redfox

joined 2 years ago
5
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by redfox to c/indiana@midwest.social
 

HB 1343 has a section that slips in a possibly dangerous ability for the governor to use a military police entity within the national guard as he wishes, without much checks and balances. See below, it's now in section/chapter 23.

This seems like a bad idea.

Note, the governor can already call members of the National Guard to state active duty orders, and there's already a military police unit under 81st Troop Command, but it's more limited and they generally are still not police for a civilian population like most people think of. LLM explained it well for those who don't know:

  1. The "Emergency" Loophole

Current Law: Generally, for the Guard to be used in a law enforcement capacity, the Governor declares a State of Emergency. This declaration is usually tied to a specific event (tornado, pandemic, civil unrest) and has time limits and legislative oversight.

Under HB 1343: The bill allows deployment "at any other time the governor considers necessary."

Implication - This effectively removes the requirement for a formal "Emergency" or "Disaster" declaration to use military police. The Governor could theoretically deploy this force to patrol a city for "crime suppression" without ever declaring an emergency or citing a specific disaster.

This is also a good way to think about it:

"Martial Law Lite": HB 1343 allows the Governor to use military personnel to police civilians without the political and legal fallout of declaring Martial Law. The courts remain open, and civil law remains in effect, but the enforcers are soldiers answering directly to the Governor, not local police chiefs or sheriffs answering to voters.


Here's the full text of the section, buried within the rest of the bill.

https://iga.in.gov/pdf-documents/124/2026/house/bills/HB1343/HB1343.04.ENGH.pdf

Chapter 23. Military Police Force of the Indiana National 29 Guard 30 Sec. 1. The adjutant general may establish a military police 31 force of the Indiana National Guard. 32 Sec. 2. (a) Before granting police powers to an individual 33 appointed as a member of the military police force of the Indiana 34 National Guard, the adjutant general shall validate that the 35 individual has a current security clearance and has not been 36 convicted of a felony. 37 (b) An individual appointed to serve in the military police force 38 of the Indiana National Guard may not exercise police powers until 39 the individual successfully completes either army or air military 40 police occupational training and receives qualifying instruction on 41 Indiana law enforcement prescribed by the adjutant general. 42 (c) An individual appointed to the military police force of the HB 1343—LS 6518/DI 116 33 1 Indiana National Guard shall take an appropriate oath of office in 2 the form and manner prescribed by the governor. 3 Sec. 3. The governor may authorize the military police force of 4 the Indiana National Guard to exercise police powers throughout 5 Indiana, or in any part of Indiana prescribed by the governor, if 6 the governor orders the military police force of the Indiana 7 National Guard to state active duty under IC 10-16-7-7. The 8 governor shall provide reasonable notice to local law enforcement 9 agencies affected by the deployment of the military police force of 10 the Indiana National Guard and coordinate with local law 11 enforcement agencies as circumstances permit. 12 Sec. 4. An individual serving in the military police force of the 13 Indiana National Guard who is authorized to exercise police 14 powers under section 3 of this chapter may: 15 (1) make an arrest; 16 (2) conduct a search or seizure of a person or property; 17 (3) carry a firearm; and 18 (4) exercise other police powers with respect to the 19 enforcement of Indiana laws.


In case you care:

Here's the voting results of the house:

https://legiscan.com/IN/rollcall/HB1343/id/1618347

 

Braun is appointing new commission members

[–] redfox 1 points 5 months ago

Every girl needs somebody to eat their...cat.

[–] redfox 1 points 5 months ago

.28! Bro...

I wonder if he'll just get reelected?

[–] redfox 4 points 5 months ago

Good thing they have all the millions of more important things solved than Wikipedia 😡

[–] redfox 1 points 5 months ago

As an uninformed resident, this is frustrating to learn, or hear confirmed.

I personally am so conditioned to assume all rates and fees are ways to keep padding executive bonuses, keep investors getting paid dividends only taxed at 1% instead of my 22%, and have nothing to do with supporting long term goals.

Maybe regulation is the only way to force investment in infrastructure and cap executive compensation and investor profit.

Maybe the government should run it since there should be no profit involved in utilities providing the basics of modern life, oh wait, they definitely won't screw all that up either, ha

 

Article regarding a local sheriff and allegations of misconduct.

[–] redfox 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I had not heard about this either. We are on Duke up here. I looked a bunch of years ago and the rate was .11 cents per kwh. That's pretty cheap. Now I'm interested in looking again.

There are many places in the world that present like they are paying extremely high rates.

There's not really competition in utilities, it's supposed to be "regulated".

 

Whoa

[–] redfox 2 points 5 months ago

I agree with your point. The military does this a lot too. Training requirements are important and necessary.

The guy is still a giant hypocrite in some obvious ways, I can't seem to shake my distain.

[–] redfox 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I think I asked this before, but does anyone support this? Currently, I do not.

[–] redfox 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Can anyone explain why people care about votes on Lemmy? Isnt it like winning a contest no one's play, or am I missing something?

[–] redfox 2 points 7 months ago

Yeah, damn, I always forget about that...just like they want...

 

I'm surprised he's appointing high paying jobs to new positions during hiring freeze and revoking remote work to cull employees and reduce head count...

[–] redfox 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Bold statements.

It took reading pretty far before calling for action from city leaders finally turned to calling for parents.

I think most rational people believe that law enforcement alone can't properly protect kids from themselves and there likely isn't enough manpower in the system to start locking up all the teens. Maybe that would taper off as the rules got enforced more.

I want to believe this should be a combination of parents and city, but mostly parents. I don't think I'd let my son run around even until 10 or 11 at night.

So what's happening here that isn't an easy solve? If it was as easy as telling parents to get your kids inside, we wouldn't have the article.

There was plenty of politics mentioned, but is that what's at play or far more complex social issues?

[–] redfox 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I guess I don't understand how you can vote in our state's elections and not be a citizen.

I consistently find myself frustrated by the government's inability to maintain our identification systems in an effective, accurate, and efficient way.

Some ID is free, some costs money which I disagree with, some has to be done in person which is annoying for less mobile people.

Maybe if we could get those things addressed, it could also accurately track naturalization and allow new citizens to vote without allowing non citizens. Doesn't seem impossible in 2025, and yet ...

[–] redfox 1 points 7 months ago

I agree with heavy commercial vehicles doing more damage, and wouldn't be as opposed in their case.

The downside of course being higher costs for freight since we have had 100+ years of dismantling rail, which I heard was most economical way to move freight, but slower.

My plate fee for a Tacoma was $600. I don't see how that can get higher.

Not that I could affect anything, but I wish we had more insight into the road project costs, and where money goes.

0
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by redfox to c/indiana@midwest.social
 

Article covers Braun's intentions to reduce state employees by revoking remote work - my opinion.

Anyone have really good support for removing remote or hybrid work?

All I hear is rhetoric about productivity in person and collaboration, but too many studies say that's unnecessary.

Is this a veiled attempt to reduce headcount or is there actual legitimacy to removing remote work?

 

Could anyone explain this in a way that doesn't make me hate it?

The usual arguments I relate to are things like: we are taxed multiple times for vehicle ownership. Purchase, plates, mandatory insurance, gas tax, parking. Did I miss any?

Now I know there's plenty of people who would rather have robust public transportation, which would be nice, but I don't see that happening as a result of all this money I'm already paying.

People who make just enough or barely enough to afford to drive to work could now have to pay for the right to trade their precious time for money.

Insert tirade here about that.

I've heard view points regarding tolls:

recover costs to maintain interstate infrastructure used by commercial trucking to move the rolling warehouse of America around so Jeff Bitchboy can have a Venice wedding and I can have my materialistic lifestyle delivered to my door possibly the same day...sorry slipped into rant.

Should I be looking at this a different way before I exercise the almost non-existent power I have as a resident and voter, which is sending emails to my elected corrupt aristocrats and beg them to consider regular people, darn did it again.

 

My reading of the article shows a decision that the right of residents to sue the government for neglect actions was not specifically granted in this instance.

 

Public Service Announcement:

Have you checked out Sophos XG Firewall for home use lately?

It's basically an enterprise firewall fully licensed for personal use.

  • All the firewall stuff
  • Normal IPS
  • Built-In easy transparent SSL/TLS proxy
  • Web Application Firewall

I like it better than PF/Open Sense right now.

https://youtu.be/Ui8UC8-MeJU

view more: next ›