# Federal highway patrol



## KPD54 (Oct 30, 2020)

Hi all,
I’ve heard this idea slung around by some co workers of mine. Honestly, they see it as an eventuality, but I’m not so sure. I just find it hard to believe. What would they enforce, what would their powers be, etc. What do y’all think about this idea.(in my head, it’s federal cops with barracks along major interstate highways)


----------



## msw (Jul 19, 2004)

I’ve not heard about this, but....... The Left needs a Federal Police Force to do their bidding, and in the not too distant future, we will hear more and more about this concept. I have not read anything about a national highway patrol, but at first thought, it would seem to be a good starting point for the Feds: begin with these guys enforcing traffic laws on interstate highways, and then move from there too..... whatever else they need ‘em for.


----------



## USAF286 (May 20, 2011)

Everything you need to know is in this book...get it before it’s burned!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DPH1992 (Mar 29, 2019)

Wow, that’s strange, I was thinking the same thing the other day. Not sure if it’s feasible though or a good idea for that matter. I could very easily see it going from strictly interstate traffic enforcement to encroaching on State and City/Town duties.


----------



## Roy Fehler (Jun 15, 2010)

msw said:


> I’ve not heard about this, but....... The Left needs a Federal Police Force to do their bidding, and in the not too distant future, we will hear more and more about this concept. I have not read anything about a national highway patrol, but at first thought, it would seem to be a good starting point for the Feds: begin with these guys enforcing traffic laws on interstate highways, and then move from there too..... whatever else they need ‘em for.


Good starting point?

There would be absolutely nothing “good” about such a naked power grab by an already overreaching Federal government.

There are reasons why the uniformed Federal law enforcement agencies have very narrowly focused missions and limited authority. I believe the only one that can enforce state/local law (outside the Assimilative Crimes Act) is the US Park Police in Washington DC, and that authority is limited to just within DC.

The Founding Fathers knew the dangers of a national police force. A Federal “highway patrol” would be the first step towards that, although the numbers of near-sighted whackers who would want the job would be frightening.

The current system of the states patrolling the interstate highways is working just fine, there’s absolutely no need to “fix” it.


----------



## KPD54 (Oct 30, 2020)

Roy Fehler said:


> Good starting point?
> 
> There would be absolutely nothing “good” about such a naked power grab by an already overreaching Federal government.
> 
> ...


I’m not suggesting there is a need to fix it, I just wanna hear what people think about the idea honestly.


----------



## DPH1992 (Mar 29, 2019)

KPD54 said:


> I’m not suggesting there is a need to fix it, I just wanna hear what people think about the idea honestly.


Interesting idea, but ultimately there’s really no need for it. States get the job done for the most part. Unless in the future traffic violations on the highways get out of hand and state LE don’t have enough personnel to enforce then maybe.. and with some of the Civil Service registration numbers I see floating around, that’s not hard to imagine.


----------



## msw (Jul 19, 2004)

Roy Fehler said:


> .......There would be absolutely nothing “good” about such a naked power grab by an already overreaching Federal government......


I’m not saying it’d be “good” for us (it wouldn’t) but it’d advantageous for an autocratic, overreaching Federal government..... so hopefully it won’t happen. Independent state and local law enforcement agencies are a barrier to any attempt at encroaching power by a centralized government. From _their _standpoint, an autocratic central government _needs _its own police force to get done what it wants to get done..... The Left knows this, and it is why my gut feeling is that we will see studies about the necessity of - and ultimately calls (from The Left) for - various additional National law enforcement agencies.

I personally have never read or seen anything about any call for a Federal Highway Patrol, so I’d like to see the source of the OP’s comments. But, think about it: If an autocratic central government wanted to ultimately establish a National Police Force, what better place to start than a Federal Highway Patrol - with “limited” traffic enforcement authority - on the Interstate Highways? You can bet if that ever happened, it wouldn’t be long till their authority was significantly expanded to include any and all types of criminal enforcement. And then voila, you’ve got what “they” want, a National Police Force, similar to what almost every other country in the world has. I’m old enough that I will thankfully not live long enough to see this happen (if it ever does); it’s up to the younger generations now to guard against these potentially liberty-ending scenarios.


----------



## KPD54 (Oct 30, 2020)

msw said:


> I’m not saying it’d be “good” for us (it wouldn’t) but it’d advantageous for an autocratic, overreaching Federal government..... so hopefully it won’t happen. Independent state and local law enforcement agencies are a barrier to any attempt at encroaching power by a centralized government. From _their _standpoint, an autocratic central government _needs _its own police force to get done what it wants to get done..... The Left knows this, and it is why my gut feeling is that we will see studies about the necessity of - and ultimately calls (from The Left) for - various additional National law enforcement agencies.
> 
> I personally have never read or seen anything about any call for a Federal Highway Patrol, so I’d like to see the source of the OP’s comments. But, think about it: If an autocratic central government wanted to ultimately establish a National Police Force, what better place to start than a Federal Highway Patrol - with “limited” traffic enforcement authority - on the Interstate Highways? You can bet if that ever happened, it wouldn’t be long till their authority was significantly expanded to include any and all types of criminal enforcement. And then voila, you’ve got what “they” want, a National Police Force, similar to what almost every other country in the world has. I’m old enough that I will thankfully not live long enough to see this happen (if it ever does); it’s up to the younger generations now to guard against these potentially liberty-ending scenarios.


My “source” doesn’t exist. Like I said , this was just an idea that my coworkers were throwing around. Honestly, we thought it was the logical place to start if you wanted a national police force.


----------



## DPH1992 (Mar 29, 2019)

msw said:


> I’m not saying it’d be “good” for us (it wouldn’t) but it’d advantageous for an autocratic, overreaching Federal government..... so hopefully it won’t happen. Independent state and local law enforcement agencies are a barrier to any attempt at encroaching power by a centralized government. From _their _standpoint, an autocratic central government _needs _its own police force to get done what it wants to get done..... The Left knows this, and it is why my gut feeling is that we will see studies about the necessity of - and ultimately calls (from The Left) for - various additional National law enforcement agencies.
> 
> I personally have never read or seen anything about any call for a Federal Highway Patrol, so I’d like to see the source of the OP’s comments. But, think about it: If an autocratic central government wanted to ultimately establish a National Police Force, what better place to start than a Federal Highway Patrol - with “limited” traffic enforcement authority - on the Interstate Highways? You can bet if that ever happened, it wouldn’t be long till their authority was significantly expanded to include any and all types of criminal enforcement. And then voila, you’ve got what “they” want, a National Police Force, similar to what almost every other country in the world has. I’m old enough that I will thankfully not live long enough to see this happen (if it ever does); it’s up to the younger generations now to guard against these potentially liberty-ending scenarios.


You have it backwards, the left doesn’t want more law enforcement, they want less. The last thing they’d want is a federal agency created just to police the highways.


----------



## USAF286 (May 20, 2011)

They don’t want LE...they want cronies they can manipulate to enforce their bullshit. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Roy Fehler (Jun 15, 2010)

DPH1992 said:


> You have it backwards, the left doesn’t want more law enforcement, they want less. The last thing they’d want is a federal agency created just to police the highways.


Oh, they want law enforcement all right, but only agencies they can use to investigate/punish their political enemies, and infringe on the civil liberties of the citizenry.

Look no further than the FBI, they’re an absolute joke in law enforcement circles now, they’ve been exposed as the enforcement arm of the Democrat Party.


----------



## KPD54 (Oct 30, 2020)

Roy Fehler said:


> Oh, they want law enforcement all right, but only agencies they can use to investigate/punish their political enemies, and infringe on the civil liberties of the citizenry.
> 
> Look no further than the FBI, they’re an absolute joke in law enforcement circles now, they’ve been exposed as the enforcement arm of the Democrat Party.


I totally agree here. If you look at what those absolute stooges are doing to the capitol riots, its ridiculous. All the while, real rioters who burn federal buildings and smash property in portland go unpunished. They've turned themselves into a joke. I once wanted to be an FBI agent, now I'd rather work in the CIA or corrections than ever touch that job. I hold nothing but contempt for those federal "investigators" who are really just acting like the gestapo of the democratic party.


----------



## Joel98 (Mar 2, 2011)

The leftists want to get rid of local, constitutional policing, and instill their own Gestapo or KGB to arrest political enemies.

They realize that the majority of Law Enforcement in this country leans to the right and follows the Constitution. That’s why they hate cops so much. However they will still need someone to enforce their dictatorship, hence why they want to create a federalized police force similar to the Stasi, a secret police.


----------



## Foxy85 (Mar 29, 2006)

The internal battle of uniform design and what type of hats to wear would rage on for years. That alone is enough to discourage the establishment of a Federal HP.


----------



## KPD54 (Oct 30, 2020)

Foxy85 said:


> The internal battle of uniform design and what type of hats to wear would rage on for years. That alone is enough to discourage the establishment of a Federal HP.


Federal highway rangers. That’s what i think they should be called. And wear scary black uniforms with the campaign hats.


----------



## USAF3424 (Mar 18, 2008)

Roy Fehler said:


> Oh, they want law enforcement all right, but only agencies they can use to investigate/punish their political enemies, and infringe on the civil liberties of the citizenry.
> 
> Look no further than the FBI, they’re an absolute joke in law enforcement circles now, they’ve been exposed as the enforcement arm of the Democrat Party.


they love arresting cops. No more needs to be said


----------



## Joel98 (Mar 2, 2011)

USAF3424 said:


> they love arresting cops. No more needs to be said


100%


----------



## Kilvinsky (Jan 15, 2007)

I've always been told/taught that the LAST thing liberals want is a National Police simply because, there's no control in the by and large. You can always disband (defund?) a local PD but a national one would be there forever barring an act of congress and of course, the mindset of the nation isn't always in one camp or the other. If a National Police Service is established (NOT the Clinton thing) and the left is suddenly sidelined, well, going back to the FBI, do we not recall where they USED to be? Commies, Radicals, Civil Rights Advocates. Granted now they seem to work for the Commies and Radicals, but as short sighted as they are, I'm sure many on the left could imagine the pendulum swinging RIGHT again and a National Police Force would definitely NOT be something they would want. No, in theory, many would love the idea, but in reality, it's best the way it is, though it often seems like there are TOO many agencies and many duplicating each other's work.


----------



## TacEntry (Nov 29, 2006)

There are no national federal highway laws. Federal law enforcement is limited to federal laws or property and typically the applicable code of federal regulations (CFRs) that apply to that agency or its purview. Way too far outside the scope of any existing federal agencies. Feds have broad authority but narrow scope for a reason.


----------



## KPD54 (Oct 30, 2020)

TacEntry said:


> There are no national federal highway laws. Federal law enforcement is limited to federal laws or property and typically the applicable code of federal regulations (CFRs) that apply to that agency or its purview. Way too far outside the scope of any existing federal agencies. Feds have broad authority but narrow scope for a reason.


I really doubt that could stop them... Ever heard of interstate commerce? Its pretty much the Feds way into regulating anything. They could create a Federal highway patrol quite easily in the "interest" of protecting interstate commerce. They could easily empower their highway rangers to enforce any and all federal and state laws. Never say it isn't possible... Its the government, it does what it wants...


----------



## mpd61 (Aug 7, 2002)

TacEntry said:


> There are no national federal highway laws. Federal law enforcement is limited to federal laws or property and typically the applicable code of federal regulations (CFRs) that apply to that agency or its purview. Way too far outside the scope of any existing federal agencies. Feds have broad authority but narrow scope for a reason.


This exactly. There are NO uniform federal traffic laws. Some agencies have written for State traffic violations on federal property with CONCURRENT or EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction, under 18 USC Sec.13 and issued CVN's through U.S. District Court. (V.A. Police, DoD, and some others). I understand the theory of establishing a federal police force. In the practicum, it has already been done. Hurricane Katrina had VA Police from all over the country flying into New Orleans and enforcing martial law. FEMA is also authorized to stand up a force of GS-0083 civilian police. Forget the Highways, the doors have already been peeked through.


----------



## TacEntry (Nov 29, 2006)

KPD54 said:


> I really doubt that could stop them... Ever heard of interstate commerce? Its pretty much the Feds way into regulating anything. They could create a Federal highway patrol quite easily in the "interest" of protecting interstate commerce. They could easily empower their highway rangers to enforce any and all federal and state laws. Never say it isn't possible... Its the government, it does what it wants...


There are regulatory non-LE USDOT guys for the interstate commerce stuff. They inspect trucks and stuff. Screw the highway ranger idea. I say we call them the Main Force Patrol (MFP) and they wear motorcycle leather. They will have yellow "Pursuit" marked cars with blue and red stripes. There will also be an elite few that drive black supercharged 1976 Ford Falcon XB "Interceptors" that have huge blowers that you can inexplicably turn on and off. Their main sidearm will be sawed-off double barrel shotguns of course. They will be extremely effective at running down rogue motorcycle gangs that are known to mostly ride Kawasaki K1000's...


----------



## Roy Fehler (Jun 15, 2010)

mpd61 said:


> This exactly. There are NO uniform federal traffic laws. Some agencies have written for State traffic violations on federal property with CONCURRENT or EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction, under 18 USC Sec.13 and issued CVN's through U.S. District Court. (V.A. Police, DoD, and some others). I understand the theory of establishing a federal police force. In the practicum, it has already been done. Hurricane Katrina had VA Police from all over the country flying into New Orleans and enforcing martial law. FEMA is also authorized to stand up a force of GS-0083 civilian police. Forget the Highways, the doors have already been peeked through.


Martial law was never declared in New Orleans after Katrina, and in fact hasn’t been declared in the United States since the 1960’s.

Martial law means the military comes into a jurisdiction and assumes responsibility for law enforcement, essentially suspending Posse Comitatus. It’s a very scary proposition, so it’s been very sparingly used, with good reason.


----------



## KPD54 (Oct 30, 2020)

TacEntry said:


> There are regulatory non-LE USDOT guys for the interstate commerce stuff. They inspect trucks and stuff.


you were thinking about this to logically. Don’t think about this as a person who sees a redundancy. Rather, think about it as a federal legislator or administrator who wants to expand the power of the federal government.


----------



## mpd61 (Aug 7, 2002)

Roy Fehler said:


> Martial law was never declared in New Orleans after Katrina, and in fact hasn’t been declared in the United States since the 1960’s.
> 
> Martial law means the military comes into a jurisdiction and assumes responsibility for law enforcement, essentially suspending Posse Comitatus. It’s a very scary proposition, so it’s been very sparingly used, with good reason.


Sorry,
should have referred to it as "declared emergency" versus martial law. I just remember L.E. of all types going to homes and illegally confiscating lawfully owned weapons that years later the federal courts ordered returned. THAT was scary too. "Posse Comitatus" interestingly enough, has NEVER had anyone charged with violating it. The Army regularly (and erroneously) cited it since the 90's to severely curtail their civilian (GS-0083) police from performing L.E. functions against fellow civilians. Don't even get me started on that foolishness.


----------



## TacEntry (Nov 29, 2006)

mpd61 said:


> Sorry,
> should have referred to it as "declared emergency" versus martial law. I just remember L.E. of all types going to homes and illegally confiscating lawfully owned weapons that years later the federal courts ordered returned. THAT was scary too. "Posse Comitatus" interestingly enough, has NEVER had anyone charged with violating it. The Army regularly (and erroneously) cited it since the 90's to severely curtail their civilian (GS-0083) police from performing L.E. functions against fellow civilians. Don't even get me started on that foolishness.


Yes.... Katrina empowered FEMA to use fed LEO's within declared disaster area. FEMA footed the bill for various federal agencies to pick up where decimated and ineffective local agencies were falling short. Seemed like a good idea at the time.


----------



## Roy Fehler (Jun 15, 2010)

mpd61 said:


> "Posse Comitatus" interestingly enough, has NEVER had anyone charged with violating it. The Army regularly (and erroneously) cited it since the 90's to severely curtail their civilian (GS-0083) police from performing L.E. functions against fellow civilians. Don't even get me started on that foolishness.


Posse Comitatus only applies to active-duty military, not to state-activated National Guard or Federal civilian police. 

It sounds like the Department of the Army just doesn’t want the headaches of their civilian police dealing with other civilians.


----------



## NEPS (Aug 29, 2006)

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. Everything 10,001 or more pounds GVW.


----------



## msw (Jul 19, 2004)

I’ve been saying for the last few years that the Left’s ultimate goal of defunding and demonizing local police is to make the populations experiencing the (easily predictable) resulting rise in crime eventually clamor for more protection. And since the local police can’t do it anymore - due to the defunding, hiring and retention issues, etc - the Feds would at some point have to step in to take care of it. Earlier today, Candace Owens was on the Tucker Carlson show and shared her similar conclusions that the defunding etc and subsequent rise in crime is a prelude to the Left pushing for some type of National Police Force. The video clip is a bit more than 3 minutes long, worth watching. (They are talking about Chicago specifically, but her comments about the Feds using the rising crime to eventually get directly involved in local policing start at about the 1:15 mark.)


----------

