I turned on the live feed just as the gas and stun grenades were being tossed at peaceful protestors. That was actually disturbing to see.
- Status
I turned on the live feed just as the gas and stun grenades were being tossed at peaceful protestors. That was actually disturbing to see.
So your against our LEO's having AR's to even the odds?
Perhaps they should be restricted to .38 special Colts?
Here's a simple definition of martial law: Martial law is the imposition of military power over designated regions on an emergency basis.
Based on the simple definition, you can see that sending "military power (National Guard Unit)" to a "designated region(Your City)" to react to "an emergency(protest/riot" falls under the definition.
Your assertion that a 'wildfire' and a 'riot' are similar is wondrous. In most states, the Fire Service has very limited policing powers and does not, with a few exceptions, fall under the application of lethal force guidelines.
Additionally, I wasn't speaking of Martial Law under Title 10 or 32 USC. Actually, the majority of declarations of Martial Law in the U.S. have been done by State Governors using the NG under STATE control.
The deployment of Guardsmen under arms most definitely requires some declaration of emergency control. Regardless of what politically correct term you may prefer, it fits the definition.
Interestingly, the reference I cited was Socialist. I have, however, long suspected that Democrat was newspeak for Socialist. I truly appreciate the conformation. I also find it entertaining that you assumed that citing Fox News meant that I must be a Republican. You would be wrong.
Lastly, the Governor of Texas is using military forces under his control to respond to a foreign invasion. That would be a Constitutionally approved use of military assets. It's a damn shame that the NCA is derelict in their duties to 'protect and defend'.
Nope didnt say that. Did you see the footage? Like a fully outfitted military squad, armed with ARs advancing in a line against citizens. Cmon man. A cop with an AR in the cruiser is one thing, these guys wasnt protecting or serving, they were ready for offensive warfare.
If you provide me a definition of a 'militaristic police force' I will give it a shot.
As police, in the common usage, are civil authorities, the only thing I have are Army MPs, USAF Security Forces, USN Masters At Arms, and USMC MPs. The USCG personnel with LE duties perform those under color of federal civil code, as I understand it. Last time I checked, the military and naval services were restricted from civil law enforcement by:
18 U.S.C. § 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus
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.
And:
10 U.S.C. § 375. Restriction on direct participation by military personnel
The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.
Who is to say the rioters don't have AR'S?
Who says the AR is a weapon of war?
A thug with an AK in the crowd is a whole 'nother thing......
So, we are sill at "They looked scary, OMG!" I tell you this, if I was going up against a bunch of unruly miscreants who might kill me, and a Godzilla suit scared the piss out of them, you can bet yer arse I'd roll out kitted up as Godzilla.
Them cammies and vests are just like a bayonet lug on yer M1A. Frightening.
unruly miscreants is your word to describe protester.
Tell ya what you dress up and play Camo cop and ill play protester. Your trying to intimidate a citizen and im within the rights of the constitution.
Cops dont need to play military, they dont need to dress the part. Cops can accomplish the same thing they are doing tonight.
A citizen with a weapon is well within his rights. A line of local cops advancing on citizens is a whole different thing. Even in a riot Cops have no business advancing with rifles.
This is the part that isnt being understood for some reason. There is a distinction between those within their rights and those outside of them, and both present different problems/solutions.
Anyone advocating for the actions of those under the color of authority like we have witnessed of late, repeatedly and without repercussions, against people exercising their rights is on the wrong side of the argument.
- Status
Similar threads
