Talk:Military police

message: For example, when you go into edit for "Australia", you get the text regarding Australia, yet when you go into the page itself, well, I'll copy/paste for you here.
TEXT AS SEEN IN EDIT; In the Australian Army, the Royal Australian Corps of Military Police also performs the role of a secondary communications network in the front battle zone.
So, someone may want to do something about this.
Also, the information about the Coast Guard members being appointed as Special Deputy US Marshals is wrong. I swerved with BOTH and in 30 years only saw a few USCG staff be appointed as law enforcement. They DON'T need it, they can arrest or detain for violations of law under the federal codes. Try reading and understanding the law before you make such silly staements. The USMS will not often appoint USCG staff as deputies.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.227.209.181 (talk) 15:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Someone has been messing with the pages

message: "The Military Police in New Zealand like to have crazy incest with their kangaroo cousins. Michael Floyd occasionally joins in on the festivities."
This passage may not be accurate or appropriate in this context.Glenn.robinson 05:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You could have removed it yourself, you know! -- Necrothesp 17:08, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question about NZ entry

message: i'm surprised there is no article about south korean MP, i heard koreans have well-trained MPs due to their current status (in war with N.Korea)
there are articles about NZ, singapore and even portuguese MP!
i'm from NZ but i never knew we had MP here lol
someone create an article regarding S.Korean MP, i think Korean topics are always overlooked on wikipedia. 139.80.123.34 23:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  S.Korean MP 

message: What about the new Força Nacional de Segurança? --Pinnecco 17:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brazil Federal Forces 

message: The powers of the various Finnish authorities are quite clearly listed in the Preparedness Act, in the Act on the State of Defence, and in various branch-specific acts. None of these includes any provision for the military police to have general jurisdiction over civilians, as far as I know. Of course, the military would use large areas as storage depots or deployment areas, and therefore, the military areas where the MP have jurisdiction even over civilians would expand hugely. 
If the State of defence act is in force, the military would have control of areas which are used for defence against an imminent attack. However, even in this area, the military authority would not have total jurisdiction over civilian persons. It would only have competence to keep peace, commandeer material, industrial installations, buildings, destroy and alter real and removable property, and obligate any persons between 15 and 65 years of age to work in duties useful for the military for a period of no more than 24 days. Still, the military would not have the right to investigate crimes committed by civilians. The military police would only have the competence to investigate crimes committed by servicemen or by civilian persons employed by the military. (In normal situation, the military authorities lack the latter jurisdiction.)
It is well known that the need of public safety will increase in a national emergency. However, the force to be used to complement the police in such a situation is the täydennyspoliisi (lit. complementary police), consisting of volunteers. This force may be used to increase the police strenght by several thousand men if the Preparedness Act is in force. However, the police reservists may use force only if they are directed by a regular policeman. (See The decree on complementary police personnel (886/1997) and Police Act (493/1995), § 42, as in the act 525/2005) Thus, there is no need to use military police for purely civilian duties, as there is a separate civilian force for that purpose.
So, if there is a provision in the Finnish legislation that gives military police a general crisis-time-jurisdiction over civilians in areas not threatened by an imminent enemy attack or used by the military, I would be most interested to hear about it. As far as I see, the Finnish legislation has been carefully crafted to make sure that the military has powers only where they are militarily useful. --MPorciusCato 06:53, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thinking over the the above discussion, I remembered that the MPs may be of course used in joint patrols with the civilian police, even in normal situation. In this case, the civilian policeman has the complete jurisdiction over civilians, and he may, at his discretion, temporarily ask any persons, including the MPs, to give him assistance in his duties. In such a situation, the military policemen (or any other persons authorized by the policeman) may use force towards any person under the direct supervision of the policeman in question. However, in this case, the jurisdiction over the civilians flows from the person of the policeman directing the operation. The military persons present have no independent authority and cannot act without the command of the civilian policeman. --MPorciusCato 07:42, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finnish MP powers in national emergency 

message: :Image:Shoulder-patch.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Shoulder-patch.gif

message: :Image:Shoulder-patch.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Shoulder-patch.gif

message: :Image:Shoulder-patch.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 06:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Shoulder-patch.gif

message: :Image:Shoulder-patch.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Shoulder-patch.gif

message: and other arab countries.. huge and active military police forces and no mention here
86.18.207.227 (talk) 19:37, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess we just don't know much about Egypt's et al military police forces. If you know some things, you can be bold and add them. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 19:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Egypt

message: Removed this :
===Limitation of authority and jurisdiction===
United States military police are prohibited from enacting state police powers and domestic peace officer powers under the Posse Comitatus Act, a federal law passed in 1878. MPs may enforce certain limited powers, such as traffic stops, on access roads and other federal property not necessarily within the boundaries of their military base or installation. The only way MPs are allowed to enforce law and order outside of the military realm as stated above is when martial law is in effect. When combined, the Posse Comitatus Act and Insurrection Act place significant limits on presidential power to use the military in a law enforcement capacity. This allows the state more time to use their resources and authorities to the fullest extent, allowing for the possibility of military involvement only when their resources have been completely used up.
The Posse Comitatus Act applies specifically to the U.S. Army (and, by extension the U.S. Air Force which evolved from a service of the Army under the National Security Act of 1947). The U.S. Navy and Marine Corps are not included in the statute but the Department of the Navy (which oversees both services) adopted the statute by regulation.  
The only military forces exempt from the act are the United States Coast Guard, as their mission includes maritime law enforcement duties; State National Guard troops under state authority and state defense forces, which are state troops serving under the governor and may be assigned enforcement support duties. The Alaska State Defense Force has a Military Police section, who are state constables.
as irrelevant to this article--Degen Earthfast (talk) 03:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: USA

message: United States military police are prohibited from enacting state police powers and domestic peace officer powers under the Posse Comitatus Act, a federal law passed in 1878. MPs may enforce certain limited powers, such as traffic stops, on access roads and other federal property not necessarily within the boundaries of their military base or installation. The only way MPs are allowed to enforce law and order outside of the military realm as stated above is when martial law is in effect. When combined, the Posse Comitatus Act and Insurrection Act place significant limits on presidential power to use the military in a law enforcement capacity. This allows the state more time to use their resources and authorities to the fullest extent, allowing for the possibility of military involvement only when their resources have been completely used up.
The Posse Comitatus Act applies specifically to the U.S. Army (and, by extension the U.S. Air Force which evolved from a service of the Army under the National Security Act of 1947). The U.S. Navy and Marine Corps are not included in the statute but the Department of the Navy (which oversees both services) adopted the statute by regulation.  
The only military forces exempt from the act are the United States Coast Guard, as their mission includes maritime law enforcement duties; State National Guard troops under state authority and state defense forces, which are state troops serving under the governor and may be assigned enforcement support duties. The Alaska State Defense Force has a Military Police section, who are state constables.
as irrelevant to this article--Degen Earthfast (talk) 03:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Limitation of authority and jurisdiction

message: The Arabic section on MP connects to this one (English is among the languages on the side of the article). But Arabic is not among the languages on the left-hand side of this article. This should be amended.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.250.250.23 (talk) 07:34, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arabic Section 

message: Isn't it a total duplication of the article  Provost (military police)-- ? Jardeheu (talk) 10:56, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Total duplication with [[Provost_(military_police)]] 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:56, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Canadian Military Police Photo 2.png Nominated for Deletion

message: Is there any reason for the USA section to be much longer and have 10 pictures?
31.205.76.155 (talk) 12:12, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not what "biased" means. "Biased" means favoring a certain point of view, disregarding objectivity. It doesn't mean that a section happens to be longer. Would you like to fork an article? If you think that more could be written on the topic, and that would be a good article, please write that. In fact, when reading the article, it seems that military police is a complex topic with the U.S. military, since there is no single MP service as in many other countries; this naturally requires more text. --vuo (talk) 21:17, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biased 

message: Anyone have info on the military police of the People's Liberation Army? It's the largest military in the world yet it appears not to be mentioned.--RM (Be my friend) 22:02, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: People's Liberation Army

message: In the opening section, when listing the various ‘types’ of MP units/forces, we currently have Brazil’s state police (SP) forces listed with its very own bullet.
To be clear, I am not against this, if the SP forces are truly unique, and can’t be classified along with any other type of MP. But that doesn’t see to be the case?
From my understanding, they appear to simply be a type of gendarmerie? They’re (inactive?) reserve forces of the Brazilian Army that police the civilian population. The only ‘unique’ portion of their mandate is that each Brazilian state controls its own SP force. This is unique for gendarmeries, as, as far I’m aware, all other gendarmeries are controlled at a national/federal level. 
However, I don’t feel this warrants a separate bullet point, especially not right at the opening. They should likely be listed within the gendarmerie bullet, unless someone can better explain why they’re so unique?
Thoughts? MWFwiki (talk) 07:02, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brazilian State Police = Gendarmes? 

message: Regarding the photographs in the introduction, one of them could be moved to the United States or United Kingdom sections. Then another photograph could be added to the introduction, such as this https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:International_Police_in_Caserta,_Italy,_6_May_1944_TR1769.jpg Dreddmoto (talk) 17:21, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photographs