Posted on Jul 7, 2024
SGT Greg Knytych
26.9K
193
56
71
71
0
I have seen many posts on Facebook in the Oldschool 95B page talking about the Army either eliminating the MP Corps or eliminating Garrison Law Enforcement from the mission.
I've heard this rumor before, even when I was still in 35+ years ago. I do believe base law enforcement duties stateside will become more and more commonly handled by DOD Police allowing more personnel assigned to units to handle the changing and evolving wartime mission. There's been criticism about "civilian" police enforcing the laws on base, but the DOD Police aren't civilian. They work under the same authority and enforce all military regulations and policies as the MPs do. They also have the same responsibility to the UCMJ as any military member. I see no issues here. What do you say?
Avatar feed
Responses: 27
Votes
  • Newest
  • Oldest
  • Votes
LTC Jason Mackay
28
28
0
Having commanded a Garrison, I can tell you DoD Police do not have the same responsibility to UCMJ as military members. Head on down to your local CPAC and the Union for that area and tell me what you find. There is some pros and cons to realigning the law enforcement mission from Garrison and creating a larger DoD contingent to take it on. The largest argument I can think of is if there is a law enforcement mission in a deployed environment, the MPs need to at least rotate through LE assignments so they can do it down range. Experience in patrol and investigation are essential. Only one way to get it…
(28)
Comment
(0)
SMSgt Lawrence McCarter
SMSgt Lawrence McCarter
1 y
I agree 100% with Your View Colonel and having spent 22 years as a military Member in USAF Air/Security Police there is no good substitute for that. We have worked with DOD Police and that's fine but as a supplement NOT a replacement. My Military Police career also led to a career as a Full time civilian Police officer as well which I had the training and experience for. The Military Police background also put Me at the top of the list for any civilian Department I had applied and I had a choice of jobs.
(5)
Reply
(0)
WO1 Mike Dwyer
WO1 Mike Dwyer
7 mo
I also see possible recruiting issues too. I was a civilian cop for 6 years and enlisted to do specifically do law enforcement. Then I became a CID Special Agent and really loved the MP Corps. I wouldn't have enlisted if only combat MPs were available.
(2)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SGM Bill Frazer
19
19
0
The 1st time you get a parcel of POWs, and you have to sit on them because there is no MPs to turn them over to and no POW camps, they will change their tune pretty damn quick!
(19)
Comment
(0)
SGT Greg Knytych
SGT Greg Knytych
1 y
It is my understanding that the core mission of POWs, traffic control and VIP security is not changing. The main change is in the stateside garrison law enforcement mission and additional cross training for 11B and 19D.
When I was in, 35+ years ago we had that cross training and that became apparent as to how much training there was when I attended the NCO Academy. MPs and Scouts were singled out in weapons and navigation classes.
I'm not opposed to more DOD Police on bases but wonder how that reception will be from other commanders on base. Whatever form the changes are, the critical mission needs to be priority.
(3)
Reply
(0)
1SG Albert Archuleta
1SG Albert Archuleta
9 mo
I totally agree with you SGM...Internment and Resettlement Operations: Army Field Manual FM 3-39. 40. There's a HUGE need for this and we need trained Soldiers who know what to do in and what not to do when working with detainees in the theater internment facility (TIF). I was the COG in Iraq at Taji, and that amount of politcal and red tape when working with detainees is ridiculous! Definitely isn’t not the most desirable or sought off job, but it provided great opportunities for HUMINT operations and the amount of intel it provided to the US Forces was instrumental. In all....We still need 31B and 31E MOSs
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P
16
16
0
A few years ago, the AF in it's infinite stupidity...uh, I mean wisdom....thought eliminating the Security Forces AFSC and replacing them with DoD contract police would be a great "cost saving" measure. That proved to be a COLOSSAL failure when it came time for extra base/post patrols, increased security checks at sensitive asset (ie: WSU, critical infrastructure, etc), and sending troops downrange to secure airfields in Afghanistan and Iraq. The union(s) that control the DoD police units basically to the AF to go fornicate themselves as those functions were not part of their contract. Oddly, the 3P0X1 AFSC made a miraculous reemergence.
(16)
Comment
(0)
MSG Thomas Currie
MSG Thomas Currie
8 mo
LTC Jorge Cordero - Definitely. The overhead on a contract is actually more than the "bloated" overhead of the government doing the job, but the biggest problem is the Statement of Work because anything that isn't explicitly included in the Statement of Work isn't covered. Take your example of running a Dining Facility. The SOW can't just say "feed the troops" or even "feed the troops three meals each day" the SOW has to spell out how many troops, what times the meals are served, what menus and options are allowed, and hundreds of other details. If anything is left out of the SOW, the contractor doesn't have to do it. If the government wants it done they have to pay SOMEONE to do it, but the contract generally prevents the government from bringing anyone else in, so if something needs to be done the government has to pay the existing contractor. But if it wasn't in the SOW, there isn't an established price for it, so the government has to "negotiate" a price with the contractor, but the contractor holds all the cards so whatever price the contractor says is Take-it-or-Leave-it.
(1)
Reply
(0)
LTC Jorge Cordero
LTC Jorge Cordero
8 mo
MSG Thomas Currie - Very much aware, of the SOW, a Reserve Maintenance Unit I commanded back in the early 90s was deployed to Kuwait because of the SOW. The company contracted to maintain the equipment use by the military for defense on the Kuwaiti border had "Maintain the equipment to 10/20 standards" in the contract. And as many of us know, if the equipment is basically functioning, that may be considered 10/20. You don't have to do any "A services" on equipment if it starts and can preform it's primary function. The Army found out almost 3 years after the gulf war that the contractor wasn't even changing fluids on equipment, because as long as a rotating unit could get in a Bradly or M1, start it up and drive it out to the border it was considered in operating condition. So when called on it, the company said, sure we can do "A services" but it would require a modification of the contract and BTW it's going to cost this much more. So the Army rotated Reserve Maintenance Units for 29 day AT missions (Overseas AT) to perform A services and a few other minor maintenance issues. Mind you I commanded a DS level maintenance unit that was used to change oil. Great moral for the unit, being overseas, but a lot of miss used talent.
(2)
Reply
(0)
TSgt Andrew Harper
TSgt Andrew Harper
7 mo
Well, I see issues already. Contractors are not a good substitute for MPs. This all about the bean counters in the Pentagon, saving money for themselves. Love those Security Police (SPs), MPs and Shore Patrol, especially overseas working "Town Patrol"
(3)
Reply
(0)
Sgt Mark Tarte
Sgt Mark Tarte
7 mo
I was an SP 50 years ago in the AF. My sgts started as APs. They told me the AF considered us as “red-headed step children” and I see really nothing has changed, sadly. The rumor I heard while serving was that the SPs, Army and Marine MPs, and Navy Master at Arms were going to be merged into a super MP corps that you joined, separate of any of the branches. I guess that is what DoD police are these days.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Avatar feed
What are your thoughts on the Army eliminating the MP Corps?
MSG Thomas Currie
6
6
0
This is an issue that has many threads tangled in the knot.

DOD Police are not really a one-for-one tradeoff with MPs for garrison law enforcement. Just one of the considerations with DOD Police is the fact that they are civilian employees with union contracts and complex rules. Also, they work for the Garrison Commander, not the Tenant unit commander even when that tenant thinks they own the whole post.

Another consideration is the simple fact that they are not seen as "one of our own" by soldiers and they don't see soldiers as one of their own either.

Using MPs for garrison law enforcement in CONUS today is sometimes little more than busy work to give the MP unit something to do.

MPs have a variety of wartime missions -- many of which simply don't get practiced very well in peacetime, even during exercises. Any thoughts about eliminating the MP Corps would need to include plans to meet those wartime missions. You don't need to look very far back in US military history to see instances of how bad things can get when those missions are not included in planning and staffing.

I remain aghast that we failed to re-learn the lessons and failed to re-establish the Constabulary Corps.
(6)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
MSG Bennie Davis
4
4
0
During my time in the National Guard, I was once a 13B. Our state needed 31Bs for deployments but didn't have enough in the state to fill all the missions. So to be able to fill everything that NGB had sent down, they retrained a whole BN at Ft. Leonard Wood, MO to complete these garrison missions. This was during '04 - '05 when the 25th MP BDE and the 25th INF BDE was in Afghanistan. Also units were deployed to replace AD units in Germany that were deployed to Afghanistan. After that deployment we had a 2 yr down time before our next deployment to Iraq in '07 - '08. The MP Corp has been around since Sep 1941 but has seen engagements since WW I, so in my opinion the MP Corp is here to stay. Either it be in garrison or in other duties!!
(4)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Anthony Tipton
4
4
0
MP Corps is great experience if someone is wanting to continue in law enforcement after service ends. MP's are more respected than DOD officers.
(4)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Eric Harmon
3
3
0
It is completely ridiculous. More and more of the Army is being contracted out. That may semi-work in a garrison environment, it is completely unworkable in a war time theater. This is the work of lobbyists trying to get contracts for donors. We saw this ridiculous BS in both Iraq and Afghanistan, jobs that should have been handled in house were contracted out to companies like Haliburton. Follow the money trail.
(3)
Comment
(0)
SGT Greg Knytych
SGT Greg Knytych
7 mo
My understanding is that this change would apply to CONUS bases so the reduced manpower can concentrate on wartime missions and training and there would still be garrison MPs in all overseas posts. Not sure exactly how it would work but I know from experience that there is no real wartime mission training in CONUS assignments because all your time is dedicated to law enforcement on post. Allowing CONUS units to have more training would be a benefit all around.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SGT Elder Franklin Jones
SGT Elder Franklin Jones
1 mo
May God save us from those pencil pushing imbeciles.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 Kevin Dougherty
3
3
0
MPs are not a thing we have in the USCG, but my impression from a couple MP types I have met is that they possess certain skills that regular combat troops lack which prove valuable in a deployed and less than friendly environment.
(3)
Comment
(0)
SGT Greg Knytych
SGT Greg Knytych
7 mo
Very true but in CONUS duty assignments there is no opportunity to train for wartime missions. Any change, from what I understand, is to the CONUS assignments.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
1SG Mark Colomb
2
2
0
The gross dereliction will come to fruition in about ten years when there are no peacekeepers on the battlefield or in garrison.

Leadership has decided the only two sets of eyes and ears for the Commander, MP and Cav Scout are obsolete.

May God save us from the imbeciles.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
LtCol Paul Bowen
2
2
0
Military Police throughout the Armed Services have a primary COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT MISSION.

That involves training in tactical communications, tactical operational planning and deployment. Heavy Weapons Training. They setup and run POW and Displaced Persons Compounds IAW GENEVA CONVENTIONS, UCMJ, MILITARY COMMISSIONS, CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT, and the SCOTUS.

The MP MISSION needs advocacy from an MP CENTRIC COMMAND STRUCTURE.

This is not a RENT-A-COP MISSION.

This decentralization effort is stupid and shortsighted.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGM Bobby Langford Sr
2
2
0
I was Military Police for thirty-years, as I also served in Correction, attended Military Security as well as Special Operation and I also served with DOD Police, they are just as qualify as military police and that free up Military Police to participate in field training, preparing them for the Battlefields condition.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Brian G.
2
2
0
Personally I think it is stupid, reckless and an invitation for problems. This smacks of political maneuvering and some pencil pushing number cruncher selling this as a great idea because it means that they are delegating these functions to non war fighters and shifting military personnel over to different areas.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Richard White
2
2
0
A very stupid idea
(2)
Comment
(0)
PFC Pamala (Hall ) Foster
PFC Pamala (Hall ) Foster
3 mo
SPC Richard White I am in full agreement. The decision is truly stupid, narrow-minded, and ignorant. Are these DoD cops well-trained Combative fighters if the need arises-like say, someone "rams the gate" and then goes to fight with one of them? Many have trained in Moi Thai, Bah Ritsu, Judo, Karate, just to name a few styles of fighting, and I have seen a few fights and sparring matches, where some of the MPs look like they could have put Brock Lesnar and Conor McGregor to the ground if they had the chance because they were that well trained! I have also been reading, and now that I am a Paralegal, I am understanding the vital necessity for a well-trained Military Police Officer because detail means everything when you are preparing for any court case.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
LCDR Aerospace Engineering Duty, Maintenance (AMDO and AMO)
2
2
0
The navy does things like this on occasion, too. "We can save money by eliminating/merging this rating!!!"

Eventually, we re-introduce the rating. I'm still waiting for someone to have the common sense to split the LS ratings back into AK/SK. At that point, I can retire, since clear heads will have finally returned.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGT Elder Franklin Jones
0
0
0
DOD Police will protect the Troops and installations for their paychecks and overtime Military Police will protect the same based on honor, espirit de corps, soldiering and most of all with their lives OF THE TROOPS AND FOR THE TROOPS!!! Garrison Law Enforcement should be handled by MP’s, MPI, and CID civilian and government departments should be used in a secondary role or for ground and air transportation to permanent correctional facilities
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SPC William Wells
0
0
0
I think that it was a bad decision. I was a 95B10 and you need people that are of the troops to police the troops. These Dod are just rent a cops.
(0)
Comment
(0)
SGT Greg Knytych
SGT Greg Knytych
7 mo
I was also old school 95B and worked with the DOD police in 2 posts stateside and they are fully authorized to enforce UCMJ, and most are former MP or SP in the Army, Marines or Air Force. A lot of it depends on what the Provost Marshal; allows them to do. Some only allow guard duties and others allow full law enforcement. They were on patrol with me and the other MPs and did a great job.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
TSgt Curt Pozgay
0
0
0
Or, they can do what they did to us in the Air Guard. They made us (USAF Security Police) attend a 2 week Peace Officers course with the Sheriff’s Department. Which indemnified us on the civilian side of the house for civilian incidents, and to enforce the UCMJ on the military side of the house.
(0)
Comment
(0)
SGT Greg Knytych
SGT Greg Knytych
7 mo
The MP School covers all of that and we were fully trained law enforcement as well as trained in the various wartime missions, such as POW Camps, Scouting and Reconnaissance, Traffic Control of troop movement, etc...
In my CONUS stations I was allowed to attend the 13-week Arizona Law Enforcement Academy (ALETA) in Tucson, AZ. This helped with enforcing Civilian Laws on base and made us equal to US Marshals.
(0)
Reply
(0)
TSgt Curt Pozgay
TSgt Curt Pozgay
7 mo
It was New York State, they were covering their asses.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SPC James Fitzpatrick
0
0
0
As a former enlisted man, I HATE MPs! But someone has to do this kind of duty, so it's unlikely to ever happen. Remember, MPs don't just persecute poor, innocent soldiers. They also serve as traffic cops, provide rear-area security, and guard POWs.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 Todd B.
0
0
0
I don't see how they could remove military police units. One huge problem would come in combat zones. It is the MP units that deal with prisoners of war and others. They are also responsible for flow of military traffic and checkpoints for that traffic. Who do they think they will use in the next war? Civilian DoD employees in a combat zone? Yea good luck with that.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
MSG Frank Kapaun
0
0
0
MPs = Mop Pushers….
(0)
Comment
(0)
TSgt Curt Pozgay
TSgt Curt Pozgay
7 mo
BOB- Back Office Bitch
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

How are you connected to the military?
  • Active Duty
  • Active Reserve / National Guard
  • Pre-Commission
  • Veteran / Retired
  • Civilian Supporter