Army Called in Aid of Alabama Police?

Yahoo ^ | 3/11/09 | Yahoo

[fightinbluhen51]

Click the link, too short to post

[Munz]

[fightinbluhen51]

Or MP “Police” vests on troops?

[ansel12]

" But against American citizens, the C-in-C cannot call out the US Army"

============================================================

I have had to deal with the army and marine corp in my own past, it resulted in me being sent to a detention center and being held without charges for five days.

"While protesters listened to music, planned their actions or slept, the authorities quickly moved 10,000 Federal troops to various locations in the D.C. area, including 4,000 paratroopers from the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division. At one point, so many soldiers and marines were being moved into the area from bases along the East Coast that troop transports were landing at the rate of one every three minutes at Andrews Air Force Base in suburban Maryland, about 15 miles from the White House."

"Every bridge coming into the city was lined with troops. Every monument, park and traffic circle had troops protecting its perimeters. Paratroopers and marines made helicopter combat assaults onto the grounds of the Washington Monument. Hundreds of troops were brought into the city by helicopter to support the police."

[RWB Patriot]

Have they arrested anyone or are they simply there to help provide control of the situation? That’s the question that needs to be answered.

[RWB Patriot]

It also seems to apply only to the military when they’re acting under federal control. Are they doing so in this situation?

[tomkat]

Could be, I usually sacrifice comprehension and intelligence for posting a pic or trying for a cheap laugh. ;-D

Good, I'm not the only one !      

[BagCamAddict]

“After Britain?s government banned guns in 1997, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. ?A recent study of all the countries of western Europe has found that in 2001 Britain had the worst record for killings, violence and burglary, and its citizens had one of the highest risks in the industrialized world of becoming victims of crime,? historian Joyce Lee Malcolm wrote for the fall 2004 issue of Journal on Firearms & Public Policy.”

But, but, but... Michael Moore didn’t mention this in his movie “Bowling for Columbine,” so it can’t be true. According to Moore, the US has so much violence (vs. Canada, for example) because there are so many guns. According to Moore, if we would just get rid of the guns, we wouldn’t have so much violence. Is he wrong?? /sarc

[nckerr]

Those are not ordinary Soldiers. They are trained law enforcement personnel from Fort Rucker. The Military Police perform identical missions as the civilian law enforcement and probably have semi mutual aid agreements in emergencies. Also, there may be a high amount of military personnel and families that live in the area off the installation.

[Gordon Greene]

Ping

[tutstar]

gnip...

[frankiep]

Regardless if that is the case, they are still active duty military members who have no legal right to be policing American cities. That is why we have local, county, and state law enforcement.

[nckerr]

They do have a right to protect military members and their families anywhere the command see fit. Yes, the arrest of an individual would have to be completed by whoever has jurisdiction, but the protection (to include deadly force) can be performed my an MP.

Alos, an MP can perform limited law enforcement with agreement with local jurisdiction where there is a large on or off duty military population. ie patrolling with civilian law enforcement in a bar area downtown to ensure the “good order and discipline” of the troops.

[big'ol_freeper]

0bama don’t need no steenkin Constitution?

Actually has nothing to do with the Constitution. It has everything to do with the Posse Comitatus Act.

[frankiep]

BS.

They are not on a base, they are patrolling the streets of an American city while armed and in uniform. That is not their job, it is the job of the police.

[668 - Neighbor of the Beast]

Yes, I knew someone would be correcting me on that :) but saying we don’t need no steenkin federal law doesn’t have the same ring does it?

[mtnwmn]

You are not the only one wondering about this latest development. Could be Army was easier to deploy?? I don’t think we are under Marshall Law.

[Gondring]

Back in 2006, President Bush signed Public Law 109-364, or the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007," (H.R.5122), which allows the President to declare a "public emergency" and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to "suppress public disorder."

It's my understanding that some or all of that provision has been repealed but I am uncertain about details.

[Gondring]

In 2008, Congress restored many of the earlier limitations on the president’s ability to deploy troops within the United States, but Bush issued a signing statement indicating he was not bound by the changes.

Those wonderful "signing statements"...

[Gondring]

Actually has nothing to do with the Constitution. It has everything to do with the Posse Comitatus Act.

...and the Insurrection Act.

[napscoordinator]

I am a bitter Pennsylvanian too...