Talk:Military aid to the civil power

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Military history: Technology

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force

Someone who is familiar with the topic should explain the difference between this and Martial Law, and include information about the American National Guard and the Corps of Engineers. Sadly, that person is not me. Rhymeless 00:15, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Military Aid to the Civil Community

Is Military Aid to the Civil Community different to Military Aid to the Civil Power in some way? Or should these two articles be merged? If they shouldn't be, they could do with having the differences explained, as I'm really confused… — OwenBlacker 23:02, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)

Based on my reading of the articles, Military Aid to the Civil Power is about law and order - helping the civil power, i.e. government. Military Aid to the Civil Community is about the needs of the community, in emergencies. --Singkong2005 00:37, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some quick answers

Martial Law does not exist in the British or democratic tradition. Its essence is the administration of law & order or justice by the military, using its own military courts martial instead of civilian courts. Aid to the civil power is just that; it provides more men to the Police Forces, allowing the police to avoid labour-intensive jobs of guarding in a crisis, so as to get on with real police work. When there are risks of violence and fire-arms, heavily armed military may be called in by the police, but the existing civilian judicial system remains the ultimate arbiter of how they performed as well as disposing of arrested persons.

THe US National Guard is a State part-time military force, with substantial federal funding and training. It can be called out by the federal government for defence purposes such as Iraq. But it is a resource that Governors can use on their own authority to maintain law & order in their state, unlike Canada where Provinces have to requisition federal troops who, theoretically, don,t take their orders from their federal government masters in such cases.

Military Aid to the Civil Community is the provision of "good deeds" and "cheap labour" OTHER than force, in situations ranging from floods, forest fires, ice storms etc, to more banal help with festivals, Olympic games etc. Since lethal or police-type force and the administration of justice are not at issue, nor do the soldiers have powers of special constables, the rules are much less complex and much can be arranged informally at a local level. The main concerns are "who pays" and avoiding taking on jobs that deprive civilian contractors of work.[[User:66.130.86.231

| 66.130.86.231]]

Air policing in Germany

" Air policing is a traditional task of the German Air Force." This is incorrect. Air policing was specifically excluded from the German Air Force's role under occupation (which I suppose, is as 'traditional' as one gets in the Federal Republic). Air policing was undertaken by the RAF and USAF until reunification. I'm sure somebody can research what exactly the situation was between then and the passing of the Luftsicherheitsgesetz. Methinks the occupying forces assuming the role probably blindsided legislators as to the constitutional issues.Sir smellybeard (talk) 13:10, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]