Is it right to belittle the user for their choice? If you had every intention of calling out people who voted "make the protesters/those arrested pay", then this is a baited trap.

What happens next is people get defensive and/or reactive, "it all starts up again", and since the docents are already tired and fed-up there could be a swift, Draconian crackdown which leads to a continuation of the simmering resentment.

Is it possible to ask us why we would vote that way, instead of telling us what we must be thinking? (and what a loaded statement it was, too.)

In civil situations, that includes crowd control and convey escort duties stateside. Although the gubmint has already gutted Posse Comitatus

National Guard under control of the Governor is a different story, as they have become the de facto "militia" (although in the truest legal sense of the word they are not militia)  

"MORBO SAYS STONE TO FLESH DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY."

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell

Relevant statutes are

Sec. 1385. - Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both; and

10 U.S.C. § 375. Restriction on direct participation by military personnel The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.

Was actually talking about this with Phil last night. He thought something in the “Patriot Act” did away with Posse Comitatus. I said, "nope."  But Phil was right (just wrong about the law).  It wasn’t in the Patriot Act, but a provision in the John Warner Defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5122.ENR), that allows the President to

“...employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to... restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States..., where the President determines that,...domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy...”

So I guess the President could conceivably call out the Army to suppress the "unlawful conspirators" of Olympia. Hard to see how they can do so preemtively though...oops! Did I say "preemptive?"

One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.

Thomas Sowell