Pentagon Unilaterally Grants Itself Authority Over ‘Civil Disturbances’

[dogshawred]

Something I received today for a local group and felt the need to share with you all.

The lines blurred even further Monday as a new dynamic was introduced to the militarization of domestic law enforcement. By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.
The most objectionable aspect of the regulatory change is the inclusion of vague language that permits military intervention in the event of “civil disturbances.” According to the rule:
"Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances."
U.S. Military ?Power Grab? Goes Into Effect | Long Island Press
I could not find any congressional authority supporting this move listed in this posting by LongIslandPress which could lead someone to believe that this just a procedural change being used to ramp up already on edge emotions regard our ineffective administration. So if anyone has seen or heard anything that they can add, please bring it on, thanks.
Dog

 

[Zombievs42]

seems to be the government giving itself more authority to stop what they would call insurection and we would call civil disobedience. greaaaat.

 

[jsturges]

US Code is NOT rules or regulations

Something I received today for a local group and felt the need to share with you all.

The lines blurred even further Monday as a new dynamic was introduced to the militarization of domestic law enforcement. By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.

If there is a military regulation implementing this part of the US Code, which is LAW, it needs to be cited. This has all the trappings of trolls at work. The word "disturbance" does not exist in the US Code cited in the article.

 

[jameshd]

Keep in mind that the military cannot do this for themselves; it takes an Act of Congress.

 

[Oldgrunt]

Keep in mind that the military cannot do this for themselves; it takes an Act of Congress.

Congress? Do we have a Congress anymore? Obama does what he likes without it being sanctioned by Congress.

 

[Chief1297]

They dont have the authority.

POSSE COMITATUS ACT

The original provision was enacted as Section 15 of chapter 263, of the Acts of the 2nd session of the 45th Congress.

Sec. 15. From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress ; and no money appropriated by this act shall be used to pay any of the expenses incurred in the employment of any troops in violation of this section and any person willfully violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction thereof shall be punished by fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding two years or by both such fine and imprisonment[4]

Exception: An exception to Posse Comitatus Act derived from the Force Acts allowed President Eisenhower to send federal troops into Little Rock, Arkansas, during the 1958 school desegregation crisis. The Force Acts, among other powers, allow the President to call up military forces when state authorities are either unable or unwilling to suppress violence that is in opposition to the constitutional rights of the people.[2]

 

[Oldgrunt]

Chief: I used to believe that also but, given all the different acts that have been written since 9-11, I am no longer sure that applies and the actions by the government seem to prove the Posse Comitatus Act to be null and void. Wish I was wrong.

 

[UATKP]

If there is a military regulation implementing this part of the US Code, which is LAW, it needs to be cited. This has all the trappings of trolls at work. The word "disturbance" does not exist in the US Code cited in the article.

Read the article. Dog ain't a troll.
Just subtle changes in the code:
Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances.

 

[Warrior1256]

Sounds troubling. Could this be aimed at 2A defenders in case we resist having our firearms confiscated? Stay informed.

 

[dogshawred]

Sounds troubling. Could this be aimed at 2A defenders in case we resist having our firearms confiscated? Stay informed.

This was my whole thinking to quell any up rising that may occur during a citizens demonstration that gets out of hand even. This could be just dangerous in the wrong commanders hands. Anyone that is toooooo politically motivated could really create TROUBLE.

 

[S&W645]

Well then this should really disturb everyone. Obama War Powers Under 2001 Law 'Astoundingly Disturbing,' Senators Say

 

[Rhino]

Read the article. Dog ain't a troll.
Just subtle changes in the code:
Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances.

Actually that isn't possible. The military can't change US Code, the code the blog links to is dated January 3, 2012, and that phrase appears nowhere in it. I'm not going to toss troll words about, but the blog article is ridiculous at best. And if you bothered to check some of the other blogs by that leftist author, you'd find that ridiculous is fairly common for him. He asserts that the founders would not only oppose 'assault weapons', but that they actively opposed civilians stockpiling any weapons that could be used to oppose the government. Some of his stuff is actually pretty funny if you have a good sense of humor.

 

[escapedthematrix]

Don't worry. If our military refuses to follow unlawfull orders because they swore an oath to the constitution there are foriegn militaries who have been training to respond to civil unrest in the United States.

 

[buckey01]

This was a topic of discussion on Real News on the Blaze. It does appear to be true that the military commanders can order the use of Federal troops when the president isn't available and martial hasn't been declared. This must be in an dangerous and critical situation.

I can't imagine a situation when the President or Vice President isn't available. But I guess he might be on the golf course. And who determines what a critical situation is? This also hasn't been approves by Congress.

This seems to be yet another way that the President can claim he didn't know that troops fired on civilians. It also sounds that they are preparing for an insurrection. And of course we can guess who the targets will be.

 

[Austin]

The military has always been the backup to law enforcement. As disturbing as this seems if there was a big enough problem that law enforcement could not handle it, its pretty obvious that the military would step in and assist. What this development seems to me to do is to cut through a little bit of the red tape. While rome burns nero wouldnt have to find someone and ask permission before helping, sounds good. But like most things these days, the differenece between being on paper and how its implemented that seems to be the problem.

 

[buckey01]

What some people call red tape; others call Constitutional protection of individual liberty. The government always seems to move from liberty to tyranny. And this document in the wrong hands could facilitate the institution of a dictatorship. And with recent developments how many have trust in Obama?

 

[Rhino]

What some people call red tape; others call Constitutional protection of individual liberty. The government always seems to move from liberty to tyranny. And this document in the wrong hands could facilitate the institution of a dictatorship. And with recent developments how many have trust in Obama?

Read the document (the code) that's linked in the blog. It doesn't say what the blog is claiming, so it won't do anything in the wrong hands and it won't facilitate a dictatorship. The quote they provide in the blog doesn't come from the US code that they linked. The phrase "civil disturbances" doesn't appear anywhere. They even got the title wrong. This blog is playing chicken little with something that doesn't exist. Or at least it sure doesn't exist in the US Code they linked to.
.
And once again, use a little common sense when reading this stuff. "By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code...the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets..." The military does not have the authority or ability to alter the US Code, and it never has had it. Your 'hoax alarm' should have been going off at full volume when you read that.

 

[AndeyHall]

Don't worry. If our military refuses to follow unlawfull orders because they swore an oath to the constitution there are foriegn militaries who have been training to respond to civil unrest in the United States.

Hey that would make for a really good movie! The US citizens and its armed forces and law enforcement vs it's own government and some foreign military power. As long as those pulling the trigger are on our side, I could give a damn who's side the White House and the Pentagon are on.

 

[NCIC105]

If you have not been paying attention "We are not a free people"

We lost 50% of what we called our freedom on 9-11.

 

[XD40scinNC]

They dont have the authority.

Criminals break the law all the time, do you really think that they give a damn about the law? Sorry, but you put way too much trust in these bastards.