• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Martial Law?

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Well, apparently "martial law" in the same sense has been used quite a few times throughout US history. Martial law in the United States - Wikipedia

I don't really understand the issue. If things are badly out of control, and large portions of cities become unsafe for inhabitants due to rioters, I think use of the military in some of these areas is justified.

I think it's justified when you start seeing stores being looted and destroyed. Trump is blaming Antifa and if he declares them an enemy combatant, soldiers can legally shoot and start killing them.

Remember all enemies domestic and foreign.

I think the best course of action would be to get to the negotiating table and right now. Trump is not playing games with these people anymore.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
That depends on how they use the National Guard. Technically if you have a curfew, you got martial law. The police are basically an extension of the military anyways except their task is to keep all civilians in line.

I was wonder about that. Beverly Hills has a 1PM curfew. o_O
Seems pretty close to martial law.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Well, apparently "martial law" in the same sense has been used quite a few times throughout US history. Martial law in the United States - Wikipedia

I don't really understand the issue. If things are badly out of control, and large portions of cities become unsafe for inhabitants due to rioters, I think use of the military in some of these areas is justified.
You might consider what the term "martial law" actually means, along with one other somewhat salient bit of information.

Martial law means the suspension of ordinary law, or "the law of the land," and hands it over to the military. ("Martial" and "military" are extremely closely related words.)

And that second bit of information? In the United States, the head of the military, with the right to command anyone within it, is the President. That's what the title "Commander in Chief" means.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I was wonder about that. Beverly Hills has a 1PM curfew. o_O
Seems pretty close to martial law.
Martial laws the same exact thing as a police state. That's pretty much what people are living in right now in the areas that have the most upheaval.
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
If he just says: "If the state governors don't put down the rebellion, I will." I'll continue watching TV reporting and eating my popcorn.
If he says: "I have just signed an executive order declaring myself God Almighty." I'm getting my gun.

I'd laugh if he declared himself God Almighty. Although I think at that point it would definitely be time for him to get a psychiatric evaluation.
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
You might consider what the term "martial law" actually means, along with one other somewhat salient bit of information.

Martial law means the suspension of ordinary law, or "the law of the land," and hands it over to the military. ("Martial" and "military" are extremely closely related words.)

And that second bit of information? In the United States, the head of the military, with the right to command anyone within it, is the President. That's what the title "Commander in Chief" means.

Right. I think "martial law" with that definition, may possibly be justified in some localized neighborhoods of some cities where the rioting has gotten out of control.
 

Terry Sampson

Well-Known Member
may possibly be justified in some local neighborhoods of some cities
Right. And when it's declared in some localize neighborhoods, it's the appropriate state or lower authorities who do it, not the President of the US.
His whole bluster spiel was a photo-op moment to give the illusion that, in spite of all his high crimes and misdemeanors which he got away with, he's "a law and order" kind of guy. CNN's "breaking news" TV headline is showing: "Peaceful protestters near White House tear-gassed, shot with rubber bullets so Trump can have church photo-op."
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Well, apparently "martial law" in the same sense has been used quite a few times throughout US history. Martial law in the United States - Wikipedia

I don't really understand the issue. If things are badly out of control, and large portions of cities become unsafe for inhabitants due to rioters, I think use of the military in some of these areas is justified.

It is not the job of the military in the US to do police action. Ever. It is also not the job of the President to call them out against US citizens (it is Congresses job under Posse Commitatus).

It is not the job of the US president to send the military into states unless the governors have *asked* for it.
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
It is not the job of the military in the US to do police action. Ever. It is also not the job of the President to call them out against US citizens (it is Congresses job under Posse Commitatus).

It is not the job of the US president to send the military into states unless the governors have *asked* for it.

You may be right, but I"m not sure. I can think of a scenario where a city got so severely out of control that the police simply could not handle it, and if the governors did not do anything about it, the federal govt could be forced to take action. Is it justified in these cases? I'm not sure yet, but I wouldn't rule it out in some areas that are spiralling out of control.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
You may be right, but I"m not sure. I can think of a scenario where a city got so severely out of control that the police simply could not handle it, and if the governors did not do anything about it, the federal govt could be forced to take action. Is it justified in these cases? I'm not sure yet, but I wouldn't rule it out in some areas that are spiralling out of control.

Again, not the job of the president to decide. Congress has that power at the federal level, governors at the state. To go against that is NOT 'Law and Order'.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
It is not the job of the military in the US to do police action. Ever. It is also not the job of the President to call them out against US citizens (it is Congresses job under Posse Commitatus).

It is not the job of the US president to send the military into states unless the governors have *asked* for it.

One thing I'll say about all this. We're all going to find out in a very direct way what people in power can and cannot do.

We heard the presidential side of it, now I'm actually wondering what the states have to say about it and what goes down thereafter if and when troops actually start showing up.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
I'm guessing you're right. I don't think Trump would dare try - he's too weak. The states are already doing what they think they need.
I wonder if it is a question of being weak or not.
Back in 1982 (?) I think it was Pres. Reagan who gave the police some sort of immunity, so even if a case goes to the Supreme Court the Court can't go against what has been put in place as being the Law.
So, if I am right, then first the Law has to be changed in order to convict to the fullest extent of the Law.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Martial laws the same exact thing as a police state. That's pretty much what people are living in right now in the areas that have the most upheaval.

Just heard Trump threatening martial law. Martial law is when the military is used against the citizenry.

Martial law is an extreme and rare measure used to control society during war or periods of civil unrest or chaos. According to the Supreme Court, the term martial law carries no precise meaning (Duncan v. Kahanamoku, 327 U.S. 304, 66 S. Ct. 606, 90 L. Ed. 688 [1946]). However, most declarations of martial law have some common features. Generally, the institution of martial law contemplates some use of military force.
Martial Law
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
I wonder if it is a question of being weak or not.
Back in 1982 (?) I think it was Pres. Reagan who gave the police some sort of immunity, so even if a case goes to the Supreme Court the Court can't go against what has been put in place as being the Law.
So, if I am right, then first the Law has to be changed in order to convict to the fullest extent of the Law.
It's called "qualified immunity"
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Just heard Trump threatening martial law. Martial law is when the military is used against the citizenry.

Martial law is an extreme and rare measure used to control society during war or periods of civil unrest or chaos. According to the Supreme Court, the term martial law carries no precise meaning (Duncan v. Kahanamoku, 327 U.S. 304, 66 S. Ct. 606, 90 L. Ed. 688 [1946]). However, most declarations of martial law have some common features. Generally, the institution of martial law contemplates some use of military force.
Martial Law
Trump is channeling China's crackdown on demonstrators and in fact on all dictators cracking down.

He'll fail.
 
Top