CIVICS: The Posse Comitatus Act

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, Navy, 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.

On September 26, 2006, President Bush urged Congress to consider revising federal laws so that U.S. armed forces could restore public order and enforce laws in the aftermath of a natural disaster, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

These changes were included in the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5122), which was signed into law on October 17, 2006.<3>

Section 1076 is titled "Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies". It provided that:

The President may employ the armed forces... to... restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition... the President determines that... domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order... or suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such... a condition... so hinders the execution of the laws... that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law... or opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.<4>

In 2008, these changes were repealed in their entirety, reverting to the previous wording of the Insurrection Act.<5>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

Reason to create disaster. Order is dependant on rule set, being orderly in a chaos system is not order. So if a system is not of structure and justice, then it is being in order to oppose it.

But you have to be honest about what is justice, and not just think on what is best for oneself.

So I think the idea of military used against civilians in the case of disorder is not best, for clean up or construction that is different. But when used as a control mechanism, it would seem wrong, the control mechanism should be a just and orderly society, not use of some action by military if a society is not in a just form.

Their is a weapon that one person can man and it can disperse 1000 protesters, if a system needs a device that a single person can use against 1000, then that system is in question. The actions of justice and a society that best serves the population is how order is established. Enforcement should have popular consent, and should be able to be done from within population units in a decentralized way if the issues make sense.


However that assumes accurate information reaches people, and again such an action like military use to put down unruly behavior can be an intent to move to security state, and so fanning of unruly action by media can be part of trying to set up security state.

If you cant use a 1 to 1000 weapon on civilians, you have to treat them right and educate them with good information systems.

All good points.

to a non dod department can be used in any case without regard to the niceties.

Didn't we want a President that follows the rule of law? Isn't that what I keep hearing here anyway?

















I'm going to hell, aren't I? :hide:

O8)

That's what an army is for -- keeping the citizens of the neighboring country from coming across the border.

who have been headed in the other direction since before the crash.

Embarrassing.

them with open arms.

such as the PResident being a reactionary political coward

Will these Nat'l Guard troops be on federal property?