With the current developing situation in Minnesota it seemed appropriate to discuss the use of National Guard men and women in responding to domestic emergencies. 

A short phrase, and one that carries so many implications for the Guard folks that get activated. It's a phrase that has become very familiar to the public over the last 20 years. After the 9/11 attacks, it was for airport security and to guard the skies from follow-on attacks. After the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, it was to serve on the front lines along active duty. Then came Katrina, Rita, Ike, Gustav, Maria, and every other hurricane and natural disaster since, and each time the Guard is activated. Now, if it floods in the Midwest, "we've activated the National Guard." If there's a blizzard in the Northeast, "we've activated the National Guard." Fire breaks out in California, "we've activated the National Guard." COVID-19? Yes, they've activated the National Guard. Now, in Minneapolis, the Guard is once again on the front lines of a domestic emergency. But what does that really mean to all involved?

While it may surprise some, the average Guard member is not necessarily a trained first-responder because the vast majority of them are in the business of either combat, maintenance, or in support of one of these two functions. In other words, a tank or aircraft mechanic is not a "trained first responder" in any way because the Guard was not created to respond to emergencies. The modern-day Guard, as created by the Military Act of 1903, the Dick Act, is there to train on, use and maintain US military equipment, and to augment the regular military components in time of war. Domestically, the Guard's role had primarily extended to situations involving security and the protection of life and property, as they're now being used in Minneapolis. Relying on the Guard to the degree that we do today to respond to natural or man-made disasters is something that didn't really start until the 90's in response to Hurricane Andrew. Even after Andrew, the Guard's role in first response was limited. Katrina became the catalyst for reinventing the National Guard into the first response force it is now portrayed to be.  

Does the Guard have equipment and personnel that can have a dual military/civilian use? Yes. Large military transport vehicles can access areas impacted by high flood waters, helicopters are invaluable for search and rescue, and Guard military police units can easily be incorporated alongside local law enforcement. Other specialized units within the Guard can also be used in response to things like chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive (CBRNE) disasters. However, outside of these scenarios, and unless they have personally acquired some type of first-response experience in the civilian world, most Guard members are not trained by the military in first response of any kind, not even CPR. Even right now in Minneapolis, we don't necessarily know what type of Guard unit was activated. Governor Tim Walz is former National Guard so he knows the Guard better than most and one would hope he activate the right personnel. Otherwise, he would be putting both the public and Guard members in a dangerous situation. The point is, to blanket-label the National Guard as a pool of trained first responders is ambitious at best, misleading at worst. 

Fast forward to Minneapolis. According to Wikipedia, in 2008 the US Bureau of Justice reported that Minnesota had "448 law enforcement agencies employing 9,667 sworn police officers, about 185 for each 100,000 residents." Assuming the figures are still fairly accurate, and recognizing that the near-10,000 number is statewide and not all would have legal jurisdiction in Minneapolis, the state could still bring in officers from other jurisdictions under an emergency declaration to help in the response. Using trained law enforcement personnel would be a better approach than to activate the Guard. But, why go through the trouble of bringing in other law enforcement agencies, paying them regular pay plus overtime and probably some type of hazard stipend, and having to deal with the police union and potential complaints and lawsuits from citizens and business owners when you can activate the Guard for a fraction of the cost and not have to worry about most of those other issues? Exactly.  

Training aside, the men and women of the Guard always rise to the challenge. That's not a tribute to the Guard so much as it is a tribute to the everyday people who serve their community, the individual soldiers and airmen who find a way to get it done every time, often times in the most dire of circumstances, and sometimes in spite of bad leadership. They get it done, nonetheless, and they do it because they want to be part of the solution...because they want to help their community and fellow citizens. And that's the truly frustrating aspect of all this. They don't mind doing it, but if they're going to be asked to respond, all they ask from the higher ups is to give them the proper tools, training and equipment, to have a solid plan, and to take care of them with adequate pay and benefits. You can't control Mother Nature, for example, but you certainly should be able to control or at least be prepared to respond to her. The public may feel safer because they think "1,000 trained, well-equipped, and ready members of the Guard" are manning their posts, but in reality, what you may often have is a hodgepodge of next door neighbors, men and women in military uniforms, running around doing someone else's job, with limited to no first-response training, ill-equipped, with little idea what their "emergency" function is from one day to another, often times sitting idle doing absolutely nothing because there aren’t enough taskings or missions to go around, and then worried whether they're going to get paid or not (that's a discussion for another day).