The only time there should be a military police (militarized civil police are just another name for military police), is if the USA is invaded by another nation.
The US Constitution deals with this in my opinion; there isn't to be a standing army at all. Now, the government and people have floated away from this by illegal means (to lawfully violate the US Constitution requires an amendment to it). In any case the basic intent is clear: don't go in this direction.
Without research, I'm going to step out on a limb... I'd imagine PC was enacted to limit the growing use of US military for executing the law resulting from the Indian wars. It probably seemed like a natural progression. Using it again foreign agents seems somewhat legal (although ugly and mean), since the Indians nations are separate from the US (that's why they remain under Federal control) almost like a US territory. PC was created to stop the seeming natural progress from US military executing Federal law/rules against foreign nations (Indian nations), to executing civilian law against sovereign citizens and institutions.
Given what I surely see at the intent, PC shouldn't have been required but apparently was. This is just like marriage which the definition of was clear to all until people got evil enough.
Given a long study of lawful law, and our lawful law, please help prevent the perversion of the most basic and fundamental structures of law: the division between civil and Admiralty law and jurisdictions. Every real American knows this is one of the cornerstones of the very foundation of our Republic and must never be played with.
Our good people have (Revolutionary War) and (I'd assume) will fight such breeches of basic law structure with all means necessary.
Please note that any recent militaristic appearances to civil law in the USA are a result of an ongoing war (against a terror network) and as such are part of the constitutional War Powers act. As such they expire after the war is over (lawfully).
"Without research, I'm going to step out on a limb... I'd imagine PC was enacted to limit the growing use of US military for executing the law resulting from the Indian wars."
Actually, PC was enacted in 1878 to limit the use of federal forces in the 'reconstruction' of the South.
"Repealing Posse Comitatus (PC) is a bad idea, period. Militarizing the civil police force is a bad idea, period. These are both attempts to move Admiralty law jurisdiction onto the land."
Two issues. One, amending PC is not necessarily a bad idea. If the federal government faces a choice of allowing citizens to suffer because of inept local politicians, then amending PC is the lesser of two evils.
'Militarizing' local police is a bad idea if by that you mean the emergence of a police force that looks like and acts like a military force rather than a police force.
"The US Constitution deals with this in my opinion; there isn't to be a standing army at all. Now, the government and people have floated away from this by illegal means (to lawfully violate the US Constitution requires an amendment to it). In any case the basic intent is clear: don't go in this direction."
So the maintenance of a federal army, navy, marine corps, and air force is unconstitutional in your opinion?