Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: KevinDavis
National Guard yes... Federal Troops no..

Yeah, that's getting closer to how I feel.

Yet even now, there are lots of exceptions in the law for federal troops.

For example, the National Guard unit in my town was deployed (under federal command) for security duty at the Atlanta Olympics. Other federal troops were used by the first President Bush to help put down the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles. Other federal troops have been deployed to help with security and cleanup after a natural disaster like an hurricane. I could go on.

I really don't have a problem with these roles, and I'm wary of journalists who try to get people all alarmed about "federal troops enforcing the law."

27 posted on 07/05/2005 1:07:36 PM PDT by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: 68skylark
Haven't they been patrolling for drug runners for years? Isn't that "enforcing the law"?

Protecting the borders and defending against terrorists does not strike me as "law enforcement" issues. The military's job should not be to arrest bad guys, it should be to defeat them and they should not be constrained with the restrictions we put on law enforcement. For that reason, it strikes me as very wrong if we start using the marines for regular law enforcement tasks, such as busting gang members in inner cities.

I recognize the line between law enforcement and military issues is thin, and I am not sure how I feel about this. I guess it will depend on the details of the proposal.
36 posted on 07/05/2005 1:22:29 PM PDT by Steelerfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson