This help will be provided in a way designed to subvert the Posse Comitatus Act, set a precedent and continue undermining the Constitution.
The person(s) committing these murders deserve to die, but we shouldn't allow them to kill our God given rights.
There's always a danger with someone abusing the intent of a Federal power. The whole Clinton administration was a complete study in this type of pathology. But there's times when you need the technology and superior equipment of the military when solving terrorism - and if this ain't terrorism, I don't know what is. And some indications are that this might be right down the alley of good ol' fashioned battle with an official enemy, except on our civilian streets.
There's no reason to believe that this is the no-turning-back signal point where the military takes over surveillance and law enforcement, any more than when the National Guard came out during the LA riots - a very welcome presence. I just wish they'd thought ahead and brought bullets the first time they arrived - but that's another story.
The person(s) committing these murders deserve to die, but we shouldn't allow them to kill our God given rights.
So, the Constitution did not exist before 1878?
God did not exist before 1878?
If you lived next door to an Army base and you drove home to find a street gang killing your mother and raping your wife and daughter, you would not cell phone the Army base for help because God has decreed that the U.S. Army cannot help when American citizems are being slaughtered on American soil?
By that logic, if an al Qaeda piloted suicide plane is flying over Maryland to crash into the U.S. Capitol Building, we can not call on the U.S. Air Force for help? We need to call Chief Moose to send up the Moose Air Force?
Americans are dying in the Washington, D.C, area.
How many more Americans are you willing to allow to die to satisfy your version of "Political Correctness"?
===============================
June 18, 1878
CHAP. 263 - An act making appropriations for the support of the Army for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, eighteen hundred and seventy-nine, and for other purposes.
SEC. 15. From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress; and no money appropriated by this act shall be used to pay any of the expenses incurred in the employment of any troops in violation of this section And any person willfully violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction thereof shall be punished by fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding two years or by both such fine and imprisonment.
10 U.S.C. (United States Code) 375
Sec. 375. Restriction on direct participation by military personnel:
The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.
Dec '81 additional laws were enacted (codified 10 USC 371-78) clarifying permissible military assistance to civilian law enforcement agencies--including the Coast Guard--especially in combating drug smuggling into the United States. Posse Comitatus clarifications emphasize supportive and technical assistance (e.g., use of facilities, vessels, aircraft, intelligence, tech aid, surveillance, etc.) while generally prohibiting direct participation of DoD personnel in law enforcement (e.g., search, seizure, and arrests). For example, Coast Guard Law Enforcement Detachments (LEDETS) serve aboard Navy vessels and perform the actual boardings of interdicted suspect drug smuggling vessels and, if needed, arrest their crews). Positive results have been realized especially from Navy ship/aircraft involvement.
===============================
I am not a lawyer but reading Posse Comitatus, it seems to make a clear distinction in the Code between 'search' and 'seizure', and surveillance. And since this distinction has been codified for at least 21 years, and practiced routinely between the Navy and Coast Guard, I don't see this as any new erosion of our rights. You can argue that took place 21 years ago when the law was clarified, but not by the action taken today.