The Civil War of 2016

[Scout26]

U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) was established Oct. 1, 2002 to provide command and control of Department of Defense (DOD) homeland defense efforts and to coordinate defense support of civil authorities. USNORTHCOM defends America's homeland — protecting our people, national power, and freedom of action.

USNORTHCOM’s specific mission:
USNORTHCOM partners to conduct homeland defense, civil support and security cooperation to defend and secure the United States and its interests.

USNORTHCOM’s AOR includes air, land and sea approaches and encompasses the continental United States, Alaska, Canada, Mexico and the surrounding water out to approximately 500 nautical miles. It also includes the Gulf of Mexico, the Straits of Florida, portions of the Caribbean region to include The Bahamas, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The commander of USNORTHCOM is responsible for theater security cooperation with Canada, Mexico, and The Bahamas.

USNORTHCOM consolidates under a single unified command existing missions that were previously executed by other DOD organizations. This provides unity of command, which is critical to mission accomplishment.

USNORTHCOM plans, organizes and executes homeland defense and civil support missions, but has few permanently assigned forces. The command is assigned forces whenever necessary to execute missions, as ordered by the president or secretary of defense.

Civil service employees and uniformed members representing all service branches work at USNORTHCOM’s headquarters located at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, Colo.

The commander of USNORTHCOM also commands the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), a bi-national command responsible for aerospace warning, aerospace control, and maritime warning for Canada, Alaska and the continental United States.

USNORTHCOM’s civil support mission includes domestic disaster relief operations that occur during fires, hurricanes, floods and earthquakes. Support also includes counter-drug operations and managing the consequences of a terrorist event employing a weapon of mass destruction. The command provides assistance to a Primary Agency when tasked by DOD. Per the Posse Comitatus Act, military forces can provide civil support, but cannot become directly involved in law enforcement.

In providing civil support, USNORTHCOM generally operates through established Joint Task Forces subordinate to the command. An emergency must exceed the capabilities of local, state and federal agencies before USNORTHCOM becomes involved. In most cases, support will be limited, localized and specific. When the scope of the disaster is reduced to the point that the Primary Agency can again assume full control and management without military assistance, USNORTHCOM will exit, leaving the on-scene experts to finish the job.

[MrsSmith]

But it still isn't justification for everyone in the employment of Uncle Sam who is a citizen of the United States to be carrying a firearm in the course of their duties daily lives to uphold misdemeanor offenses or to DETERMINE that a crime has been committed which requires lethal force. Do you really want some kid who took a six month class in biology a three day concealed carry course to tell you that you can't hunt redfish until June can't take his parking spot then put a bullet in your head? Seriously?

I can't even begin to fathom how you can see this as acceptable. - Are you truly unable to discern the difference between a government employee who carries a weapon to enforce his will on you versus the government employee who carries a weapon simply to protect themselves, same as any citizen would? I played around with your post a bit to (hopefully) show how specious and nigh hypocritical your argument is. Either you are a U.S. citizen with all the rights of citizenship, or you are not. As wrong as it is to deny rights to private citizens, so too is it to deny them to the public servants of those private citizens who are also themselves citizens. Just because Fishery Officer Joe carries a pistol does not mean it is for the sole purpose of enforcing his fishery authoritay, just as the reason you, MrsSmith, may carry a pistol is not for the sole purpose of murdering everyone who annoys you. This is very close to the anti-gunner's argument of blame the instrument, rather than the person. Only one of those things is capable of premeditative motive and intent, and here's a hint: It isn't the inanimate object.

I have one final comment and I'll leave this alone.

The difference between me carrying a pistol for self-defense and a government employee carrying one in the course of his job is that I am solely carrying my pistol to protect myself, not to enforce laws, and in no way can I be construed as holding a position of authority, neither real nor perceived. I'm not sure how you got *blaming the instrument* from my argument. It has nothing to do with the use of a tool and everything to do with excessive government ARMED authority over citizens. I stated very clearly that I believe every individual ought to have the right to carry a weapon for self-defense. But I don't use my pistol to enforce my will or to enforce laws. Big difference.

[Scout26]

USNORTHCOM is a command in search of a mission.  And of course there is always mission creep.....

[Tallpine]

USNORTHCOM is a command in search of a mission.  And of course there is always mission creep.....

Support also includes counter-drug operations ...

Why no-knock when you can use artillery ?   

[RoadKingLarry]

Why no-knock when you can use artillery ?   

Or just lob a Tomahawk or two at the problem.

[Ron]

Or just lob a Tomahawk or two at the problem.

Drones, it's all about the drones these days.

[Tallpine]

Drones, it's all about the drones these days.

That's why the census wanted GPS numbers   

[tokugawa]

That's why the census wanted GPS numbers   

 YEP.

[slingshot]

That is a very tin foil/black helicopter comment. But I wear tin foil every now and then.

What bothers me the most about all this kind of talk is a total distrust of government that has developed and is migrating slowly but surely through the citizentry.  I think this kind of thinking belief tends to fall on people with some experience and hence probably limited to the over 30 or over 40 groups and tends to be people who believe in limited government versus a more liberal view held by "progressives".  I hate that word....  call a spade a spade.

[longeyes]

The Framers must have been wearing tinfoil hats, not tricornered, when they crafted the Bill of Rights?  Certainly the BOR embodies a distrust of Authority placed in central government.

[Jamisjockey]

The Framers must have been wearing tinfoil hats, not tricornered, when they crafted the Bill of Rights?  Certainly the BOR embodies a distrust of Authority placed in central government.

They were quite paranoid and predicted much of the idiocy we're suffering from currently.

[roo_ster]

They were quite paranoid and predicted much of the idiocy we're suffering from currently.

But, how can that be?  We are so much smarter than they were.   

[AZRedhawk44]

But, how can that be?  We are so much smarter than they were.   

But... but... they never had turr'ism on their soil!  They never had armed, angry grassroots organization on their soil!  They never had an underground subversive press working against government progress on their soil!  They never had a domestic surveilance State where Officers of the State would snoop in your cellphone and build information maps from social networking platforms and datamine all cleartext emails compel people to board Agents of the State in their own residences...

They never had to face those challenges.  We need new rules to protect the Crown and its various Revenues the State and its Interests.

[MrsSmith]

That is a very tin foil/black helicopter comment. But I wear tin foil every now and then.

What bothers me the most about all this kind of talk is a total distrust of government that has developed and is migrating slowly but surely through the citizentry.  I think this kind of thinking belief tends to fall on people with some experience and hence probably limited to the over 30 or over 40 groups and tends to be people who believe in limited government versus a more liberal view held by "progressives".  I hate that word....  call a spade a spade.

Trust is earned, not given. Any individual with a brain in his head is going to keep a close eye on whoever he puts in a place of authority. That's just common sense. Or ought to be. 
And yes, folks who have this distrust do tend to be over 30 because that's typically about the time in our society when folks get serious about their futures. (Of course many of our 20-something APS members are already there.)

[Tallpine]

But... but... they never had turr'ism on their soil!  ...

Injuns ? 

[Ned Hamford]

The difference between me carrying a pistol for self-defense and a government employee carrying one in the course of his job is that I am solely carrying my pistol to protect myself, not to enforce laws, and in no way can I be construed as holding a position of authority, neither real nor perceived.

I dunno, I've also made it a firm policy of mine to listen closely to the person with the gun. 

[French G.]

Injuns ? 

Whisky rioters. Way before the Tea party 2.0 was cool.

[makattak]

Whisky rioters. Way before the Tea party 2.0 was cool.

I'd have used the Loyalists as an example. I suppose the Whisky Riots works, too.