.jpg)
Canadian troops patrol the streets of Montreal during
the 1970 October Crisis.
(Photo: Canada's Department of National Defense)
Now that the Army has conceded that 22 military police soldiers were dispatched from Fort Rucker to Samson, Alabama, in the wake of the horrific mass murder there, local officials are coming out to take responsibility for inviting the military presence and to thank the troops for their assistance. While local reaction to the presence of troops seems overwhelmingly to be one of gratitude, and the small-scale deployment was almost certainly well-intentioned, the actions likely violated federal law. It was also a step in the wrong direction.
Geneva County Sheriff Greg Ward says he asked the local Army base for assistance because his department and the tiny Samson police department were simply overwhelmed by the murder spree that took the lives of 11 people.
“The lieutenant colonel called our [911] dispatch to say ‘we’re here if you need us,’” Ward told Army Times.
I asked for MPs to come in and relieve our personnel long enough so they could get something to eat."
--Sheriff Greg Ward
Sheriff Ward was reportedly relying on 12 of his own deputies plus ten officers from local police departments. The offer of help from an Army unit with which, by all accounts, people in the area have an excellent relationship must have been very welcome, indeed.
Ward went on to tell the newspaper, “I thought, let me call them back. So I asked for MPs to come in and relieve our personnel long enough so they could get something to eat.”
The offer of troops and their acceptance seems to be a sincere act of assistance by good neighbors.
But it's probably illegal.
The Posse Comitatus Act, passed in 1878, reads:
Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
The law has been trimmed and modified since then. In particular, the military can be used to put down insurrections or help in the wake of natural disasters -- when invited by state governors. The federal government can send troops of its own accord to suppress rebellions or when "major public emergencies" render state and local authorities incapable of protecting people's constitutionally guaranteed rights. The biggest hole in the law is the provision allowing for the use of troops to enforce drug prohibition and immigration laws, and to collect tariffs. But the Posse Comitatus Act still remains as a prohibition on the use of troops in most civilian law-enforcement roles.
There's a good reason for that. The history of mixing the military into civilian governance and law-enforcement activities is extremely unpleasant. Training and equipping troops to battle an enemy, and then turning them loose on your own population, turns out to frequently have nasty consequences.
The American experience with the domestic use of troops against people is, fortunately, limited. The most famous example was Reconstruction, when much of the country was under military occupation in the wake of the Civil War.
That the Posse Comitatus Act came out of Reconstruction should be an indicator of how well that went.
But Reconstruction was a long time ago. Is that experience still relevant?
Soldiers are aimed at enemies from outside the country. Police are supposed to protect their fellow citizens from criminals, and to maintain order with a minimum of force."
--Professor Glenn Reynolds, University of Tennessee
For a more contemporary example, look to our neighbors to the north. In 1970, after a flurry of violence by Quebec separatists sparking the "October Crisis," the Canadian government invoked the War Measures Act, effectively suspending civil liberties. Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau then sent troops into the street -- not just in Quebec, but also in the nation's capital, Ottawa. Hundreds of suspected separatist sympathizers were arrested without warrants.
While popular at the time, the use of troops and extraordinary measures quickly became controversial because of the dire implications for due process, individual rights and dissent. No blood was shed, but the military presence gave the government overwhelming force which was used in ways that still spark debate.
To our south, in Mexico City, just days before the opening of the summer Olympics in 1968, soldiers opened fire on protesting university students, killing at least 40 and probably hundreds, though the exact number has never been established. Facedwith a political demonstration, soldiers responded with tanks and bullets.
Some countries have had enough of military intervention in civilian affairs. In 1948, after bloody fighting resulting from a disputed election, Costa Rica abolished its military completely.
Closer to home, law-enforcement agencies have increasingly turned themselves into civilian replicas of the Army, adopting military equipment, tactics and training with predictable consequences. Writing for the Cato Institute, Radley Balko documented as many as 40,000 violent raids each year to enforce even laws against nonviolent activities. The result has been dozens of deaths of innocent people, police officers and nonviolent offenders.
The problem is sufficiently widespread that it has been covered even in the pages of Popular Mechanics. Glenn Reynolds, a professor of law at the University of Tennessee wrote:
Soldiers and police are supposed to be different. Soldiers are aimed at enemies from outside the country. They are trained to kill those enemies, and their supporters. In fact, “killing people and breaking things” are their main reasons for existence.
Police look inward. They’re supposed to protect their fellow citizens from criminals, and to maintain order with a minimum of force.
It’s the difference between Audie Murphy and Andy Griffith. But nowadays, police are looking, and acting, more like soldiers than cops, with bad consequences. And those who suffer the consequences are usually innocent civilians.
That's the result of police playing at soldier. Put actual soldiers on the streets and ...
Which brings us back to the soldiers dispatched to offer a helping hand in Samson, Alabama. It was certainly a friendly gesture, intended to help a community through a very difficult time. There were no bad consequences and locals are thankful for the assistance.
But putting armed troops on the streets to act as police for even the best of reasons takes us down a path we don't want to follow.
email J.D.: civilliberties (at) tuccille.com
You might also enjoy these:
Civil Liberties Examiner is now on Facebook!
Or follow the latest civil liberties news on Twitter: Libertywriter
Comments
the sheriff could deputize citizens for the extra manpower. Even if he desired to avoid using them as patrolmen, they could get and deliver food, they could close intersections, and direct traffic etc. And guess what? It's legal.
And we don't end up with an occupying military on our streets.
The harsh reality many wish not to recognize is that 'illegality' is reserved primarily for the civilian, non-governmental population...very rarely to be applied to the personnel of the militarized police state.
And though this particular incident is probably technically a violation of federal law-and there were other options-such as deputizing locals-common sense would indicate that prosecution might not be warranted. The U.S. Attorney will likely display lenience in this case; but why not in the myriad totally ridiculous cases that are routinely prosecuted (often with very dirty convict-by-any-means tactics) by the feds???
And, suspicious lovers of Liberty may see occasions such as this one in Geneva County Alabama, as well as the utilization of military forces in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, as setting the stage for more interesting military deployments to come.
As for the increasingly militarized behavior of police-why the surprise, with so many of them being ex-military? And, police have been tasked with "fighting wars" on (some) drugs, and crime, promoting a militarized battlefield mentality.
J.D. says "...putting armed troops on the streets to act as police for even the best of reasons takes us down a path we don't want to follow."
It appears we may already be way on down that dangerous path...
There may come a day here in the US when the total police state deems it necessary to round up innocent people. The sad fact is that on that day many will be surprised and wonder how we got to that point. By chipping away at our rights a little at a time for our own good or completely innocuous reasons, they numb us just a little more to slavery. Most people are sufficiently numb enough already to not feel the current weight of oppression or recognize how far we've drifted away from freedom and toward a totalitarian state.
Notice the Lt Col called the sheriff first, and an army officer should know the law. In fact they do know what they are not allowed to do. He wasn't just some PFC from the base.
The sheriff also must know the Posse Comitatus Act.
So, two wrongs don't make a right.
Has the sheriff ever heard of a map?
You call another civilian agency. You call another municipal agency close by. You call the governor and request Highway Patrol for relief.
This is a major fail on his part and he has no business being a sheriff.
I may yet live to see the troops presently deployed abroad returned home to quell the riots that will erupt when economic conditions become so bad that the French and Russian revolutions will be considered to be like a Quaker picnic by comparison. Steve, World War2
I find it disturbing when people condone illegal activities by government. I have seen this a lot around E. Texas. They will actually demand that their local government break federal laws, when enough people think something is a good idea. Frightening! Yes, J.D., I think we've already gone too far. People need to understand U.S. laws and *why* a lot of things that are going on in government now are illegal. Not sure how to make them understand.
Actually I think the Army just wanted to help out and knew the local sheriff needed their help. The simple, legal, solution to this scenario would have been to have the MPs show up in civilian clothes and get deputized by the sheriff. This places them under his jurisdiction for the time they are helping out, and still gives the Sheriff some trained LEOs to help during the emergency. If necessary, their colonel could have asked for volunteers (which I'll bet he did anyway) and just let them go on leave for the duration of their time as special deputies. Thus, all control would remain clearly in civilian hands at all times, but the Sheriff could use locally available extra talent when he badly needed it.
all this is just more proof that the U.S. Government knows it is dangerously close to 'collapse' and they have one last "hail mary" pass to throw before 'We The People' force them out of office at pitchfork point.
Obombya will be the first bastard to declare MARTIAL LAW in the U.S., and you can quote me on that! We will see it on his watch, as a feeble attempt to hold back the seething rage in the population when everyone realizes they all were screwed, blued, and tatooed by the government, and their entire livlihood 'looted' by these bastards in the Military Industrial Complex who've been in charge of the nation since 1963, after they murdered John Kennedy.
Maybe I'm missing something, but the gunman killed himself & was no longer a threat. So what are the extra police needed for?
Move these army patrols out of Alabama and put them on the Mexican border before this violence spills over here- wait a minute what am I saying- The neighborhoods out here where I live in Southern California are already wrecked with violence from drug gangs-
It is like living in a parallel universe-
Does anyone remember Kent State??
Good point Bill P- Having been raised in Alabama I can tell you that unlike the students at Kent State- they will probably shoot back in Bama-
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!