US Army deployed to Samson, Alabama after mass shooting

[creeky]

Any soldier who shoots an unarmed and shackled detainee and then claims "I was just following orders" is guilty of a crime--even if an officer gave the command to fire, the soldier is still guilty.

I agree... but it sounds like these guys were directing traffic, and maybe, maybe answering some 911 dispatch calls. I don't think their moral radar, or spider sense started tingling over it.

If they were grabbing guns, or shooting people in the streets I'd be with you 100%. Just see this as a little different. No need to make examples out of the little guys when you can go after the ones that should have known better. (IMHO)

[poak]

If they were grabbing guns, or shooting people in the streets I'd be with you 100%. Just see this as a little different. No need to make examples out of the little guys when you can go after the ones that should have known better. (IMHO)

That's exactly how I feel about it.

If I was given an order to work an intersection or answer emergency calls, I would probably follow it. While I agree that the orders these soldiers received were definitely not well thought through, I hardly think it qualifies them as robots for following them.

Our military is made up of your brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, sons, and daughters. To assume they would blindly follow an order to unjustly impose martial law on their countrymen, just because they were quick to offer aid in an emergency situation is just plain .

[Guest justme]

I agree... but it sounds like these guys were directing traffic, and maybe, maybe answering some 911 dispatch calls. I don't think their moral radar, or spider sense started tingling over it.

I admit it is slightly different--but the facts are they were still conducting local law enforcement. The ground we tread is a slippery slope.

If they were grabbing guns, or shooting people in the streets I'd be with you 100%. Just see this as a little different. No need to make examples out of the little guys when you can go after the ones that should have known better. (IMHO)

I'm not in full disagreement--all I want is for them to understand that what they were doing was and still is crime. I don't want innocent people in Leavenworth, but neither do I want to see this be a pretext for getting the people used to the idea of having soldiers on our streets. I don't know--but I just suspect the government of ulterior motives in everything they do--they prime the people enough and they tend to get used to things and accept them as normal--and that is what I fear about this.

[memphismason]

Let me put it this way. I have respect for his opinion in general. My point is if you don't have experience in a field you're opinion is not going to be as valid. That's just reality.

I don't walk into the OR at work and tell them how to make incisions and I wouldn't want a Dr. coming in and telling me how to run my security operations.

Not that we may not have valid opinions, but experience is something that cannot be equaled by a book or a story told to you.

I think Justme has a valid point and his heart is certainly in the right place, but I don't think R1100R is out of line for questioning his experience in military operations.

The wording was "I don't see a military icon for service under your avatar. I might be wrong but what in the hell would you know about defending the Constitution." is out of line, due to the reasoning that military experience is not a prerequisite to having knowledge about defending the constitution.

It is basically saying that all non military citizens, have no idea when the constitution is being upheld or trampled on, and that is not correct.

People understand the Laws that the police enforce, that is in the same ballpark as this topic, not " I don't walk into the OR at work and tell them how to make incisions and I wouldn't want a Dr. coming in and telling me how to run my security operations." No one is walking out in front of a unit, and telling them how to do their jobs, and how that leep was made, I have no idea. The orders the unit was given was wrong, and that is the issue.

However, I do agree that the young men sent into that town, do not need to be punished for following orders, but instead their superiors should be investigated. And I do believe I have the right to that opinion even though I have never been in the military, and I say a big Thank You to the men and women who put their lives on the line to ensure I keep that Freedom.

Agreed. However, after he made a statement that the soldiers out there needed to be locked up, his ignorance to military operations and chain of command was free to be called into question.

You are correct, but his "ignorance" to the defending of the constitution is not "free to be called into question" based on his non-existent military record.

The words were "I don't see a military icon for service under your avatar. I might be wrong but what in the hell would you know about defending the Constitution."

not

"I don't see a military icon for service under your avatar. I might be wrong but what in the hell would you know about military chain of command."

Peace and Love, Peace and Love

[memphismason]

double post sorry

[Guest justme]

That's exactly how I feel about it.

If I was given an order to work an intersection or answer emergency calls, I would probably follow it. While I agree that the orders these soldiers received were definitely not well thought through, I hardly think it qualifies them as robots for following them.

Our military is made up of your brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, sons, and daughters. To assume they would blindly follow an order to unjustly impose martial law on their countrymen, just because they were quick to offer aid in an emergency situation is just plain .

I'm not but I also understand the mentality. Now granted--man on man I believe they would not follow an order to harm another American, however, get them together and they are trained and indoctrinated to follow the orders of their officers. It is a gutsy person who would refuse to obey an order while the others did so.

And the military is made up of our brothers, sisters nieces, nephews, sons and daughters---but part of the training is to indoc them into obeying the orders issued to them as a unit. An army is not composed of individuals--there is no individuality in the United States Army.

As for their offering aide--my understanding is that they were requested in violation of Posse comitatus. The point is--there was plenty of civilians who could have rendered assistance--plenty of police would have helped, but instead they called in the Army, and in doing so, they violated the law, and used them for domestic law enforcement activity. And at the end of the day--that is still the unalterable truth about this whole affair.

[Punisher84]

The wording was "I don't see a military icon for service under your avatar. I might be wrong but what in the hell would you know about defending the Constitution." is out of line, due to the reasoning that military experience is not a prerequisite to having knowledge about defending the constitution.

It is basically saying that all non military citizens, have no idea when the constitution is being upheld or trampled on, and that is not correct.

People understand the Laws that the police enforce, that is in the same ballpark as this topic, not " I don't walk into the OR at work and tell them how to make incisions and I wouldn't want a Dr. coming in and telling me how to run my security operations." No one is walking out in front of a unit, and telling them how to do their jobs, and how that leep was made, I have no idea. The orders the unit was given was wrong, and that is the issue.

I guess you can read into both sides however you want. I agree with you that you don't have to serve in the military to know about the constitution, but there are 2 types of defending the constitution. Both are equally important, but for now, only one involves possibly laying down your life for it.

I made the comparison in my post for lack of knowledge purposes. I don't think anyone should assume they know how things operate if they haven't done it. If you'll notice Justme stepped back from initially calling for all of the soldiers to be punished to a lesser appeal.

All in all though I think we are arguing semantics.

[Guest justme]

I made the comparison in my post for lack of knowledge purposes. I don't think anyone should assume they know how things operate if they haven't done it. If you'll notice Justme stepped back from initially calling for all of the soldiers to be punished to a lesser appeal.

All in all though I think we are arguing semantics.

I have far from stepped back. I say now and have said from the start, that this needs to be investigated, and if those soldiers committed a crime they most certainly should be punished--as well as their officers. Many want to take issue with the fact I think the individual soldier bears culpability as well as the officer--that is your right, I have my opinion, and that is that the individual soldier bears responsibility if they commit a crime while following orders. Just following orders is not a justification--because if it was, we would not hung Hussein, and we would not be about to hang the man we know as "Chemical Ali", or also known by his real name Ali Hassan Al-Majid and we would not have hanged those we did at Spandau prison...because following orders is following orders...the circumstances may be different, but the idea behind the statement is exactly the same--which is:by following orders, I absolve myself from guilt for any crime that may be committed during the carrying out of my orders....

Look at it this way--if we mistakenly do something that would be a crime, regardless of the fact that we just didn't know--we would be arrested and ignorance of the law would not be used as an excuse...this is no different.

18 USC 1385 prescribes up to 2 years imprisonment and/or a fine for a violation of Posse Comitatus.

And no, we are not arguing semantics.

all I want is for this to be really investigated instead of just being quietly hushed up and pushed away into the background.

Edited March 19, 2009 by justme

[323ssplt]

justme..

First, let me qualify myself by saying that I have served in the military for just shy of 10 years now. I am an E6, Staff Sergeant. I am a school trained marine scout sniper, and am the chief scout and platoon sergeant for my sniper platoon.

Now, you say you are not tin foil hatting it, but to even try to make a comparison beyween a dozen or so Military Police officers responding to a request, be it legal or not, and anihalting millions of jews is....well......its out there. You are correct about the use of the military on US soil. However, I doubt at the time that the local commanders or the cops who had no idea what was occuring at the time gave a second thought to that. They needed help, and called on a vast pool, read probably hundreds,of trained police officers that were just down the road.

To think that this is some attempt at a "trial run" at "occupying" the US is

Since you have stated it's only yours and God's business as to whether you served then you might or might not be familiar with the reprecussions for some E2 private to refuse an order such as this. He would more than likely end up confined to quarters waiting for an NJP, Non Judicial Punishment, or at worst a court martial. It would be then and only then that he could successfully, but more likely unsuccessfully, defend his reason for disobeying an order. In this situation, non of that was warranted.

My unit is in New Orleans. If something happened and my friends on NOPD asked me to bring my guys out to help control traffic, I would probably do it without a second thought. Now AS TO DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION. I know, to a man, my unit would NOT follow any order that would require us to occupy, detain or confiscate ANYTHING fom the civilians of this great country. And, after having served so many years and dealt with MANY other units, I can confidently state that my sentiment is shared by the VAST MAJORITY of others serving.

You seem like an intelligent individual, but you are paranoid and need to realize that this one incident is not the catalyst for government confiscation, or death squads or any such other lunatic fringe ideas. Take two of these and call me in the morning.

[memphismason]

I guess you can read into both sides however you want. I agree with you that you don't have to serve in the military to know about the constitution, but there are 2 types of defending the constitution. Both are equally important, but for now, only one involves possibly laying down your life for it.

I made the comparison in my post for lack of knowledge purposes. I don't think anyone should assume they know how things operate if they haven't done it. If you'll notice Justme stepped back from initially calling for all of the soldiers to be punished to a lesser appeal. All in all though I think we are arguing semantics.

I agree. Aren't semantics are silly?

[Guest justme]

justme..

First, let me qualify myself by saying that I have served in the military for just shy of 10 years now. I am an E6, Staff Sergeant. I am a school trained marine scout sniper, and am the chief scout and platoon sergeant for my sniper platoon.

Proud of you--seriously I am. It takes a lot of dedication to go through the scout sniper school.

Now, you say you are not tin foil hatting it, but to even try to make a comparison beyween a dozen or so Military Police officers responding to a request, be it legal or not, and anihalting millions of jews is....well......its out there. You are correct about the use of the military on US soil. However, I doubt at the time that the local commanders or the cops who had no idea what was occuring at the time gave a second thought to that. They needed help, and called on a vast pool, read probably hundreds,of trained police officers that were just down the road.

To think that this is some attempt at a "trial run" at "occupying" the US is

Now for the guts of this: First, I plainly stated--or at least I thought so anyway, that the IDEA behind the statement of "just following orders" is the same--the idea behind it was expressed by those hanged at Spandau prison, and it was expressed by Ali-Hassan Al-Majid, by soldiers and by many others. The IDEA behind the statement is this :by saying I'm just following orders somehow absolves me from criminal liability for any crimes I commit while carrying out my orders I did not say that what happened in Alabama is the same as what the Nazis did to the Jews--I said that the IDEA behind the statement "i'm just following orders" has been echoed down through the years by MANY people. I made a comparison between the IDEA behind the statement, not between the actions, there is a difference.

It was not the responsibility of law enforcement to call in the Army. All they had to do was call the Alabama State Police, the Alabama Bureau of Investigation, the Enterprise, Alabama police, even the Montgomery Police would come if the local police would have called, and more than likely the Florida highway patrol would have too, and the FBI, ATF, and any other civilian law enforcement agency in the area would have come to their aide. Using military assets for this was and is wrong. This was not a terror attack, it was not an act of war, it was not at attack by a foreign power, nor was it an occupation of an Alabama town by a foreign army. It was a single, deranged person who took a semi-automatic rifle and killed several people. I don't think this was a trial run by the government--I DO think that any time something along this line happens, the government watches to see how the people will react. It is common sense to do so.

Since you have stated it's only yours and God's business as to whether you served then you might or might not be familiar with the reprecussions for some E2 private to refuse an order such as this. He would more than likely end up confined to quarters waiting for an NJP, Non Judicial Punishment, or at worst a court martial. It would be then and only then that he could successfully, but more likely unsuccessfully, defend his reason for disobeying an order. In this situation, non of that was warranted.

18 USC 1385 should be justification enough--obviously not though. I'm not against the individual soldier, I am against their USE for domestic law enforcement activity--even something as simple as directing traffic while operating with or under the authority or perceived authority of the United States Army was, and is wrong when it is carried out on American soil.

My unit is in New Orleans. If something happened and my friends on NOPD asked me to bring my guys out to help control traffic, I would probably do it without a second thought. Now AS TO DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION. I know, to a man, my unit would NOT follow any order that would require us to occupy, detain or confiscate ANYTHING fom the civilians of this great country. And, after having served so many years and dealt with MANY other units, I can confidently state that my sentiment is shared by the VAST MAJORITY of others serving.

And you would be violating the Posse Comitatus Act, along with your men. Congress placed restrictions on use of the armed forces on American soil for a very good reason. Use of the US armed forces for reasons other than those prescribed by Congress, or by the President during times of imposed martial law is and has been prohibited since at least 1878.

but as for defending the Constitution--kudos to those like you.

You seem like an intelligent individual, but you are paranoid and need to realize that this one incident is not the catalyst for government confiscation, or death squads or any such other lunatic fringe ideas. Take two of these and call me in the morning.

I'm far from a paranoid individual. I assure you I am quite normal. I just don't buy the official line merely because it carries an official stamp of approval. It is just that sometimes I get on a high horse about issues which are important and I come off completely wrong or in a way I did not intend to.

The single issue here is this: Did the United States Army violate the law when US Army troops deployed from Ft. Rucker to Samson, Alabama, who requested them, what actions did they take, and who gave the command to go. Beyond this--it gets into what ifs. The issue is--Was Posse Comitatus violated, and if so, what actions will be taken to discipline those in the Army who were involved and who are guilty, and to hold those civilians accountable who requested them?

Edited March 20, 2009 by justme

[Guest gunslinger707]

First off i'm no expert on any of this but i am a combat vet.As far as the statement "i was just following order's " ask Lt.William Calley how far that get's you when you allow an atrocious massacre to occur under your command.Do i think Posse Commitaus was violated in Samson Ala.Absolutely.Should the soldier's be charged or punished for it NO.BUT their Commander's should be from their Platoon Sergeant's on up the chain of Command.Any Platoon Sergeant should know that it is a violation of Posse Commitatus to deploy under those circumstance's as well as their commander's . JMHO worth just what you paid for it !

[R1100R]

I would like to say that I truly do not believe you have to serve in the military to defend the Constitution as I implied earlier.

This thread just pisses me off about punishing soldiers. I have had the privilege of taking care of Soldiers ( To include all branches) for 34 years.

In a few days I will be leaving for a year to take care of another 5000 and their families.

There are a lot of really good people on here. Some of them have served and others

serve in different ways. I am glad there is a place to discuss firearms in Tennessee.

It just seems there in a lot of negative political and tin hat theories going on of late.

I wish the best to all of you

PS:

LT Calley let a bunch of people get murdered. They were not directing traffic.

If you want to see him, he is still running a Jewelery store on Victory Drive just

outside the main gate at Ft. Benning. You should hear his side of the story.

Edited March 20, 2009 by R1100R

[Guest Matchguy]

It will be interesting to see where the orders to deploy the troops originated. While I think it is always wise to question why Regular Army troops are being deployed to such situations, having been involved in emergency incident management for three decades my first inclination is to suspect a well-intentioned screwup rather than an insidious encroachment of our freedom.

Whenever a five man police department whose biggest challenge is to write parking tickets for parking the wrong way in a cul de sac or to keep the drunks out of the nice neighborhoods suddenly finds itself in a shooting war with well-armed lunatic hosing down the whole town with bullets, I guarantee you that mistakes will be made and the Marquis of Queensbury Book of Rules will be the first casualty.

But as a place to start the investigation, I would be especially interested to know what the interaction was between the Army OIC and the local police chief after the troops got to town. If the OIC accepted mission assignents from the polce chief, legal or not, then it was more-than-likely a well-intentioned screwup. If the OIC took the lead, however, then the Army Officer who gave the deployment order will prolly be reassigned to the Coast Guard Fog Horn Test and Repair Activity at Adak, Alaska in summer uniform for the duration of his career.

I'm not saying to be entirely trusting of the situation, gents, but any time I've ever been around emergency service agencies interacting with military units under tumultuous circumstances, there were always misunderstandings about whose turf was what. Just get involved in a military aircraft crash where a state-of-the-art-top-secret aircraft crashed into an area occupied by civilians and you'll know what I'm referring to.

I'll reserve judgement until I see what the investigation says. Given past experience, I can't conclude that the Constitution has been deliberately and wantonly tromped upon without more to go on than this one article.

MG

[memphismason]

I would like to say that I truly do not believe you have to serve in the military to defend the Constitution as I implied earlier.

This thread just pisses me off about punishing soldiers. I have had the privilege of taking care of Soldiers ( To include all branches) for 34 years.

In a few days I will be leaving for a year to take care of another 5000 and their families.

There are a lot of really good people on here. Some of them have served and others

serve in different ways. I am glad there is a place to discuss firearms in Tennessee.

It just seems there in a lot of negative political and tin hat theories going on of late.

I wish the best to all of you

PS:

LT Calley let a bunch of people get murdered. They were not directing traffic.

If you want to see him, he is still running a Jewelery store on Victory Drive just

outside the main gate at Ft. Benning. You should hear his side of the story.

You becareful going back over there.

I will keep you in my prayers.

[Guest gunslinger707]

I would like to say that I truly do not believe you have to serve in the military to defend the Constitution as I implied earlier.

This thread just pisses me off about punishing soldiers. I have had the privilege of taking care of Soldiers ( To include all branches) for 34 years.

In a few days I will be leaving for a year to take care of another 5000 and their families.

There are a lot of really good people on here. Some of them have served and others

serve in different ways. I am glad there is a place to discuss firearms in Tennessee.

It just seems there in a lot of negative political and tin hat theories going on of late.

I wish the best to all of you

PS:

LT Calley let a bunch of people get murdered. They were not directing traffic.

If you want to see him, he is still running a Jewelery store on Victory Drive just

outside the main gate at Ft. Benning. You should hear his side of the story.

R100R

I was'nt condemning Lt.Calley just pointing out how far just following order's can get you in the military.Personnaly i think he was screwed to cover up for his higher up's. I would love to meet the man a lot of stuff happened in Vietnam that should'nt' have. And thank you Sir for your dedicated service when you deploy be careful and Godspeed to you .

[Guest justme]

I would like to say that I truly do not believe you have to serve in the military to defend the Constitution as I implied earlier.

Fully agree 100%

This thread just pisses me off about punishing soldiers. I have had the privilege of taking care of Soldiers ( To include all branches) for 34 years.

If, after an investigation, it is determined that the soldiers did indeed know, or had reason to suspect that they were violating the law, then yes--they, along with their officers should be punished, whether the punishment comes in the form of a general courts martial after an by civilian trial in federal court, or as a njp. Personally, I would rather they receive a NJP, unless they really knew they were committing a crime.

I do not want innocent soldiers to be put in jail simply because they were directing traffic, but neither do I want to see the Constitution stepped on. I DO want to see the person(s) responsible for calling the Army in put on trial, as well as the commanding officers of the unit involved, because they should have known better--as for the enlisted members, if the enlisted men didn't know they were violating Posse comitatus then I feel a njp would be best. For NCOs and the officer corps however--they should have known better and bear the greater burden. However, if the enlisted soldiers really knew, and understood that what they were doing was a violation of Posse Comitatus then a general court martial, or trial in federal court would be proper. I'm not a cold-hearted person. I just love my country more than most people know and don't want to see the Constitution stepped on, or our rights subverted. This event, regardless of how sad does not justify the deployment of regular army, regardless of how the people try to make it more palatable. Nothing that happened in that town justified the call out of the Army. I say there was, and is enough resources available to assist the local police without calling in the Army--I most certainly do call for the person who called and asked the Army to come to be put on trial, and to be made an example of so that similar call outs do not happen in the future.

In a few days I will be leaving for a year to take care of another 5000 and their families.

You carry on sir--and take care, and I do mean that sincerely. Regardless of whether we do or do not agree on some things.

There are a lot of really good people on here. Some of them have served and others

serve in different ways. I am glad there is a place to discuss firearms in Tennessee.

It just seems there in a lot of negative political and tin hat theories going on of late.

I wish the best to all of you

Absolutely agree 100% that there are a lot of good people here on this board. As for the "tin hatting"--I would not view it so much as tin hatting, as viewing what the government does with a jaundiced eye. Thus far this new administration has sunk us into a debt that we can never repay, may be in the process of devaluing the dollar as a result--which is yet to be seen, but look at Zimbabwe to see what unprecedented printing of money will do to the value of a dollar, as well as the Attorney General, and the President viewing their prime, number one target as our Second Amendment rights, as a way to coddle to the Mexicans--so they are wanting to strip us of our rights as a way to make nice to Mexico?

and then you have the Iowa National guard who planned to carry out what was described as a large scale exercise in a small Iowa town where they would do a cordon and search in an effort to find a fictitious arms dealer, and part of the exercise was to use citizen actors who had agreed to allow their homes to be searched as part of the exercise, while others acted like spectators while soldiers carried out crowd control. This exercise, originally planned for April, has since been rescinded to only platoon level exercises to be carried out at the guard base, because of the number of complaints the national guard had received over this exercise.

I don't see it as tin hatting--I see it as viewing what this administration does, and is talking about doing with the idea that there is most likely an ulterior motive behind it.

PS:

LT Calley let a bunch of people get murdered. They were not directing traffic.

If you want to see him, he is still running a Jewelery store on Victory Drive just

outside the main gate at Ft. Benning. You should hear his side of the story.

Lt. Calley was hung out to dry. I fully believe that. I have no doubt that he, and his unit were issued the search and destroy order, and I have no doubt that had he refused to carry it out, he would have been placed in Leavenworth. I don't hold it against Lt. Calley for what he did, I really don't, but following orders did not justify what happened there, and it does not justify what happened in Alabama.

That said, I feel that the commanding officers should be the first ones to suffer for the bad orders they give, and in the case of Lt. Calley--I feel that his commanding officers, the CIA or whoever issued the order to send him on the search and destroy mission should have received the greater punishment for the mission they sent him on--Calley was a scapegoat, a sacrificial lamb, and while he was responsible for the actions he took and allowed others to take, I also think the greater sin for what happened laid with the higher chain of command for sending him on the mission--whether intel was messed up, or whether they knew that civilians were in that villiage, the higher chain of command still bears the greater responsibility, and should have received the greater punishment, but that does not absolve the Lt. of what he did. You just don't kill civilian non combatants, if you know that they are non combatants, but that is the problem when the US is fighting a guerrilla war, like in Vietnam, or is now fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan--it is very hard to distinguish between a true civilian, and an insurgent who hides in the civilian population. However, that is not the focus of this discussion.

Edited March 21, 2009 by justme

[R1100R]

Justme,

I would think that you absolutely S**t if you truly knew how often the military

is off the reservation amongst the regular folk every day. SF,,ASA, CID, DIA,SDI and

Homeland Security for some. That's just the tip of the iceberg. I know and have met a lot of them. There are people on this board that have been there.

But I guess it is OK for local law and state and federal law enforcement to step all over peoples rights at times. There are a lot of good civilian law enforcement officers , but there are a good share of bad ones. I speak from experience on this. They tend to take care of their own also.

I guess we will just agree to disagree.

Edited March 21, 2009 by R1100R

[323ssplt]

justme...

First, I want to thank you for the very mature and professional manner in which you have conducted yourself in this thread. I thank you for the kind words you have said for myself, R100R and others. I can see that you are a patriot, and you do care about your country. Sometimes, a little fervor is a good thing. I believe in this situation we just have to agree to disagree with regards to the treatment o possible punishment of the soldiers involved. But, sir, again, I thank you for your honesty and love of our great country.

[323ssplt]

R1100R....Good luck to you man. Stay small and fast. And keep in touch when you can.

[TripleDigitRide]

Peace and Love, Peace and Love

[Punisher84]

ALF???!!!

[Guest clownsdd]

from directing traffic and helping out to killing the jews.

ya'll sound like a lot of liberal newspapers when a permit holder shoots someone.

Yes, an investigation is necessary

Yes, someone made a mistake and more and likely an honest one trying to help

Yes, the commanding officer should be disciplined

Yes, the civilian should be better instructed

No, no live, property etc was harmed, taken etc

Just get over it.

sorry for the rant

[Guest justme]

Justme,

I would think that you absolutely S**t if you truly knew how often the military

is off the reservation amongst the regular folk every day. SF,,ASA, CID, DIA,SDI and

Homeland Security for some. That's just the tip of the iceberg. I know and have met a lot of them. There are people on this board that have been there.

No, I'm quite aware, and I quite personally don't like it.

But I guess it is OK for local law and state and federal law enforcement to step all over peoples rights at times. There are a lot of good civilian law enforcement officers , but there are a good share of bad ones. I speak from experience on this. They tend to take care of their own also.

And no, it is NOT ok for the feds, the locals or the state to step on our Constitutional rights. How you came to that conclusion is beyond me. When you speak about the difference between good/bad law enforcement and the extreme difficulty in distinguishing between them, you are preaching to the choir.

It most definitely is NOT ok to have our rights stepped on, to be unlawfully detained, unlawfully searched, confiscated of our property or to be harassed, assaulted or falsely accused of crimes we do not commit, whether we are harassed because we carry or not--harassment is wrong. I fully believe that we need more control over the police and that they need to be held liable, both civilly through an expensive lawsuits, but also through having the bad law enforcement being made an example of and being put in jail in the general population when they violate our rights. Law enforcement is no better than anyone else, and should be held to the same laws as everyone else.

I guess we will just agree to disagree.

I guess so-I'm the type who thinks it should be JUSTICE, not the "JUST US" that we all know from the myriad of videos on the internet about police abuses and harassments of those who carry and that law enforcement, government and the military should all be held to account when they violate our rights or our Constitution, regardless of the reason for it.

violations of our rights IS WRONG, regardless of who does it.

[Guest justme]

justme...

First, I want to thank you for the very mature and professional manner in which you have conducted yourself in this thread. I thank you for the kind words you have said for myself, R100R and others. I can see that you are a patriot, and you do care about your country. Sometimes, a little fervor is a good thing. I believe in this situation we just have to agree to disagree with regards to the treatment o possible punishment of the soldiers involved. But, sir, again, I thank you for your honesty and love of our great country.

No Staff Sgt. It is I who thanks you.

Regardless of whether we disagree on one small issue or not, we are both Americans with a love of country that surpasses one little disagreement.

SEMPER FI Marine

Edited March 21, 2009 by justme