Tactics gone wrong - Page 9

Huey14 · 11-01-2006, 19:15

Has the possiblity of either amending, or doing away with entirely, the Posse Comitatus Act ever come up?

**The Reaper** · 11-01-2006, 19:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huey14

Has the possiblity of either amending, or doing away with entirely, the Posse Comitatus Act ever come up?

I for one hope that it does not.

The AD military should not be involved with law enforcement in the US.

TR

El Cid · 11-02-2006, 10:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huey14

Has the possiblity of either amending, or doing away with entirely, the Posse Comitatus Act ever come up?

In a crisis the President can override it temporarily. I thought this was done with the prison riots in Alabama and Louisanna many moons ago, but am not positive.

mugwump · 11-02-2006, 11:29

The President gains broad powers to employ the military domestically, I believe, in H.R.5122, S.2767 which apparently became law on 10/17/2006. The lefties I work with (and they compose 95% of my colleagues) are all atwitter. It does appear to be the end of Posse Comitatus.

The use of the military in a pandemic has been discussed ad nauseum in some of the meetings I've attended. These guys think that the military are a) stooges of Bush and b) have God-like powers to solve problems with food/water/power distribution and to quell civil unrest. It would be funny if it weren't so sad. (For instance, I heard one otherwise sensible scientist say that the military could take over electrical generating stations if the operators were dead/ill/MIA. There's an MOS for "Operator, electric generating plant, coal-fired", right?)

Cite

(Sec. 1042) Revises federal provisions allowing the President to utilize the Armed Forces in connection with interference with federal and state law to allow the President to employ the Armed Forces and National Guard in federal service to restore public order in cases of natural disaster, epidemic or other public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or domestic violence. Requires the President to notify Congress within 14 days of the exercise of such authority. Authorizes the President, when exercising such authority, to direct the Secretary to provide supplies, services, and equipment to persons affected by the situation.

**Razor** · 11-02-2006, 15:47

Its ironic you posted this, Mugwump. I'm a day away from completing a week of training in the DoD's role in Defense Support to Civilian Authorities (DSCA), and I'll tell you that the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) is not only alive and well, but a pervasive concern in every aspect of DSCA, from disaster support such as Katrina, to a full-blown terrorist attack. In the particular cited section of that law, notice that Armed Forces and National Guard are listed as separate entities. I have no doubt that this is deliberate, as the National Guard, while under State Active Duty (SAD) or Title 32 under state control, are able to conduct law enforcement in their home state. Once federalized, however, they lose that capability, and are fully subject to the PCA. Note also that the PCA and other applicable directives and regulations do not restrict the DoD providing specific support to law enforcement. There is a long tradition of separating the military from law enforcement in the US; don't look for that to change anytime soon. Also, like The Reaper said, DoD isn't interested in civilian law enforcement; it takes too many resources, and is far too restrictive.

There has been a great deal of planning for the response to a pandemic, in DoD, the federal govt, state govts, etc. You can read the National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza (PI) on the web - http://www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/n...ementation.pdf . USNORTHCOM has a Concept Plan for DoD support in the event of (PI) as well, and is constantly updated as new information is received. Think of the number of critical infrastructure specialists in the civilian world (power, water, transportation, etc), then look at the overall DoD strength. There's no way in hell DoD could take over all these critical functions nationwide in the event of a PI outbreak. DoD supports civilian efforts, they don't assume them.

It will probably be a waste of breath, but you can tell your tinfoil-hatted friends that the DoD is likely more concerned with preventing violations of the PCA than they are.

BTW, yes...there is a whole battalion of prime power production specialists in the Army, MOS 21P.

El Cid, the only way the President can "override" the PCA is by invoking the Insurrection Act, which isn't an easy thing to do. Incidentally, if anyone is wondering why the Navy and USMC, who aren't specified in the PCA, can't be used for law enforcement activities, its due to DODD 5525.5, which makes them subject to the PCA.

Huey14 · 11-02-2006, 16:32

I ask about the PCA because it seems (to me, anyway) that if there's a serious situation that only the military can resolve, and are nearby, then why not use them?

While we've never used the SAS domesticly (to my knowledge), they're there if STG can't handle something. Kinda tiered I understand.

It seems to work well here. But then, we're much smaller and can have experts on site within a pretty short space of time.

mugwump · 11-02-2006, 16:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razor

Its ironic you posted this, Mugwump....

Yowsah. Thanks for this Razor. Do you mind if I pass this on? (I'll remove the tinfoil reference -- a flies vinegar/honey move -- even though it's deserved.)

This place is great, I learn something new most every day.

**Razor** · 11-02-2006, 18:52

Huey, there are very few (notice I said few; I'm not looking to restart a discussion on active shooter scenarios) civilian law enforcement events for which the military would be a better match than civilian LE, IMO. As for non-law enforcement (CBRNE events, disaster response, etc), the federal, state, local and tribal governments have multiple layers of response redundancy, and in cases where the military is well-suited to support local officials, there are plenty of resources available. However, note that I again said the DoD is in a supporting role. The only circumstance in which the DoD is a lead federal agency in an emergency function is when it deals with public works, and the Army Corps of Engineers fills that role.

Mug, feel free (minus the tinfoil, of course

).

Anyone wanting to probe my new found knowledge (and limited experience), I'd be happy to tell you what I know.

Huey14 · 11-02-2006, 19:31

Like I said, I'm not privvy to the hows and whens of if SAS (or should I say CT TTAG these days) would take over from the police. The only example I can think of that's remotely close is the Princess Gate seige.

Just keeping with PCA a bit. I read somewhere that AD units can't train LEO units due PCA. True?

**Razor** · 11-03-2006, 11:21

The PCA doesn't address military support to law enforcement. However, training is addressed in DODD 5525.5. According to this, military units can provide law enforcement units training on the operation and maintenance of specialized equipment, and provide expert advice as required.

**The Reaper** · 11-03-2006, 11:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razor

The PCA doesn't address military support to law enforcement. However, training is addressed in DODD 5525.5. According to this, military units can provide law enforcement units training on the operation and maintenance of specialized equipment, and provide expert advice as required.

That was the limit of the military role at Waco, and I am glad.

Can you imagine the fingerpointing if Reno had ordered Army troops to assault the compound, along with Fed LE?

American soldiers do not need to be killing American civilians, except in dire emergencies.

TR

11-03-2006, 14:54

Razor,

Let me get this straight. Even in extraordinary circumstances, the military can do everything to assist, except for the fact that it cannot be the one that actually "pulls the trigger" when it comes to assisting local law enforcement taking the BG(s) down?

Huey14 · 11-03-2006, 16:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razor

The PCA doesn't address military support to law enforcement. However, training is addressed in DODD 5525.5. According to this, military units can provide law enforcement units training on the operation and maintenance of specialized equipment, and provide expert advice as required.

So according to DOD rules then a military unit can't give instruction on, say, the finer points of CQB to a police SWAT team?

**Razor** · 11-03-2006, 22:27

Huey, what you're asking has been done, and will continue to be done under the 'expert advice' portion. If you're going to lay an ambush, you need to camouflage your flank security positions better.

MAB, no trigger pulling, or any other assistance that would put DoD in 'direct' involvement in civilian law enforcement, defined (according to the directive) as interdiction, search or seizure, arrest, stop & frisk, undercover activity, interrogation, acting as an informant, or investigation.

TR, absolutely!

brianksain · 11-09-2006, 17:36

Not an epiphany here but ...

American soldiers are encouraged to kill ENEMIES of the United States in THEIR country.

American policemen are sometimes forced to kill CITIZENS of the United States in OUR OWN country.

Those citizens may be crazy or criminal but they are protected by the same Constitution the cop is ... right up to the point that the cop has to shoot them.

Surviving the court proceedings is the second (and often worse) fight.

The SWAT guys and some others in LE have the benefit of learning from the SpecOps community sometimes in a roundabout way. It usually comes full circle. Real deal guys get out and teach in the private sector where the cops pick it up and pass it on.

Cross-pollination if you will.

BK