Replies

Thanks for the reply, Sam.

There have been ideas such as yours (the National Guard) being brought in to help. The idea has merit, but I would ask the following:

When will the strict Constitutionalists bark that it is illegal to bring in federal troops to catch a criminal? (And it isn't illegal. The military CAN help in a civilian investigation, as long as they do not participate in the actual arrest). Also, along with that argument goes with, 'My taxes are paying for the government to catch a criminal that local LE should be getting'. You know someone will say that.

There is no doubt in my mind that the local LE can not handle this, particularly with the scenario you raise. Yet, there will be some who will say that deploying federal troops in a local investigation is just another reason the Patriot Act is unconstitutional. What's to stop the federal troops from thwarting other crime that may be occuring?

SamAdams76, I think your ideas are good. This is such a complex situtation that I think no matter what is done, issues will be raised. Thanks again for the reply.

Well remember the National Guard is supposed to be utilized stateside for national emergencies and defense purposes. Stationing National Guard troops in the woods with night-vision goggles is not the same as posting regular Army troops or Marines on U.S. soil. I don't think the Constitutionalists should have a problem with that.

"When will the strict Constitutionalists bark that it is illegal to bring in federal troops to catch a criminal? (And it isn't illegal. The military CAN help in a civilian investigation, as long as they do not participate in the actual arrest)."

Unless "federalized" (i.e. called into active duty), the National Guard answers to STATE government, so the governors of Virginia and Maryland could certainly use the NG in this mode if they choose to do so. This has been done in the past.