|
10 Aug 02 - 08:44 AM (#762983) Subject: End the Pose Comintatus act?!?!?!?!?!?! From: InOBU Biden, a democrat and some Republican is putting forward a bill to end the Pose Comintatus Act, so that soldiers can police the streets in the USA. HEY STUPID! did they ever concider WHY we have not had military coups in the US? Do the idiots think it is genetic? I don't know about you, but I don't see the streets in America beyond the control of the cops, in fact, if you travel about New York looks more like a police state than a republic when you notice cops with automatic pistols on almost every corner... so why do we need soldiers as well? God help the remains of this Rebublic... Any one seen Thomas Paine anywhere???? Cheers Larry |
|
10 Aug 02 - 10:08 AM (#763001) Subject: RE: End the Pose Comintatus act?!?!?!?!?!?! From: katlaughing Here's some interesting reading on it: Washington University Law Quarterly and, copy of the Act. Note, this one has an op/ed piece running along side of it. Neither of the above necessarily represent my views. I need to read up on this more. Thanks, Larry, for bringing it to our attention. kat |
|
10 Aug 02 - 10:22 AM (#763007) Subject: RE: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!?!?! From: Sorcha This could be scary........... |
|
10 Aug 02 - 11:01 AM (#763014) Subject: RE: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!?!?! From: GUEST A thread said they would scorch ya sorcha |
|
10 Aug 02 - 11:38 AM (#763023) Subject: RE: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!?!?! From: Wotcha Nice article: Posse Comitatus Act only applies to the Navy or Marine Corps by regulation ... and the Coasties are out of the picture, since they enforce the law under their DOT role. If you read and believe James Bamford's book, "Body of Secrets" the Posse Comitatus Act didn't seem to bother some folks in the early 1960s from engaging in what seemed to be the plot for Frankenheimer's 1964 movie "Seven Days in May." More recently, an essay written by an Air Force officer --got him in some hot water (so much for the First Amendment) -- surfaces the tension because the military is perceived as capable of doing everything (sounds like the premise for federalization of airport security). If you can find it, read "The Origins of the Coup of 2012." (US Army War College, Parameters, Winter 1992/93) Cheers, Brian |
|
10 Aug 02 - 12:52 PM (#763043) Subject: RE: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!?!?! From: katlaughing Here it is, Wotcha, thanks for the cite: Origins of the Coup of 2012 |
|
10 Aug 02 - 04:54 PM (#763095) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: artbrooks As the cite to the Washington University Law Quarterly (above) makes very clear, the Posse Comitatus Act was originally a knee-jerk over-reaction to a specific situation right after the Civil War, and only applies to the Army (and the Air Force since it was originally part of the Army). The military wants nothing to do with law enforcement, the civilian law enforcement agencies don't want the help of the military, and nobody in their right mind wants this to change.
|
|
10 Aug 02 - 05:18 PM (#763107) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: X You have a group of citizens and a government that want to take way your RIGHT to keep and bear arms and suspend the Posse Comitatus Act. Anyone see a pattren? |
|
10 Aug 02 - 05:18 PM (#763110) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Janice in NJ If you search the US Code on-line, you will find that the Posse Comitatus Act as amended now applies to all branches of the US Armed Forces except the Coast Guard. Here it is copied verbatim: TITLE 10, Subtitle A, PART I, CHAPTER 18, Sec. 375. Sec. 375. - Restriction on direct participation by military personnel The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law. Click here for US Code! |
|
10 Aug 02 - 06:04 PM (#763132) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: artbrooks Entirely correct, and, since it has been incorporated into the US Code, the original act is not necessary and may be voided without having any impact upon anything. BTW, not being presently a member of a "well regulated militia", under the meaning and intent of the 2nd Amendment, I believe that I have the legal right but not a "Constitutional" right to "keep and bear arms". I do have a few swords around the house. |
|
10 Aug 02 - 06:15 PM (#763138) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: toadfrog Art, I think if you look closely, the 2d Amendment says "keep and arm bears," a fact THEY have conspired to keep from us all these years. As a true mudcatt, I propose we gather and compose a song, preferably to the tune of Battle Hymn of the Republic: End the Posse Comitatus End the Posse Comitatus End the Posse Comitatus As we go marching on! |
|
10 Aug 02 - 06:30 PM (#763140) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: artbrooks The 2nd Amendment says "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". It is ridiculous to contend that any part of it, such as the clause about the militia, can be eliminated without changing the meaning of the entire Amendment and aborting the intent of the Founding Fathers. The "right to bear arms" was directly linked by them to membership in an organized militia force. This doesn't mean that "the government", whoever that is, has any right or intent to confiscate anybody's personally-owned submachine gun. BTW, you do know that the stories about the Nazi and Soviet governments confiscating all of the private weapons as soon as they came to power are myths, don't you? |
|
10 Aug 02 - 07:23 PM (#763150) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: InOBU I personaly believe that the origional language was the right to arm bears... but you all know I get things backwards... Cheers Larry |
|
10 Aug 02 - 07:49 PM (#763165) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: X Art: According the Federalist Papers any American male between the ages of 16 to 68 is a militiaman. If you fall into this category guess what? You belong to the Militia. So, in around about way you are also Constitutionally required to own a firearm. LOL |
|
10 Aug 02 - 09:40 PM (#763209) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: InOBU WWWWWWWWWWWeeeeeeeeeeeeellllllllll, not quite Banjoist... the First Amendment recognises the right of a few of us to opt out of that. Course it took a while, which is why we Quakers used to meet a bunch of Adventists, Amish, Menonites, Bretheren, Orthodox Jews in jail every war until recently... Cheers. Larry |
|
10 Aug 02 - 11:01 PM (#763245) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: X Yea, While I went to Nam you were home nice and safe. |
|
10 Aug 02 - 11:59 PM (#763256) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Amos The right to keep and bear arms is allocated by the Second Amendment to the people so that they can form a Militia. There is nothing that says the right goes away when they aren't doing so. Bear in mind too that the eviction from New England of the imported Hessian and British troops -- government troops -- was accomplished by a local militia, although since it was an outlaw militia in the eyes of Vested Authority, it could be argued that it was just a bunch of terrorists. Whatever it was, it seems it was the model preserved in the Consititution. Ya gotta be careful about the abuse of legitimacy, or you find things being promulgated with legitimate tags on them that would never be tolerated otherwise -- such as contemplating a major invasion overseas with little evidence of adequate grounds and hauling down billions of U.S. tax dollars to make this horror show become a reality~!! Imagine if Mizz Clinton had asserted he was agonna go over there and drop bombs! Or if Bush had done so before the country got so scarred up by 9-11-01. They woulda laughed tthem out of town, methinks... A A |
|
11 Aug 02 - 12:16 AM (#763260) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: artbrooks I don't believe that particular statement actually appears anywhere in the Federalist Papers. They were basically "letters to the editor", written in 1788, after the Constitution (1787) but before the Constitutional Convention that ratified the Bill of Rights. They were essentially the political opinions of John Jay, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, and were intended to garner votes for their positions at the Convention. The Federalist Papers are not law. They can be read here; a search on "militia" might be informative. |
|
11 Aug 02 - 02:35 AM (#763280) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: GUEST,Claymore Actually the original statement about the Posse Comitatis Act still only applying to the Army (and by extention, to the Air Force) is still technically correct. The ammendment cedes to SecDef (the Executive branch)the "regulation", thereby expressly circumventing the "legislation" or "law" of Congress. In fact, the Marines were once called out to preserve the law of the land (trivia question: where and under what circumstances - no fair if a Marine answers). Under separate circumstances the National Guard already has a form of this very authority, thus being used to put down riots, looting etc. under martial law. And folks, the "Cabal of Officers" plot has figured in many B-grade thrillers with nary a twitch of reality. For God's sake people, this is America, not some third rate European, Asian, South American, or African country. (Second trivia question: America is one of the very few countries in the World which has not had a military coup succeed in over turning the duly constituted government of that nation; name some others... If some General wants power, he runs for President, like Ike, Grant or Washington (or not, like Powell). And consider that after WWII, Russian citizens had multiples of guns for every citizen (and still do), yet Stalin did what he wanted, when he wanted. It has never been about taking guns away; it's about taking away the will to fight. If you keep the will, the guns come easy. BTW, the First Ammendment, by virtue of the UCMJ, does not apply to members of the Armed Forces. In fact, by well established precedent, the truth of the statement is not a bar to prosecution, (as every young officer is taught). As we Marines used to say, "We use deceit, death, and destruction to preserve truth, honesty, justice, and the American Way of Life". (A world the protected will never know...) |
|
11 Aug 02 - 07:09 AM (#763322) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Hrothgar Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Canada haven't had military coups. Is that a good start? Although at one stage you could be excused for thinking South Africa was being run by the police..... All rugby playing countries, too. Just lucky, I guess. |
|
11 Aug 02 - 02:56 PM (#763452) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: GUEST,Claymore Hothgar, did Oliver Cromwell play rugby? ;} You do raise an interesting point however. Off the top of my head, I believe that every country where soccer is a major sport, has had an military overthrow, while no American style football country has so suffered. This is not true of baseball (Japan), basketball or ping pong (China)or even bowling (that bastard Cromwell again). There may be other sports connections, but I leave those to others... |
|
11 Aug 02 - 05:33 PM (#763505) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Big Mick For God's sake people, this is America, not some third rate European, Asian, South American, or African country. And you wonder why "Americans" are viewed in various countries with disdain or even hate. These "third rate" countries are filled with folks with the same aspirations, dreams, hopes, as we have here. We were fortunate enough to be born in a place with the form of government we have. Mick |
|
11 Aug 02 - 06:06 PM (#763518) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Gareth HHmmmm ! This could be the end of many a "Cliche" in 'B' Movies. Incidently Cromwell, and his religious fundamentalists, tried to ban football, along with the Maypole, and Xmas. Who says that Ben Ladin is a modern invention. Gareth |
|
11 Aug 02 - 07:40 PM (#763561) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: GUEST,Claymore Mick, you made my point exactly. We Americans tend to look to the Europeans (et al) as some form of wise elders, when in fact, we must understand their basic irrelevance in our future. As for some other nationalities "viewing us with distain or even hate"; when some Europeans write that "I am afraid of America", my retort is that, for either psychological or political reasons, you may have a "need" to be. We must be cognizant of the world at large, but not servile to it. A "Cabal of Generals" scenerio was fruitlessly played out when former General (and then Chief of Staff) Al Haig, in a misbegotten attempt to calm the Nation after Reagan was shot, said "I am in charge", and was quickly corrected by members of the press, Congress, and anybody with a mouth. And the only shots fired were Hinkley's... Your last sentence says it all... |
|
12 Aug 02 - 04:51 AM (#763718) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Teribus Claymore - I would suggest you read Antonia Fraser's book on Cromwell. Cromwell was a member of a legally assembled parliament. He fought on the parliamentary side in defence of the rights of the people against a King who ardently believed in the "Divine Right of Kings" (to do what ever they wanted, whenever they wanted), a doctrine that challenged the rights won by the barons with the signing of the Magna Carta.
Gareth - "Incidently Cromwell, and his religious fundamentalists, tried to ban football, along with the Maypole, and Xmas. " Cromwell did not - the Levellers were the fundamentalists you mention and Cromwell did much to water down what they proposed. The United Kingdom has never experienced a military coup wrt the overthrow of an elected government. We've had lots of instances of rebellions and threats of foreign invasion, but no military coups. |
|
12 Aug 02 - 07:52 AM (#763750) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: InOBU Hi Banjoist... Safe at home? I was a combat photographer in Belfast in the late seventies, the most dangerous time for press in the northern counties of Ireland, and many of my fellow COs, such as my Friend Gene, who we burried last month, was a medic on Sipan during WWII. For those, who for their belief that war is an imoral and inefficent way to solve problems, went to jail in the days I mention, all were subjected to torture, some died, an most lived their lives thereafter to make the world a better place, having been responcible for some of the greatest changes in the way (for example) people were treated in mental health centers - a common place where COs where given alternative service. If your concience led you to fight in that war, that is the choice you made. We all make choices, and to presume yours was the only brave and moral choice may not always be the case. Just as (contrary to the steriotype) COs don't generally see you all as baby murderers, you may be surprised to find COs are not all cowards. Best wishes, Larry |
|
12 Aug 02 - 09:32 AM (#763785) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: GUEST,John Hernandez Larry is right. Do not presume that because a person is a conscientious objector, or even a non-cooperator, he/she is a coward. Many American COs, for example, were pioneers in the Civil Rights Movement. Read Freedom Ride by Jim Peck, a World War II CO, and you will discover that the tactics of nonviolent resistance to racial segregation were first developed by COs within the federal prison system. Many of those very same COs were later involved in the sit-ins and Freedom Rides, including Mr. Peck himself who was nearly beaten to death by a mob waiting at the bus terminal in Birmingham, Alabama. |
|
12 Aug 02 - 11:42 AM (#763852) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Big Mick I went to war, that was my choice. I have known genuine heroes. Many of the bravest and most heroic people I have known were people, indeed friends, who flew in the face of society and didn't go to war. One of the things that one learns as s/he ages, if and only if they are open to it, is wisdom. If one is open to learning the lessons of the life they have lived, then they see in their past that which was truly valiant. I can find every bit as many hero's in those that struggled against the war, as I can in those of us who chose to go. I can also find cowards on both sides of that equation. There are many contradictions to being alive, and it does not serve much to try and put these types of feelings in neat little columns. Mick |
|
12 Aug 02 - 06:24 PM (#764054) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: John O'L Curse my forefathers for not migrating to Claymore's America. Then I too would be one of the master race instead of an infinitely lesser creature from an irrelevant country. Teribus - What peoples rights was Cromwell "defending" in Ireland? |
|
13 Aug 02 - 05:07 AM (#764268) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Teribus glen2Glen - Remember that Cromwell was involved as a parliamentary commander in the middle of a civil war that was by no stretch of the imagination restricted purely to England. The Irish had been in rebellion in support of King Charles for almost eight years prior to Cromwell's arrival in Ireland. That rebellion was supported by Spain with the tacit agreement of the Stuart monarchy - treason in the eyes of Parliament. If decisive action was not taken in Ireland there existed a creditable threat of invasion of England backed by Spain. In this context it should also be remembered that the Spanish Armada (1588) was still, in historical terms, a fairly recent event. The perception seems to be that Cromwell treated the Irish rebels in a harsher manner than the forces opposing Parliament on the mainland (i.e. England and Scotland). If that perception of the treatment of the Irish is true, it is only marginally so. The loss of life in his campaign in Scotland was held below that of his campaign in Ireland because of two factors. His campaign in Scotland was decided by set piece battles after which his Scottish captives were sent to work as slaves on the plantations of newly captured Jamaica. They still died, but not during the campaign. The predominant feature of his campaign in Ireland was the investment and storming of fortified and garrisoned towns and cities. Remember that the rebels/Royalists in Ireland had had years to entrench themselves and were therefore tougher opposition. The unfortunate but established norm for such operations (and there are many such examples in history, from Troy until the seige of San Sebastion during the Napoleonic Wars) was that once beseiged a town was invited to surrender, if it did, all well and good, the population and garrison were afforded safe conduct. If, on the other hand, they did not surrender and forced the beseigers to take the town by force, then the town and it's inhabitants were generally given no quarter. The reasoning behind this being that the commander of the forces attacking knew his casualties would be far higher than in a fixed battle and the prospect of plunder was the only incentive he could give his troops to storm the city beseiged. |
|
13 Aug 02 - 07:01 AM (#764306) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Hrothgar Maybe the reason that very few countries that play American football have had military takeovers is mathematically linked to the number of countries that play American football... |
|
13 Aug 02 - 08:43 AM (#764338) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: artbrooks Another thing to remember about Cromwell's campaign in Ireland (and wasn't he there only about 9-10 months?) is that he was primarily fighting English "settlers" in Ireland and not the Irish themselves. Granted, the destinction is rather blurred 350 years later, and some of the English had been there for several generations. |
|
13 Aug 02 - 05:30 PM (#764675) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: John O'L Teribus, The civil war by definition must be restricted to England. The reason Cromwell needed to take decisive action in places other than England (and this, by good luck rather than good management, returns us more or less to the intention of the thread) is that he felt obliged to uphold and perpetuate the folly of his self-deposed predecessors. England should never have been in the position where she needed to put down a rebellion in Ireland. Glenn |
|
13 Aug 02 - 09:48 PM (#764865) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: McGrath of Harlow I'd suggest that the argument about whether Oliver Cromwell is someone the English should revere or not should be carried on in some thread labelled as being about that, and we could all pile in. Not one of my favourites, but then my list of favourites in this context would be pretty short.
I imagine that if a bunch of crooks and villains wanted to take over control of the USA they'd find a more subtle way of achieving that than a simple military coup, which is always dependent on having an obediant soldiery. And remember Hitler didn't come to power by way of a miltary coup, but through a flawed democratic system. |
|
13 Aug 02 - 10:19 PM (#764889) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: X Larry: I've heard it all before and I still don't buy it. I've done your job and you know what? A Nikon is not an M-14, don't even try to compare the two. You can have the last word, I don't give a damn what you have to say. |
|
13 Aug 02 - 10:27 PM (#764894) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: InOBU The point being (neglecting the fact that I used a Lica ... ;-) ) that it takes more guts to face the guns with a gun than a camera? Well, it would be intersting to see what percent of combat photogs died, per capita, it may be quite high. As to comparing a camera to a gun, I agree they aren't the least bit alike, thank God. As to not caring what another says... well, I hope you get over that particular trait, it limits your growth. Caring is what defines us as human rather than other apes. Best wishes old man, Larry PS As to the point of this thread, we still don't know if you are in favor of repealing the Pose Comitatus Act or not! Oh well.... |
|
13 Aug 02 - 10:30 PM (#764896) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: InOBU Lieca? Leica... hmmmmm, where is the dusty old thing anyway....? have to hunt it out and see how the name is spelled.... |
|
14 Aug 02 - 05:34 AM (#765011) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Penny S. Respect for CO's may be dependent on having a volunteer rather than a conscript army. I can understand how members of the latter might regard CO's as having found another clever way out of service - but I hope that they would regard being a member of a powerful family who can swing the draft and election results with the same contempt. I have a friend from the US who is of the opinion that the USA has had a coup, though not military. Penny |
|
14 Aug 02 - 06:13 PM (#765454) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: GUEST,Claymore glen, you may have missed my point that, rather than being a "master race" as you would call them, in what might be characterized as a supercilious tone, is that for the most part, we Americans are not afraid of our government, have no fear of a military coup, and within the bounds of well-considered disagreement, have a healthy discourse on the military and political policies of our government. Rather than being driven by some jingoistic impulse, our Nation is known for being increasingly concerned about military casualties, and leaving the scene of a fight after sustaining what would be considered in most countries, as negligible losses. All this may be bad or good, but it is certainly not the stuff of a "Master race." Moreover, our politicians know this. Bush could nuke Baghdad tomorrow, but in a manner uniquely characteristic to this Nation, we can only "sell" going to war to the voting population, by being attacked (Pearl, 9-11, etc.) or coming to the aid of an ally. Thus the "floating" of ideas dealing with Iraq, in the papers. And again characteristically, it will be a hard sell. Not exactly the stuff of cabals, dictators, or jingositic nations. And by the way, if your country (unstated in your comment) is irrelevant to mine, I would consider it an act of kindness to make my country irrelevent to yours. This "I would to buy the world a Coke" mentality is a drag on both our countries. If you wish to visit or immigrate lawfully to our country, a 1000 welcomes, but please learn to drive on the right side of the road. If we are irrelevant, go in peace. If you wish to harm us or harbor those who do, don't shoot weapons in the air at a wedding. It's kind of a IQ test... And Hothgar, you, like Big Mick, have made my point exactly... with the subtle inclusion of Canada in the bargain. (Though I do believe the concept of war in Canada has more to do with neatness than American football). ;} |
|
14 Aug 02 - 06:30 PM (#765469) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Big Mick Claymore, I am not sure where you get that "looking at Europeans as wise elders" stuff. I certainly don't. But what I do look at them as is partners for the most part, and adversaries in some cases. This has to do with national interests on both sides of the equation. What I am speaking to with you is the vernacular that you have chosen to use. I don't believe that there are any third rate countries. Just countries of different circumstance, customs, needs, luck, etc. Our European neighbors are tired of the U.S. acting in a unilateral manner without consultation, nor with regard to how that will impact them. The President shows his lack of depth in this regard daily. He allows the ultra right wing part of his administration free reign and justifies it with oversimplistic rhetoric. There was a huge article just today in USA Today that dealt with how this administration has squandered a huge amount of good will since September 11, 2001 by taking that tragic event and using it to justify other parts of their agenda. In other words, taking advantage and acting in a unilateral fashion. That shouldn't surprise those of us that live here, they have been doing the same thing domestically. Your 20/20 hindsight with regard to the tone of your message is, I think, what bothers me. It seems to place us on a pedestal that I do not believe is where we want to be. Mick |
|
14 Aug 02 - 07:48 PM (#765527) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: GUEST,Claymore Mick, Not to drive a point into the ground, but we consult to death with our European allies. There are less complicated mating dances with the African Bowerbird. They don't seem to get the idea that, just because we disagree with them, after "intense consultations", that we are still going to do what is in our national interest to do. During the entire Cold War did France ever agree with us? Should that have stopped us? We rarely tie our foreign aid to countries who disapprove of our policies, only to those who actively attack them. If we were making every country in Europe (or Africa etc.) happy, we would be doing something wrong. Finally, the use of the term "third rate" seems to have been taken by some as an indication that I meant ALL European countries were "third rate". Please note I said "some third-rate European country". American English is my native tongue, and by no stretch of any of my words, can you make that statement inclusive of all European nations (or any others). To the extent that some Europeans included themselves in, I suggest a national 12 step self-esteem course (or aroma therapy...) |
|
14 Aug 02 - 08:14 PM (#765535) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: McGrath of Harlow I take it that no offence would be caused by anyone talking about third-rate states in the USA?
When I read posts like the last I get a suspicion it's someone who hates the USA trying to stir up antagonism against it.
It wasn't just Americans who were killed on September 11th. It won't just be Americans who'll be killed in the new war against those who weren't reponsible for September 11 but who fall into Bush's elastic definition of outlaw states.
|
|
14 Aug 02 - 08:59 PM (#765542) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: GUEST,Jack Worthington What is a militia? I believe it includes every able bodied man under the age of 45 and additionally, any man who has retired or been released after some period of service in one of the branches of the military(army, navy, airforce, marines et.al.)up to the age of about 62. On the frontier it would have been ludicrous to have disarmed any man or family and stowed all the muskets or rifles in a warehouse as that would put him or them in danger of all sorts of enemies. So, it was and remains essential that the men must have their own guns and know how to use them and when called on, become part of the militia bearing those personal arms(notice that these guns are privatly owned and not forcibly procured with taxes). |
|
14 Aug 02 - 10:01 PM (#765560) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: McGrath of Harlow "every able bodied man under the age of 45 and additionally, any man who has retired or been released after some period of service in one of the branches of the military(army, navy, airforce, marines et.al.)up to the age of about 62."
So the "right to bear arms" wouldn't apply to women? |
|
14 Aug 02 - 10:35 PM (#765568) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: NicoleC And, apparently, the part about being a "well-regulated" militia goes right out the window. 200 years ago men knew how to use and care for gun the way most people know how to drive cars today. That kind of comparision of the term militia isn't apt, because it presumes that your 21st century man (and apparently not women) has the same skillset. I'm all in favor of well-regulated, disciplined and trained civilians carrying and knowing how to use arms as part of their civic duty. Perhaps more importantly, being trained in when not to use them. I'm not in favor of labelling a mis-mash of people who can afford to buy or manage to steal weapons, many of them responsible guns owners but a whole bunch of them NOT -- a "militia." |
|
15 Aug 02 - 09:19 AM (#765792) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Teribus Having read through katlaughing's extremely informative links, I personally can see no need to change the PCA as it stands. Exemptions (by direct instruction and with the consent of Congress) have been granted where deemed appropriate and the "system" seems to work. In the first of the links posted by katlaughing they seem to object to an exemption being made with regard to use of military know-how with respect to biological and chemical weapons - I don't know of any organisation in the civil sector who would be better qualified to advise or handle those situations. Surely the National Guard of each state, who are specifically exempted from the terms of the Act as they are under State control, are the "militia" as referred to in the US constitution. The term "militia" infers some sort of organisation, not any Tom, Dick or Harry on the basis that they own a gun. It may have been that back in 1776, but even then the Toms, Dicks and Harrys were organised into militia units and operated under some form of command structure. I am currently reading Elizabeth Longford's revised book on "Wellington" - In the 1820's in the UK he saw the need to seperate the military from what were civil matters. It took Wellington and Sir Robert Peel damn near nine years to get the Police Force established in fact. Thereafter the only role for the military in civilian matters was as an "Aid to the Civil Power" and only on specific direction from the Home Office. So the situation as it stands in the UK is remarkably similar to that which exists in the USA with the PCA in place in it's present form. If it's not broke - don't fix it. glen2Glen in very simple terms what you stated is correct regarding what constitutes a civil war - but only in simple terms. In the case of Parliament v the King, the latter, unfortunately,happened to be King of England, Scotland and Ireland. I say unfortunately because he used that position to further his cause by attempting to pit one against the other - hence the spread. His negotiations with foreign powers to assist in his war against his lawfully assembled parliament was one of the main reasons he got his head chopped off. As a foot-note Kevin, if I respond to statements made in a thread leading to further comments - irrespective of how much off topic - neither I, or anyone else, requires your blessing to continue that discussion, nor your directions as to where we should discuss it. |
|
15 Aug 02 - 02:57 PM (#766029) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Ebbie Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year. The Federalist Papers Very much like the National Guard, only with less training and supervision. And this statement was made by Alexander Hamilton, in the belief that a militia was a necessity. However, that was a day when people hunted for food and carried guns for safety against footpads and varmints. Today a trip to the supermarket for most people doesn't require quite as much forethought or protection. (Hey, as we go 'round peering into people's bedrooms and garages obeying our government's decree to monitor each other for our citizens' safety, maybe we can carry guns and take care of any problems as they arise?) |
|
15 Aug 02 - 03:42 PM (#766065) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: artbrooks Please keep in mind that the Federalist Papers were the opinions of three individuals, published in local newspapers in order to influence delegates to the upcoming Constitutional Convention, and have no legal status whatsoever. |
|
15 Aug 02 - 08:51 PM (#766210) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: Wotcha Well ... end the PCA and use soldiers as scab labor for even more tasks other than fighting ... "You don't get me, I'm in the Union ... Till the day I die ... " but then again I think the Danes or Dutch have unions to represent their military ... In the States, there is a distinction between the National Guard and Militia, although in context of a Second Amendment debate this gets obscured rather quickly. Texas actually has a Militia and a National Guard. Cheers, Brian |
|
29 Aug 02 - 01:34 AM (#773386) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: GUEST Coup of 2012 - explain more Katlaughing |
|
05 Sep 02 - 12:42 AM (#777252) Subject: RE: BS: End the Posse Comitatus act?!?!?!?!? From: GUEST Katlaughing - please post the other historical times this "emergency need" has been enacted. |