Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

appal_jack

(3,813 posts)

9. Unconstitutional laws are unconstitutional. n/t

Reply to Ikonoklast (Reply #8)

Wed May 15, 2013, 05:34 PM

May 2013

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

35 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Pentagon Unilaterally Grants Itself Authority Over �Civil Disturbances' [View all] appal_jack May 2013 OP

It is distrubing and people even here were cheering this on......you have no rights. bowens43 May 2013 #1

+1000 ! nt snappyturtle May 2013 #26

The article confuses the USC with the CFR: struggle4progress May 2013 #33

Thanks for this useful info, s4p appal_jack May 2013 #34

The link in the article is to US Code as of January 2012. Three things wrong with this: leveymg May 2013 #2

See response #4 appal_jack May 2013 #5

You must have missed this part... Ikonoklast May 2013 #3

Right, because the gov't NEVER oversteps its authority. appal_jack May 2013 #6

Please show one, ONE time in this nation's history that the military arbitrarily decided to Ikonoklast May 2013 #8

Unconstitutional laws are unconstitutional. n/t appal_jack May 2013 #9

You are correct. Ikonoklast May 2013 #14

Then why do they need this? woo me with science May 2013 #15

There have been emergency plans in place that deal with a catastrophic event such as this since the Ikonoklast May 2013 #16

That's brazenly untrue, that nothing is new. Of course it's something new. woo me with science May 2013 #17

OFFS. The military cannot *grant* itself anything. Ikonoklast May 2013 #18

When you don't have an answer, cry "libertarian." woo me with science May 2013 #19

There have ALWAYS been plans that included the military in case of catastrophe. Ikonoklast May 2013 #22

No, you are absurdly attempting to defend a change woo me with science May 2013 #23

Read up on the history of the COG plans first. Ikonoklast May 2013 #24

Your arguments here should embarrass you, but especially that last gem of a post. woo me with science May 2013 #35

Well, if we get hit by an asteroid cluster... aquart May 2013 #31

Before posting this, I investigated whether it was nuttery or not. I think it's legit. appal_jack May 2013 #4

You're on the right track and thanks for posting. The militarization of the local police function is byeya May 2013 #12

+1 woo me with science May 2013 #20

+1 nt snappyturtle May 2013 #27

The Pentagon issued the regulation pursuant to a federal statute geek tragedy May 2013 #7

The Final Rule was published in the Federal Register 4/12 with effective date of 5/13/13 pinboy3niner May 2013 #10

Here's what appears to be the gist of it. Authorizes local commanders to take action without orders leveymg May 2013 #11

The author of the article is wrong. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #13

I agree that the author's second paragraph is awkward. appal_jack May 2013 #25

another heaven05 May 2013 #21

Succinct and to the point. I think that is exactly what has happened. nt snappyturtle May 2013 #28

At what times in modern history defacto7 May 2013 #29

We shouldn't even have a standing army mwrguy May 2013 #30

I think we can date this back to 1994, at least muriel_volestrangler May 2013 #32