Saturday, July 26, 2014

Posse Comitatus

Recently, Sir Knight was reading a news article about the Boston marathon bombing.  The accompanying photos were disturbing - police officers, arrayed in full in tactical combat gear were clearing houses, military fashion.  They were making their way through a suburban American neighborhood, rifles at the ready, stomping on what was left of their fellow citizens Constitutionally guaranteed rights.  

Pulling the next article up, this one dealing with the exploits at the Bundy ranch, Sir Knight noticed a troubling trend - the militarization of civilian law enforcement.  Once again the law enforcement officers looked more like Rambo than Sheriff Andy Taylor.  Their very aggressive demeanor served only to escalate hostilities rather than to facilitate peaceful resolution.  

As he read these articles, he asked, somewhat rhetorically, "What has happened to Posse Comitatus?  We are Americans and yet we allow troops to walk through our front door just like the Nazi's in WWII?  I guess we need to get ready for the gas chambers next!"

Think he's overreacting?  Here is a little history on Posse Comitatus....
 
Posse Comitatus is a Latin phrase meaning "power of the country".  Posse Comitatus referred to all males over the age of 15 on whom the Sherriff could call for assistance in preventing any type of civil disorder.  Although it had it roots firmly entrenched in English Common Law, it was used extensively in the western frontier, and in fact, is the origin of the term Posse.

The Posse Comitatus Act is a federal law that was enacted on June 18, 1878, after the end of Reconstruction (the Civil War).  Its intent was to limit the powers of the Federal Government with regard to using federal military personnel to enforce state laws.  The Act, which was modified in 1981, refers to the United States Armed Forces, it does not, however, pertain to the National Guard being deployed in their own state under the direct authority of the governor. 


Boston


Boston

Boston


Iraq
Bundy Ranch - at least according to Google Images, although it would appear to be Iraq
Iraq
Boston
Boston
Bundy Ranch
Bundy Ranch
Boston
Boston
Bundy Ranch


Iraq
Just for reference, I have included photos for your consideration.  You tell me - which ones are our military engaged in far-away locations and which ones are our federal and local law enforcement agencies operating in our own back yard?

Our police officers now wear (military) combat uniforms.  They deploy tanks and armored personnel carriers.  They have night vision, thermal imaging and drones.  They undergo military training, use military terminology and  employ military tactics.  Our law enforcement agencies, both federal and local, have become military units.  And yet we still allow them operate on American soil. 

Wake up and smell the Gestapo.  The gas chambers are coming..... 

44 comments:

  1. Glad to see you are posting again. I missed you! They aren't military they are police? You could have fooled me!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Me too! (Glad you are back.)

    I heard (radio) very recently that about 60% of the new enlistments in to the US armed forces are illegals looking for citizenship.....and we wonder if our military and law enforcement would fire upon the legal citizens of this (once) great country.....really?

    Natokadn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Check your facts before posting "60%".

      Lori Trujillo Fields first generation AMERICAN serving in the Army

      Delete
    2. 60%?! hahah I call BS on that!

      Delete
    3. As I stated-I heard this on the radio the other night. Now, Lori - as a "first generation AMERICAN" would you round up civilians and/or disarm this IF ORDERED TO DO SO so by your superior? (They did it after Katrina.) That is the question that I am asking....I bet you would......

      I know that the "volunteer" recruitments in my state have hit "rock bottom' and the military always liked the soldiers that came from here......

      So hahaha - then you tell me what it is..........Natokadn

      Delete
  3. I didn't look at the picture titles at first..they looked like they were in Europe. Unfortunately for us I don't think the do personality test of the police lately. Seems you read a lot about trigger happy police shooting people and dogs. Not to long ago you looked up to a police officer, now, I wonder what their next move is going to be. The town I live near has 36,000 people, we have a swatmobile and a full team but yet we have had 5 murders since Jan. Guess all that gear doesn't replace good old gumshoe officers.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The level of weapontry and skills available to the criminals dictate law enforcement response in weapons and tatics. Andy Taylor didnt have to deal with ak47's eotech sights, drug cartels, etc. If I was a LEO, I would want to have a higher level of weapontry then the bad guys. The northridge bank robbery was a perfect example of this. My taxes are for the police to win, not the bad guys.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And during the bank robbery what happened? The police decided to rob the local gun store instead of ask. Much less ask for help from some local sportsman or vets (with some nice groupings) No they just decided to riddle the neighborhood with hot lead for a few hours. Also what happened to neutralizing a threat on your own to protect yourself and others? Oh that's right in beautiful sunny california the criminals have all the rights, While john Q public has to call the police to MAYBE catch the rapist that's long gone, after raping his wife and kids in front of him. Otherwise he goes to prison because the rapist is a victim of society. Its not his fault its that mans fault for having and not redistributing the wealth. Sarcasm off

      Delete
    2. Are you kidding me?! You obviously know nothing about the Northridge shooting, they were supposed to ask a gunstore owner to get weapons in the middle of a firefight!? I guarantee you that the city paid the claims that came in from the store owners, heck they probably made money! The police were totally outgunned by the a-holes with ak47's and body Armor. What you think of the laws in cali doesnt mean policemen have to die.

      Love ya enola!

      -Redleg Oathkeeper

      -redleg oathkeeper

      Delete
    3. Oh yes, just run into the gunstore, grab a rifle, grab a bunch of ammunition and head out to shoot people WITHOUT zeroing the rifle with the ammunition. Only by the pick of the litter (LUCK) will you get one that actually hits near where you aim. Yep, they were sure "protecting" the people alright, by shooting rifles without seeing where the bullet hits before firing in anger No wonder it took so long to terminate the shooters, "Guncontrol" is hitting your target not throwing lead into an area.

      Delete
  5. During the boston bombing the police acted fully within the constitution by searching for the perpetrators, they did not stomp on anyone rights, they acted under the case law involving a continuing investigation, hot pursuit doctrine. The government had the right to protect the public, that is actually the only Biblical role for the civil magistrate, Got Romans 13?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They weren't in "hot pursuit". They were systematically clearing private homes where they had no specific reason to believe the terrorist was there. I'm glad someone else is calling the alarm on this.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, I have Romans 13 and it does not mean what you say it does. The Boston police were not within the Constitution, they were violating the 4th Amendment at every house. They were not protecting the public. They were terrorizing the public every bit as much as the "bomber" they were looking for.

      Delete
  6. Thank you for this post and for addressing this. I am very surprised at the replies here defending the officers stomping all over citizens rights. Please remember people, if we don't have our rights and freedoms, we have NOTHING. There have been many, many cases in the news all over the country, of mistaken identity where officers bust in a innocent person's home in the middle of the night, shoot the family dog, and in some cases shoot the homeowner. Saying "Sorry, wrong house or mistaken identity", can't bring a life back. Fox news did a one hour special on this very topic tonight, I was glad to see it getting some news attention. It IS getting way out of hand. There are plenty enough things to fear in this world, we should not have to live in fear of those who are sworn to protect us. For the unbelievers, Google "24 unarmed citizens killed since 2010 in Albuquerque, NM"

    ReplyDelete
  7. Define "stomping" on peoples rights. Mistakes happen unfortunately, so we are to dimantle our criminal justice system? The police mess up, you sue them. Cities pay out millions of dollars every yearto settle police misconduct charges, many of which are bogus and cooked but by lawyers who are looking for a deep pocket, they know the cities will settle instead of incurring the costs to fight in court

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, actually 'cities' don't pay millions of dollars every year. The taxpayers in those cities do. And, the police are never personally held accountable.

      You might want to dig out a copy of the constitution and take a read. Don't forget the preamble. For that matter, grab a declaration of independence and do the same.

      Delete
    2. The "criminal justice system", therein lies the problem. It is all about criminal justice, not justice for the victim and it is a system. Played and abused by the players.

      Delete
  8. Yes, the "police" need to be armed like the criminals, but by limiting the law abiding citizens we cannot be. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment was so the common citizen would not be outgunned BY THE GOVERNENT. The government cannot protect (LEO are not there when you need them) you and your local police have the choice to NOT protect you should they so choose. This has been upheld in court on several occasions in our country. (Google it) Sue them-REALLY? Those cases are being thrown out right and left by government owned judges. Most guilty officers are getting paid leave or a desk jockey time........Natokadn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, but the police arent the arbiter s of the 2nd amendment,its not their role.

      -Redleg oathkeeper

      Delete
  9. I live in the Boston area. When this was happening there was a very dangerous terrorist on the run who had killed and maimed without remorse. The police and the governor did an outstanding job trying to locate this fugitive and protect the citizens of city. In this case the police were trying their best to protect and serve and the criticism of them as stomping on our rights is unmerited. I'm not a Boston liberal and I didnt vote for Governor Patrick. I'm a conservative Christian who is often at odds with the views of many ppl in my state ; however in this case I stand firmly with them... the police were not stomping on our rights... the terriorist was! We were grateful to have the portection of our dedicated "men in blue" and thank them foelr their service including 1 officer who was killed and many other injured.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You need to read your Constitution. I live in MA less that 20 miles from where the shelter-in place police state suspended our Constitution for ONE person. Exigency is not a good enough reason for the unreasonable searches that took place. I can search my own home thank you very much and I have no desire for anyone with a gun, whether they have a badge ort not, to turn me out of my home. I'm perfectly capable of 'clearing' it myself.

      Delete
  10. Oh boy, what a bunch of statist boot licking anonymouses... If you feel so inclined at least state your name, then I might lead credence to your opinions... which my grandfather used to say, every opinion is like elbows, every one has two... Sir Knight is trying to open your eyes to the creeping police state, and all of it's fallacies and terrors. Some of you want to be safe and protected in your cocoon and not know about the bad people out there. Simps

    Kevin Cederquist
    South by God Idahoan

    ReplyDelete
  11. ”Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security.”
    Ben Franklin

    I am guessing nearly everyone who visits this site has seen or heard this quote more than once - why does it not sink in?

    We are blessed to have a LOE who lives nearby who believes that citizens should have the option to carry should they wish to. The scumbag we have in office now (county sheriff) has publicly stated that he would assist the feds in a door to door search and seizure of arms. And we live in a relatively low population, low crime area..... Make an effort to meet your local LEO....

    Natokadn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Vote your Sheriff out of office! Problem solved!

      Delete
  12. Enola, Is the up armored Humvee with what looks like private contractors suppose to be Bundy ranch? Looks like an Iraq picture judging by the buildings in the background. Thanks Don

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don-
      That one creeped me out too! I pulled it up on Google Images and actually followed it to the accompanying news article, which claimed that it was taken at the Bundy Ranch (or thereabouts). I was flabbergasted! If you google "Bundy Ranch", that photo will appear in your search.
      Enola

      Delete
    2. That one I'm thinking is a mistake. Thanks for the quick reply. Don

      Delete
  13. http://survivalblog.com/letter-re-our-struggle-with-survivalism/

    Going the same direction.

    ReplyDelete
  14. There are some articles in Backwoods Home Magazine about the rising number of swat teams being used by local law enforcement agencies. Very eye opening reports, read them if you can.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ben frankin was a godless deist, I would not grant him any warrant. @cederq, sir knight's point is well taken. The Biblical role of the civil magistrate is to protect the good and punish (not rehabilitate) the evil ones. In the case of Boston, they were doing just what they were supposed to do (finally). What difference does it make if im an "anom" discuss the issue at hand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, a "deist" believes in God, just not that he is actually involved in our lives on a daily basis. So therefore, Ben Franklin could not be a "godless" deist. And although Ben Franklin was a deist as a younger man, he had totally changed his mind when he was old, and stated that if it wasn't for God BEING involved in the lives of man, we wouldn't have won the war against Britain.

      So sorry, anonymous, you are wrong (and also not very well informed, it seems).

      Delete
    2. Ben Franklin a Godless deist? You're a fool. Read his own words during an impasse at the Constitutional Convention. These are most obviously NOT the sentiments of a Godless man.

      "In this situation of this Assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings? In the beginning of the Contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the divine protection. ”Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a Superintending providence in our favor. To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth- that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that "except the Lord build the House they labour in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments be Human Wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.

      I therefore beg leave to move, that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the Clergy of the City be requested to officiate in that service."

      There's more. Read the rest at http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=98

      Delete
  16. Once the regime fires first (we must let them fire first to keep the moral high ground and win support from possible allies) then we must respond with all the 4GW resources that we have. It will be a long war and costly but freedom is never cheap. There are many of us east of the Mississippi who are preparing for the inevitable. Thank you for your weblog. God bless and good Fortune to you always.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What the heck are you talking about?!

      Delete
  17. No one mentioned Katrina when the "law" went door to door confiscating people's guns. I will let Ben Franklin speak for me any day.

    ReplyDelete
  18. To be honest, though there are many disturbing reports of police error and excessive force, I'm even more concerned with the non-law enforcement agencies acquiring SWAT teams and huge stockpiles of ammunition. If the BLM feels they need armed help to enforce their rules, why shouldn't they have to ask for help from law enforcement agencies? I worry that an armed BLM employee (or SSA, for heaven's sake!) is more likely to make fatal judgment errors than an LEO with more experience. By the way, I'm curious where one poster heard that 60% of military enlistments are non-citizens. The closest I could extrapolate using Google was less than a third.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An author and guest on "Ground Zero" a couple of nights ago made the statement.....it just got me thinking a little as I have heard that there are many "foreigners" joining the US armed service for benefits and citizenship. I don't have time to research it all...but we have sniper incidents on bases (some of which were not US born) and I have heard/read that numerous generals in various branches are being removed/retired for various reasons and replaced with "more suitable" commanders for the "new" military....

      Natokadn

      Delete
  19. Gas chambers? Really?

    ReplyDelete
  20. As a historian, the allusion to the gas chambers and Nazi Germany does not sit right with me. Surely there is a big difference between being one of a majority of free citizens protected by a constitution unhappy about militarized police units (an absolutely valid concern, I think), and being a minority subjected to segregation and all kinds of persecution BY LAW.
    This is just comparing your relatively comfortable situation to a level of persecution that is beyond imagining and far beyond what you experience. I do not think you are likely to have all your belongings taken away from you and sent to a death camp. Such comparison always seem rather lacking in respect for the people who really had to deal with this level of persecution.

    Nazi Germany can teach us another lesson, though.
    Strangely enough, Nazi police in Germany did not rely on a show of force. As a rule, Gestapo would not go from house to house with guns and tanks and so on. They would write a letter asking you to turn up at a specific assembly point with provisions, suitcases and so on. And people would turn up - a) because the state had taken away their other options beforehand but also b) because they had been taught to do what the state asked them to do. Maybe also c) because they suspected their neighbours - equally obedient people - would turn them in as the state required them to do. Then again, in 1944, Nazis sent some "specialist" police to Hungary to start the transport of the Hungarian Jews to the death camps in Poland. It took less than thirty - THIRTY - Germans, the rest was done by Hungarian police. The lesson is: you don't need a lot of force to do unspeakable things to your population, you just need to train them to have a "sheep mentality" and do what the authorities tell them to do.

    As to your concerns - I absolutely agree, I believe as economic pressure on the western democracies rises, so will politicians' willingness to use increasing pressure (even violence?) against their citizens to keep them in line. We ned to be very, very, wary and alert. We can't afford to let governments lull us into thinking they know best.

    ReplyDelete
  21. You have one picture (fifth down) that says Bundy ranch that is actually a picture of Blackwater guys in Iraq (check out the middle eastern architecture in the background).

    Also, Posse Comitatus was overturned in the 2007 Defense Authorization Act.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The police now call "us" civilians, even though they too are civilians. I corrected one last year...he was quite miffed. I know what a civilian is, being an Army brat (which is not quite civilian imo, as I had to wear dog tags overseas, also). Police now think because they have all the toys, they are no longer civilians.
    We bought a place in another state, and may regret it if Taylor Haynes gets the governor nomination. He promises to end the militarization of WY police and make them PEACE officers, while allowing us to more freely defend our own property and lives. We all ready have Constitutional Concealed Carry without permit. He would like to see ALL households have battle rifles. How great is that?
    Hope Idaho catches up!
    sidetracksusie

    ReplyDelete
  23. The police now call "us" civilians, even though they too are civilians. I corrected one last year...he was quite miffed. I know what a civilian is, being an Army brat (which is not quite civilian imo, as I had to wear dog tags overseas, also). Police now think because they have all the toys, they are no longer civilians.
    We bought a place in another state, and may regret it if Taylor Haynes gets the governor nomination. He promises to end the militarization of WY police and make them PEACE officers, while allowing us to more freely defend our own property and lives. We all ready have Constitutional Concealed Carry without permit. He would like to see ALL households have battle rifles. How great is that?
    Hope Idaho catches up!
    sidetracksusie

    ReplyDelete
  24. All I can say is "Sketchy, Sketchy".

    ReplyDelete