Posted on 07/03/2014 7:44:55 PM PDT by doug from upland
As far as I know they do, for instance 40% of our WWI troops were Guard.
The Guard and active duty are seamless when called to active service, for instance Green Beret units, regardless of whether they are currently active, or Guard, are the same when called up.
Here is the misunderstanding. This is what I was responding too. Guardsmen can be federalized but they do not become Army.
Same thing, if a guardsman doesn’t become part of the U.S. army when he goes active, then what is he?
Active Duty/ Guard ping.
I’m trying to understand this. Some up thread said the NG couldn’t be armed. However, the article includes:
“SAD is based on State statue and policy as well as State funds. Soldiers and Airmen remain under the command and control of the Governor. A key aspect of this duty status is that the Posse Comitatus Act does not apply, giving National Guardsmen the ability to act in a law enforcement capacity within their home state or adjacent state if granted by that state’s Governor.”
Given Posse Comitatus doesn’t apply and they have the ability to “act in a law enforcement capacity”, if they are under control of the Gov and are in compliance with Texas state laws (not sure about the law regarding the NG, but I know TX is open carry), I’m trying to understand why they couldn’t be armed.
Thanks!
Incorrect. Unless they are activated under Title 10 the State has authority to direct Guard forces in support of law enforcement activities. A State can authorize the State National Guard to enforce state law, if the States law allows it.
3-2. State Policy
State laws and policies govern the use of National Guard Soldiers and Airmen in support of domestic law
enforcement support and mission assurance operations while serving in state active duty and US Code, Title 32
statuses. State laws and policies authorize National Guard members in either Title 32 or state active duty (SAD)
status to support law enforcement agencies and are implemented through state plans and policies. As most National
Guard operations in support of law enforcement and mission assurance are conducted in a non-federalized status, a
clear understanding of applicable state policies is critical to mission success. It is strongly recommended that state
commanders receive a legal briefing addressing state specific laws, policies, directives and executive orders from
their Judge Advocate General prior to conducting domestic law enforcement support and mission assurance
operations within their respective states.
NGR 500-5/ANGI 10-802 August 18, 2010
4
a. Criteria for the use of the National Guard operating in a state status in support of domestic law enforcement
and mission assurance operations are defined within the laws, policies, directives and executive orders that govern
the specific state in which operations are conducted.
b. Department of Defense policies and directives do not address National Guard assets in a non-federalized
status conducting state operations approved by the Governor in support of local and/or state civil authorities.
However, there exists potential for such state operations to result in confrontation, use of lethal force, or national
media attention. Therefore, the Adjutants General shall inform the Chief, National Guard Bureau (CNGB) of such
support. The CNGB shall then inform the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS), and
the Joint Director of Military Support (JDOMS).
When operating under SAD or Title 32 they are only restricted by state law. A Governor can activate and direct the forces to use force if necessary, to enforce law, etc if the states laws allow it. Posse Comitatus as you listed does not apply and if State law allows it they can most certainly be armed.
OK so Perry calls up the National Guard on his own authority as governor and sends them to the border. Who is responsible for paying their salaries, food, fuel for their vehicles and helicopters, so on and so forth? Based on that chart it looks like the state is.
The taxpayers
The states are. Since states receive money for Guard pay from the Government, the money for SAD would come out of the general fund or emergency fund.
Thanks! I was thinking they could be armed (if OK under state law), but there seemed to be conflicting thoughts to that up thread.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.