Incendiary Image of the Day: Marines’ “Wield the Shield” Riot Control Training

Yes, yes: United States Marines need to train for riot control. These days, the Few, the Proud are “peacekeepers” keeping the peace in territories prone to civil unrest. Unrest that’s occasionally sparked by the presence of U.S. Marines. Where was I? Oh right. Obviously this riot control training has nothing to do with peacekeeping on U.S. soil. That’s the job of the National Guard. I mean, the police. Unless it’s a big thing or a federal emergency of some sort. Then it’s down to the DHS. FBI? ATF? I can’t keep track. Someone non-military – in command structure if not weapons and tactics. The incendiary part of this video comes at the tail end, as the vid fades out. Is that standard practice for riot control?

comments

  1. avatar ray says:

    Considering Marines deploy to sure up security at embassies in some very dangerous places, this methodology does not suprise me

    1. avatar jollyroger says:

      After Egypt, Libya, and Yemen the Marines opened their eyes a little more. Also with the end of Afghanistan the Marine Corps is training for a very broad range of potential missions

      1. avatar Kiljoy616 says:

        Yes mostly in the states.

        Except in a war zone Marines are not going to play riot anything or they will get shot at and fire bombs. Unlike here in the states where the population is passive for the most part when it feels its been wrong I don’t see them doing any of this in some far flung gun owner paradise with people shooting at them from all sides. Unless you think we will be sending the Marines to deal with the Bahamas?

        No I still see this as training for here more than anywhere else.

        Police in many places militarized, National Guard well they are not even part of the States unless that has changed, and Marines may deal with a problem at an embassy but they would be killed and overrun if they pulled that stuff in some 3rd world countries unless of course it had become a war zone and troops after troops where been deployed.

        1. avatar jollyroger says:

          Actually we used these tactics in Afghanistan ( I was there) in 09 some Army ranger stabbed a Quaran hundreds of miles north of us and we felt the repercussions. They through boots and rocks and spit and all sorts of nasty things but we can’t just kill them, but they have to leave the area of our COP.
          ps we also used these tactics in Haiti after the earthquake in 09 while passing out food

    2. avatar Heretical Politik says:

      I’ve always thought the modern combat shotgun is at least partially analogous to the musket (think buck and ball or slugs). Using ancient shield wall tactics combined with Napoleonic infantry tactics makes a lot of sense in this context.

      1. avatar Cliff H says:

        This is a short video, and being the Marine Corps I doubt they have ignored flank security, however…

        The entire crowd being controlled had the appearance of a non-violent, unarmed protest. The clear shields in use did not appear to be bullet-resistant. At what point, and under what provocation, did the commander of this group decide that it was reasonable to deploy a dozen or more shotguns on the crowd?

        And what about they guy who breached their line and was hauled to the rear. Good move if he was wearing a Semtec vest.

        I am just a former Army medic and armchair military historian and I could see in that 33 seconds any number of ways an even moderately intelligent enemy could put a lot of hurt on those Marines.

        1. avatar Kiljoy616 says:

          It did seem to be more about passive, sheep like protestors, not the kind of thing you see around the world.

        2. avatar jdkchem says:

          1. Nobody breached the line armchair army. They opened the line to come out and make a snatch.
          2. It’s called training for a reason. Sorry if those Marines weren’t being authentic enough for you.

        3. avatar Marine Gunner says:

          That was just training, Army; just practicing the motions. Bringing the hurt is what Marines do. In a real situation, you would NOT want to give those Marines an excuse to escalate into their real jobs; killing people and breaking things. Contrary to appearances, Marines are not cops and don’t want to be cops. We train to close with and destroy the enemy and we’re good at it. So, maybe the rioters might not want to push their luck.

        4. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          Rioters? Like the ones in Kiev, right now? Or the ones in Venezuela? From the looks of it they are quite willing to hand out the hurt, not like the whiny American college kids crying for their MTV and welfare in OWS cry-a-thons.

  2. avatar DownrangeFuture says:

    Really? Raging against people that volunteered to serve so you don’t have to? Wow.

    And yes, that’s a normal response if people start shooting. Because honestly, that front row with the shields will have a lot of people falling down shot if people start shooting at them. It’s part of the continuum of force.

    1. avatar BDub says:

      He’s not raging against the “people” who serve. He’s questioning the legitimacy of the Institution, for engaging in this kind of training.

    2. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      Make sure you thank IRS and TSA agents for their service too. Don’t forget the DMV ladies. Blind loyalty to the military without an honest examination of their current mission indicates extensive indoctrination. They are no different than any other federal employee.

      1. avatar tdiinva says:

        Like most anarchists Henry believes he has the ability to fend for himself. Maybe he does, right up to the point where he get, injured, sick, old or just runs up against a gang of less individualistic souls.

        1. avatar Evan B says:

          Anarchists believe in voluntary interactions and associations with other individuals. Even if there was no government people would generally form groups of some kind, but they would be small and localized. Heck If you and a collection of friends wanted to start a communist village where everyone was a willing participant more power to you(it will probably fail miserably). Government’s only tool is force and coercion through the use of the phony social contract theory.

        2. avatar Henry Bowman says:

          Don’t pretend to know me!

          I’m a Voluntaryist. Look it up. Besides, I’ve never said anything opposed to a the idea of a common defense force. However, the current U.S. military mission has nothing to do with common defense.

        3. avatar tdiinva says:

          There is a word to describe this and it’s Radical Syndicalism. However, without a central authority there is nothing to keep the individual syndicates from warring with one another. Whether you call it syndicalism, radical or otherwise, or anarchy your basic assumption is that the state of nature is innocent and organized society corrupts that innocence. It is pure Rousseauian romanticism of the primitive. Go look around the world to see what this kind primitivism looks like.

          Yes, Henry I know you believe “volunteerism”. You volunteer to follow the laws that suit your purpose. All other are invalid. Some would call that sociopathic behavior.

          Two hundred years ago we had a military built along the lines self-defense. How did that work out for us? By the way military service in the War of 1812 was not voluntary. See the Militia Act of 1792.

        4. avatar Cliff H says:

          “…without a central authority there is nothing to keep the individual syndicates from warring with one another. ”

          For “individual syndicates” replace with “tribes”. American Indians lived under this system and they had a far from idyllic existence since there was almost constant conflict with neighbors for resources, etc. This is the fate of almost every society that believes this sort of hogwash. Feudalism, monarchy, tribalism, dictatorship. It’s all the same crap. Without some form of minimal, agreed upon and controlled government structure we all end up like Mad Max and all the other dystopian societies of history and future fiction. With no power structure in place SOMEONE will always step up and attempt to assert their own authority. This is the antithesis of LIBERTY.

        5. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          Oop, there it is.

        6. avatar William Burke says:

          You have a severe misunderstanding of what “Anarchism” means. Look it up next time, so you don’t make an ignoramus of yourself.

        7. avatar Cliff H says:

          From Wikipedia:

          “[…]
          As a subtle and anti-dogmatic philosophy, anarchism draws on many currents of thought and strategy. Anarchism does not offer a fixed body of doctrine from a single particular world view, instead fluxing and flowing as a philosophy. There are many types and traditions of anarchism, not all of which are mutually exclusive. Anarchist schools of thought can differ fundamentally, supporting anything from extreme individualism to complete collectivism. Strains of anarchism have often been divided into the categories of social and individualist anarchism or similar dual classifications. Anarchism is often considered a radical left-wing ideology, and much of anarchist economics and anarchist legal philosophy reflect anti-authoritarian interpretations of communism, collectivism, syndicalism, mutualism, or participatory economics.”

          I think I’ll pass. It would appear logical that anarchism will inevitably lead to small groups competing for limited resources and ruled by petty despots. Good luck with that.

        8. avatar William Burke says:

          Yet another fail. Anarchism as a philosophical system involves groups of people interacting and trading in various actions, through MUTUAL interests, not exclusive interests.

          You read that and figures you became an “expert” on Anarchism. Anarchism, at its base, means ZERO COERCION, of any kind.

          Now you can start again, and become a little more authoritative on the subject. You need to read DOZENS of books on the subject, not just a couple paragraphs, which you also failed to comprehend.

        9. avatar tdiinva says:

          Can you point to any ungoverned areas where such an idyllic state of nature exists? Perhaps the Puntlands of Somalia with their pirates would such a paradise.

          Funny thing is that neither you nor Henry would ever survive in such an environment. In a state of anarchy you have rely on a small group for mutual protection. Nobody is going trust you to have their back. Both of you would be expelled in very short time when the group found out that you are only for yourself and not the group.

    3. avatar Anonymous says:

      So that we don’t have to? What a laugh – I would prefer them not serve.

      What exactly are they protecting me from? I can just see them marching down my road with their shields and letting me know they are “here to help.”

      1. avatar Evan B says:

        Exactly

      2. avatar jwm says:

        I understand that the judgement of our leaders in how to use our military has not always been the best. But no military? It protects you by simply being in existence. If we had no military how long before people like the Chinese or the Russians or whoever decides to move in and take the low hanging fruit?

        1. avatar peirsonb says:

          It’s one of few legitimately Constitutional things our government does, and people still b*tch because they take something like 60% of the budget….

        2. avatar Chris Mallory says:

          There is nothing in the Constitution about keeping bases in 170 other nations. There is nothing in the Constitution about regime change in some ME hellhole. There is nothing in the Constitution about nation building in some African cesspit.
          When the defense budget is cut by 3/4 and our troops are not sent or stationed outside of our territorial limits, then come back and talk to me about Constitutional mandates.

        3. avatar Chris Mallory says:

          Not no military, but one replaced with a Swiss system and forbidden from every again going overseas.

        4. avatar ropingdown says:

          Our interventions abroad, almost without exception, have been to keep markets open, to preserve access to commodities in the global trading system, and to protect the foreign assets of US corporations.

          I therefore have a complaint: The debt used to fund wars becomes the liability of the taxpayer. The benefits of using force to maintain access (to the extent they succeed) flow to corporations. The risk of an expensive adverse outcome are borne, again, by the individual taxpayers. I would like to see the war expense funded in part by a surtax on corporations. Corporate support for this surtax would allow us to determine just how keen the corporate taxpayers are about the cost/benefit realities of the particular foreign adventure.

          This has, of course, no particular tie to the post’s ‘riot control’ theme, but has a very close tie to the maintenance of a large standing army, for which politicians find new uses and new justifications.

          I see absolutely no good flowing from the Iraq war as opposed the prior regime of no-fly zones, and Afghanistan promises to leave the same bad aftertaste. “Support the soldier, but not the war.”

        5. avatar Cliff H says:

          “Not no military, but one replaced with a Swiss system and forbidden from every again going overseas.”

          Huh, what?

          Like it or not modern technology has shrunk the world around us. Missiles fired from half-way around the world can reach us in 30 minutes or less. Fascist and fanatic enemies can mount suicide attacks and have operatives in place in hours. In the 20th century there were TWO world-wide conflicts that required moving, stationing and supplying our troops on every continent except South America.

          America is currently THE military superpower in the world. It is through our good intentions and projection of power that many of the less blessed nations on Earth are not swallowed up by conquering neighbors. I shudder to even imagine what the bloody consequences would be/will be if the stabilizing influence of American military power were gone from the world.

          And you want us to withdraw everything within our own borders and stick our heads in the sand?

          Aside from the turmoil this would create all over the world, the danger of any significant standing army within our own borders was a major concern to our Founding Fathers when they created this country. The danger of NOT having a significant standing army rationally deployed world-wide in this day and age is also a significant concern. But how would anyone justify the expense of training and maintaining an army large enough to respond to external emergencies if they were all kept within our national borders, and to where would we deploy them in such emergencies, with no foreign bases at our disposal?

          A brief glance at GoogleEarth will quickly reveal that in terms of size and geography we are NOT Switzerland. The Swiss model cannot and will not keep us secure for the simple reason that no nation has found it worthwhile to expend the resources necessary to take that land-locked area, not because it couldn’t be done. A simple blockade of their mountain passes would accomplish the task without a shot fired. America does not have the luxury of being geographically or resource-wise undesirable.

          Your concept would turn the U.S. into a de fact third world nation with little or no influence in world politics. That seems both stupid and extremely dangerous to me.

        6. avatar Skeptical_Realist says:

          In response to peirsonb, DoD spending is about 20% of the federal budget, not 60%. Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are also 20% and 13-15% respectively, with those three items being the “big 3” poles in the tent.

    4. avatar Chris Mallory says:

      So, why would I have to serve? Which of my freedoms were they protecting in Afghanistan, Iraq, Viet Nam, Korea, Panama, Outer Bumfreakistan? Those people “serving” are the danger to my freedoms. Two oceans and an armed citizenry do more to protect us than all the money spent on defense in the last 20 years.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        There’s this thing nowadays called ships. Allows you to cross oceans very rapidly. I do believe in an armed citizenry, but if a foreign army doesn’t make the attempt at all because of a standing military aren’t we all ahead of the game? Or do you look forward to holding your AK over your head and yelling “Wolverines”?

        1. avatar Kiljoy616 says:

          Those so called ships do not cross in days, so no you don’t need a massive army ready to pounce on the population if it gets out of hand. I personally am not saying the military is a bad thing, but lets not kid our selves how much we spend to keep our own Roman Empire doing its thing all over the world and scaring the pants even of our allies.

        2. avatar jdkchem says:

          Having been on one of those ships it’s days and we were in no particular hurry either.

      2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Chris,

        I have the same sentiments by and large.

        There are two considerations for which I have no answer:
        (1) We need natural resources that we cannot possibly acquire in the U.S. such as rubber and some exotic elements used in electronic components. If we pull back entirely and leave the world to its own devices, will we be able to acquire those resources at a “fair” price?
        (2) If we pull out of the world and leave it to its own devices, will a giant evil coalition develop that seriously threatens the U.S. in spite of the great oceans between us? We might be hard pressed to defend ourselves such a situation. And could the aforementioned giant evil coalition conspire to completely prevent us from purchasing those natural resources that I mentioned in (1) above?

    5. avatar Marine Gunner says:

      Shoot at Marines? That might not be their smartest choice because nobody is better at shooting than Marines. They might want to consider another option.

      1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

        Really? USMC should be used to force the citizens of ——- to crawl on their knees and suck socialist/islamist c*ck. Okey dokey then, “marine gunner”.

  3. avatar joe l says:

    i see the last part as if they get fired on it gets the guys with defense weapons outta the way and lethal force can then be used without harming own guys

    1. avatar GoldiGlocks says:

      The Marine Corps is the DoD executive agent for the development of non-lethal capabilities. The shotgun being used in the video is the Mossberg 580A1. The USMC uses the pump gun for its non-lethal program. The M1014 (Benelli M4) semi-auto is issued for tasks where the use of lethal force is anticipated.

      1. avatar Cliff H says:

        And if they show up with the Mossbergs and people unaware of the distinction start shooting back, what then?

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Transition to the m16s hanging on their back.

        2. avatar Kiljoy616 says:

          Depend where in the word they are, here in the states well the sheep will fall in line. In some 3rd world, the blood bath will begin and we will be justified in bringing in the Army and building up what ever puppet regime we decide will give us what we want. I can see them been intimidating in NY and maybe England but I don’t think they will impress anyone in Somalia

          I am not against the training, but you have to wonder where the brass think this training will be used.

      2. avatar Skeptical_Realist says:

        I can’t seem to find any info on the 580A1. Perhaps you meant 590A1?

        1. avatar GoldiGlocks says:

          Yes, I fat fingerd it.

  4. avatar Henry Bowman says:

    The “protestors” interlocked arms, laying down, and shouts of “we ain’t moving” indicates peaceful (or, at least, non-violent), passive resistance… which is SOP for U.S. protestors.

    1. avatar Paul G. says:

      Everyone confuses peaceful with non-violent. Peaceful, or peaceable (as in assembly) is not defined by a lack of violence. It is defined by not “disturbing the peace”.

  5. avatar Craig says:

    I’ve seen better shield walls. They were at least tight, but not braced nearly well enough.

  6. avatar PGT says:

    the Navy uses a technique with shotguns loaded with bird shot and salt and aimed at a shallow angle at the steel decks…scatter guns…..bird shot + salt with hits below the waist = protestors not really wanting to continue their advance.

    Why is this an outrage?

    1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      Steel decks + imbedded salt = worst nightmare for the boatswain’s mates.

      1. avatar PGT says:

        given the shallow angle and the thick steel, its doubtful that was a concern (any moreso than the salt water that gets washed over the deck)

    2. avatar Kiljoy616 says:

      What protestors are the Squids going to stop? I am all ears. Really I want to know does the Navy have that many protestors problems.

      1. avatar The Last Marine out says:

        yes the Navy M/P are VERY GOOD at Riot control ,I have seen them in action oversea…..

      2. avatar Skeptical_Realist says:

        Tea Party protesters.

        Baddum, Tsh.

  7. avatar John A. Smith says:

    Pretty sad. I remember when the saying used to be “Aim for the blue helmet.” I suppose those days are long gone.

    1. avatar lolinski says:

      Those days may be gone for you but not for many people in southern and eastern Europe. Don’t forget the African continent.

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      For all intents and purposes, these gyrenes ARE the blue helmets.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        Or the marines and other servicemen are keeping the blue helmets away.

  8. avatar Roll says:

    Marine Security Guards? Marines (and most MIL)in general are not to be F^cked with…

  9. avatar Mk10108 says:

    As a former Marine (I do not scribe to once a Marine always a Marine) I can say this exercise is disturbing. Embassies have a small force, usually less than 20 and will never go outside to enforce anything.

    I find no reason to conduct this type training..

    1. avatar Skyler says:

      Riot control is important in many scenarios, “former Marine.”

      My unit did identical training when we were in Afghanistan. I took a lot of pictures of it in fact. I recall riot control being critical to operations in Iraq as well, but not where I was.

      1. avatar Kiljoy616 says:

        Well instruct us old timers so how many of these did you do to the populous; love to hear how it went down and how many rifles where pointed at the PEACEFUL locals. //yes its sarcasm

    2. avatar jdkchem says:

      Well EX-Marine, We were doing this training back in the early 80’s. It may upset you pogues but this type of training is nothing new.

      1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

        The most “disturbing” thing in this video is that some stupid f**k orders them to lay down on TOP of the shields in front of protestors. Clearly something only a f**king moron with a college education could think up. I was never taught to do some stupid sh*t like that.

  10. avatar jollyroger says:

    I received riot control training as part of a standard work up for a MEU. I was issued a moss 500 with a 14 inch barrel and trained for rubber slugs. Its pretty standard when embassies around the world are always going to hell and we even used riot control in Afghanistan to avoid using lethal force

    1. avatar Ken says:

      My thoughts as well. Having been there as well in another capacity, for riot control the line of defense behind the shields is typically NOT lethal.

      1. avatar Paelorian says:

        Yeah, when I see pump shotguns in a riot-control context I generally assume nonlethal rounds. This video would have been incendiary if they were aiming M4s, not beanbags. The whole idea here is to avoid killing people. Considering that a huge part of modern conflict is political, “winning over hearts and minds”, killing people, even if justified, damages the mission by turning public opinion against us and breeding resentment and hate that leads to new insurgents and terrorists. Best to use nonlethal tactics against violent protesters and rioters whenever possible. Israel is a good example in how they bend over backwards to minimize their use of violence, because they know that anyone they kill is going to be called a martyr and their death used to justify more violence against Israel. See also the IDF Purity of Arms doctrine.

    2. avatar jdkchem says:

      I was doing this back in the 80’s when we were still MAU’s and before Marine Security Force became FASTCO. Semper Fi

    3. avatar Marine Gunner says:

      OoRAH! But when the situation goes south, a quick transition can be made from rubber bullets and riot control to real bullets and combat patrol.

  11. avatar jollyroger says:

    Also MPs are trained in riot control. They deal with protesters who block the main gate making getting to work a joy. And in my 5 years in the Corps MPs showed up twice with riot gear ready after we got back from a month long field op, and shortly after my first deployment. The reason being groups of young drunk Marines in the infantry like to party. Hard.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      This sort of training is NOT about foreign embassies. This sort of training is about US.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        And we should accept your theory, why?

        1. avatar Kiljoy616 says:

          Because it is better than “if the marines find them selves in Somalia they may need it” that is why.

    2. avatar Marine Gunner says:

      Actually, I witnessed a riot and MP response at the Quantico E-Club. A fight broke out and the OD and a couple of MPs showed up immediately. The OD stood on a table and shouted an order to stop the fighting. And it did. For about five seconds everything stopped and everybody sort of looked at the OD standing on the table and the OD looked surprised that they actually listened. Then, somebody threw a glass or pitcher at the OD and it was on. My buddies and I decided that this might be a good time to make our exit. As we were reaching the sidewalk, a couple of trucks loaded with the guard mount and MPs arrived and ran up the stairs into the club. I heard it got really ugly and a couple of guys went to the brig.

  12. avatar Peter says:

    I was thinking (hoping) rubber slugs or bean-bags myself. Then again, I’m an optimist.

    1. avatar DisThunder says:

      The fact they were all shouldering shotguns and not rifles supports that conclusion.

  13. avatar 2hotel9 says:

    Really? Does the USMC no longer have medium and heavy machine guns?

    1. avatar ST says:

      Machine gunning a crowd of looters,protesters and rock throwers is poor tactics. That’s a good way to inspire an armed rebellion.

      1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

        Tell that to the survivors of the Tehran Embassy, I’m certain it will make them feel better. Marines are killers of men, not cops. Attack Marines and you should fully expect to die, not be treated like a pack of college kids throwing a hissy fit.

        1. avatar Chris Mallory says:

          All the more reason to keep Marines unarmed while they are in CONUS.

        2. avatar jwm says:

          rines are disarmed in CONUS. Weapons in the armory and ammo locked away. Violates the hell outta 2a, but you apparently support a lot of restrictions on the constitution.

        3. avatar Marine Gunner says:

          OooRAH! Exactly.

  14. avatar Logan says:

    I hope those guys are up to speed on the Posse Comitatus Act. The military is not to be used for domestic law enforcement.

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      The Posse Comitatus Act applies only to the Army and by derrivation the Air Force. It applies to the Department of the Navy by policy not statute. It is much easier to get an exception to policy then it is to change the law.

    2. avatar GoldiGlocks says:

      They are training for overseas deployment. Marines do “forward presence” and “crisis response”. In addition to the aforementioned embassy reinforcement, they do humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, and non-combatant evacuations. Their is a potential for riots and civil unrest in each of these mission tasks. If a foreign nations government had a handle on it, the Marines would not be deployed there in the first place.

      I did this exact training 20 years ago. It has been conducted continiously for the decades before and since.

    3. avatar William Burke says:

      WHAT Posse Comitatus? Obama will overrule it by Executive Fiat, whenever he feels like it.

    4. avatar Kiljoy616 says:

      Like most 20 year olds will care, good luck hoping.

  15. avatar jerry says:

    Not sure what the problem is. I had the same training when I was an Army MP. Not every uniformed employee or agent of the government is automatically the bad guy.

    1. avatar MudPuppy says:

      And the Military Police in Guantanamo had to put down several such demonstrations and riots during the Cuban refugee crisis in the early 90s.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        Before they had goatherds to waterboard.

  16. avatar The Last Marine out says:

    We trained for riot control with fixed bayonets, Would we kill , You best believe it…. A real riot is bad news. been there ,done it……..

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Killing American citizens. Semper effing Fi.

      1. avatar Drew says:

        That is entirely rhetorical and you know it. and about killing American citizens, what do you think all your agitating would lead to if it ever lead to anything? All your blustering about the reason for the 2nd and your attempts to cast some as the enemy is attempting to justify the killing if Americans. By you apparently. I understand very well that the 2nd is in large part designed to allow us to make war against our own people, but un like you it seems I don’t relish that idea. For me and most others the thought of civil war is terrible enough that we would rather fight in the courts and the polls than the streets.

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          FAIL. Never before have so many words and thoughts that were not my own been laid at my doorstep. It won’t stick. Grow the eff up.

      2. avatar Marine Gunner says:

        Burke, I don’t know what you’re smoking son but you obviously got some bad s**t. Marines do not deploy against Americans.

        1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          Marines have in fact been used against American citizens, as has US Army. Opening eyes IS a viable tactical option.

  17. avatar jwm says:

    The riot training we recieved 40 years ago was much harsher than this. Pepper foggers, loaded batons, bean bag rounds out of a 40 mike mike and live ammo with bayonets.

    I noted that the shotgun carriers had M16s slung. No doubt the shotguns were loaded with less lethal options.

    We have enough real world problems without this site going all Alex Jones on us.

    1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

      I think the main thing he is critical of is the stupid sh*t they do at the end.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        I think he was implying they were about to unleash deadly force at the end.

        1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          Throwing away the advantage that the shield line gives is just dumb. Clearly some college educated moron thought that move up.

        2. avatar GoldiGlocks says:

          If the video continued it would have shown 1 volley of non-lethal projectiles fired, and then the shield wall quickly raised again. Every tactic is situationaly dependent and executed based on the mission orders, rules of engagement, and directions of the on-scene commander. This one is not that dangerous if the mob has been pushed back to a reasonable distance in front of the shield wall.

  18. avatar tim.m says:

    robert, you are blowing this way out of proportion. Allot of what the US military is doing now is pretty close to policing (with the exception of outside the cities and towns of afghanistan). especially MPs and Marines, heck marines are used as embassy security. its pretty easy to come up with some sort of a scenario where the embassy may be the scene of a riot (current embassies in Egypt or the Ukraine) at times all it could take is some US citizen or military member doing something stupid (example: US personnel rapes someone in Korea or Japan and the locals get pissed and go to the base or embassy)

    Take a chill pill they arent sending the Marines for your guns…. hell most Marines i know would be there helping u keep your guns.

    1. avatar DisThunder says:

      The Marines I know would sooner piss on their mothers than turn on their friends and family. And the ones that would show up, to obey some kind of bullshit unlawful order? They’re going to have a lot of extra riot shields.

    2. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      “Allot of what the US military is doing now is pretty close to policing”

      Yes… that’s exactly the problem. The U.S. military has absolutely no business policing the world.

      1. avatar tdiinva says:

        Outside of the residual war if Afghanistan that will come to an end this year the US has abandoned the policing role. As a result chaos is becoming the norm. If you don’t think that will have adverse effect on the United States then you are a fool. By virtue of our size the US has a huge footprint in the world. The only way to prevent foreign entanglements is the complete withdrawal of all US political, military and commercial relations with the world outside of North America. What you might see as the right to trade with other nations, their adversaries sees as supporting their enemies and they will act accordingly.

        Question: What was the cause of the War of 1812 and our entry into the Frist World War?

        1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

          Please don’t take my refusal to engage with you any more as a concession to your argument. You are simply a waste of my time.

        2. avatar tdiinva says:

          Please, your scorn is lame. True scorn would be to totally ignore. Typical sociopathic behavior.

        3. avatar Chris Mallory says:

          So, when are we bringing our troops home from Germany, Japan, Korea, and Outer Bumfreakistan?

          The War of 1812 was started in large part by our desire to take Canada, God knows why we would want it.

          The entry into WW1 was due to Wilson’s Anglophilia.

        4. avatar tdiinva says:

          The War of 1812 was an extension of the Napoleonic Wars. Its root cause was the UK’s blockade of the Continent and the need to man Royal Navy ships. They interpreted the US desire to trade with French occupied Europe as support for Napoleon rather than mere desire to make money. They also refused to recognize American citizenship for anybody born in the US prior to the Treaty of Paris or someone who emmigrated to the US afterwards.

          While is true that Wilson was an Anglophile, it was the interference with trade that brought the United State into conflict with Germany. Had Germany not attacked US flagged shipping the US would have stayed out of the war. The Germans felt that American ships carry sustenance and war materials to their enemies were fair game. Americans, even those who were pro-British would have been more than willing trade with the Central Powers if they could get away with it but the impracticality of breaking the British blockade made such trade with the Central Powers moot. Early in the war the US did protested British stop, search and seize operations directed at US flagged ships trying to trade directly or indirectly with Germany. The Germans did not take direct steps to deliberately attack US flagged ships until they resumed unrestricted submarine warfare in 1917.

          In both cases it was trade that led to US involvement in both conflicts. I also note that a lot of the pro-Confederate sentiments on the part of the UK and France during the Civil War arose from the Union blockade of the South. The inability to obtain southern cotton caused economic dislocation and widespread unemployment in the UK and France as the supply of American cotton was cut off.

          If you want to interact with the world economically and you have the economic footprint of the US expect to get involved in other peoples wars. Imagine that in 2025, the Chinese and the Japanese go to war over oil rights in the Senkakus. This could actually happen much sooner. Do you think Japan would let us continue our economic relations with China? If we trade we will end up fighting. If you don’t want to fight don’t trade; and don’t complain about your lowered standard living either.

        5. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          It is a global economy, people are simply going to have to accept that and get over their isolationist stupidity.

        6. avatar William Burke says:

          Spoken like the true fascist you are.

        7. avatar tdiinva says:

          William: If you are directing that comment at me then I guess actual history is Fascist. Perhaps if you spent a mere 9,990 hours researching the Kennedy assassination and devoted 10 of those hours to the history of War of 1812 you might know how silly your pejorative comment is..

  19. avatar Kevin R. Mussack says:

    The Phalanx formation (shield wall), in use since the 25th century BCE.

    1. avatar KCK says:

      With the archers, I mean 870’s, right behind

  20. avatar lolinski says:

    Why did they line up with their heads pointed forward in the end? Doesn’t that open you up to headshots and the classic brick to the head?

    1. avatar ropingdown says:

      The heads have helmets. The ass? Not so much.

      1. avatar lolinski says:

        At least put up the shields to protect the guys behind you.

  21. avatar ST says:

    Given that our troops usually arrive immediately before or not long after a foreign government falls, it’s a good idea to have a few troops trained in riot control during the meantime.

    I’m thinking of a sitatuon like post-Saddam Iraq where there wasn’t an LE presence after the dictator was removed. If we have to perform surgery on a regime like that in the years to come-and we likely will again someday- the military will have to play cop until an indigenous force can be trained up. Battle tactics for invading a country are far different from law enforcement.

    1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      Let’s not forget that the US Government helped Saddam-the-Dictator seize power in the first place.

      1. avatar tdiinva says:

        Wrong. He was a Soviet ally, They helped him gain power.

        1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          What confuses nitwits is the small fact that we supported Iraq during their war with Iran, sold them TOW missiles and gave them a great deal of satellite/aerial reconn materials. The Russians supported the Ba’athists, not just Iraq but also in Syria, Lebanon and Jordan as a counter to our support of Pahlavi Shah and the House of Saud and other ME countries. US being tight with the Turks was what really set Russians off. And I say Russians not Soviets because Russia has been in The Game for centuries, same as the leaders of the major Tribes and countries in ME. Another point you can never get across to nitwit leftards who screech about how evil America is.

        2. avatar tdiinva says:

          Henry is not a leftist, although he will parrot some leftist arguments. He is a “sovereign individual” who recognizes no authority other than his own.

        3. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          In other words a classic leftard.

        4. avatar Matt in FL says:

          No, tdiinva has it right.

          Protip: Not everyone with whom you disagree is automatically a leftard.

        5. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          I am reading what Henry is writing, and it screams leftard. Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck,,,,,,,,,,,,,

          This is a tactic the left excels at, posting comments at places they consider hostile by pretending to be “one of the guys” but just not in lockstep with everyone else. Now he will be all indignant, or try the “I’m just going to ignore you” tack. In the end just read what it is posting and ponder on it. I see the exact same stuff in workshop posts at HuffPo, DailyKos, DemocratUnderground and others.

          You have to know your enemy’s tactics and methods, and I been studying leftards since the 1970s.

        6. avatar Matt in FL says:

          Believe what you want, but as he’s been posting here easily a year longer than you, and has 3x the comments, I’m comfortable with my assessment of his position.

          For the record, I’m not using that comment history difference to give him more basic credibility than you have, I’m just saying that I’ve been reading his words long enough to believe that I understand who he is.

        7. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          Fair enough. From the comments I have seen from him in other threads I would not trust him, damned sure would not turn my back on him. I know quite a few people that are running this “sovereign” schtick and I do not trust any of them. Duplicitous is about the nicest way I can describe them.

  22. avatar John Taylor says:

    This may be a ‘much ado about nothing’ situation. We trained in riot control tactics as part of (QRF) ‘landing party’ training at least as far back as the ’70s, for embassy and foreign base protection. (Of course, it is also true that a riot is a riot, be it foreign or domestic, from a tactical standpoint.)

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Google “Operation Garden Plot”.

  23. avatar 2hotel9 says:

    And why would you not just have second rank shooters fire BETWEEN the shield men? Dropping the cover provided by the shields is stupid. And where are their fire hose men? Molotov cocktails tend to set people on fire.

    1. avatar Jack in MT says:

      Seriously. Why wouldn’t you have the front rank take a knee to lower the shield line and then deploy the shotguns over the top? Proning out on top of the shields just means it takes that much longer to crawl back off of them in order to redeploy the shield line when the shotguns go dry.

      1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

        Yep, this is clearly some stupid sh*t thought up by a college educated moron, and you can bet it gets people injured and killed.

  24. avatar stitch1870 says:

    Non-lethal/riot packages are routine prior to units deploying on MEU’s or in other capacities. As far as having an issue with the ending of the video, the shotguns are loaded with a variety of LTL rounds for incapacitation and the third or fourth line carries an M16/M4 for deadly force in the chance that shit goes bad and it goes bad quick. And no, these Marines nor the ones I served with would indiscriminately fire upon anyone unless they were a direct threat to our safety. Our job was to f^ck up the foreign guys not the domestic ones

  25. avatar ropingdown says:

    When the LAPD walked away from the task of controlling the ’92 riots, among the Guard called in were Marines. My personal take is that the LAPD should have been docked the cost of the federal help, and the Koreans should have been reimbursed for their warning-shot ammo.

    I’m more concerned about the armed civilian federal SWAT guys and their no-knocks than about riot control. Why a mass rampaging through a neighborhood shouldn’t be stopped in an orderly way is beyond my comprehension. Peaceful demonstrations rarely trigger call-outs of the National Guard. If you want to pick a fight with some aspect of anti-riot measures, pick on the provocateurs, federally trained and otherwise. That isn’t the military’s specialty. Review the Kent State records and the belief of many that the shooting was provoked by a man with a .45 and a gas mask essentially working as a confidential informant for the local PD.

    1. avatar The Last Marine out says:

      You must understand Marines from boot Camp on are trained to kick butts, KILL everyone , no thinking about what the other side stands for or believes …BEING GONG HO means get them with pleasure …Been in a real riot. It gets wild fast and heads must be CRACKED and fast… as PATON said make the other guys DIE for his country.. This keeps your WIA and KIA down… and the who or where does not count….

  26. avatar WI Patriot says:

    Not a big deal, when stationed in the ROK(Republic of Korea) in the early ’80’s, I was part of a QRF/RRF(Quick Reactionary Force/Ready Reactionary Force) unit, and we practiced for civil disobedience all the time…granted, we were in a foreign country, but the premise is still the same…no biggie…

  27. avatar Paul Brown says:

    Robert,

    As a Marine (2005-2010) I can attest that this kind of training has been normal for some time, and it is always presented with the backdrop that the Marine Corps is deployed all over the world and often has to deal with peacekeeping situations where this sort of riot control has to take place. These specific Marines are in Okinawa, Japan training for a MEU (Marine Expeditionary Unit). In other words, they are about to embark on a sea voyage for many months on end, in which they will stop at several locations around the Pacific. In some circumstances they may be called upon by various other nations for help.

    I understand it is easy to get paranoid about anything that any part of the government does, but remember: Marines swore an oath to protect the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Their reason for existing is defending against foreign threats. No training that the Marine Corps conducts is with its own citizens as threats in mind. Is that something you would necessarily know as an outsider? No. And we should be keeping a close eye on our government. But if SHTF so to speak, Marines will be on your side, not against you.

    S/F

    Paul

    1. avatar USMC0321 says:

      Paul is dead on.

      Fantastic misrepresentation of the facts behind this video on ttag’s part. If you go to the video on YouTube or dvids and actually read the description, the information is presented. All MEUs receive this training prior to float. Line cos receive the riot control and NEO training in the event of security issues at embassies.

      BTW, this has been going on since at least the 80s as part of MEU and MEU(SOC) pre-deployment training and MCCRE for UDP.

  28. avatar Pedro Of NYC says:

    I’ve read a couple of posts & 1 perspective I would like to throw out there is this. When the SHTF many on these Marines, Army, National Guard & even cops will ALL defect to our side. Why? because when the sh%t will be hyper-inflation & the dollar in the pocket of an LEO, will become just as worthless as a dollar in anyone or any citizen’s pocket.
    So all the riot gear, all the militarization of police, all the scenarios of the LEO putting their boots on our necks (though its plausible) may not become real because what reward will the LEO’s have besides a paycheck. Milk will cost them $200 a gallon just as it will non-leo.
    My 2 cents.

    1. avatar Skyler says:

      “Our side?”

      I don’t know who you are, but no Marines will defect to any other “side.” We are on the side of the Constitution, and that is all.

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      The armed forces and police will follow their orders. And that’s that.

      1. avatar Drew says:

        That’s the only assumption you can make. If it ever dose go down some damn fools are going to bite it thinking they are buddies with the guys in khakis. They won’t be a great loss for either side. Also, sides? Someone has apparently not read up on civil wars.

  29. avatar Charlie says:

    Looks like some training that they might be doing as MSG (Marine Security Guard) or a similar unit.
    On another not I don’t see a lot of Marines in my unit being the type of people to blindly obey orders, epically orders to do disarm people or things of that nature. Not everyone in the military or everybody with a badge wants to take our guns, not saying they don’t exist but I’m not seeing it in this video.

  30. avatar jollyroger says:

    You know what I hate about the anti gunners? Their ignorance fueled fear. This post saying the Marines are training for civilian riot control in the States to enforce a dictatorship is the same as saying “the shoulder thing that goes up” and “thirty caliber ammunition clips.” If the gun grabbers knew anything about guns they wouldn’t sound nearly as stupid
    Perhaps learning a little about the Marine Corps capabilities and their wide variety of missions would help understand why this training is useful. Knowing what a MEU is and its mission, as well as understanding the reasoning behind the Marine corps being the nations fastest reacting force on a global scale and what this means Marines have to train for.
    Semper Fi

  31. avatar Model66 says:

    Coming to a Police Department near you!!

    1. avatar jwm says:

      You must have missed the 60’s. police departments have this gear and training and have had them for a very long time.

      1. avatar Model66 says:

        🙂 I was born in ’82….I missed the 70s, also.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Lord, I got kids older than you. Sigh.

  32. avatar 2hotel9 says:

    And in the name of full disclosure, yea, I had riot control training in Army. We were detailed to Ft Smith to guard Cuban “refugees” from the Marialis Boat Lift and got 5 days training for it, handling rioters, taking people into custody using non-lethal methods, segregating violent from non-violent, all the fun sh*t. Too bad we did not, for the most part, speak their language. Would have made things a bit easier.

    1. avatar Roll says:

      To me violence is a universal language: the smart ones “should” learn quickly and back off if they are unwilling to deal with it; the dumb ones…well the dumb ones will learn the hard way 🙂

      1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

        The Cuban “refugees” we dealt with fell into the dumb ones category. Castro emptied his prisons with the “humanitarian” release to America. Then we had to deal with it, and still are.

  33. avatar Marc Norman says:

    I’ve been out of the USMC for 22 years. We trained in riot control back then too. We are unpopular in some far flung locations. It’s part of the mission.

  34. avatar Bill says:

    The Marine’s have a very valid reason for practicing riot control, as other posters have stated here.

    If they start doing this on US Soil, they need to know which side they have chosen to stand with.

  35. avatar Sam Spade says:

    Like has been said upstream. I was, in a former life, an unvoluntary soldier (read draftee). We trained for riot control with bayonets and machine guns. Sorry, no live ammo on the line–the machine guns and snipers were behind to protect the soldiers in formation–the ones with bayonets– from gunfire from the crowd.

    The army’s purpose was to protect federal institutions. In those days left-wing crowds caused quite a bit of destruction, and the only real federal police force were the FBI and T-men. Not much good for riot control.

    The reason–they said–for no ammo in the line was that a favorite tactic for left-wingers was to hang to the back of the crowd, link arms, and push them into a violent confrontation. Oh, and fire randomly toward the front trying to get soldiers to fire indiscriminately into the crowd. Baby-killers we were anyway. Left-wingers have absolutely no conscience for the deaths of innocents. None.

  36. avatar Samuel Leoon Suggs says:

    Oh the marine cause the riots they combat I see, they don’t protest the presence of U.S embassy’s it’s just the marines in them got it carry on.

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

      I’ve read that four times, at least, and still can’t figure out what message you’re trying to get across.

      1. avatar Samuel Leoon Suggs says:

        yeah sorry about that, admittedly it is a failed attempt at sarcastic commentary. However let me explain: Robert stated: “Unrest that’s occasionally sparked by the presence of U.S. Marines” deflecting blame for riots off the people perpetrating the riot and onto the Marines. I was attempting to respond by pointing out that most of the riots Marines are trained to deal with are caused by the presence of United States embassy’s not the presence of the Marine embassy guards in and around the embassy’s. The “you put troops in their so then the bad stuff showed up” meme Roberts was perpetuating is a classic mainstream media tactic. a blame the response not the problem sort of thing. (Please don’t grammar nazi me)

        1. avatar Matt in FL says:

          Got it now. I just couldn’t figure it out is all.

  37. avatar Samuel Leoon Suggs says:

    Just Robert kicking the hornets nest as usual. Is this your idea of entertainment?

  38. avatar H.C. says:

    I usually chime in on the comments of soldiers, marines, etc, turning on their own countrymen and blindly following orders… most of the other officers, NCOs, and soldiers would never do such a thing, officers and NCOs especially, my rational being that you have a little money and some marketable skills or family base to turn to when you say “no thanks” and resign. Anyone who is going to go hungry or be out of a job would be more likely to follow orders and quell and insurrection or rebellion of some kind. In short, most guys I serve with are constitutional purists and would not break their oath to support it.

    That being said, I served with one guy who supported weapons registration and assured me “no one is going to come for your guns, dude, its just better if we know where it all is”… I mean, WTF? I asked “to what end do you need to know and information is generally gathered to act upon, why else would you need to know? to feel good?” He had no response…. he was from CT by the way, go figure…

    1. avatar Samuel Leoon Suggs says:

      Their are people with that particular anti-constitutional opinion in every walk of life; it’s knee jerk and doesn’t really make them any more interested in firing on American citizens.

  39. avatar Samuel Leoon Suggs says:

    Look this is just not new, it’s just a way for the marines to preform a vital part of their defensive and quick reaction missions against people who are violent but don’t warrant the use of good old deadly force. You want this alternative too exist in an embassy or military base riot; I know it doesn’t make you feel warm inside but riot control is a legitimate response; protester control is not and yes the distinction is a difficult one.

  40. avatar former water walker says:

    The whole world wondered after the Beast. It’s here & Mr Farago is correct to be concerned. So your opinion doesn’t cou nt unless you’re ex military? I barely missed going to Vietnam. Happy you think the military will side with you. Good luck with that

    1. avatar jwm says:

      The beast? Is that like Godzilla? Barely missed?

      1. avatar Samuel Leoon Suggs says:

        I think he may be under the influence of some creativity enhancing chemicals.

  41. avatar DBM says:

    Of course the shotguns are loaded with rubber buckshot. Maybe. I just saw some pictures of the Venezuelan food riots and the cops are shooting the protestors at long range with real buckshot and birdshot at close range. Puts a nice round bloody hole in the skin. In some of the picts the buckshot can be seen sticking out of the wounds on peoples heads. All it will take is an interuption in the food supply/electricity/water caused by a natural disaster or terrorist attack and that will happen here too.

    1. avatar Samuel Leoon Suggs says:

      You actually have that reversed; they are shooting the protesters at excessively close range with rubber riot ammo designed for a stand off distance. They may also be peppering them with bird shot as has been done on numerous occasions by riot cops; but doing the same with real buckshot isn’t possible it retains too much energy over distance too be used in such a way.

  42. avatar Samuel Leoon Suggs says:

    Robert, do you honestly believe this training has no place in the mission of the United States Marine Corps? Seriously if this is just a little meat for the comment section that’s fine but I need an honest answer here.

    1. avatar Dave says:

      I have to agree. All military branches train for this. I don’t see anything “incendiary” about this, but maybe that’s because I’m a Veteran.

    2. avatar Jus Bill says:

      There’s a need for this in the military. Think Benghazi. Marines guard embassies. The Army has facilities in places where men marry their daughters before puberty and have affairs with the livestock. Those people are NOT going to put flowers in the barrels.

      1. avatar Samuel Leoon Suggs says:

        Actually think Haitian international aid mission, Benghazi was an armed attack so that was more a “Beltfed bitch” situation than a rubber buckshot and shields deal.

  43. avatar KCK says:

    Riot control is primarily actions against non-firearm equipped civilians.
    Even in a foreign country, we have no reason to engage our military against civilians.
    True, insurgents blur the line between combatants and civilians but the the presence of an AK-47 quickly clears that up.
    A civilian riot is often an action of the people against an oppresive Govt. Let’s not have our boys between the people and thier government.
    Not our job ouside the country, not the Marines job inside our country.
    Anybody see function creep here?

  44. avatar Ralph says:

    So the plan is: cuff ’em now, kill ’em later. What a great system!

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Yeah… there’s that.

  45. avatar Jus Bill says:

    Seems to me like the Brits tried that on us a couple of times and it didn’t end well for them at all. Reverting to 1700s’ TTPs? Really?

  46. avatar dan says:

    as an old salt…I think all the ‘peace’ will have gone out of any future protest….in this country….shields and shotguns and ‘marines’ will not be met with friendly ‘flowers’…..imho…Semper Fi

  47. avatar The Last Marine out says:

    If we were to have bad riots say because the banks/money died most people will be crying for the Marines/Army to help… Riots are not a Civil War or is it a attack on 2A…..People need to put their heads on straight. and many people will support the military with arms to restore order…and the American people will want law & order and safety to return ….and the people on handouts will have no legal grounds ……….

  48. avatar benny says:

    Le sigh.
    RF, turn down the paranoia knob, My friend. After reading this I called up a buddy of mine who IS a Marine security guard. He reaffirms just about everything Skylar and the other Marines here have stated. Riot control has been around for awhile.
    Some of you guys make me wonder if ANYTHING others do isn’t an attack on the 2a or some government conspiracy or training to herd us to the FEMA camps. We have this wonderful thing called OUTSIDE. Also, to sit there and act like you know what military men will do or think, without ever being in The military yourself is pretty damn ignorant. Lol I’m amazed at some of you guys. And you wonder why the left thinks we’re all batshit crazy?

  49. avatar Tom says:

    Ground forces have been training in riot control pretty much since the end of WWII. This isn’t just used in far off war zones or on the chance that the NG and police forces are unable to here in the US. These tactics and equipment have been used in many areas of the world in instances where there are riots at a military station/base in a foreign country and on occasion a government will have riots that they are not capable of dealing with and will ask for our assistance via base personnel.

    I can think of the use of the 42nd in Germany as an example. Watched video of that after an old 1sg told us about it. I don’t think I have ever witnessed a riot response team be more effective or more scary in my life. I still think of that damn steel striking the ground sound every time I think of riot teams.

    Anyway, nothing in that video is new. The military does not train like your local PD and the mindset is very different. There is a reason that military forces aren’t used as internal police in any place that has much sense about it. I don’t think we would want to count the graves of the people who thought that a military wouldn’t kill the citizens of their own nation. That includes right here in the good ol US. History has taught us that when you train people to kill for a living, form tight groups and follow orders, then place them up against another group of people bad things will happen.

  50. avatar ken says:

    Riot control training has been with us since MacArthur put down the Veterans Riots in the 20’s it became more visible in the 60’s for a Base reaction force with all the hubbub going on!
    It Seems as though our Elected leader’s fear the People, and are trying too provoke a civil war so they can be absolute ruler’s and this is.a hint at the use off force by our troops in Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act unless martial law is declared

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      That’s my take; you are not alone.

      1. avatar The Last Marine out says:

        Riot control has been here since the Civil War, The Union Army was sent to New York City to put down the DRAFT riots as many in the north did not support the war against the south (other Americans). the biggest support was new people right off the boats (Ireland and Germany)…..the troops were Union combat troops pulled from the fighting it was so bad lots fires and killing in NYC……

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          Yep; Manhattan, in particular, was a hotbed of Confederate sympathizers and resisters to the War of Northern Aggression.

          When you diss NYC, you should remember that it was not the kind of place it is now. And it could change again. Not anytime soon, but it could happen.

  51. avatar JLR84 says:

    Sometimes I find myself wondering if the Posse Comitatus Act, restricting the ability of the armed forces for the purpose of domestic law enforcement, has actually had the perverse effect of encouraging police militarization.

    I think most of us will agree that there are at least some occasions where tactical teams and riot-control are necessary, even if they are vastly overused. Of course once every local police department has that ability, they’re going to want to use it.

    At least there would be a layer of separation if the local police had to call in the military to handle these types of situations.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      “Sometimes I find myself wondering if the Posse Comitatus Act, restricting the ability of the armed forces for the purpose of domestic law enforcement, has actually had the perverse effect of encouraging police militarization.”

      I can’t see how. Can you tell me how? Posse Comitatus, like much of the law that is designed to protect us, is basically ignored by the power structure.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email