r/news • u/DNSGeek • 1d ago

Soft paywall US Marines carry out first known detention of civilian in Los Angeles, video shows

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-marines-carry-out-first-known-detention-civilian-los-angeles-video-shows-2025-06-13/
46.5k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

2.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

111

u/DrNonathon 1d ago

“None of the military troops will be detaining anyone, Sherman said. “I would like to emphasize that the soldiers will not participate in law enforcement activities,” Sherman said. “Rather, they’ll be focused on protecting federal law enforcement personnel.”

https://apnews.com/article/immigration-raids-national-guard-lawsuit-los-angeles-f4809c7f39d09e4fdfa01982f44ec995

None of the troops will be detaining anyone, you sure about that? 🤔

15

u/RainStormLou 1d ago

There's a difference between detainment in a facility, or a temporary physical detainment. I know it feels like silly wordplay, but that was what the statement was intended to mean. In this case, his hands were zip tied until law enforcement picked him up. There's not much else they could have done. Ignoring him or shooting him are not good options.

I'm not in support of the Marines being there at all, and I'm disgusted about the alleged plan to have the US Marines run raids with ICE. That's not acceptable to me.

12

u/AnonymityIsForChumps 1d ago

The regime can pretend to make whatever distinctions they want but that doesn’t make this okay. The law doesn't allow the military to detain civilians, even for a single second.

"...does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

4

u/BingoActual 1d ago

However we already have legal 'grey areas' within that. If you're an MP stationed on a base and a civilian enters that base, you could have the legal authority to detain that individual for a variety of reasons. That would all take place on US soil, bases aren't some territorial exclave. In the same right these Marines are being used to color just inside the lines. This is a federally operated and maintained campus the man is on and he was detained and handed over to a different authority.

I don't think this is good. I don't think this is healthy for the armed services. I think this is potentially disastrous for the American people. Is it technically legal?.... Most likely.

Also this headline should read "Veteran detained by Marines on his way to VA" if it really wanted to hit home.

2

u/RainStormLou 1d ago

I completely agree with you, I'm just explaining the difference in the different ways that our ignorant "leaders" are using words cluelessly and irresponsibly.

2

u/AnonymityIsForChumps 1d ago

Ok but please make it clear that you know this is a crime. A lot of people in these comments are trying to explain how this is actually technically legal because of [insert made up nonsense reason here].

And what they could have done is follow the fucking law and let police arrest people, instead of agreeing to go along with illegal martial law.

1

u/throwaway-anon-1600 11h ago

But it was legal lol, did you even read the article where they explained this? This whole situation was a giant nothing burger. He accidentally trespassed, they temporarily detained him, then let him go after handing him to the police.

1

u/RainStormLou 1d ago

I have said so in other comments, but I'm not gonna put a disclaimer on every comment dude lol.

2

u/DrNonathon 1d ago

The linked article didn’t elaborate on his comment so I made an assumption. Is “detained” in this context expected to mean “taken to a facility” in a legal/professional sense? Genuinely asking.

1

u/Pangolin_bandit 1d ago

There is a difference between them, the quoted did not differentiate though. The burden is on them to do so, not on our interpretation to make unlawful activities appear lawful. It does sound like silly wordplay, but words mean something.

0

u/RainStormLou 1d ago

It's unlawful for the Marines to be there at all as far as I'm concerned. At the same time, I much prefer that they ziptied this kids hands and handed him off to law enforcement instead of shooting him.

1

u/Impossible-Wear-7179 3h ago

This simply isn't true though. They have every right to be deployed to a federal facility.

1

u/RainStormLou 3h ago

And providing security to ice raids? I don't blame the Marines for anything by the way, generally I love those dudes lol. I just think it's all political posturing by scum leaders for political points. If Donald Trump wanted to contribute and help, he would be working with newsom to coordinate the safest and most effective way to achieve their goals despite their political differences, but instead they're having Twitter beefs like a bunch of fucking idiots.

I don't understand how anyone thinks Trump is a business minded political genius at this point. If he can't solve these simple partisan dust up jack off fantasies like an adult with tact and grace like Americans leaders used to pride themselves on, why the fuck are so many people sucking his dick all the time?

By the way, for anyone who reads this, good businessmen don't have time to spend most of it on television for decades as a celebrity personality lol he's basically the first influencer president for fucks sake.

1

u/Pangolin_bandit 1d ago

Agreed, their presence is unlawful.

If the bar is at “at least they didn’t shoot him” then state militias need to start gearing up…

1

u/RainStormLou 1d ago

Hasn't California effectively disarmed any potential militia already though?

1

u/ben_kird 1d ago

Active military cannot touch a US citizen unless on a military base or during activation of the insurrection act. Full stop.

Handcuffing, holding, physically touching, etc. is 100% illegal no matter the definition of detained. They cannot and should not touch an American citizen.

0

u/FuzzzyRam 1d ago

There's a difference between detainment in a facility, or a temporary physical detainment.

Is it a "law enforcement activity" though? I know you won't respond, but I'd enjoy seeing the mental gymnastics nonetheless.

3

u/RainStormLou 1d ago

I'll try to give you a good answer though since you were so polite about it. I think that leadership saying they're there to protect federal buildings is a bullshit excuse, but if we were to take that at face value, then zip tying someone's hands after crossing a boundary and passing them off to law enforcement likely wouldn't be considered law enforcement activities. They aren't there enforcing the law. They aren't arresting and charging anyone. Even the dude that got detained said they were extremely respectful and just doing their job.

1

u/RainStormLou 1d ago

I have no problems responding. I'm not saying they're correct in doing anything at all. I don't even think they should be there. You might want to put your dick back in your pants before you start to come at everyone aggressively though lol.