This is not good - Army in Alabama - Merged

This situation has NOTHING to do with "personal initiative" or with troops watching a gunman shoot people across the street. Apples and oranges.

These troops were requested AFTER the shooting was over, from a military base 35 miles away from the area. Hardly an emergency.

Personnel could have been requested from Dothan, AL, which is only 45 miles away, Brewton is 80 miles, Ozark is 55 miles, and Montgomery is 100 miles.

In addition, Florida and Alabama have assistance agreements in effect that would have allowed Fort Walton Beach (75 miles) police to assist, as well as Pensacola (110 miles).

They could have deputized citizens, called for the National Guard, or used the civil air patrol or even neighborhood watch, all of which would have been legal.

Conspiracy? No. If allowed to satand, can it be precedent setting? Yes. Should the person who "freelanced" be punished in some way? Yes. This is exactly the same type of freelancing that resulted in the NOLA gun grabs.
 
Lots of help many miles away. If the MP's are right there in town and the help is needed are you going to wait until someone comes 80 miles? Lets all relax a little, MP's helping the local cops is not the start of mass gun confiscations.
 
I will start worrying more when people don't get their knickers in a twist about this.

As long as everybody gets all exercised whenever Air Force cops are directing traffic during an air show, we're good.
 
Lots of help many miles away. If the MP's are right there in town and the help is needed are you going to wait until someone comes 80 miles?
Click to expand...

Uh, the MP's were just about as far as the rest. They are 35 miles away. There were plenty of cops at just about the same distance. There were two large towns within ten miles of the base, and plenty of major cities only 50 miles further.

The emergency was OVER. The shooter was dead. The shooting was OVER. There was nothing here to require laws to be broken. The law here was broken. As an officer of the law, are you suggesting that it is OK to break the law if you happen to be the government?
 
Tamara said:
I will start worrying more when people don't get their knickers in a twist about this.

As long as everybody gets all exercised whenever Air Force cops are directing traffic during an air show, we're good.
Click to expand...

Ah, if only it were everybody... as Bond007 wrote, what's troubling is the lack of media attention to this, and to the issue I noted in my previous post, that we now have active-duty troops assigned to a role that includes dealing with "civil unrest and crowd control," i.e. law enforcement.

They're not sposta be doing this.

And if the mainstream media aren't covering it, the mainstream folks won't know about it, and their knickers will remain neatly pressed.
 
I am not real sure that a group of MPs standing around in the middle of a street is a violation of posse comitatus.

It all depends on just what they were doing, and on what/who's authority.
 
excerpts from recent news updates from all news reports the last 24 hours are pretty much growing in details..

Jim Stromenger, a dispatcher at the Samson Police Depatrment, told CNSNews.com that the troops “came in to help with traffic control and to secure the crime scene” and that the department was glad for the help. “They weren’t here to police, let me make that clear. They were here to help with traffic and to control the crime scene--so people wouldn’t trample all over (it).”
Click to expand...
http://aliberals-hitlist.blogspot.com/2009/03/army-probes-domestic-use-of-troops-in.html

I thought this to be interesting also because if the gunmen did not kill himself and was apprehended I believe this could of been a reason for mistrial if crime scenes were not maintained by the civil law enforcement and exit and entry logs were not maintained for the crime scene(s)? Were they keeping logs? If so I would assume they were acting in a policemen's role.

Riley (being the Governor) isn't concerned whether the military overstepped its bounds, said Press Secretary Jeff Emerson.
Click to expand...

Hrmm ok so if no charges are filed in this matter I guess the Governor just opened the door with this statement?

Residents said Soldiers from Fort Rucker, a major employer in southeastern Alabama, have a reputation for helping nearby communities in emergencies.
Click to expand...

So this happens a lot then unchecked ..interesting

http://www.military.com/news/article/army-investigates-troop-use-in-alabama.html

March 19, 2009
Associated Press

SAMSON, Ala. - The Army said Wednesday it opened an inquiry into whether federal laws were broken when nearly two dozen Soldiers were sent to a south Alabama town after 11 people died in a shooting spree last week.

State officials said the deployment of 22 military police officers and the provost marshal from Fort Rucker was requested neither by Republican Gov. Bob Riley nor the White House, which typically is required by law for Soldiers to operate on U.S. soil.

Col. Michael J. Negard of the Army Training and Doctrine Command at Fort Monroe, Va., said officials are trying to determine who ordered the Soldiers to Samson, who requested them, why they were sent and what they did there.

"In addition to determining the facts, this inquiry will also consider whether law, regulation and policy were followed," he said. He declined further comment.

Former Samson resident Michael McLendon, 28, fatally shot nine victims in the town and killed a 10th in a neighboring county. The March 10 spree ended when McLendon killed himself, and the Soldiers arrived in the hours after.

Investigators said McLendon was despondent over his inability to hold a job and his failure to become a Marine or a police officer.

Riley isn't concerned whether the military overstepped its bounds, said Press Secretary Jeff Emerson.

"From what I understand it was a few folks who came to direct traffic or help where they could," Emerson said. "If it had been more than what it was there might be a reason for concern, but these folks just came to see if they could help and left."

The White House press office did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

Reporters and curious citizens poured into the town of 2,000 after the slayings, and city officials said Soldiers directed traffic. The town is located near the Florida state line about 35 miles from Fort Rucker, the Army's main helicopter training base.

Samson's tiny police force and county officers were stretched to the limit after the shootings, which left investigators with at least seven different crime scenes to check for evidence.

Residents said Soldiers from Fort Rucker, a major employer in southeastern Alabama, have a reputation for helping nearby communities in emergencies.

According to a summary by the Congressional Research Service, federal law generally prohibits the armed forces from being used as domestic police. Exceptions include emergencies, when troops can help civilians but don't directly act as police.

The chairman of the Libertarian Party of Alabama, Stephen Gordon, said while many are worried about the use of Army troops in civilian police roles, he doubts there was anything nefarious about the Soldiers in Samson.

"There is no apparent harm here, but the principle still needs to be upheld," Gordon said. "The barrier has been lowered for the next time, and we really need to take a look at what happened."
Click to expand...
 
soldiers

then it must be ilegal for soldiers to be sent to help if there is a hurrician.from the little I can read here its a bunch of fanatics that have gone of their rockers and mad a big thing about it .have at it as I am gone .:rolleyes::eek::mad:
 
then it must be ilegal for soldiers to be sent to help if there is a hurrician.from the little I can read here its a bunch of fanatics that have gone of their rockers and mad a big thing about it .have at it as I am gone .
Click to expand...

It is, if the troops in question are Army and not national guard, and the troops are being used in a law enforcement role. During the 7 hurricanes that I have been deployed to (Andrew, Charlie, Ivan, Francis, Jean, Katrina, Wilma), the National Guard and police have enforced the laws and curfews, while the Army (I believe it was the 82nd Airborne) was performing rescues and passing out food and medical care. (a decidedly non-law enforcement role) The Army troops were easy to spot, as the ones I saw had no weapons.

The troops in these photos carried weapons, wore "Police" clothing, and were "securing" a "Crime scene." A decidedly police role.

I find it interesting to note that anyone who does not agree with you is a fanatic that is off their rocker.
 
The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 16, 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.

The rest of the article is here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

So the Army can come to town, but they cannot perform law enforcement duties.
 
LaBulldog, there is much much more to it than that.

TEDDY said:
the prohabition is to prevent active interaction against civilians.there is nothing about helping in traffic control or helping in a hurrican situation.the ruby ridge and waco were what should not happen.get real,or you will see bogge men all night.
Click to expand...

The Act was necessary to address severe grievances required to restore the Confederacy to the Union. It is on a par with the constitution, and violation could be argued as a risk to the stability of the Republic.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1385.html

Title 18 US Code, PART I, Chapter 67, 1385, The Posse Comitatus Act
In a nutshell, this act bans the Army / Air Force from participating in arrests, searches, seizure of evidence (or protecting evidence) and other police-type activity on U.S. soil. The Coast Guard and National Guard troops while under the command of STATE GOVERNORS are excluded from the act. Naval operations under Coast Guard command would be also be excluded. Under specified circumstances, the Marines can be excluded as well.

The Act as originally written contains specific punishments for violation - no exceptions. 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. (No exceptions)

Change Note: POST WWII: The only exemption allowed for the Army/Air Force has to do with nuclear materials (18 U.S.C. 831 (e)

Ruby Ridge did not involve the Posse Comitatus Act. Waco may have, but was obfuscated with the aid of the then current administration.

Under the posse comitatis Act, the Army/Air Force can't get involved in local, national law enforcement, but there is a stipulation that the Marines can help if signed off by the defense secretary, the chairman of the joint chiefs. (i.e. Marine Commander) For Army/Air Force, Congress would have to change the law.

There have been problems associated with Posse Comitatus even when used according to the Act.

Example is taken from James D. Delk, author of "Fires & Furies: The L.A. Riots"

LA Riots
29 April 1992: Police officers acquitted in beating trial of Rodney King
Most destructive civil disturbance in US history, causing the deaths of at least 54 people and more than $800 million in property damage throughout LA County. More than 10,000 troops from the California National Guard (CANG - under direction of California State Govenor) and 1,500 Marines were deployed to the area at the height of operations.

Sample incident: Marines assigned to "assist" local law enforcement, and Marine Squad Leader subordinated to senior police officer, operating under authority: special circumstance, posse comitatis exclusionary. No other instructions provided to Marines.

Circumstance: Police officers responding to a domestic dispute, accompanied by marines. They had just gone up to the door when two shotgun rounds were fired through the door, hitting the officers. One yelled "cover me!" to the marines as they retreated to safety. The Marines then laid down a heavy base of fire. . . . The police officer had NOT meant "shoot" when he yelled "cover me" to the marines. [He] meant . . . point your weapons and be prepared to respond if necessary. (Police training) However, the marines responded instantly in the precise way they had been trained, where "cover me" means provide me with cover using firepower. . . .over two hundred bullets [were] fired into that house in less than a minute.
 
If you have never served then you need to know we take an oath to protect the American people.Assist-Protect -and Defend.Maybe you would change your tune if you were in that situation.
 
I was in the military. For 6 years. The oath says nothing about "to protect the American people.Assist-Protect -and Defend."

The oath:

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the State of (STATE NAME) against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of (STATE NAME) and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations. So help me God.

According to law. Hmm. Funny.
 
I've been in the military for nearly 25 years now, with nearly 17 in the Coast Guard. This still disturbs me a bit. I don't see anything nefarious in this but I do think it is too close to that slippery slope we talk about. The other thing that bugs me is that you shouldn't ever knowingly put your troops or sailors into a bad situation. Putting your A#% on the line is part of the job, being sued because your CO made a stupid mistake is not.
 
In 1941 Gen. George S. Patton personally drove a tank through the "strip" of bars and cat houses across the river from Ft. Benning Ga. into Phenix City, Alabama whose residents frequently robbed, beat and even murdered soldiers on weekend pass. Somehow missed by history, Phenix City, a mob run city in Alabama in the 1930's and into the early 1950's, was the site of many violent attacks against blacks and whites due to the organized crime activity. In 1954 a military government was installed, and the arrest of hundreds of mobsters, and ejection from town of thousands, and dynamite destruction of many buildings, finally cleaned up the town. orchidhunter
 
Last edited:
He is talking about the MP oath, drilled into MPs at training. Assist, protect and defend. If you were not an MP. You don't have a clue.

The oath you listed is not for active duty troops. These troops were active duty.
 
You are right, that one was the NG. The current one from Army.mil



"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)
Click to expand...

and an oath taken at some MP school still cannot authorize the breaking of Federal Law.
 
Law not democracy

This is about the law. America is a republic, not a democracy. The law rules, not what the majority thinks is best at a given moment.

The act of deploying armed active duty soldiers into a domestic law enforcement environment without proper authority is illegal. In this day and age any Army Post Commander can be talking to the very senior leadership of the military, and our nation, in minutes. Certainly in a shorter time than it takes to drive the distance in this case. Bad judgement costs, the appropiate individual should be dealt with as his or her boss, and the law, sees fit.

Doesn't mean it was wrong. Lots us have probably been in a situition where we said "I know this isn't following the rules, but in this time and place I'm not following the rules" It may be anything from speeding to get a loved one to the hospital, to bending the rules of engagement in combat. It happens, and when you get caught / called on it you own up, and pay up.

Those MP were in the right place doing the right thing. That's not the issue - someone higher up broke the rules, took shortcut, or let emotion cloud a military decision. That is what was wrong here, helping fellow citizens in time of need was, and is, dead solid perfect. If our elected leadership was involved this would be a story 180 degrees out. Then if the elected leadership does this type thing at the wrong time, we, the citizens of America, fire their ass at the next election.
 
m.p.driver & Dust Monkey,

I'm with you. As for the "tinfoil hat folks" here...all I can say is MFMSC.

USASA aka Army-MP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top