had they not been in uniform, there would have been nothing said here or elsewhere.
One question to you, suntzu; are you now or have you ever been a part of the United States Armed Forces?
And again they are not allowed to be used to conduct domestic law enforcement.
had they not been in uniform, I assure you sir the police would not have allowed them into the area--especially with firearms. This was not a neighbor helping a neighbor--this was an armed military detachment conducting local law enforcement and most likely-though not reported, assisted in the initial investigation. No ulterior motives? I would submit that given the air of things as it stands--there was plenty of ulterior motives here.
Whether I am now, or have been a member of the armed forces of the United States is not an issue. The issue is that the United States Army conducted domestic law enforcement in full violation of Posse Comitatus and that an example needs to be made of the individuals involved so that this kind of activity is never condoned or conducted again absent martial law.
As for griping about whether they used untrained personnel--if local police are untrained to conduct an investigation contact a neighboring law enforcement agency, the FBI, or the Alabama State Police, or Alabama Bureau of Investigation, or maybe even the Florida Highway Patrol might have agreed to come up and investigate..NUMEROUS agencies could and would have assisted that city police force--the Army was not needed, nor should it have been used, and those involved should be prosecuted, right up to the person who requested their presence.
They do not deserve a pass---no one in civilian clothing would have been "given a pass" if any showed up and began conducting law enforcement after something like that--if you think the police would have let any armed, plain clothes citizen near that place, or any like it carrying a gun you are sadly mistaken--much less if they showed up carrying anything that even resembled an M4 or an AK--they would have been either arrested violently, or cut down altogether the moment the police caught sight of a citizen walking with an M4 look a like, or an AK...Don't kid yourself into thinking that they would react any other way.
Last edited on Thu Mar 19th, 2009 09:22 pm by suntzu
|
suntzu
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 899 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 19th, 2009 09:24 pm |
|
Citizen wrote: This is just a drive-by post. Not sure if anyone has expressed this yet.
I wonder if there is a non-publicized plan to deploy troops to mass shootings as a terror response since the Mumbai incident?
It would not surprise me a whole lot--even though it is still a violation of Posse Comitatus.
|
Gunslinger
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Mar 19th, 2009 10:33 pm |
|
quentusrex wrote: http://www.yourpoliticsareboring.org/2009/03/us-army-deploys-troops-to-alabama/
Can someone confirm/deny this?
He's wrong. The bill he talks about was repealed and the posse comitatus act is alive and well.
|
mathar1
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed Feb 4th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 23 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 22nd, 2009 06:39 pm |
|
MI-copperhead wrote: It doesnt have anything to do with domestic police issues, unless those are National Guardsmen, this is a direct violation of the posse comitatus act. I'm sorry to see it in the great state of Alabama.
As long as they are not granted police powers of arrest/detention this is perfectly legal. The entire 1st Brigade of the 3rd ID is tasked with "homeland security and assistance" by NORTHCOM. Posse Comitatus took a severe beating after 9/11 and has been basically emasculated by the president and congress. If the troops are invited by local officials for purposes of security and stability then Posse Comitatus has not been breached. (According to George Bush/Barack Obama and the last 7 congresses)
|
suntzu
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 899 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 22nd, 2009 09:41 pm |
|
mathar1 wrote: MI-copperhead wrote: It doesnt have anything to do with domestic police issues, unless those are National Guardsmen, this is a direct violation of the posse comitatus act. I'm sorry to see it in the great state of Alabama.
As long as they are not granted police powers of arrest/detention this is perfectly legal. The entire 1st Brigade of the 3rd ID is tasked with "homeland security and assistance" by NORTHCOM. Posse Comitatus took a severe beating after 9/11 and has been basically emasculated by the president and congress. If the troops are invited by local officials for purposes of security and stability then Posse Comitatus has not been breached. (According to George Bush/Barack Obama and the last 7 congresses)
not 100% true.
As for the use of 1st Combat Brigade 3rd ID,
"USNORTHCOM's Joint Force Land Component Command under US Army North, headquartered in San Antonio, Texas, has operational control of the first CBRNE Consequence Management Forces. Another USNORTHCOM component, Joint Task Force Civil Support at Fort Monroe, a., provides the operational headquarters for the forces and coordinates with civil authorities in the event military support is required. This response force will not be called upon to help with law enforcement, civil disturbance or crowd control, but will be used to support lead agencies involved in saving lives, relieving suffering and meeting the needs of communities affected by weapons of mass destruction attacks, accidents or even natural disasters," Army Col. Michael Boatner, USNORTHCOM future operations division chief, said.
Yes, the laws which protect us from an ever intrusive government have been gutted, and more than ever we are now faced with intrusive breaches of our civil liberties, illegal wiretapping, renditioning, the possibility that any American can be declared an "enemy combatant" and made to disappear...and all of this was made possible because the people allowed their government to terrify them into thinking that we the people have to give up our rights in order to be secure...
we need to quit being afraid, and we need to stop letting our government scare us...
|
Redwolf
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 1st, 2009 |
| Location: | Southwest Aisa |
| Posts: | 34 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 1st, 2009 04:49 am |
|
| I would like to add that a lot of MP's are trained Federal LEO's, just like the FBI and Marshals.
|
oilfieldtrash11
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Apr 1st, 2009 08:37 am |
|
Redwolf wrote: I would like to add that a lot of MP's are trained Federal LEO's, just like the FBI and Marshals
What do you have to back-up that statement? I highly doubt that "a lot" of them are trained the way you say, maybe a few, probably not "a lot".
Even if they are federal LEO's, they did not have jurisdiction, they were not needed for that because they are MILITARY.
I have a feeling that this was from the higher up, to see how people respond to it. If it goes well, then they will do it more and more and gently infringe upon our rights and just make people so used to it they dont even notice. With this new administration, you never know what they are planning to do. I for one am ready for it.
Here is something that happened just outside of my town about a year ago:
A 3 strike felon, on parole got stopped by a deputy sheriff. He shot the officer and the officer died in the hospital very soon after he was shot. Other officers chased the car down 45 miles away and the guy got out and hid in the middle of the an alfalfa field next to I-5 in California. No military was dispatched to this.
Instead they called for help from every agency in California. I was driving by and I saw units from as far away as 4 hours, they all responded to help in the manhunt. My dad responded from his days off and just heard it on the scanner. He is local LE. By the time the manhunt was over, there were Santa Barbara PD officers on scene.....This happened 40 miles north of Sacramento. Look up where Santa Barbara is, it is a very very long way away.
My point is, every agency in the state was willing to help, and dropped everything they were doing to haul ass and help. I am willing to bet, that there would have been more than enough LEO's to go around in that town to help out the local PD even though it wasn't a cop that was shot.
There was absolutely no need for the military to be involved in that. There should be no way they can get let off, but we all know it will happen. they CLEARLY violated Posse Comitatus, and they should be charged and sentenced accordingly.
|
fxdwngflyr
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Apr 1st, 2009 11:46 am |
|
SFCRetired wrote: suntzu wrote: cvickers wrote: suntzu wrote: SFCRetired wrote: cvickers wrote: SFCRetired wrote: jmlefler wrote: Another report, but with Reuter's photo
http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=45206
After having read that, I would suspect that a commander is, at the least, going to be relieved of his command. I would expect that an officer would know better; especially a military police officer.
I would really like to know who requested the troops.
All that said, I can well imagine that those tiny police departments were completely overwhelmed in the aftermath of those shootings and were desperate for any type of assistance.
What is strange to me is why a local sheriff or police chief cannot deputize law-abiding citizens to help in that sort of situation.
Local Law Enforcement & Sheriff Departments can require civilians to assist with law enforcement activities. But think about it. Just from the traffic stand point; would you want to be sitting in a traffic jam (this didn't happen in Samson) caused by a civilian who had never had any training in traffic enforcement/directing. Then think about it from the point of view of the family of the victim. Would you want an 'amature' directing who could or could not access a crime scene. When would you start complaining if the investigation got messed up-- and whose fault would you think it would be. You certainly wouldn't cut Law Enforcement a break because thay had 'civilians' working at the scenes. I think they did the best they could with what they could get their hands on. You did notice that Ft. Rucker was only thirty-five miles away. While I am of the opinion that a commander messed up, I am also of the opinion that the presence of trained military police was a godsend to those police departments at that time.
I fully disagree. The US military is not meant, nor was it intended to police the population of the United States. The purpose of the US military is to wage war and kill the enemy. The troops used in that town, the commander involved, and the people who sent them should all be put in Leavenworth for violation of Posse Comitatus.
And YOU would be the first one to bitch if you thought a death investigation was botched by untrained personnel. this whole thing was fouled up from the get go. They take a shooting carried out in a small town and turn it into a need for military on the streets? BS. The Army was not needed to conduct this investigation. Laws were broken and heads should roll in that town. I have NO sympathy for the person who called the army in, regardless of the reason they used to do so. Whoever requested them to come, the soldiers and their commanding officer should all be in jail. The shooting is a tragedy, I admit that, but there are bigger issues at stake here than a death investigation.
The army is not meant to, nor should it be conducting civilian law enforcement activities--their job is to wage war and kill the enemy...NEITHER of which was located in Samson, Alabama.
As someone else said, if the investigation were fouled up because the sheriff or police chiefs involved had to use untrained personnel to secure the crime scenes, you, sir, would be the first to gripe about it.
I am very much against the use of military for law enforcement. That said, I would suggest that the police departments involved were very happy to get that help. In this particular case, I believe I would give all involved a pass. There were no ulterior motives; just a desire on the part of some young men and women to help their neighbors. Had they not been in uniform, there would have been nothing said here or elsewhere.
One question to you, suntzu; are you now or have you ever been a part of the United States Armed Forces?
I am going to take the liberty and interject here.
I am military, have been for quite some time. I completely DISAGREE with using the armed forces for a policing action. Even if it is for a special circumstance it only opens the door for other moves in an arena that we are specifically forbidden to intervene in. It is unhealthy and unamerican. I can promise you that there are some salivating at the possiblity of using the armed forces to squash dissenters to their beliefs.
|
Daddyo
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Jun 28th, 2008 |
| Location: | Moody, AL |
| Posts: | 205 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 1st, 2009 03:16 pm |
|
oilfieldtrash11 wrote:
Redwolf wrote: I would like to add that a lot of MP's are trained Federal LEO's, just like the FBI and Marshals
What do you have to back-up that statement? I highly doubt that "a lot" of them are trained the way you say, maybe a few, probably not "a lot".
Even if they are federal LEO's, they did not have jurisdiction, they were not needed for that because they are MILITARY.
I have a feeling that this was from the higher up, to see how people respond to it. If it goes well, then they will do it more and more and gently infringe upon our rights and just make people so used to it they dont even notice. With this new administration, you never know what they are planning to do. I for one am ready for it.
Here is something that happened just outside of my town about a year ago:
A 3 strike felon, on parole got stopped by a deputy sheriff. He shot the officer and the officer died in the hospital very soon after he was shot. Other officers chased the car down 45 miles away and the guy got out and hid in the middle of the an alfalfa field next to I-5 in California. No military was dispatched to this.
Instead they called for help from every agency in California. I was driving by and I saw units from as far away as 4 hours, they all responded to help in the manhunt. My dad responded from his days off and just heard it on the scanner. He is local LE. By the time the manhunt was over, there were Santa Barbara PD officers on scene.....This happened 40 miles north of Sacramento. Look up where Santa Barbara is, it is a very very long way away.
My point is, every agency in the state was willing to help, and dropped everything they were doing to haul ass and help. I am willing to bet, that there would have been more than enough LEO's to go around in that town to help out the local PD even though it wasn't a cop that was shot.
There was absolutely no need for the military to be involved in that. There should be no way they can get let off, but we all know it will happen. they CLEARLY violated Posse Comitatus, and they should be charged and sentenced accordingly.
Now that you mention it, there was a case here about 10 years ago where this dude kept escaping from custody and killing folks. At one point they thought they had him boxed in on the north side of I20 around Moody/Leeds. I had to drive through there on my way to a job and the entire north side of the freeway was lined with cops. It went on for about a week, not because they couldn't catch him but because he kept escaping. But the military never got involved (Moody is about 50 miles from Ft. McClellan). They just called in everycop around and told the residents to cowboy up.
|
oilfieldtrash11
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Apr 1st, 2009 06:02 pm |
|
Daddyo wrote: oilfieldtrash11 wrote:
Redwolf wrote: I would like to add that a lot of MP's are trained Federal LEO's, just like the FBI and Marshals
What do you have to back-up that statement? I highly doubt that "a lot" of them are trained the way you say, maybe a few, probably not "a lot".
Even if they are federal LEO's, they did not have jurisdiction, they were not needed for that because they are MILITARY.
I have a feeling that this was from the higher up, to see how people respond to it. If it goes well, then they will do it more and more and gently infringe upon our rights and just make people so used to it they dont even notice. With this new administration, you never know what they are planning to do. I for one am ready for it.
Here is something that happened just outside of my town about a year ago:
A 3 strike felon, on parole got stopped by a deputy sheriff. He shot the officer and the officer died in the hospital very soon after he was shot. Other officers chased the car down 45 miles away and the guy got out and hid in the middle of the an alfalfa field next to I-5 in California. No military was dispatched to this.
Instead they called for help from every agency in California. I was driving by and I saw units from as far away as 4 hours, they all responded to help in the manhunt. My dad responded from his days off and just heard it on the scanner. He is local LE. By the time the manhunt was over, there were Santa Barbara PD officers on scene.....This happened 40 miles north of Sacramento. Look up where Santa Barbara is, it is a very very long way away.
My point is, every agency in the state was willing to help, and dropped everything they were doing to haul ass and help. I am willing to bet, that there would have been more than enough LEO's to go around in that town to help out the local PD even though it wasn't a cop that was shot.
There was absolutely no need for the military to be involved in that. There should be no way they can get let off, but we all know it will happen. they CLEARLY violated Posse Comitatus, and they should be charged and sentenced accordingly.
Now that you mention it, there was a case here about 10 years ago where this dude kept escaping from custody and killing folks. At one point they thought they had him boxed in on the north side of I20 around Moody/Leeds. I had to drive through there on my way to a job and the entire north side of the freeway was lined with cops. It went on for about a week, not because they couldn't catch him but because he kept escaping. But the military never got involved (Moody is about 50 miles from Ft. McClellan). They just called in everycop around and told the residents to cowboy up.
and if they told me to come out and join the party i would in a heartbeat. there is no point for the military to be involved. EVER
|
Redwolf
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 1st, 2009 |
| Location: | Southwest Aisa |
| Posts: | 34 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 03:23 pm |
|
Yes I agree they violated Posse Comitatus by directing traffic and trying to help. What should be the sentence? I understand that we are not civilians and have no legal authority to help. I’m not sure if it’s an inherent right or obligation to protect Life, Liberty, and from sexual attacks. By no means can we enforce local, state, or federal laws. After walking (and being shot at) the streets of New Orleans for 30 days I do know what I can and can’t do as an active duty soldier. But I do not want to be arrested for stopping some thief breaking into my neighbor’s house which would clearly violate Posse Comitatus. I ask you to remember that we are nothing more than your sons, daughters, husbands, wives, brothers, sisters. Fathers, mothers, friends and neighbors that swore an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic,”
Last edited on Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 09:04 pm by Redwolf
|
Daddyo
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Jun 28th, 2008 |
| Location: | Moody, AL |
| Posts: | 205 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 07:12 pm |
|
I think all would have been just fine if they had slipped into some civvies first.
|
oilfieldtrash11
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Apr 3rd, 2009 06:30 am |
|
Redwolf wrote: Yes I agree they violated Posse Comitatus by directing traffic and trying to help. What should be the sentence? I understand that we are not civilians and have no legal authority to help. I’m not sure if it’s an inherent right or obligation to protect Life, Liberty, and from sexual attacks. By no means can we enforce local, state, or federal laws. After walking (and being shot at) the streets of New Orleans for 30 days I do know what I can and can’t do as an active duty soldier. But I do not want to be arrested for stopping some thief breaking into my neighbor’s house which would clearly violate Posse Comitatus. I ask you to remember that we are nothing more than your sons, daughters, husbands, wives, brothers, sisters. Fathers, mothers, friends and neighbors that swore an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic,”
they need to be tried in a federal court. and they can decide the sentence.
the fact of the matter is, the military cannot do what they did. sure they had the best of intentions, but they should have just not helped. it sucks, but they cannot interfere with anything that goes on in the civilian world like this.
I know many people in the military and have done 3 tours in the sandbox, one is there now, and i understand they are just regular people. the only problem is they CLEARY violated Posse Comitatus and they should be tried accordingly. rules are not meant to be broken and they are there for a reason.
|
Current time is 12:25 am | Page:   1 2 3   |
|
|
|
