Replies

I heard Biden on Sunday morning on Fox discussing this new power. He said it would be necessary for the military to foil any plot using a weapon of mass destruction. Under current law, for instance, if an Arab terrorist were attempting to detonate a suitcase bomb in the Lincoln Tunnel, and the military were the first to arrive, they would not be authorized to either detain or shoot at the terrorist because the military lacks the proper police powers under such circumstances. I say do whatever it takes to track and kill Arab terrorists.

It is my understanding that under the circumstances you outlined above, the military would not need arrest powers. They would be repelling an open, alien attack on our soil which is the military's number one purpose.

I am absolutely against the military having arrest powers on our borders or anywhere else in the USA. It is what the founders feared most but were blessed with General Washington's easing the tensions among his unpaid officers corps after the revolution. A lesser man could have used that tension to rule the new country as many military leaders have done and continue to do.

"Under current law, for instance, if an Arab terrorist were attempting to detonate a suitcase bomb in the Lincoln Tunnel, and the military were the first to arrive, they would not be authorized to either detain or shoot at the terrorist because the military lacks the proper police powers under such circumstances."

Smoke and mirror BULLSPLATTER!!
These people would have you believe that a member of the armed forces first on the scene of possible mass destruction would not do their best and utmost to prevent such an occurrence except after ordered to? These soldiers are I assume citizens of these states and have the right to protect themselves and their loved ones under our constitution. I didn't think wearing a uniform negated that. IMO, any soldier that did not do his best to prevent such an attack would be culpable at worst and subject to war crimes; failing to do their duties (protect the homeland and its citizens)
But maybe I don't understand the scope of the militaries duties.

if an Arab terrorist were attempting to detonate a suitcase bomb in the Lincoln Tunnel, and the military were the first to arrive, they would not be authorized to either detain or shoot at the terrorist because the military lacks the proper police powers under such circumstances

I don't believe this for one second. In the situation you describe, the military fires first and consults the lawyers later.

Why does the military need the power to Arrest Civilians in order to fire upon Arab terrorists, who are (by the way) foreign combatants in wartime? This excuse just doesn't work.

Under current law, for instance, if an Arab terrorist were attempting to detonate a suitcase bomb in the Lincoln Tunnel, and the military were the first to arrive, they would not be authorized to either detain or shoot at the terrorist because the military lacks the proper police powers under such circumstances.

That's a bunch of nonsense. If a private citizen showed up, saw a terrorist attempting to detonate a suitcase bomb and blew him away, I seriously doubt any charges would be filed.

We don't need any special law giving these powers to the military.

Just substitute 'soldier' for civilian in my example, and there is no question that either would have acted appropriately.

He said it would be necessary for the military to foil any plot using a weapon of mass destruction. Under current law, for instance, if an Arab terrorist were attempting to detonate a suitcase bomb in the Lincoln Tunnel, and the military were the first to arrive, they would not be authorized to either detain or shoot at the terrorist because the military lacks the proper police powers under such circumstances.

In a war, the military does not "arrest" the enemy. The enemy is "captured". Also, in a war, the military is allowed to shoot the enemy without without giving him a fair trial or reading him his Miranda rights.

To: robowombat
I heard Biden on Sunday morning on Fox discussing this new power. He said it would be necessary for the military to foil any plot using a weapon of mass destruction. Under current law, for instance, if an Arab terrorist were attempting to detonate a suitcase bomb in the Lincoln Tunnel, and the military were the first to arrive, they would not be authorized to either detain or shoot at the terrorist because the military lacks the proper police powers under such circumstances.

I say do whatever it takes to track and kill Arab terrorists.
# 3 by 1bigdictator

*************************

Why stop at Arab terrorists, 1bigdictator?

We have domestic “terrorists,” people who actually believe that they have the right to believe as they please, like that madman Koresh, or that criminal Randy Weaver.

Let's not forget those whacko organizations who call themselves "Patriots," and "Militias," and people who support the 2nd Amendment, and people who have the audacity to quote relevent passages of the Constitution to government officials.

Senator Biden just wants the legal power to use the military against citizens, 1bigdictator. In practice, they don’t actually wait for Congressional permission. The one who decides whether to use the military or not is our President, who usurps powers delegated to Congress, in violation of the provisions of the Constitution.

The use of military personnel in civilian matters is illegal under the Constitution. I’ve been saying so for years.

Senator Biden’s proposal shows that our Congressmen knew that the use of the military was un-Constitutional, as well.