Wednesday, September 22, 2021
HomePatriot DispatchesAs a Courtesy to Our Civilian Friends.....

As a Courtesy to Our Civilian Friends…..

   

  Excuse me, does anyone see a problem here?

 

https://www2.wrbl.com/news/2011/apr/22/military-patrols-start-friday-night-ar-1752061/

 

Now, Columbus Police will have the company of two uniformed Fort Benning soldiers on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights.

Mayor Tomlinson says the soldiers will not be able to make any arrests, but will be able to command order of all military personnel and if need be, alert military police.

First they came for rowdy off-duty soldiers…….

 

bobmontgomery
Poor. No advanced degrees. Unorganized. Feeble. Disjointed. Random. Past it. .... Intrigued, Interested, Patriotic and Lucky.

14 COMMENTS

Leave a Reply

14 COMMENTS

  1. I’m not sure how to take this one, bobmontgomery. If the local soldiers are getting out of hand while they are on leave to the point that it presents a threat to the community…I can see why those higher in command might want to police their own a bit more.

    Still, it does tend to go in the direction of acclimating our military to policing citizens, doesn’t it?

  2. Unless the soldiers are carrying their M-1’s into town and shooting up the place, if they are committing crimes in Columbus, GA, and the the Columbus Police Department can’t handle it, there’s always the Georgia State Patrol. If there is a huge problem, then the military needs to restrict the grunts to base, and discharge people who get in trouble in town. You do not have military patrols in civilian areas, armed or otherwise. This is America.

    • That’s more or less the impression I’d had in the past, that if there was problem in the unit, the higher ups could restrict the entire unit…it was usually dealt with internally at that point and prevented the same kinds of events from repeating themselves.

      And I do agree with that response. I think it is the best way to deal with it.

      • You’re right Lineholder, it can be easily dealt with at the unit level. There were formerly “Courtesy Patrols” downtown who dealt with issues ranging from uniform infractions to the often seen busting up of bars, in John Wayne movies anyway. Unless the unit Commander suffers from the same lack of testicular fortitude as the GOP Senators that is…

  3. What we have is a prelude to one of Kenny Solomon’s famous ‘nudges’. Kenny has a blurb up about it at his site. “Courtesy patrols” theoretically are ride-alongs by army personnel so they can ‘take charge’ of unruly soldiers. However, sometimes the line between unruly soldier and unruly civilians can get blurred, can’t it? Keeping the peace in an American city is supposed to be a civilian matter.

    • The “courtesy” is to the military, in an area where there are a few soldier-types getting out of hand, this gives the military a chance to get them off the street and back to base before they get arrested. In a situation where a cop has to respond to a drunk and disorderly, the D&D person goes to jail. If they’re drunk, can’t just turn them loose because then if someone gets hurt, the department gets sued.
      So the “MP” takes charge of the guy and gets him back to base, usually to a non-judicial punishment.
      \Makes sense to me.

    • Thanks, Erick. You’re more familiar with these situations than we are, so we’ll hold our water for now. With all the extra curricular activities going on in the Obama administration’s use of the executive branch agencies and departments to circumvent….normal channels….we, like our South Floridian friend, get ‘edgy’ at times.

    • So long as the MP ride-alongs deal only with military personnel acting out in town, all is well. The military is forbidden, under posse comitatus, from exercising police authority on non-federal property, ie: civilians, generally speaking. (As memory serves me at least!)

      • The only reason I mention this is because our NG unit struggled with the finer points when activated by the Governor under state authority, which (again, going by memory) is a whole other ball of wax. The gist was when activated as State militia, yes to police power; if federally activated (“called up”) by the President, no police power in the USA. Sound right to any resident legal eagles?

        • Yes, you’re right mrriggio, Title 10 powers limit the involvement of Federal Troops inside the United States. Something from our Founding Fathers and their dislike for standing armies, especially those standing armies that cross the Rubicon. This may not even be on the banks of the Rubicon but I don’t like it. There’s no reason Ft Benning couldn’t have instituted their own program, separate from local law enforcement. They do have MPs.

  4. I am sure there is no immediate problem. However, it hasn’t been that long since we were treated to an excellent essay by Lineholder on frogs, and getting acclimated to warmer and warmer water. I mean, when the tree-huggers started going into the schools forty years ago to help the kiddies celebrate Earth Day, what could possibly have gone wrong?

  1. I’m not sure how to take this one, bobmontgomery. If the local soldiers are getting out of hand while they are on leave to the point that it presents a threat to the community…I can see why those higher in command might want to police their own a bit more.

    Still, it does tend to go in the direction of acclimating our military to policing citizens, doesn’t it?

  2. Unless the soldiers are carrying their M-1’s into town and shooting up the place, if they are committing crimes in Columbus, GA, and the the Columbus Police Department can’t handle it, there’s always the Georgia State Patrol. If there is a huge problem, then the military needs to restrict the grunts to base, and discharge people who get in trouble in town. You do not have military patrols in civilian areas, armed or otherwise. This is America.

    • That’s more or less the impression I’d had in the past, that if there was problem in the unit, the higher ups could restrict the entire unit…it was usually dealt with internally at that point and prevented the same kinds of events from repeating themselves.

      And I do agree with that response. I think it is the best way to deal with it.

      • You’re right Lineholder, it can be easily dealt with at the unit level. There were formerly “Courtesy Patrols” downtown who dealt with issues ranging from uniform infractions to the often seen busting up of bars, in John Wayne movies anyway. Unless the unit Commander suffers from the same lack of testicular fortitude as the GOP Senators that is…

  3. What we have is a prelude to one of Kenny Solomon’s famous ‘nudges’. Kenny has a blurb up about it at his site. “Courtesy patrols” theoretically are ride-alongs by army personnel so they can ‘take charge’ of unruly soldiers. However, sometimes the line between unruly soldier and unruly civilians can get blurred, can’t it? Keeping the peace in an American city is supposed to be a civilian matter.

    • The “courtesy” is to the military, in an area where there are a few soldier-types getting out of hand, this gives the military a chance to get them off the street and back to base before they get arrested. In a situation where a cop has to respond to a drunk and disorderly, the D&D person goes to jail. If they’re drunk, can’t just turn them loose because then if someone gets hurt, the department gets sued.
      So the “MP” takes charge of the guy and gets him back to base, usually to a non-judicial punishment.
      \Makes sense to me.

    • Thanks, Erick. You’re more familiar with these situations than we are, so we’ll hold our water for now. With all the extra curricular activities going on in the Obama administration’s use of the executive branch agencies and departments to circumvent….normal channels….we, like our South Floridian friend, get ‘edgy’ at times.

    • So long as the MP ride-alongs deal only with military personnel acting out in town, all is well. The military is forbidden, under posse comitatus, from exercising police authority on non-federal property, ie: civilians, generally speaking. (As memory serves me at least!)

      • The only reason I mention this is because our NG unit struggled with the finer points when activated by the Governor under state authority, which (again, going by memory) is a whole other ball of wax. The gist was when activated as State militia, yes to police power; if federally activated (“called up”) by the President, no police power in the USA. Sound right to any resident legal eagles?

        • Yes, you’re right mrriggio, Title 10 powers limit the involvement of Federal Troops inside the United States. Something from our Founding Fathers and their dislike for standing armies, especially those standing armies that cross the Rubicon. This may not even be on the banks of the Rubicon but I don’t like it. There’s no reason Ft Benning couldn’t have instituted their own program, separate from local law enforcement. They do have MPs.

  4. I am sure there is no immediate problem. However, it hasn’t been that long since we were treated to an excellent essay by Lineholder on frogs, and getting acclimated to warmer and warmer water. I mean, when the tree-huggers started going into the schools forty years ago to help the kiddies celebrate Earth Day, what could possibly have gone wrong?

Must Read