DRUDGE HEADLINE US MILITARY snatches PROTESTER - Page 6
Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 65

Thread: DRUDGE HEADLINE US MILITARY snatches PROTESTER

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The High Country
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    ...the NG has no business in the streets of Pittsgurgh, unless there was an earthquake, hurricane or massive flooding, i.e. a national emergency. They cannot be used within the borders of the U.S. as policemen against the general population. This is against posse comitatus.
    Actually the NG has business anywhere within the State whenver the Govenor chooses to deploy them at their discretion for any purpose he/she deems necessary, within their legal authority. I will request you cite the reference that delineates the criteria (fire, flood, earthquake) of which you speak.

    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    ...And the NG IS military - anyone who says they are not part of the military is sadly mistaken. They participate in all military activities, draw military pay, and even qualify for military retirement.
    Who said they weren't military?

    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    ...And so the mayor of Pittsburgh can be fined and charged with a misdemeanor if he used NG troops to quell any disturbance or arrest and detain anyone.
    As stated above, you would have to talk to the Govenor about that. I'm sure the Mayor and him along with their respective subordinates, chief of police, Brigade commanders, etc. were in close consultation. But it was authorized at the Govenor's direction, nobody else's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    ...I am entirely supportive of the NG overseas; I am entirely NOT supportive of the use of NG within our borders.
    I doubt anyone on this forum is at a high enough pay grade to see and comprehend the big picture when it comes to allocating and utilizing national resources. Let me just provide some emphasis here: NATIONAL Guard. I'm sure you are familiar with the term "national." Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion, but until it becomes your responsibiilty to maintain order in a similar situation I'd be careful about the armchair quarterbacking.

    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    ...So watch who you are calling an ungrateful, paranoid, ignorant SOB.
    What you are supportive of is welcomed to the extent that it recognizes the facts and circumstances of the matter. Until you are clear on that, I'll withold judgement as to whether or not you may be subject to my characterization of others who clearly are not.

  2.   
  3. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Cocked _and_Locked View Post
    Actually the NG has business anywhere within the State whenver the Govenor chooses to deploy them at their discretion for any purpose he/she deems necessary, within their legal authority. I will request you cite the reference that delineates the criteria (fire, flood, earthquake) of which you speak.
    Read the posse comitatus act I posted. And the NG is NOT the governor's private army. He may request the NG, but he does not control them.

    I doubt anyone on this forum is at a high enough pay grade to see and comprehend the big picture when it comes to allocating and utilizing national resources. Let me just provide some emphasis here: NATIONAL Guard. I'm sure you are familiar with the term "national." Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion, but until it becomes your responsibiilty to maintain order in a similar situation I'd be careful about the armchair quarterbacking.
    The National Guard is a part-time on-call arm of the military. It is assembled state-by-state, hence NATIONAL. It is not a civilian force. The members are sworn military members, on a part-time basis. And as such it cannot be used as a police force. Forget the armchair quarterbacking - read the Constitution: using the military as a police force within the borders of the U.S. is unconstitutional.

    What you are supportive of is welcomed to the extent that it recognizes the facts and circumstances of the matter. Until you are clear on that, I'll withold judgement as to whether or not you may be subject to my characterization of others who clearly are not.
    I actually don't give a rat's ass what you think of me. Obviously, I know more about the Constitution than you do. Do a little more study on the 3rd Amendment and Posse Comitatus, and then come back and talk to me.
    -= Piece Corps =-

  4. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    ...posse comitatus...
    +1

    The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. 1385) passed on June 18, 1878, after the end of Reconstruction, with the intention (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) of substantially limiting the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement. The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services (today the Army, Air Force, and State National Guard forces when such are called into federal service) from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain "law and order" on non-federal property (states and their counties and municipal divisions) within the United States.

    The statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the National Guard under federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Coast Guard is exempt from the Act during peacetime.

    US CODE: Title 18,1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus

    Posse Comitatus Act of 1878

  5. #54
    Unfortunately, cocked_and_locked is going off half-cocked on this one. He has no idea what the National Guard is, and he has no idea what Posse Comitatus is, so obviously, he hasn't read the Constitution very thoroughly, either.

    Succinctly, it is unconstitutional to use United States military forces, including the National Guard, as a police force within the borders of the United States. When they ARE used, it is in humanitarian work during and after disasters, at the request of the governor of the state involved. To ask the NG to police streets and control riots in Pittsburgh is illegal and unconstitutional. Period!
    -= Piece Corps =-

  6. #55
    Uh, guys, everybody take a breath, here. While I appreciate the warrior mentality, we don't have to eat our young just to get our point across. Hard argument is one thing, and we can and should certainly call one another out on point of fact, but we're not ignorant sons a bitches or anything else, for taking part in the discussion. I don't know, as an old fart, I'm new to real active blogging on these sites; is this how it's done?

    That said, my two cents on the issue at hand:

    1) I believe (and I don't profess to know the Constitution inside and out, I'm working on it) that it is unconstitutional to use the military for domestic LE.

    2) But the government in PA did, and so...what? You think anyone will get busted in any way, shape or form for authorizing this?

    3) It really doesn't matter, from a tactical perspective, that it was the NG called out. "They" simply needed the numbers. You think the local police force is not on a materiel basis with the NG? Jackboots are jackboots.

    4) The most salient point (and someone has already mentioned it): If "they" can do it there for that particular demonstration, then "they" can do it here (your house) for another demonstration (Oh, I don't know, maybe a Tea Party). So, that's bottom line to me. Yeah, I'm not fond of the pussified weenies who protest the G-2, but I'm fond of my freedom-loving friends and compatriots throughout the country. Is this not the most important issue?

    Ok, I'm gonna post this now; don't hit me...

  7. #56
    The more that the Constitution is ignored or, worse, compromised, the more ammunition we have to hang those who have compromised it. And we are keeping track of all these things. When the "tribunal" comes around, all of these charges will be brought up and those who have committed them will be held to task.

    For example, it is unconstitutional for the government to demand that people have health insurance. It is unconstitutional to take over the auto industry. And it is unconstitutional to print money we don't have. Wait till the Fed gets audited...
    -= Piece Corps =-

  8. #57
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The High Country
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    Read the posse comitatus act I posted. And the NG is NOT the governor's private army. He may request the NG, but he does not control them.
    Careful you don't trip over yourself backing up. You originally attributed the NG use to the Mayor of Pittsburgh. How's that work, now?
    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    The National Guard is a part-time on-call arm of the military.
    Tell that to the guys I know after back-to-back deployments to Iraq. Part time - riiiight. Yes, that's the intention. But when it comes to protecting National security, they don't take a day off. Maybe they should read an excerpt from the Constitution to their Commanders when they get their next deployment orders if they don't want to go.
    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    It is assembled state-by-state, hence NATIONAL.
    Used for among other things, to further the security interests of the U.S. Like assisting in the orderly conduct of an international venue where the POTUS was in attendance.
    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    It is not a civilian force.
    Nobody said it was. But it may be used to supplement civilian authorities in similar aforementioned applications.
    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    And as such it cannot be used as a police force.
    It wasn't. They we assisting in the transpostation of detained offenders.
    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    Forget the armchair quarterbacking
    No armchair quarterbacking here. I fully support exactly what happened, no second guesses. You sir, are the armchair quarterback who has not a clue what you would do under similar circumstances except to whine and complain when your Constitutionally warped perception, inflamed by slanted media videos, portrays results you don't expect. Take off the blinders.
    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    I actually don't give a rat's ass what you think of me. Obviously, I know more about the Constitution than you do. Do a little more study on the 3rd Amendment and Posse Comitatus, and then come back and talk to me.
    Excellent. You have been attributed. After you finally get yourself so wrapped up in the Constutution, maybe you'll be incapable of seeing anything resembling reality at all. The world we live in does not always reflect the perfect fantasy world you would like to think, neatly framed within the Constitution. You are one of those staunch literal interpreters that wants your cake and eat it too. As long as it suits your argument you will quote chapter and verse. If the situation doesn't fit perfectly, it's unconstitutional. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Wake up and smell the coffee, or go back to comiserating with your buddy Bohemian in your Constitutionaly justified perfect world. The rest of us will press on and take care of business.

  9. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Heart of Dixie
    Posts
    1,225
    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    The more that the Constitution is ignored or, worse, compromised, the more ammunition we have to hang those who have compromised it. And we are keeping track of all these things. When the "tribunal" comes around, all of these charges will be brought up and those who have committed them will be held to task.

    For example, it is unconstitutional for the government to demand that people have health insurance. It is unconstitutional to take over the auto industry. And it is unconstitutional to print money we don't have. Wait till the Fed gets audited...
    +1 AMEN!! I would love to see the day that the "mad kenyan" usurper and his thugs are tried for high treason.

  10. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Piece Corps View Post
    The more that the Constitution is ignored or, worse, compromised, the more ammunition we have to hang those who have compromised it. And we are keeping track of all these things. When the "tribunal" comes around, all of these charges will be brought up and those who have committed them will be held to task.

    For example, it is unconstitutional for the government to demand that people have health insurance. It is unconstitutional to take over the auto industry. And it is unconstitutional to print money we don't have. Wait till the Fed gets audited...

    And unconstitutional for a non citizen to be President.
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  11. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Florida Panhandle
    Posts
    3,098

    Exclamation Okay everybody assume the lotus position and breath deeply

    1. The Army Natl guard is partially funded by the states and partially funded by the US Gummint.
    2. The Govenor has the right to call up the guard within his/her state to assist with natural disasters, domestic riots and any thing else IF...it is deemed a state of emergency by said govenor.
    3. The guard guys and gals I know are just as fervent about their service as any Active Duty Members.
    4. The guard gets crapped on when deployed to warzones by the pentagon brass
    5. The people in the videos did not have the proper license for their event
    6. The cops/Natl guard went way overboard and deployed a lot of crowd control
    7. The sonic cannons used are a recent development and cause permanent hearing loss...nausea...and an overall sense of unreasonable anger (side affect of high intensity noise over 120db for extended periods)
    8. If I owned a business I would be glad someone was trying to keep the bricks out of my glass windows and store front.

    9. The police should have been doing the arresting not some quasi military snatch and grab crap
    10. Nobody has heard from the govenor on this matter...WHO GAVE THE ORDERS????
    FESTUS
    IN OMNIA PARATUS

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast