Lethal force authorised for the Military inside the US

[Bigfoot]

Just curious if this pertains to migrants or only Trump supporters?

^ THIS ^

 

[ManualF150]

https://www.esd.whs.mil/portals/54/documents/dd/issuances/dodd/524001p.pdf

 

[Defilade]

How'd that section 98 work out during those bullshit covid lockdowns? Nobody was held accountable? At least 70% of our leaders should've been removed but none were.

Nobody knows the laws. Too busy being entertained. So many people are afraid of so called "authorities" in costumes to stand up

 

[GOYABEAN]

So perfectly fine to open fire on civilians but our military can't shoot down a FUCKING drone doing surveillance over our Military bases / Nuclear site's / Air bases got it! #LINETHEMUP

 

[spat]

Nobody knows the laws. Too busy being entertained. So many people are afraid of so called "authorities" in costumes to stand up. But I will say now there has been an immense awaking and people ain't putting up with that shit again.

If there's a law, but nobody follows it, and nobody is punished for not following it, is it even a law ?

 

[zorro]

It’s a law ONLY when they need it or it suits them

 

[Cooolone]

Oh boy...

Another Big Bad Wolf story that never comes, never materializes... It's fucking hysterical!

These misfits that sit at some computer desk dreaming up this bullshit, getting kicks out of it once it gets gobbled up and regurgitated online!

It didn't happen last election, it won't this time either... Primarily because nobody has the balls! The first shots that ring out would result in another Ranch Standoff... And despite what Sleepy Joe thinks, the number of guns and gun owners far outnumber the cumulative number of Federal agents and military, and there's many of them that would never, ever violate the Constitution supporting some dimwit progressives...

Ok, enough from me, end rant! Lol

 

[Bozo]

I will ask the question, has anyone read this entire directive?

Maybe I missed the part of lethal force, if I missed this, please point me in the right direction and page number.... Thank you

Page 13 - Section 3.3 a (2)(c) with regard to permissible assistance that would require approval directly from SecDef. I did not check to see if this language was in previous revs of the directive, or is truly new as is being claimed:

Assistance in responding with assets with potential for lethality, or any situation
in which it is reasonably foreseeable that providing the requested assistance may involve the use
of force that is likely to result in lethal force, including death or serious bodily injury. It also
includes all support to civilian law enforcement officials in situations where a confrontation
between civilian law enforcement and civilian individuals or groups is reasonably anticipated.
Such use of force must be in accordance with DoDD 5210.56, potentially as further restricted
based on the specifics of the requested support.

Edit - having now read @ManualF150 's link to the previous rev, this appears to be a wholesale rewrite. Previous rev does not mention lethal force at all.

 

[GOPerfect]

Page 13 - Section 3.3 a (2)(c) with regard to permissible assistance that would require approval directly from SecDef. I did not check to see if this language was in previous revs of the directive, or is truly new as is being claimed:



Edit - having now read @ManualF150 's link to the previous rev, this appears to be a wholesale rewrite. Previous rev does not mention lethal force at all.

I saw this. I still do not see where the Military is allowed to fire upon civilians.....

I see that all agents and personal of the DIC can be used though.

 

[Bigfoot]

Holy Jeez!!.....I wish Brett Baier was aware of this shit (and had a hair on his ass) when Kamala brought up Trump threatening military action upon civilians........this should have been shoved in her face!!

Explain it cunt............it happened under your tenure!

Exactly...

-

 

[Bigfoot]

I know scissors cuts paper and paper covers rock but......

.......what does paper do to a jack-booted thug with a gun in your face?



View attachment 247357

 

[Bigfoot]

What's the topic of this thread? I lost track.
Things seem to usually veer off topic around pages 2 or 3.

IIRC it is - Lethal force authorized for the military inside the US.


We're living in the Clown World era...
Be aware of that and never underestimate what the Marxist Democrats will do to maintain power.

I'm just saying.

 

[Defilade]

I know scissors cuts paper and paper covers rock but......

.......what does paper do to a jack-booted thug with a gun in your face?



View attachment 247357

Exactly right. You shoot them in the face first. They have become tyrants and are baddies now.

 

[Celt]

 

[FrankenCub]

I will ask the question, has anyone read this entire directive?

Maybe I missed the part of lethal force, if I missed this, please point me in the right direction and page number.... Thank you

"is reasonably foreseeable that providing the requested assistance may involve the use of force that is likely to result in lethal force, including death or serious bodily injury."
I read "use of force likely to result in lethal force" as firearms.
Maybe I'm reading too much into it?

 

[GOPerfect]

"is reasonably foreseeable that providing the requested assistance may involve the use of force that is likely to result in lethal force, including death or serious bodily injury."
I read "use of force likely to result in lethal force" as firearms.
Maybe I'm reading too much into it?

I don't see where the military has been given the okay to use force.

 

[FrankenCub]

I don't see where the military has been given the okay to use force.

That part C, under Secretary of Defense Approval, kinda reads to me use of deadly force is approved.

 

[spat]

I saw this. I still do not see where the Military is allowed to fire upon civilians.....

I see that all agents and personal of the DIC can be used though.

They merely need to declare something an "insurrection" and then posse comatitus becomes moot.

It specifically exempts that.

And we have all seen just how easily they can declare an "insurrection".

 

[Clancy]

Nothing new. Eisenhower sent units of the 101st Airborne to help force desegregation, and at least 2 US civilians were killed by them. During the race riots in the 1960's we had US Army units patrolling cities and firing on and killing rioters.

 

[FP1201]

Page 13 - Section 3.3 a (2)(c) with regard to permissible assistance that would require approval directly from SecDef. I did not check to see if this language was in previous revs of the directive, or is truly new as is being claimed:



Edit - having now read @ManualF150 's link to the previous rev, this appears to be a wholesale rewrite. Previous rev does not mention lethal force at all.

SO, (and if I can read it this way, someone bent on utilizing it could easily twist it post facto) IF there were another January 6th "insurrection" (as claimed by Dem. leadership) the National Guard could be activated with live ammunition issued...Kent State anyone?

 

[Grimscale]

SO, (and if I can read it this way, someone bent on utilizing it could easily twist it post facto) IF there were another January 6th "insurrection" (as claimed by Dem. leadership) the National Guard could be activated with live ammunition issued...Kent State anyone?

Yeah, they are changing this to get ahead of any lawsuits resulting from their people shooting unarmed protesters during the upcoming protests they expect to happen when they are caught cheating.

 

[FP1201]

Yeah, they are changing this to get ahead of any lawsuits resulting from their people shooting unarmed protesters during the upcoming protests they expect to happen when they are caught cheating.

My thoughts exactly, and since Secretary of Defense is a political appointment, one can see where a quick call from the Speaker of the House or POTUS could abuse the situation, conversely these same forces and authorizations could be used to quell true Riots (arson/looting/murder/etc.) even then, there IS a line that must be respected by Government and it's strong arm.

 

[Cooolone]

I'll agree it is interesting...

I'll say that it in itself is an agitator! Designed to stoke anti-government resentment before there is any issue at all.

I'll say it is designed the "flush" some of those potential agitators out by drumming up chatter that can be monitored before hand and then targets be known or established.

I'll say if in fact, that the current administration were to activate or use military without provocation, there will be a problem and immediate retribution!... Can anyone say BUNDY (Ranchers)...?

It could be a potential powderkeg with dimwit progressives little understanding the undercurrent social forces at play and possible momentum of societal reaction they would have little control over once they light the fuse. Think about those guards who let demonstrators walk into the building...

All in all, for "me", my opinion is it is worry about the Big Bad Wolf that never comes! But should it... Can be dealt with appropriately! So what's the worry?

Anyways...

 

[stokes]

Ok, get out the tin foil hats for this one. We are all assuming the Dems are behind all this bullshit. But in reality the dems arent running the gov. Look at Brandon for the last 4 yrs, he wasnt running shit. And if they cheat Kameltoe into the WH she wont be any more in charge than he was. There is a deep state, and I think they aint dems or repubs they just happen to have more control over the dems at the moment. Perhaps they realize the lead and amount of people behind Trump are too big to cheat. So they have to figure a way to deal with the repubs "taking over" and becoming the lead actors in the theatrics that is Wash DC. Maybe they are anticipating a Trump win and the libs being the next insurrectionists. They can call for marshal law and wont get a lot of push back from the right at first, which at the moment seems to be the majority in this nation. Just a thought.

 

[Defilade]

They merely need to declare something an "insurrection" and then posse comatitus becomes moot.

It specifically exempts that.

And we have all seen just how easily they can declare an "insurrection".

Not moot! And who is "they" you speak of?

 

[Zerex]

EO to get the guns.....................simple; you die, or get lots of battlefield pickups.

Not hard to figure out..............has never been used................BUT WILL BE SOON.
YOU MAGA SCUM.

 

[spat]

Not moot! And who is "they" you speak of?

View attachment 247444

The posse comatitus statute itself specifically exempts troops that are being used to put down an insurrection.

All a POTUS needs to do is declare an insurrection, then he can ignore posse comatitus.

 

[spat]

SO, (and if I can read it this way, someone bent on utilizing it could easily twist it post facto) IF there were another January 6th "insurrection" (as claimed by Dem. leadership) the National Guard could be activated with live ammunition issued...Kent State anyone?

Not just national guard. If they declare an insurrection they could send regular army.

And until very recently, posse comatitus *only* applied to the army, so a POTUS could sent the Marines to enforce the law without even doing anything.

 

[Defilade]

The posse comatitus statute itself specifically exempts troops that are being used to put down an insurrection.

All a POTUS needs to do is declare an insurrection, then he can ignore posse comatitus.

Maybe that is a good thing considering we have an insurrection with all these illegals..




Trump on “Violating” the Posse Comitatus Act— Using the Military to Deport Illegals

The dumb reporter says the Posse Comitatus Act can’t be used against civilians…

Trump counters and says they are not civilians because they illegally invaded our country.

Trump says that a “Major Force” is forming in the US, specifically 29,000 Chinese illegals..

He said he’s use the national guard inland, but if Nat Guard couldn’t handle, “I can see myself using the National Guard and, if necessary, I'd have to go a step further.”

MY THOUGHTS:
It’s becoming pretty clear some of what we are going to witness when Trump comes back to office… what a time it is going to be to be alive!

I think a lot of what we’re going through is to build up a public consensus, public outcry to get illegals the hell out.

 

[livingston]

If there's a law, but nobody follows it, and nobody is punished for not following it, is it even a law ?