• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

HB 20: Emerg Serv & Disas Law; shall not be interpreted to prohibit carrying firearms

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
HB 20: Emerg Serv & Disas Law; shall not be interpreted to prohibit carrying firearms

Delegate Wilt has submitted a bill on emergency services and carrying of firearms. The full text is not posted at this time, so we'll have to wait to see what it says.

TFred

Emergency Services & Disaster Law; shall not be interpreted to prohibit carrying, etc., of firearms

Emergency services and disasters; constitutional rights. Provides that nothing in the Emergency Services and Disaster Law shall be interpreted to limit or prohibit the possession, carrying, transportation, sale, or transfer of firearms.
 

markand

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
512
Location
VA
I'd like to see this allow carry in schools, which are often used as emergency shelters.
 

MSC 45ACP

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,840
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
You know what should have prevented what happened in NOLA after Katrina?

Posse Comitatus.

So much for that.

Posse Comitatus only covers the use of the military in law enforcement in the U. S.
It doesn't cover the National Guard (State-"owned" military) or
Coast Guard (Dept. of Homeland Security & Federal Law Enforcement Agency).

I know the CG was involved in the shameful siezure of firearms in NOLA. I believe the National Guard was also. They also had other LEAs from outside the area acting "as directed" by "local authority".
I don't remember the Army, Navy, Air Force or Marines being involved in the illegal theft of private firearms after Katrina.
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
I always thought that Posse Comitatus covered ANYONE acting in a capacity of or under the umbrella of military service - essentially that NO MILITARY could be used as an extension or augmentation of LAW ENFORCEMENT.

They simply don't have the training, nor the authority. Just because the governor activates the Guard in an emergency doesn't immediately deputize them. The governor doesn't have that authority either, I don't think.

Regardless of the semantics, what happened in NOLA was shameful and they are just lucky most people laid down and did whatever they were told like good, obedient subjects. Come to my house like that and it ends very differently.
 

ODA 226

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
1,603
Location
Etzenricht, Germany
I always thought that Posse Comitatus covered ANYONE acting in a capacity of or under the umbrella of military service - essentially that NO MILITARY could be used as an extension or augmentation of LAW ENFORCEMENT.

They simply don't have the training, nor the authority. Just because the governor activates the Guard in an emergency doesn't immediately deputize them. The governor doesn't have that authority either, I don't think.

Regardless of the semantics, what happened in NOLA was shameful and they are just lucky most people laid down and did whatever they were told like good, obedient subjects. Come to my house like that and it ends very differently.

Travis,
Mike is 100% correct. The Guard CAN, WILL and HAS been used to augment Law Enforcement in Virginia. I did it myself when I was a Guard member.
Craig
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
I always thought that Posse Comitatus covered ANYONE acting in a capacity of or under the umbrella of military service - essentially that NO MILITARY could be used as an extension or augmentation of LAW ENFORCEMENT.

They simply don't have the training, nor the authority. Just because the governor activates the Guard in an emergency doesn't immediately deputize them. The governor doesn't have that authority either, I don't think.

Regardless of the semantics, what happened in NOLA was shameful and they are just lucky most people laid down and did whatever they were told like good, obedient subjects. Come to my house like that and it ends very differently.

Posse Comitatus only applies to Army and Air Force as a law.
 

grylnsmn

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
620
Location
Pacific Northwest
Posse Comitatus only covers the use of the military in law enforcement in the U. S.
It doesn't cover the National Guard (State-"owned" military) or
Coast Guard (Dept. of Homeland Security & Federal Law Enforcement Agency).

I always thought that Posse Comitatus covered ANYONE acting in a capacity of or under the umbrella of military service - essentially that NO MILITARY could be used as an extension or augmentation of LAW ENFORCEMENT.

You are both partially correct.

Posse Comitatus prohibits federal military personnel from being used for law enforcement purposes on US soil (excepting on military installations). It does apply to the National Guard, but only when they are called up for federal service (i.e. activated at the order of the President of the United States) and they are acting within the chain of command of the US Army. It does not apply when they are called up for state service under the Governor's orders (and thus under state command).

Similarly, the Coast Guard has a dual role as both law enforcement and military. They are primarily considered a law enforcement agency when serving under the DHS and are exempt from the restrictions of Posse Comitatus (as it only explicitly identifies the Army and Air Force). However, during time of war, some or all of the Coast Guard can be transferred to be under the Department of the Navy. Any forces acting under Navy direction would be under the same restrictions as the Navy and Marine Corps (which, while not covered by the Posse Comitatus Act, are under a similar directive by regulation), unless otherwise specifically authorized for law enforcement purposes.
 
Last edited:

gm2max

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2011
Messages
66
Location
Virginia Beach
I am glad to see this, and hope it goes through. I have begun (slowly) starting my SHTF plan, and just yesterday was speculating what would happen if a disaster happened and I had to go to a shelter. This brought me to the point of schools. We will see how it goes.
 

MSC 45ACP

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,840
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
You are both partially correct.



Similarly, the Coast Guard has a dual role as both law enforcement and military. They are primarily considered a law enforcement agency when serving under the DHS and are exempt from the restrictions of Posse Comitatus (as it only explicitly identifies the Army and Air Force). However, during time of war, some or all of the Coast Guard can be transferred to be under the Department of the Navy. Any forces acting under Navy direction would be under the same restrictions as the Navy and Marine Corps (which, while not covered by the Posse Comitatus Act, are under a similar directive by regulation), unless otherwise specifically authorized for law enforcement purposes.

grylnsmn:

Thank you for correcting me on the missions I performed for over 22 years of my life. To my knowledge, the entire Coast Guard has never been placed under Navy control. Even during World War Two, there were Navy ships manned by Coasties, Landing Craft crewed by Coasties (The one and only Coast Guardsman to be awarded the Medal of Honor was a Landing Craft Coxswain) but the Coast Guard maintained its autonomy with the beach patrol and Coastial SAR missions.

Some units have been placed in the Navy Chain of Command for periods of time. I was in a Port Security Unit (PSU) during Desert Storm. We were part of the Navy's Harbor Defense Command (HDC). Your Google-Fu obvioisly works, but you are incorrect in your mission priorities for the CG. Here are the missions of the Coast Guard listed in order of operating budget percentage:

Missions
By law, the Coast Guard has 11 missions:
Ports, waterways, and coastal security
Drug interdiction
Aids to navigation
Search and rescue
Living marine resources
Marine safety
Defense readiness
Migrant interdiction
Marine environmental protection
Ice operations
Other law enforcement

Thus, we are military, multi-mission, and maritime.

There are currently several cutters (and boats) in Iraq performing "coastal security".
 

grylnsmn

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
620
Location
Pacific Northwest
grylnsmn:

Thank you for correcting me on the missions I performed for over 22 years of my life.
Hold your horses! You seem to have missed the part where I was talking to both you and wylde007 when I said that you were both partially correct. I was essentially supporting your statement about the Coast Guard. However, I was correcting you with regards to the National Guard. My statements about the Coast Guard were primarily in response to wylde007.

Your statement that the National Guard is not subject to Posse Comitatus is not completely accurate. They are subject to it when they are federalized, but not when they are called up by the governor, at least under current interpretations of the law. As one overview* of Posse Comitatus states:
The Effect of the Posse Comitatus Act

Before speculating on why this act is so misunderstood, it is useful to spell out exactly what the act as it is written does and does not do. The Posse Comitatus Act

- Applies only to the Army, and by extension the Air Force, which was formed out of the Army in 1947.

- Does not apply to the Navy and Marine Corps. However, the Department of Defense has consistently held that the Navy and Marine Corps should behave as if the act applied to them.

- Does not apply to the Coast Guard, which is part of the Department of Transportation and is both an armed force and a law enforcement agency with police powers.

- Does not apply to the National Guard in its role as state troops on state active duty under the command of the respective governors.

- May not apply to the National Guard (qua militia) even when it is called to federal active duty. The Posse Comitatus Act contains no restrictions on the use of the federalized militia as it did on the regular Army. [9] It is commonly believed, however, that National Guard units and personnel come under the Posse Comitatus Act when they are on federal active duty, and this interpretation is followed today.

- Does not apply to state guards or State Defense Forces under the command of the respective governors.


- Does not apply to military personnel assigned to military police, shore police, or security police duties. The military police have jurisdiction over military members subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. They also exercise police powers over military dependents and others on military installations. The history of the law makes it clear that it was not intended to prevent federal police (for example, marshals) from enforcing the law.

- Does not apply to civilian employees, including those who are sworn law enforcement officers. The origin and legislative history of the act make it clear that it applies only to military personnel. In those days, there were no civilian employees of the Army in the sense that there are today. In particular, no one envisioned that the Army would hire civilian police officers to enforce the laws at its facilities.

- Does not prevent the President from using federal troops in riots or civil disorders. Federal troops were used for domestic operations more than 200 times in the two centuries from 1795 to 1995. Most of these operations were to enforce the law, and many of them were to enforce state law rather than federal law. [10] Nor does it prevent the military services from supporting local or federal law enforcement officials as long as the troops are not used to arrest citizens or investigate crimes.
I hope that clarifies my previous post to your satisfaction.

* For full disclosure, that article comes from the website of the Homeland Security Institute, or HSI. My father was employed by HSI from its founding in 2002 until 2005. However, he had no role in writing that article.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Delegate Wilt has submitted a bill on emergency services and carrying of firearms. The full text is not posted at this time, so we'll have to wait to see what it says.

TFred

Emergency Services & Disaster Law; shall not be interpreted to prohibit carrying, etc., of firearms

Emergency services and disasters; constitutional rights. Provides that nothing in the Emergency Services and Disaster Law shall be interpreted to limit or prohibit the possession, carrying, transportation, sale, or transfer of firearms.
Not sure why it took so long, most bills post the full text at the same time they put the link up... but I just noticed they finally got around to posting the full text of this bill.

IANAL, but it appears to me that this is a useless bill. Perhaps even worse, because the name implies a protection, but the guts of the bill does not.

Maybe someone with more legal smarts can verify this... upon plain text reading, I wouldn't support this bill with a 10 foot pole. In the text below, I simulate the "highlighted" version on LIS, but added the bold myself for emphasis.

TFred

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?121+ful+HB20+hil

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:

1. That § 44-146.15 of the Code of Virginia is amended and reenacted as follows:

§ 44-146.15. Construction of chapter.

Nothing in this chapter is to be construed to:

(1) Limit, modify, or abridge the authority of the Governor to exercise any powers vested in him under other laws of this Commonwealth independent of, or in conjunction with, any provisions of this chapter;

(2) Interfere with dissemination of news or comment on public affairs; but any communications facility or organization, including, but not limited to, radio and television stations, wire services, and newspapers, may be required to transmit or print public service messages furnishing information or instructions in connection with actual or pending disaster;

(3) Empower the Governor, any political subdivision, or any other governmental authority to in any way limit or prohibit the [strike]rights of the people to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by Article I, Section 13 of the Constitution of Virginia or the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, including the[/strike] otherwise lawful possession, carrying, transportation, sale, or transfer of firearms except to the extent necessary to ensure public safety in any place or facility designated or used by the Governor, any political subdivision of the Commonwealth, or any other governmental entity as an emergency shelter or for the purpose of sheltering persons;

(4) Affect the jurisdiction or responsibilities of police forces, [strike]fire-fighting[/strike]firefighting forces, units of the armed forces of the United States or any personnel thereof, when on active duty; but state, local and interjurisdictional agencies for emergency services shall place reliance upon such forces in the event of declared disasters; or

(5) Interfere with the course of conduct of a labor dispute except that actions otherwise authorized by this chapter or other laws may be taken when necessary to forestall or mitigate imminent or existing danger to public health or safety.
 
Top