Posted on Mar 21, 2015
Should the Secret Service (President Protection) be replaced by a Military Detachment? Every week there's another scandal.
16.8K
162
67
7
7
0
It seems like there's scandal after scandal with the secret service. Should a special operations detachment take on the mission of protecting the President? Not saying that the military doesn't have it's own discipline issues but it is almost unheard of in these kinds of units. Seems like a better job for the President's 100. What are your thoughts?
http://www.npr.org/2015/03/17/393646631/secret-service-director-grilled-about-agency-scandals-in-house-hearing
http://www.npr.org/2015/03/17/393646631/secret-service-director-grilled-about-agency-scandals-in-house-hearing
Posted in these groups: 
Homeland Security
Homeland Security
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 37
6
6
0
Not our lane....we have no place on US soil by design. If we took over what else would we start taking over?
(6)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
The White House Communications Agency (WHCA), originally known as the White House Signal Corps (WHSC) and then the White House Signal Detachment (WHSD), was officially formed by the United States Department of War on 25 March 1942 under President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The organization was created to provide normal and emergency communications requirements in support of the President. The organization provided mobile radio, Teletype, telephone and cryptographic aides in the White House and at "Shangri-La" (now known as Camp David). The organizational mission was to provide a premier communication system that would enable the President to lead the nation effectively.
(2)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
So Congress could modify the Posse Comitatus Act to give the mission of protecting the president to the military.
(2)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
SFC Robert Giffin
The difference with WHCA is they don't have any law enforcement authority or powers.
The difference with WHCA is they don't have any law enforcement authority or powers.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SGT David Schreiner please give some examples of PCA being "violated with impunity" because in my experience it's a pretty big deal and the military often shies away from actions that aren't even prohibited by the PCA.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
The Secret Service really has suffered setbacks and disappointment after disappointment.
A military specialized unit would be much more disciplined that what we've seen from the current performance of the Secret Service. Take a look at the qualifications:
http://www.secretservice.gov/opportunities_agent.shtml
A military specialized unit would be much more disciplined that what we've seen from the current performance of the Secret Service. Take a look at the qualifications:
http://www.secretservice.gov/opportunities_agent.shtml
(6)
(0)
SGM Mikel Dawson
They got a lot of college requirements which seems to dictate they want smart people, hasn't proven out too good. Bet some of our non-college NCOs could / would do better.
(2)
(0)
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
It's not like the military is well known for it's intense dislike of alcohol, partying and shennanigans...
(5)
(0)
GySgt (Join to see)
@
5
5
0
@SSG Michael Hasbun I was just going to post something similar to this! It's a good thing we didn't have social media, digital cameras, or 24/7 news back when I was in. The antics of the Secret Service pale into comparison! LOL
5
5
0
@SSG Michael Hasbun I was just going to post something similar to this! It's a good thing we didn't have social media, digital cameras, or 24/7 news back when I was in. The antics of the Secret Service pale into comparison! LOL
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
I can see the arguments for both. This was not their original mission after all.
(5)
(0)
4
4
0
It's our SOP to erase video tapes after 72 hours...........um.......yeah. If we tried that stuff, we'd get booted through the goal posts of life.
(4)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
IMO, Just like Air Force One (Presidential Plane) and Marine One (Presidential Helicopter) the Presidential Limo should be called Army One (Driven and maintained by the Army).
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
We're all grown-up adult-type people here. What ever happened to accountability? I know this is a novel concept, but punish the bad and reward the good. Hire competent employees and supervisors. Stop using government agencies as a place for your pals and supporters to be rewarded for kissing butt. The military has a mission. Leave them to it. The Secret Service has a mission, make them do it! If the military screws up we don't talk about having the US Marshals Service step in and take over for them. Why are we even discussing this? Are the lunatics running the asylum? Oh right, stupid question.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Let the Secret Service continue, I think a military detachment protection, would lend itself to portraying us as a 'police state', and possibly a more threatening presence in diplomatic situations that might need a more subtle approach. As military, we're the 'big guns' or the humanitarian options behind diplomacy. Let the Secret Service handle housekeeping security stuff. However, I agree, the Secret Service needs a complete overhaul, & perhaps the addition of some well trained umbrella standees for those rainy days?
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
This is another yes and no question.
The Army 701st MP Group already provides protective services for all the key members of DOD. They could handle the the president too. But, that is the mission of the USSS.
But, the secret service also does more than just PS. They are good at PS, and I think the media loves to blow this stuff out of proportion.
The secret service, like us, does a great job, so let's not throw the baby out with the bath water..
The Army 701st MP Group already provides protective services for all the key members of DOD. They could handle the the president too. But, that is the mission of the USSS.
But, the secret service also does more than just PS. They are good at PS, and I think the media loves to blow this stuff out of proportion.
The secret service, like us, does a great job, so let's not throw the baby out with the bath water..
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
I voted to keep the Service in place, if only because there are enough conspiracy theories as it is. Last thing the Army or US Government needs in general is some myth about how POTUS and the military are in cahoots to eliminate the other branches or something equally ridiculous.
I think the instance was blown out of proportion (if they weren't drinking which is unknown), but the advice they gave was sound. Don't try to adapt the culture slowly, get rid of the ones who think a culture of scandal is acceptable.
I think the instance was blown out of proportion (if they weren't drinking which is unknown), but the advice they gave was sound. Don't try to adapt the culture slowly, get rid of the ones who think a culture of scandal is acceptable.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
I believe the Secret Service should continue this mission. However, I caveat that by saying that it is time for a major top to bottom house cleaning (instead the "deck chair rearranging" that has occurred in the wake of every recent scandal).
(2)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SGT Steve Oakes
I would be all for it but for one point. If we had the Military do it, yes the standards of conduct both on and off duty would go up. HOWEVER you would be placing and armed military unit in a position to be policing civilians. American civilians. The Military is NOT supposed to be used to police or control the civilian populace except under very extreme circumstances.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google