Active-Duty US Troops "Close to breaking Posse Commitatus Law"

originally posted by: AnakinWayneII

Active-duty troops are barred from performing law enforcement functions inside the U.S. by the Posse Comitatus Act, a federal law enacted in 1878 that prohibits the government from using military forces to act as a police force within U.S. borders.

Except on federal property.

You will see military doing police work on military bases and can work on other federal property.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Lumenari


Not seeing where it says anything about citizens and non-citizens, can you bold that part? I mean, that's what you claimed, right?

~sigh~

Can you tell me the reason that we have the military? Why it was written into the Constitution?

Why does any sovereign nation have a military?

Could it possibly be to defend that nation and defend its borders against invasion?

The distinction was probably not made because WE DID NOT NEED AN ARMY TO DEFEND THE NATION AGAINST CITIZEN INVADERS FROM OUTSIDE OUR BORDERS.

Since that is what the military is actually for... defending a nation against foreign invasion.

So you are entirely correct... there is no part of the Posse Commitatus Law that states the difference between citizens and non-citizens.

Nobody thought it was needed, since any rational person would understand what the military is for.

But here we are!

a reply to: AnakinWayneII

Posse Comitatus became irrelevant during the Reagan Administration. It was sacrificed at the altar of the War On Drugs.

Certainly DJT doesn't give a damn about it.

originally posted by: Lumenari
The distinction was probably not made because WE DID NOT NEED AN ARMY TO DEFEND THE NATION AGAINST CITIZEN INVADERS FROM OUTSIDE OUR BORDERS.

Nice goal post shift and totally not relevant.

a reply to: Lumenari

Seems like a really long-winded way of saying that AM is correct and the Posse Comitatus Act makes no distinction between citizens and non citizens, as your first comment attempted to claim.

I as an FE on Awacs during hurricane katrina, in the aftermath we had to schedule full training missions down around New Orleans so we could legally take the calls from the various agencies because most of their radios couldn't talk to each other.

Because it was typically an emergency of some type we were allowed to knock off from the training mission and take care of it, that's how it was briefed to us by the Legal office.


If you have read the 411 books military units (non guard) have been put into the field to help with search and rescue, while at Barksdale a bad tornado hit a nearby small town on a Saturday night they rounded up all the sober people on base and we were out there searching for survivors.


Guy I went to high school with, joined the marines after graduation and was deployed to the border during Clinton era.


That is just what I have seen or read about, so I imagine its happened a lot but now this time its considered a problem, GTFO you might be looking through political glasses rather than what is right or wrong.

(sigh) it's irritating how many people don't know how the laws work in thier own country......

Even if they were to engage on the border, against foreign threat that doesn't break it, it's their job to guard against enemies foreign and domestic

We were deployed several times when I was stateside

There are US citizens who are perfectly content with Posse Commitatus so long as it's the 'right people' they're going after.
Perfectly content with sweeping executive action outside of the authorization of Congress so long as it's 'their guy.'
Absolutely content with the systematic denial and outright ignorance of rights so long as it's 'non-citizens.'

There is no line that Trump can't cross for some of these Americans to say, 'no, no, that's too much!' Unless, of course, it impacts them directly.

Exactly how does the writer of this article expect these troops to perform wellness checks if they are no in the direct presence of the detainees? Of course they are in the same room. These aren't psychic troops. There is no time limit on a wellness check. What would be more in their interests. A brief occasional check, or constant monitoring of their condition?

Just another, "I want to complain about Trump" article.

I've personally seen them do road closures on there own, and participate in road closures and they were authorized to use force if force was used against them or the police units they were attached to. One time a lone MP was blocking off GMR in Azusa during a situation where there was an emergency on both ends and not enough police, I asked and he said the call went out to everyone who could come and the sheriffs would not answer my questions or return my calls when I inquired. Also the military currently has 40-50,000 troops assigned to the US itself I forget where exactly, the north east if I recall. Also some friends tried to rent a room in a motel on PCH and were met by armed men who said there will never be vacancies. This might be secure housing for the military contractors that work for the Navy and other military contractors in the area but this kind of thing also blurs that line in some regards. I will say I have seen a noticeable uptick in military activity in socal over the last couple months, black helicopters doing training, black hawks almost every day, low level transport planes, grayed out lear jets flying odd low level landing patterns, people in uniform all over the place, especially pilots and rangers. I almost think Jade Helm 2 is underway with no press.

originally posted by: links234

Perfectly content with sweeping executive action outside of the authorization of Congress so long as it's 'their guy.'

Yes, that's exactly why people vote a specific individual into an elected office. Because those voters agree with the policies of that individual which is the entire reason they voted that person in to begin with.

Have you not understood how politicians operate? Not being a jerk. I'm dead serious. The reason there are political parties is because of belief systems. We vote into office whom we want to support our belief systems.

Trump ran on controlling the border because it's what his base wanted. He is supporting that. They are supporting him because he is supporting what they wanted.

Congress is inept. Trump bypassed the inept democrat led Congress because they believe in open borders. An open border means there is no control over who and how many come in. Do you think having open borders somehow benefits the US?

We have an excellent legal immigration plan that is designed to empower legal immigrants and help make the US a better country. Do you know much about the legal immigration process, what is required and how legal immigration works? I have 2 friends who are legal immigrants who came to the US 5 years ago. They now own and operate their own small businesses that employs 32 people in one and 56 in another. They provide jobs, pay taxes, and contribute to the growth of the local economy. They are degreed individuals who understand how to run businesses. Valuable skill sets which have translated into successful small businesses.

The illegals at the border have little to no education, possess little to no skills above remedial manual labor, are largely not immunized and carry many different diseases, and have no money to support themselves. Your argument is what exactly?

That we should simply allow anyone who desires to enter our country at anytime without any level of oversight? Do you think allowing an epidemic of measles or small pox outbreak to enter unabated is a good idea? Or that flooding the local economies with unskilled labor where there are no jobs available meaning these people live on the streets is a better idea?

We have a good legal immigration process today and one that is being improved upon. Slowly but surely. However, illegal immigration needs to be stopped entirely.

I'm fine with Posse Commitatus as long as it stays within the lines of its lawful use.