Question for active duty U.S.military

[labrys 0]

Quote

Just curious, If ordered to the US to quell civil unrest could you/would you enforce an order to take all fire arms ,house to house,from civilians.

I'm not active duty any more and I don't see why it would matter. If I had been asked to do such a thing when I was still in the military, I'd have refused. If I'd ended up in the brig, I'd have lived with that consequences.

They don't remove your brain at a MEPS.

Owned by Remi #?

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

i don't think active duty military can be legally used used to quell civil unrest. i'm not sure about the national guard.

Quote

active duty military cannot operate against us citizens.

Yes, there are multiple statutes under which active duty military could conceivably be deployed CONUS under a non-foreign military invasion situation. There are not a lot of them but they do exist for Title 10 forces, e.g., incident involving nuclear material (Title 18 USC, Section 831) and chemical or biological weapons emergency (Title 10 USC, Section 382). Both require concurrence of Attorney General and SecDef not State Governors.

One specific example of which I am familiar is CONPLAN: 0500-98, "Military Assistance in Domestic Consequence Management Operations in Response to a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, or High-Yield Explosive Situation." Title 10 forces can be activated altho’ whether they could be used in the manner suggested by the OP is unclear – I would argue unlikely under such a situation. Title 32 forces (National Guard) could be, however.

The Stafford Act also permits use of active duty military domestically during natural disasters. There’s some limit on the number of days, 10 or 12 iirc.

Active duty military have previously been used domestically in the “War on drugs”, approved Congress in Title 10 U.S.C., sections 371–381.

The Insurrection Act (Title 10 USC, Sections 331-335) has been generally read as giving the President the authority to deploy active duty (Title 10 forces) military personnel at the request of Governor or a State legislature to suppress insurrections. It also allows the President to use federal troops to enforce federal laws when rebellion against the authority of the US makes it impracticable to enforce the laws of the land. Section 332:

Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.

As part of PL 109-364, the “John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122, sponsored by Rep Duncan Hunter (R-CA)), signed by President Bush in 2006, Sec. 1076. Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies, amended Section 333 of Title 10 USC to read as follows:

Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law

(a) Use of Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies- (1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to—

(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that--
(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; and
(ii) such violence results in a condition described in paragraph (2); or

(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2).

(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition that--
(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that State or possession, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

(B)opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

How individuals in the Title 10 forces or State, federal, local, or tribal law enforcement might respond to such an order is a different question.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Troll or not. A very good question.

Concur that it’s an interesting "what if?"-type question that uniformed folks should think through their responses: follow lawful order or not? And that non-uniformed citizens should think about regardless of the motivations of the OP, of which I have zero insight.

Imo, it’s also more of a potentially thoughtful "what if?" question than a pragmatic one domestically. Widespread domestic insurrection likely to trigger the Insurrection Act Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies Act is more Hollywood or conspiracy web pages (at both end of the political spectrum … & the corners too) than reality.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

more Hollywood or conspiracy web pages (at both end of the political spectrum … & the corners too) than reality.

I agree, generally; but the brief period of anarchy in New Orleans after Katrina, and the incident where some local police went around confiscating guns from people in their homes, is thought-provoking.

[cliffwhite 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

i have been deployed to several countries, iraq being one of them

and no, i had no reason to fear for my life from anybody...
__________________________________________________

So ,when ordered to Iraq what was the mission?

Blues ,
Cliff

doesnt matter, and has nothing to do with your origional post. im not going to start answering whatever questions you may have.

but i do wonder what your reasoning for posting about this in 2 diffrent threads is?[/
____________________________________________________

Sorry for the late reply theonly ski.

I posted the question in two different threads so that I could maintain a seperation between the replies of LEO's and military personelle.

Do you understand now theonlyski?

Blues ,
Cliff


__________________________________________________

2muchTruth

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[millertime24 8]

Quote

Just curious, If ordered to the US to quell civil unrest could you/would you enforce an order to take all fire arms ,house to house,from civilians.

Blues Cliff

As an active mil member I cannot give you my truthfull response to this question.

Muff #5048

[labrys 0]

Quote

As an active mil member I cannot give you my truthfull response to this question.

That's complete horseshit unless you think you have such insightful and inflammatory comments to make that you could actually affect the good order and discipline of the armed forces, or bring discredit upon the service. Sorry, just sounds a bit "drama queen" to this old chief.

Owned by Remi #?

[millertime24 8]

Quote

Quote

As an active mil member I cannot give you my truthfull response to this question.

That's complete horseshit unless you think you have such insightful and inflammatory comments to make that you could actually affect the good order and discipline of the armed forces, or bring discredit upon the service. Sorry, just sounds a bit "drama queen" to this old chief.

Whatever you think "Chief".

Muff #5048

[matthewcline 0]

What issue of the Army Times are you talking about? I just perused the whole web page and went through the past stories sections and could not find the story your refered too.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

Just curious, If ordered to the US to quell civil unrest could you/would you enforce an order to take all fire arms ,house to house,from civilians.

That's not the right question to ask. Our leaders aren't stupid enough to risk inciting armed revolt which could stop the economy and cut-off the three hundred million million dollar gravy train they control.

The right question is "Would you visit the homes of suspected terrorists, confiscate their guns, and take them into custody"

Prudent moves would be identifying the most likely trouble makers by what they've read and transmitted to the web (the government is being sued for installing fiber optic splitters feeding semantic content analyzers at telephone companies), looking for people who buy a lot of guns (using illegally retained NICS records which they've also been sued over), run forward traces on the manufacturers' 4473 forms for people who like military guns, and perhaps credit card activity. Heck, they might just look for repeat purchases in the records which have been computerized from gun shops that went out of business. Dump all that into one database and ask for the top 10,00 offenders to round up.

For the people doing the seizing, it doesn't look to a door to door operation they may object to. Especially if they are upset about a recent terrorist act.

The government could also bring in the private contractors they've had practicing urban combat amongst a non-combatant population who may be less motivated by a sense of duty to the Country and Constitution rather than its current government.