There is, in times of domestic disturbance and problems, a temptation to call in the military. The Posse Comitatus law of 1871 forbids the military from acting in a law enforcement function, and, by and large that’s a good idea.
That’s because even though police officers carry guns, and soldiers carry guns, their purposes are very different. Police officers enforce the law. Soldiers pursue policy objectives by violent means. Police officers are trained in what actually constitutes law, both the breaking thereof and the civil liberties that must be protected in taking the extraordinary action of depriving someone of liberty (let alone life). Soldiers are trained to function on the battlefield, a very different environment, with very different rules.
Only under extreme circumstances are even the National Guard brought in to keep order (e.g., to apprehend looters after a natural disaster). The Guard functions in a grey area between civil law enforcement and the military.
Though we are in a “war” on terrorism, and “battles” have been fought on our soil, the idea of expanding the military’s role in domestic anti-terrorism efforts is a very dangerous one, and should be examined very carefully each step of the way.
Just because someone’s been assigned to carry a gun doesn’t mean they can function as a good soldier. Or a good police officer. Or, especially, as both.
InstaPundit, whence this story, notes:
The home front in the war on terrorism has been a pathetic morass of dumb PR moves, incompetence, and vaguely Orwellian proposals. This is another example, combining elements of all three. …
We’d better win this war on the ground in Iraq — and Saudi Arabia — because it’s not going to be won at home. Nobody ever won by playing defense. And our homeland defense team looks to be junior-varsity, at best.
Another commentary on the subject is here, which claims that weakening Posse Comitatus to allow military activities in the “War on Drugs” has had just the sort of ill effect predicted for further weaking it again.
What I’m looking for is a decent description of the law/policy and the its genesis.
And here it is, at the Army National Guard site:
And a more detailed history can be found here (albeit with some appeal to Black Helicopter thinking). A more scholarly commentary and history by a Reserve JAG officer can be found here.