The impression I had reading this thread is that there are situations where soldier guarding a sensitive military installation would be allowed to use deadly force where a police officer (or a mall cop, or a regular joe) would not, and would in fact face murder charges if they did.
If that is the case I’m wondering where their legal protection from prosecution would come from. Is there some law that states this ?
In regards to “The Law of the Land”, it is worth noting that this isn’t a rent-a-cop stopping someone from breaking into an electronics store. It’s not even a homeowner with a shotgun who hears someone smashing a window to open his front door. It is the US Federal government, protecting some of the most powerful means of killing people witnessed by man since the Flood, on Federal property. “Shoot to kill” to protect such devices from theft or sabotage is the law of the land. State laws and city ordinances don’t get invited to that dinner party.
And also, like I said, they will endeavor to defuse the situation before deadly force becomes necessary. How necessary they perceive it will of course depend on he circumstances and how the intruder is acting. The aforementioned Grandma with a peace sign probably isn’t going to get shot, no matter how stubborn she is. If it’s a fellow in camo fatigues with a ski-mask and what looks like a gun, the response may be very different.
My “Use of Force” training that I received at my last duty station. Mind you, if they ever decide that I should be guarding nukes, that’ll be a weird day.
I don’t think Griffin is questioning the logic of using deadly force to protect vital military assets. I believe he’s asking what law or legal authority authorizes it.
Is there a part of federal law that says military personnel may use deadly force, even when no one’s life is in immediate jeopardy? Is there a principal that property owners may use deadly force against trespassers, so the military is simply operating under that standard?
Again, I believe he’s looking for the legal technicality that allows a military guard to shoot someone when you or I could not. Where can he find that provision in the law?
warning: I SANAL (=I Sure Ain’t No Lawyer ) , so I am just making a wild guess here…but
aren’t military orders themselves part of “the law of the land”?
The rules of engagement are given to a soldier by his commanding officer, who received them from his commanding officer, who ,etc.etc… all the way up to the Commander-in-Chief at the White House. And the army has its lawyers* , who are ,I assume, held legally responsible for writing its Rules of Engagement.
There are still a few military facilities that you can get onto as a civilian without a specific “need” to enter.
Arlington Cemetery in Northern Virginia is accessible to the public during certain hours of the day. No ID checks the last time I was there.
The Naval Academy campus (Annapolis, Maryland) is open to visitors, though you have to show ID, and I suppose they could deny you entry.
You can get onto the Pentagon outer grounds without passing a security checkpoint, though you do pass a sign stating that by entering the “reservation”, you are subject to search, and that no photography is permitted. There’s a transit hub there (several bus lines have an enpoint there, and there is a Metrorail station on base), and plenty of people transfer from bus to train there. I used to come through there often, transfering from bus to train at the Pentagon in the morning, and train to bus in the evening.
Bit of an old thread, but the cite you’re looking for in a military context is probably this one: 32 CFR 632.4 This is a section of the (United States’) Code of Federal Regulations, which have the force of law. Title 32 deals with National Defense, and section 632 deals with “Use of force by personnel engaged in law enforcement and security duties.” Similar regulations exist for security personnel working for NASA, guarding the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, etc…, though their regulations don’t allow for deadly force unless necessary in self-defense or to prevent serious bodily harm to another. GPO Access is a great resource; go have fun with the full text search utility for the situations you’re interested in.
Quoting liberally from the above Federal Regulation (emphasis is added by me):
And this was pre 9/11, but I remember being allowed to visit Ft. Ord and the Presidio in California, back when they were operating bases. I was a civilian, and just had to check into the front of the base, but otherwise could drive around the public parts of the base.
Things are a bit stricter there now. Also, if you aren’t in the military, chances are you won’t be allowed into the dorms at all assuming the Dorm Guards are doing their jobs.
) , so I am just making a wild guess here…but