.... By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.
Quote:
According to the rule:
Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances
I am trying hard to think of any political viewpoint, right, left, or center, that would think this a nifty idea. I can't.
Relax americans, what's the worst that could happen?
laugh it up. you have a bunch of oil and are next door. if ***gets stupid here and someone turns things down the road that Germany went down in the 30s where do you think that'll lead for you?
Relax americans, what's the worst that could happen?
laugh it up. you have a bunch of oil and are next door. if ***gets stupid here and someone turns things down the road that Germany went down in the 30s where do you think that'll lead for you?
I'll be one of the first in the gulag for sure. We're really not that far off from this scenario up here either.
The sissy constitution, U.S. and international law has never stopped the military from doing anything before, so what's new?
Years from now your descendants won't be able to make such statements because they probably will have never heard of the constitution. That's the significance.
world is going to hell in a hand basket. i swear people in power don't read history books. tons of civilians die, then eventually those in power die.
If I were you I'd be more concerned about the fact that they are indeed well versed in history.
Don't be naive.
either way it ends badly for civilians. if they are well versed in history it ends in the way that the world is in 1984
We're pretty much there. Big Brother just hasn't been branded/identified yet.
yup. they can listen whenever they like, grab you whenever they like, hold you however long they like. oh, and to the guy who said get away from population centers, don't forget the UN is trying to move everyone into cities and out of the country, i have to go to work soon, i'll find you a link when i get home
world is going to hell in a hand basket. i swear people in power don't read history books. tons of civilians die, then eventually those in power die.
If I were you I'd be more concerned about the fact that they are indeed well versed in history.
Don't be naive.
either way it ends badly for civilians. if they are well versed in history it ends in the way that the world is in 1984
We're pretty much there. Big Brother just hasn't been branded/identified yet.
yup. they can listen whenever they like, grab you whenever they like, hold you however long they like. oh, and to the guy who said get away from population centers, don't forget the UN is trying to move everyone into cities and out of the country, i have to go to work soon, i'll find you a link when i get home
The UN finally found a way to scare me. If I showed your post to my grandparents, they would panic.
Now, less serious but still probably true. Can we label the UN a terrorist organization? They fit the bill: spreading panic and fear.
The sissy constitution, U.S. and international law has never stopped the military from doing anything before, so what's new?
Years from now your descendants won't be able to make such statements because they probably will have never heard of the constitution. That's the significance.
You obviously don't know America very well. If you were to ask someone on the street what the Constitution means to them, they'll probably say "Take a laxative".
The sissy constitution, U.S. and international law has never stopped the military from doing anything before, so what's new?
Years from now your descendants won't be able to make such statements because they probably will have never heard of the constitution. That's the significance.
You obviously don't know America very well. If you were to ask someone on the street what the Constitution means to them, they'll probably say "Take a laxative".
We're dumb like that.
but i bet they can tell you all about honey boo boo, kardashians and jersey shore >.>
Relax americans, what's the worst that could happen?
laugh it up. you have a bunch of oil and are next door. if ***gets stupid here and someone turns things down the road that Germany went down in the 30s where do you think that'll lead for you?
I'll be one of the first in the gulag for sure. We're really not that far off from this scenario up here either.
Honestly I don't think we can fully trust our federal government unless we find a way to reform it into something that actually serves the people. There will always be those out there who will make grabs for power, and try to further some kind of agenda. The idea that the 2nd Amendment is there to prevent a tyrannical government, is looking less and less crazy each day.
Current events/issues/scandals with the DOJ/IRS/BATF/DHS/ and our awsome Attorney General aren't at all shocking are they?
.... By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.
Quote:
According to the rule:
Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances
I am trying hard to think of any political viewpoint, right, left, or center, that would think this a nifty idea. I can't.
Only time it'd more than likely matter is in two very real (as we've seen recently) situations:
1- Terrorist attack (think Boston Marathon bombing).
2- Natural disaster (Super-storm Sandy, tornadoes, earthquakes).
In both situations, local law enforcement already has it's hands full trying just to seek out survivors in the rubble and are admittedly SHORTHANDED. The police, the fire department, and the EMTs are outnumbered, in any town or city in the USA, by a huge margin. With this rewording of a law, the military has granted itself the split-second decision process it needs to move in with resources and people to help out said outnumbered police, firemen and EMTs.
Of course, however, only the dipshit gun nuts that've been whining "DA GOV'MENT'S CONTROLLING ERRYTHIN'!!" will see a problem with having that ability while they forget that after a disaster or terrorist action, that time lost waiting for resources means lives lost due to injuries.
As far as a natural disaster goes we already have the national guard and other agencies standing by (the downside is the delay you spoke about). One of the best things about the Obama Administration is that they are top notch when it comes to federal emergency management and homeland security. I believe a lot has been learned from his predecessor's mistakes. I don't mind them giving immediate support to disaster areas though while state and local governments have to wait on bureaucracy to get national guard and disaster response units en-route.
What I am against how ever is that this could potentially be used as a police state. It wouldn't be the first time a government agency or politician abused their powers. Call me what you will, and insult me how ever you want. It doesn't matter what you might say in regards to personal attacks. People might say "The Government would never do that." , then why is the door left wide open? Why is there not an exception to this to prevent that abuse of power?
The word "civil disturbance" is very vague, and can be used for many events. You can say it could also be used in regards to "peaceful assembly" which is protected under the 1st amendment of the constitution. It depends how far they want to take things, but I would not be surprised if this type of policy becomes abused.
edit: for some reason "an" did not get put between the letters m&y... meant many events, not "my events"
With this rewording of a law, the military has granted itself the split-second decision process it needs to move in with resources and people to help out said outnumbered police, firemen and EMTs.
Where did you learn how the military operates, as far as deploying forces and logistics go? Wherever it was, I sure hope you didn't give them any money, because it's pretty far off.
There aren't like, pallets of MREs waiting on airfields, with C-130s fueled up idling, waiting to air drop aid to rural areas, or companies heavy equipment operators just sitting around with their gear packed, ready to ship halfway across the country and remove debris. About the one thing the military can do pretty quickly is show up with some guns.
Of course, however, only the dipshit gun nuts that've been whining "DA GOV'MENT'S CONTROLLING ERRYTHIN'!!" will see a problem with having that ability while they forget that after a disaster or terrorist action, that time lost waiting for resources means lives lost due to injuries.
I read about 1/4th of the document now. It defines civil disturbance: Group acts of violence and disorder prejudicial to public law and order.
Somewhere in the sections defining when the military can come in it talks about 'the envionment'. Ugh wtf. Still reading until my eyes can't take the confusing text no more.
Not sure I am reading it correct. /7/ nvm read it wrong for sure.
Eyes hurt, head hurts.
Section 12 or something says they can't use firearms unless itOrin self defense or protect other DoD pps, I think. I'm done reading that for today.
This isn't going to happen, the government isn't out to get us! A precedent that has been in effect for 200 years? Well 200 years ago we didn't have people bombing marathons or flying planes into buildings. This rewording of the law is merely so that if chaos erupts during an extreme emergency situation and the local government is somehow unable to deal with it or needs assistance then the military can step in to help, such as the coast guard or the national guard. You fugging gun nuts need to stfu because the government has yet to occupy us in our 237 years and they don't plan on doing it. You saying that you're willing to shoot down a government agent if you feel they are stepping over their bounds that you've made up is simply saying that you are insane and a killer. The issue is nonexistent but I guess anything to make Obama look like some kind of terrorist or sympathizer will do, and you aren't short of ideas how to do it. This whole freaking discussion is HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE it shouldn't even be.
.... By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.
Quote:
According to the rule:
Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances
I am trying hard to think of any political viewpoint, right, left, or center, that would think this a nifty idea. I can't.
