Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Jackboot thugs come for coffee

do you have a link?

Yes but that doesn�t fit into the agenda of increasing the power of the federal government. Uneducated Mexicans are likely to vote which way? Gun owners are likely to be perceived as a threat to an increasingly dominant federal government.

Each and every Army post and every state that has an infantry unit has a MOUT range. Military Operations on Urban Terrain. There are ample places to practice room clearing cold, the armory for example has more than 1 room, the motor pool has more than 1 room, so on and so forth.

Yep, we used to practice mout in the Barracks with blanks. Can't do that anymore due to B.O.S.S. regs. Les

The Defense Authorization Act of 2006, passed on Sept. 30, 2007, empowers The President to impose martial law in the event of a terrorist "incident," if he or other federal officials perceive a shortfall of "public order," or even in response to antiwar protests that get unruly as a result of government provocations. . . .

It only took a few paragraphs in a $500 billion, 591-page bill to raze one of the most important limits on federal power. Congress passed the Insurrection Act in 1807 to severely restrict the president's ability to deploy the military within the United States. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 tightened these restrictions, imposing a two-year prison sentence on anyone who used the military within the U.S. without the express permission of Congress. But there is a loophole: Posse Comitatus is waived if the president invokes the Insurrection Act.

Section 1076 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 changed the name of the key provision in the statute book from "Insurrection Act" to "Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act." The Insurrection Act of 1807 stated that the president could deploy troops within the United States only "to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy." The new law expands the list to include �natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition" -- and such "condition" is not defined or limited. . . .

The story of how Section 1076 became law vivifies how expanding government power is almost always the correct answer in Washington. Some people have claimed the provision was slipped into the bill in the middle of the night. In reality, the administration clearly signaled its intent and almost no one in the media or Congress tried to stop it . . . .

Section 1076 was supported by both conservatives and liberals. Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the ranking Democratic member on the Senate Armed Services Committee, co-wrote the provision along with committee chairman Sen. John Warner (R-Va.). Sen. Ted Kennedy openly endorsed it, and Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), then-chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, was an avid proponent. . . .

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, warned on Sept. 19 that "we certainly do not need to make it easier for Presidents to declare martial law," but his alarm got no response. Ten days later, he commented in the Congressional Record: "Using the military for law enforcement goes against one of the founding tenets of our democracy." Leahy further condemned the process, declaring that it "was just slipped in the defense bill as a rider with little study. Other congressional committees with jurisdiction over these matters had no chance to comment, let alone hold hearings on, these proposals."

As is typical, very few members of the media even mentioned any of this, let alone discussed it (and I failed to give this the attention it deserved at the time), but Congressional Quarterly's Jeff Stein wrote an excellent article at the time detailing the process and noted that "despite such a radical turn, the new law garnered little dissent, or even attention, on the Hill." Stein also noted that while "the blogosphere, of course, was all over it . . . a search of The Washington Post and New York Times archives, using the terms 'Insurrection Act,' 'martial law' and 'Congress,' came up empty."

Bovard and Stein both noted that every Governor -- including Republicans -- joined in Leahy's objections, as they perceived it as a threat from the Federal Government to what has long been the role of the National Guard. But those concerns were easily brushed aside by the bipartisan majorities in Congress, eager -- as always -- to grant the President this radical new power.

The decision to permanently deploy a U.S. Army brigade inside the U.S. for purely domestic law enforcement purposes is the fruit of the Congressional elimination of the long-standing prohibitions in Posse Comitatus (although there are credible signs that even before Congress acted, the Bush administration secretly decided it possessed the inherent power to violate the Act). It shouldn't take any efforts to explain why the permanent deployment of the U.S. military inside American cities, acting as the President's police force, is so disturbing. Bovard:

"Martial law" is a euphemism for military dictatorship. When foreign democracies are overthrown and a junta establishes martial law, Americans usually recognize that a fundamental change has occurred. . . . Section 1076 is Enabling Act-type legislation�something that purports to preserve law-and-order while formally empowering the president to rule by decree.

The historic importance of the Posse Comitatus prohibition was also well-analyzed here.

As the recent militarization of St. Paul during the GOP Convention made abundantly clear, our actual police forces are already quite militarized. Still, what possible rationale is there for permanently deploying the U.S. Army inside the United States -- under the command of the President -- for any purpose, let alone things such as "crowd control," other traditional law enforcement functions, and a seemingly unlimited array of other uses at the President's sole discretion? And where are all of the stalwart right-wing "small government conservatives" who spent the 1990s so vocally opposing every aspect of the growing federal police force? And would it be possible to get some explanation from the Government about what the rationale is for this unprecedented domestic military deployment (at least unprecedented since the Civil War), and why it is being undertaken now?

that's in the real world...in paranoid delusions they're always black. or so I read.

I'd let them in with advance notice. They'd have to take their shoes off like everyone else. My safe would be locked of course.

It would be a good opportunity so observe how they conduct searches, where they look, etc. Never know when that info. would come in handy.

BTW this BS about US gunshows and shops being the source of Mexican narco's weapons hoards is patent BS. El Salvador and Nicaragua were both awash in AKs and M16s during the wars there, and the narcos have ties and smuggling connections to get anything else they want overseas.

The idea that somebody would come to the US, jump through the hoops to legally buy a gun, and then risk a Mexican prison for smuggling it into Mexico is so stupid only the liberal media could buy it.

I don't think that MaDeuce and the RPGs the gangs were using in last week's shoot out came from a gun show. If they did, I want to start going to THAT gun show.

You betcha, I want to go too!

Good point!

Mexico`s drug war looms large for US-Americas-msnbc.com Analysis by Shannon K. O`Neil.

"This was completely blown out of proportion," Kohorst said. "They were going to come through and meet with the townspeople and just practice going in and out of their homes. They were never, ever going to confiscate guns or anything like that."

Well, if you believe that, I have this big red bridge in San Francisco I want to sell. Cheap too.



"Besides that, the posse commitatus statute is a slight problem."

Well, that is a federal law, I'll grant you that. However, I have noticed that the biggest violators of federal laws is the federal government itself.

Paul B.

you really should disabuse yourself of thoughts like that. When push comes to shove, the military, and the cops will be knocking, or kicking......

�Whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience.� ~ John Locke

And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? [...] The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin�s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!�

-The Gulag Archipelago, A. Solzhenitsyn. Chapter 1 �Arrest�, fn. 5.

If they want a life like training mission, do it in compton calf.

Ya know, I had to read "A day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich" In school I think Solzhenitsyn should be required reading.

And then the US government will have more problems than they ever dreamed of.
I agree they would like to try, but it would be a big time mistake, and much of the thee branches of government would have to worry about more than just being kicked out of office.

All it takes is a little exhuast to blow around on them and they are black! JP-4,5, or 8 doesn't matter which!

I do know that 100 Low lead will turn the exhaust cowling a nice ashy white/gray

Mike

And they tell the public that those who fear a new world order, are all just paranoid chicken littles...

naaawwww our dumocrat lead government wouldn't do that to us, would they?

While I don't doubt for a moment the collectivist desires of the new Dear Leader, the democrats are...at their core...a bunch of p*ssies who shrink from violence for any purpose. They will chisel and try their bureaucratic methods and spread the state power in a thousand irritating ways. But this bunch lacks both the balls and the competence for a violent coup. And our side still has the guns. To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen:

I knew Joe Stalin, Mr. Obama, and you're no Joe Stalin.

Now, Hillary.....there's a potential American Stalin.