Copy/paste and then followed by a thank u, captain obvious.

Once again, added nothing to the thread.



Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

CERTIFIED plagiarist! Just like the Joe!

You were hoping to find that… here?  What, are ya new? 🤣

Touche!

Seeming how hpd denied multiple legal permament residents and US nationals the right to buy a gun (not a 1 time mistake), its a reasonable assumption u gotta be a US citizen to be a cop. Or u cannot carry a gun for duty. Unless hpd gives special treatment to officers and recruits.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

I see what you mean now, you are making a legal argument.
I was interested in a line of reasoning why it should be illegal.

United States Army Military Police units have combat zone responsibilities in addition to their law enforcement duties. These responsibilities include mounted and dismounted patrols, response force operations, area damage control, route reconnaissance, cordon and search operations, critical site security, and convoy and personnel escorts. Operationally, these duties fall under the "security and mobility support" discipline of the Military Police Corps.

I know civilians that ended up in federal court for their actions on government property. They were at a minimum detained. Outside the United States they most definitely practice law enforcement.

Nothing you said has a thing to do with enforcing US laws against US citizens on US soil.

Unless the US resident alien is a military cop, they would not be doing anything like what you said -- and then it would likely be along the lines of gate or facility security.  Most MP/SP cops will hand over any law breakers to the base commander.  Usually the scofflaw will be barred from the base in the future.  If the infraction is serious, either local or federal (FBI) LE will take over the investigation.

You said "US military has no authority to perform law enforcement duties"

You may not get it, but the topic is about non-citizens doing LE on US soil against US residents. 

What the military does on foreign soil is a completely different animal.  That's not part of our legal system or the Constitution.  That is part of military operations in conjunction with  foreign military and law enforcement rules of engagement.

Under certain circumstances (national emergencies, etc.) the states have the ability to activate the National Guard to help in disasters, insurrections and so on  --  usually to stop looting.  That's NOT the same as a LE officer who is routinely enforcing the laws of a given jurisdiction.  It takes an act by the Governor or the President to activate the National Guard and use them for any LE purposes.

So, no, the military -- under normal conditions -- have no authority to perform LE duties UNLESS they are deployed to a foreign land OR an executive office authorizes them for a specific situation to help local law enforcement.

Let me know if you can find an instance of an active duty military member doing traffic stops and issuing speeding tickets -- even in Afghanistan or Iraq.

Generally speaking, using active duty troops in America does not involve
law enforcement roles UNLESS these troops are activated under the
Insurrection Act. Other ways U.S. troops can be used for domestic law
enforcement include situations dealing with weapons of mass destruction,
nuclear materials, counter drug operations, and counter-terrorism.

https://veteran.com/military-civilian-law-enforcement/

So I guess you just mistyped.

No.  I forgot who i was replying to.

It takes too much effort to post every single detail and nuance so people (like you) with no idea what they are talking about won't think Google is smarter.

There are exceptions with every rule.  I stand by the rule I "typed."

No.  I forgot who i was replying to.

It takes too much effort to post every single detail and nuance so people (like you) with no idea what they are talking about won't think Google is smarter.

There are exceptions with every rule.  I stand by the rule I "typed."

Plus when xhes told to read entire threads, xhe doesnt. Cause this answers alot of post xhe does.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

I type therefore you’re wrong

Plus when xhes told to read entire threads, xhe doesnt. Cause this answers alot of post xhe does.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Just like disregarding the RO's

Yes in Illinois

https://www.foxnews.com/media/illinois-gov-pritzker-allows-non-us-citizens-become-police-officers-new-law-fundamentally-bad-idea

Well that’s one way of getting rid of illegals….give them a badge and a gun….

Well that’s one way of getting rid of illegals….give them a badge and a gun….

Or give a politically, legal alien in. Then when they apply to be a cop, pass them due to politics. Then he shoots and kills a woman in her own driveway while she was walking on it.



Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

The issue is not whether a non-citizen can effectively fulfill the position of a law enforcement officer.

The real issue is non-citizens being given the right to vote.  CA cities are already going down that road.

The argument will be, "If a non-resident can serve in law enforcement -- a government (tax payer) funded position -- as well as pay their taxes and so forth, then why are they not being allowed to vote?  If they ACT like citizens, then should they not be afforded the same rights and privileges as citizens?

Pay attention to what's going on at the border.  Our country is being invaded .... literally.  And giving someone a green card, a badge and a gun is just one more step along the path to more Democrat voters -- potentially in the tens of millions.

Nothing is ever as simple as they tell you.  It's all connected.