"Military is not fine, using military to control the public is what dictators do."
The role of the US military in quelling domestic protests
"Footage from a 1 June assault on Channel Seven reporter Amelia Brace and cameraman Tim Myers in Washington, DC exposed Australians first-hand to the widespread and ongoing police brutality in the spotlight in the United States following the killing of George Floyd. Just blocks away from the site of the journalist assault, local police used tear gas on peaceful protesters to allow President Trump to stage a photo op in front of a local church. He also directed active-duty Army units to report to Washington and threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act, a law that could allow him to employ these units on domestic soil. By 10 June, the number of National Guard soldiers activated to combat COVID-19 and help quell the protests reached more than 75,000 in total across the United States...
Throughout US history, presidents have called on both the National Guard and active-duty military for domestic purposes, including for law enforcement, but their ability to do so remains subject to certain legal restrictions...
When a president orders troops to conduct law enforcement tasks, the federal government bears full responsibility for their actions. Any service member – whether active duty or National Guard – under the president’s command is funded by the federal government and falls under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for discipline and accountability. While most service members are highly disciplined, President Trump’s willingness to grant clemency to two convicted war criminals and one alleged murderer last year introduces at least some uncertainty about whether any individual soldiers would feel less bound by legal constraints. The military also would likely use the standing rules for the use of force (SRUF), a set of guidelines that dictate when and how they can use force while conducting policing..."
Note. I have not expressed any opinion on this matter.
