It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
a) Transfer Authorized.—
(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and subject to subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense may transfer to Federal and State agencies personal property of the Department of Defense, including small arms and ammunition, that the Secretary determines is—
(A) suitable for use by the agencies in law enforcement activities, including counter-drug and counter-terrorism activities; and
(B) excess to the needs of the Department of Defense.
(2) The Secretary shall carry out this section in consultation with the Attorney General and the Director of National Drug Control Policy.
(b) Conditions for Transfer.— The Secretary of Defense may transfer personal property under this section only if—
(1) the property is drawn from existing stocks of the Department of Defense;
(2) the recipient accepts the property on an as-is, where-is basis;
(3) the transfer is made without the expenditure of any funds available to the Department of Defense for the procurement of defense equipment; and
(4) all costs incurred subsequent to the transfer of the property are borne or reimbursed by the recipient.
(c) Consideration.— Subject to subsection (b)(4), the Secretary may transfer personal property under this section without charge to the recipient agency.
(d) Preference for Certain Transfers.— In considering applications for the transfer of personal property under this section, the Secretary shall give a preference to those applications indicating that the transferred property will be used in the counter-drug or counter-terrorism activities of the recipient agency.
originally posted by: The Vagabond
a reply to: IseeyourBS
I am in fact an ameteur standup comedian. I'd tell you about a product called Trojans Solos that will probably be coming out in the next couple years the way our culture is headed, but there's rules and topic to consider.
As for whether Obama would go to jail, that's not really my point. My point is that if liberals and conservatives could make common cause here, it is a fact that we could each help the other brush an adversary back from the plate a bit.
In the highly unlikely even that they could help us stop the 1033 program, they would then have a righteous article of impeachment and even an actual crime to run with. And personally I'd rather take some of the unquestioning support away from the fascists than protect a guy who won't protect me when push comes to shove.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has launched a nationwide campaign to assess police militarization in the United States. Starting Wednesday, ACLU affiliates in 23 states are sending open records requests to hundreds of state and local police agencies requesting information about their SWAT teams, such as how often and for what reasons they're deployed, what types of weapons they use, how often citizens are injured during SWAT raids, and how they're funded. More affiliates may join the effort in the coming weeks.
It was during the Reagan administration that the SWAT-ification of America really began to accelerate. Reagan (and a compliant Congress) passed policies encouraging cooperation and mutual training between the military and police agencies. The president set up joint task forces in which domestic cops and soldiers worked together on anti-drug operations. And, with some help from Congress, he nudged the Pentagon to start loaning or even giving surplus military gear to law enforcement agencies. Subsequent administrations continued all of these policies -- and a number of new ones.
1. That military hardware can be used against civilians for absolutely any law enforcement related purpose, against the spirit of the Posse Comitatus Act, provided that the equipment is never withdrawn, but instead permanently transfered to the local police, and is not operated by active duty soldiers. (There are actually two flavors this argument can come in. The first is that the hardware remains military once transfered to the police, but can be used for any law enforcement purpose as the 1033 programs founding legislation states in the above quote. The second is that the hardware ceases to be military when transfered to the police under that law, and therefore Posse Comitatus no longer applies to the hardware.)
The Security and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act is legislation proposed by Senators Larry Craig (R-ID), John E. Sununu (R-NH) and Richard Durbin (D-IL) which would add checks and balances to the USA PATRIOT Act. This legislation, which was introduced in the House on April 6, 2005, would curtail some powers of the USA PATRIOT Act by requiring court reviews and reporting requirements.
The SAFE Act would also revise the definition of "terrorist" to exclude certain groups of people such as anti-war protesters and abortion demonstrators.
This legislation was introduced to provide an alternative to the USA PATRIOT Act that some felt was too overreaching in its effort to fight terrorism.