Why US Troops won’t carry weapons at the Mexican border (Posse Comitatus)

preview_player
Показать описание
Federal troops can't act as law enforcement in the US due to "Posse Comitatus Act." This act was passed during southern reconstruction to make the US Army apolitical and get them out of local affairs. The act was later amended to include the Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force and Space Force.
The Coast Guard is not covered under the act.,

Austin Approves Homeland Security Request for Troops at Border

Posse Comitatus Revisited

Reconstruction.

What are the origins of the Posse Comitatus Act?

For uncensored video, check out my substack at:

Like my shirts? Get your own at:

Watch all of my long form videos:

Twitter:
@ryanmcbeth

Join the conversation:

Want to send me something?
Ryan McBeth Productions LLC
8705 Colesville Rd.
Suite 249
Silver Spring, MD 20910
USA
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

Federal troops can't act as law enforcement in the US due to "Posse Comitatus Act." This act was passed during southern reconstruction to make the US Army apolitical and get them out of local affairs. The act was later amended to include the Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force and Space Force.
The Coast Guard is not covered under the act.,

Austin Approves Homeland Security Request for Troops at Border

Posse Comitatus Revisited

Reconstruction.

What are the origins of the Posse Comitatus Act?

For uncensored video, check out my substack at:

Like my shirts? Get your own at:

Watch all of my long form videos:

Twitter:
@ryanmcbeth

RyanMcBethProgramming
Автор

I absolutely love the fact that you showed the posse lineup from blazing saddles😂😂😂😂.

callsignmohas
Автор

Posse comitatus also doesn't apply to the Coast Guard, as we do not fall under the DoD. It's one of those little hidden powers we have that people don't think about. We can operate both as law enforcement and military.

Guardian
Автор

I work as an armed guard for a small private security company. National guard was running a covid vaccination center in a not so good area and had to hire us on as armed guards to work alongside them cause they couldn't have firearms. It was weird man.

spiceywolf
Автор

The 7th infantry and USMC during the LA riots would like a word

thekentuckyrifleman
Автор

They can carry weapons but only by congressional approval.

allenhaney
Автор

If you think about it, both sides in the Civil War wanted the same thing in the end.

Free black people.

gusa
Автор

Border enforcement is not a "local law enforcement" responsibility. It's FEDERAL jurisdiction.

milescoburn
Автор

“America’s original sin” you mean the entire planet’s original sin?

nickniehaus
Автор

There's one instance where armed US soldiers were deployed on American soil, and that's the Little Rock crisis of 1957 following the historic _Brown v. Board_ decision.

There's a few things that probably necessitated the 101st Airborne, primarily the fact that the governor of Arkansas used the National Guard to prevent black students from entering the schools. Eisenhower called in the 101st to federalize the Arkansas National Guard and allow the students to enter. There's archival photos showing the troops with rifles slung on their shoulders.

MMuraseofSandvich
Автор

Blazing Saddles is the best possible example that u could've used.
"Can I get a harumph?"
"Give the Governor a harumph."
"Harumph harumph harumph."
"Alright, boys. How ya doing?
She's the best secretary I've ever had."

reginaldinoenchillada
Автор

we need to absolutely secure our borders.

alphawolfgang
Автор

Internal law enforcement and border security seem like 2 different things. The nation's security should the primary reason for the military. On the borders, not internal, a little less endless wars.

joshuakumm
Автор

I’m gonna do a slight correction, the north was not “slave free” at the time of the Civil War kicking off. It just didn’t have the same amount of slaves as the south did. When the Union was getting their asses kicked, they had a hard time getting soldiers to fight for their army, so Lincoln decided to outlaw slavery. Not only did that give the Blacks in the north a real reason to fight, but it also caused a fair chunk of slaves in the confederacy to want to fight for the Union as well. They still weren’t treated the same either way you look at it because the union didn’t trust them to lead themselves or interoperate with white units so they gave the blacks their own units, commanded by white officers.

soccerkiller
Автор

Protecting our nations boarders is not a police activity, it’s a national security one. It’s just a political move. Other than that, this video is factually accurate

peterprovenzano
Автор

Interesting history lesson. YouTube content makers providing free knowledge to viewers. Knowledge is the greatest of all gifts. Thank you, Ryan.

ScottMcMaster-erxj
Автор

Any "Baby Boomer" that were born between 1946 and 1956 and lived in the south, would have actually seen the effect of "Jim Crowe" laws in action. I remember seeing "Colored" bathrooms at the local stores next to the Men and Women's restrooms along with the "colored" water fountain.
My friend and I used to go into the single "colored" restroom to see what they had that we in the white restrooms didn't have.
AND, of course we drank from the "colored" water fountain to taste the "different" water.
It was a crazy time.
Yeah, we also sat in the back of the bus but only when there were no black people on it.
IF you were white and sat in the back of the bus and there were "colored" people there, they would make you move. It was funny....but, I'm sure, not for them but we were just kids.
Oh, and Tuesday was "Colored visit the Zoo day" and only "Colored" could sit in the movie theatre balcony.
It was a real, "To Kill A Mocking Bird" era back then.

robertpage
Автор

The "Blazing Saddles" clip is appreciated as well as your informative videos.👍

lateefcarrere
Автор

Clears up popular misconceptions about the subject, thanks.

tuckersabath
Автор

Emancipation Proclamation was issued January 1st 1863. Not 1866.

georgethomson