Below is a link to a 2003 AF Office of General Counsel document outlining how the posse comitatus law applies to the AF. We've discussed this issue ad nauseum in regards to CAP, but I don't think I've ever actually seen an official document that lays out the situation from the AF point of view in regards to CAP like this.
Now they certainly don't give any specific focus on CAP, but they say that PC applies to:
QuoteCivil Air Patrol (CAP-USAF) members performing Air Force-directed missions.
Now, I think that the use of CAP-USAF was probably a mistake and that they meant normal CAP members and not members of CAP-USAF, who are actually military members already covered elsewhere in their analysis. This is backed up by their listing of when PC
generally (their emphasis) doesn't apply where they specifically mention CAP members:
QuoteCivil Air Patrol members performing non-Air Force-directed missions;
Now, I might advise the AF to clarify that language a bit to ensure that it is clear that CAP is bound by PC on any AFAM since we do have situations when we're working for other federal agencies (as the AF aux) and the use of the "directed" could be misunderstood.
So, while we've heard backchannel stuff like this, it is interesting to see it confirmed that the AF thinks that CAP members using CAP assets could perform law enforcement missions without running afoul of PC just so long as we weren't on an AFAM.
Of course CAP regulations still officially prohibit LE, but I think this interpretation explains the trend I've seen for NOC approval of missions that come real close to, if not over, the LE line.
And, CAP regulations might not ever change in this regard since even if allowed by law, the AF as a matter of policy, probably doesn't want CAP getting that involved in LE at the local or state level.
Here is the link:
http://www.dtra.mil/documents/newsservices/deskbook/full_text/Other_Relevant_References/Posse-Comitatus-Guidance-FINAL.pdf
I don't remember ever having seen an official document preventing CAP from LE activities either however, the CAP-USAF JAG opinion is NO; as is many other JAG opinions considering this topic. However, one of the reasons we no longer have "USAF Aux" on our aircraft is due to the eventual possibility of a change in thought.
Until something changes, I guess we just need to live with it.
Quote from: FW on July 13, 2009, 10:03:52 PM
I don't remember ever having seen an official document preventing CAP from LE activities either however, the CAP-USAF JAG opinion is NO; as is many other JAG opinions considering this topic. However, one of the reasons we no longer have "USAF Aux" on our aircraft is due to the eventual possibility of a change in thought.
Until something changes, I guess we just need to live with it.
The regs prohibiting actions in the LE area usually predate the 2000 change to CAP's status. There has been an ongoing study of CAP's potential LE role, but the study has been done by lawyers, and has never produced any definitive guidance for NB members to hang a new reg on.
The AF position pretty well mirrors what most of us have believed, but apparently their lawyers are smarter than CAP's. CAP's lawyers are too besy telling veterans that their wartime awards are "Inappropriate."
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 13, 2009, 10:15:50 PM
Quote from: FW on July 13, 2009, 10:03:52 PM
CAP's lawyers are too besy telling veterans that their wartime awards are "Inappropriate."
...
for wear on the CAP uniform, right?
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 13, 2009, 10:15:50 PM
Quote from: FW on July 13, 2009, 10:03:52 PM
CAP's lawyers are too besy telling veterans that their wartime awards are "Inappropriate."
...
for wear on the CAP uniform, right?
Quote from: Rotorhead on July 13, 2009, 10:55:02 PM
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 13, 2009, 10:15:50 PM
Quote from: FW on July 13, 2009, 10:03:52 PM
CAP's lawyers are too besy telling veterans that their wartime awards are "Inappropriate."
...for wear on the CAP uniform, right?
The implication was clear: warrior = bad
Peace, love, dove! ;D
In addition to the constitutional authority, Congress has created myriad exceptions to the
Act. These statutory exceptions permit some actions that may otherwise be prohibited by the
Act. For example:
• Military support for civilian law enforcement agencies (including information
sharing, use of military equipment and facilities, and training of civilian law
enforcement agents by military personnel, subject to certain limitations);19
• Counter-drug support (including aerial and ground reconnaissance,
intelligence analysis, and training, subject to certain limitations);20
• Quelling insurrections;21
• Disaster relief (Stafford Act);22 and
• Defense against weapons of mass destruction (including advice and training, use of
equipment, and emergency response teams).23
PER DOCUMENT, SO NO PROBLEM
Quote from: Rotorhead on July 13, 2009, 10:55:30 PM
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 13, 2009, 10:15:50 PM
Quote from: FW on July 13, 2009, 10:03:52 PM
CAP's lawyers are too besy telling veterans that their wartime awards are "Inappropriate."
...for wear on the CAP uniform, right?
"Since CAP is a non-combat organization, the wear of any combat awards is inappropriate."
So, I shoulda grew my hair long and burnt my draft card, along with him, back in the 60's.
Far out, dude. Make love not war!
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 15, 2009, 11:52:35 PM
Quote from: Rotorhead on July 13, 2009, 10:55:30 PM
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 13, 2009, 10:15:50 PM
Quote from: FW on July 13, 2009, 10:03:52 PM
CAP's lawyers are too besy telling veterans that their wartime awards are "Inappropriate."
...for wear on the CAP uniform, right?
"Since CAP is a non-combat organization, the wear of any combat awards is inappropriate."
I don't understand why you have such a problem with this.
No one has called your service "inappropriate," despite what you're claiming. No one said you should not have served.
They just said wearing the decoration on this (non-combatant) uniform is not appropriate.
Considering CAP is the volunteer, civilian auxiliary of the Air Force, and we wear its uniforms and (hopefully) behave appropriately, the wear of combat decorations is completely appropriate. I'm with Kach, though I certainly hope the national legal officer, for the NLO's sake, was misunderstood.
I think maybe CAP's moved a bit from its original intent. There should be no issue with us flying border patrols and assisting Big Blue with its missions where appropriate. We shouldn't see the intercept missions as a novelty, but as an everyday CAP service.
That we're doing VSAF stuff like handing out towels at the base officer club sauna... that's making a mockery of CAP's wartime successes and misapplying our manpower. We need to look at ourselves and assess what we can really do for the Air Force and the nation, and realize that we can be more than a trivial presence to the parent service.
We've got to stop patting ourselves on the back for perfect attendance and step up to the challenges CAP can really face.
Quote from: Rotorhead on July 15, 2009, 11:58:56 PM
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 15, 2009, 11:52:35 PM
Quote from: Rotorhead on July 13, 2009, 10:55:30 PM
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 13, 2009, 10:15:50 PM
Quote from: FW on July 13, 2009, 10:03:52 PM
CAP's lawyers are too besy telling veterans that their wartime awards are "Inappropriate."
...for wear on the CAP uniform, right?
"Since CAP is a non-combat organization, the wear of any combat awards is inappropriate."
I don't understand why you have such a problem with this.
No one has called your service "inappropriate," despite what you're claiming. No one said you should not have served.
They just said wearing the decoration on this (non-combatant) uniform is not appropriate.
I know what "Inappropriate" means. I do NOT consider the awards given to me by my country, and by our ally, South Vietnam, to be "Inappropriate" in ANY context.
I can wear them on my hat if I want to, on my tuxedo, hang them in my den, or wear them on the uniform of a military auxiliary.
They symbolicly state that when my country called upon me, I answered. Unlike many others in my generation, I bore arms under my country's flag.
Apparently the NLO has a problem with that. Therefore I have a problem with the NLO.
Quote from: Gunner C on July 14, 2009, 12:51:46 AM
Quote from: Rotorhead on July 13, 2009, 10:55:02 PM
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 13, 2009, 10:15:50 PM
Quote from: FW on July 13, 2009, 10:03:52 PM
CAP's lawyers are too besy telling veterans that their wartime awards are "Inappropriate."
...for wear on the CAP uniform, right?
The implication was clear: warrior = bad
Peace, love, dove! ;D
Whoa guys, full stop.
WHO/WHEN did This happen??? I'm not calling BS here, I just wanna know the details.
QuoteThat we're doing VSAF stuff like handing out towels at the base officer club sauna... that's making a mockery of CAP's wartime successes and misapplying our manpower.
Except of course for the fact that this isn't anything like what the VSAF people appear to be doing. The reports we've had here were from a guy working in what is basically their emergency management department if I recall correctly.
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on July 16, 2009, 05:39:57 AM
Quote from: Gunner C on July 14, 2009, 12:51:46 AM
Quote from: Rotorhead on July 13, 2009, 10:55:02 PM
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on July 13, 2009, 10:15:50 PM
Quote from: FW on July 13, 2009, 10:03:52 PM
CAP's lawyers are too besy telling veterans that their wartime awards are "Inappropriate."
...for wear on the CAP uniform, right?
The implication was clear: warrior = bad
Peace, love, dove! ;D
Whoa guys, full stop.
WHO/WHEN did This happen??? I'm not calling BS here, I just wanna know the details.
Johnny:
My personal nose got put out of joint when I read the official discussion on the proposal to permit wear of military decorations and badges on the TPU. Among the non-concurrances was a statement from the NLO, who said:
"Since CAP is a non-combatant organization, the wear of combat awards is inappropriate."
I did not even consider that some CAP members may still be around who earned the Air Medal for CAP serice when we were a combat asset of the United States. I only read that statement as an implication that, for some reason, "Non-combatant" equals "Pacifist" in the mind of the NLO, and he is ashamed of the fact that some members have earned combat awards in the service of the United States in branches of service other than CAP.
I am particularly struck by his use of the word "Inappropriate." Somehow, it equates the wearing of earned combat awards with getting drunk and taking indecent liberties with other men's wives at the O-club.
I'm not proud of this, but a while back I was into some pretty heavy drinking. I have been accused of "Inappropriate" behavior on occasion. I have the counseling letters and reprimands to prove it, if you are interested. To compare that conduct with displaying honors that were earned in battle is, to me, offensive beyond description.
^^ Concur wholeheartedly, although I think this part of the dicussion may now deserve its own topic (Just my opinion).
This needs to be changed. I think of our new vets returning with Purple Hearts, Silver Star's, and the like who were given these awards due to extreme personal sacrifice. Yet, they cannot display them on the uniform of a military auxiliary because we don't want to look too military.
We can't have it both ways.... if CAP is a non-combatant organization and wear of combat awards is inappropriate in the eyes of a legal guy who most likely never even had to face a remote possibility of getting shot at for his country, then we should no longer wear AF-style uniforms either.
This is an absolute slap in the face to our CAP members who are vets.
Quote from: smj58501 on July 16, 2009, 05:45:41 PM
We can't have it both ways.... if CAP is a non-combatant organization and wear of combat awards is inappropriate in the eyes of a legal guy who most likely never even had to face a remote possibility of getting shot at for his country, then we should no longer wear AF-style uniforms either.
This is an absolute slap in the face to our CAP members who are vets.
Even worse is that many of those former military members are among our best senior members, especially where cadet training (to include aviators, not just leadership officers and commanders) is concerned. The Air Force is our parent. The non-Air Force uniforms are way out of hand, to the point where we're insulting the Air Force with them. And that affects how we play with Big Blue, believe it or not. I'd rather be 'in like Flynn' on meaningful Air Force-tasked missions, wouldn't you?
Oh, wait... the CSU is illegal now, isn't it? Didn't the ICLs expire? That oughta make the Air Force happy. And hey, if the ICLs really die after 90 days, we can take the flags off our BDUs. Maybe the expectation is that since all this stuff was done via ICL, at some point, we'd let it ride until the Air Force said 'no,' then say, 'oh, yeah, the ICL expired, our bad.' Wouldn't that be funny...