Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1
    Senior Member TrippleJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    6,713


    Boston - Police State

    Interesting article here in regards to the Police house to house check in Boston..


  2. #2
    Administrator Tracy Rainwater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    18,070


    I didn't watch the whole thing, but man. How many people were in that house.

    It really was an unprecedented situation. The Police were determined to apprehend the last suspect. Did they go too far with some of the searches? Maybe, but it was difficult situation for everyone involved.

    I heard reports of seizures and arrests, mostly drug related, due to those searches. Those are a bit out of line in my opinion, even thought I don't agree with that lifestyle. I just hope that we don't ever have to go through this again.

  3. #3
    Senior Member David Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Northern, CA
    Posts
    13,925


    Sadly, this is only the start.
    David Vaughn
    Technical Writer/Blu-ray Reviewer
    Sound and Vision Magazine

  4. #4
    Banned!!!
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    2,537


    That's right Dave, where is it ever going to end? It seems that the cops, the FBI, local police are getting better, and they learn from each of these unfortunate incidents, but the bad guys always seem to keep a step ahead. They keep recruiting nut jobs.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Largo, Florida
    Posts
    1,434


    The real issue is how much of your freedom are you willing to cede for a minimal increase (if any) in safety?

    'Terrorist' cells like this can totally stay off the radar, I have always posited that a few people could easily make a bomb/perform a terrorist act without a trace. NO, to anyone who thinks I may be a terrorist, you couldn't be more wrong! I have spent most of my life treating trauma patients and want NO ONE to ever have to be a victim of any trauma, much less a terrorist event, yet I do not know how much of these small fringe sects any amount of government could prevent us from. Hell, in 1984 there were still even 'thought crimes' and that society was totally monitored... ( OK, fictional note but you get the point.....)

  6. #6
    Senior Member sven1olaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    the vast flatness
    Posts
    100


    Don't the terrorists win if we voluntarily give up our rights?

    Obviously the bad guys need to be dealt with, and the process should be deliberate.

    This article struck me as poignant, though a bit extreme:



    http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/reawakening-liberty/2013/apr/20/bill-rights-was-written-dzhokar-tsarnaev/

    TAMPA, April 20, 2013 – 19-year-old Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokar Tsarnaev is in custody. Assuming that Tsarnaev is indeed guilty of these crimes, a very real threat to public safety has been taken off the streets. That’s the good news.

    The bad news is that the Tsarnaev brothers have taken the last vestiges of a free society in America down with them.

    The Bill of Rights was already on life support before this tragedy. Before the dust settled after 9/11, the 4th Amendment had been nullified by the Patriot Act. The 5th and 6th Amendments were similarly abolished with the Military Commission Act of 2006 and the 2012 NDAA resolution, which contained a clause allowing the president to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens on American soil without due process of law.

    Americans had already grown accustomed to having their persons and papers searched at the airport without probable cause and without a warrant supported by oath or affirmation. After a brief, politically-motivated backlash against the Bush Administration, Americans similarly resigned themselves to the government tapping their phones, reading their e-mails and generally spying on them wherever they went. Things were already very, very bad.

    They just got a lot worse.

    Not only did the militarized domestic law enforcement complex put the City of Boston under martial law, but nobody seems to have found it out of the ordinary, much less outrageous. Yes, a few journalists like libertarian Anthony Gregory raised a finger. But, for the most part, nobody seemed to mind that the entire city was under military siege, complete with paramilitary units in full battle gear, battlefield ordinance and tanks. Tanks!

    How did we get here? 238 years ago to the day, the inhabitants of the very same city started a war and seceded from their union over a mere infantry brigade attempting to disarm them. Now they cheer those who violate their rights much worse than the British ever did.

    When Lee Harvey Oswald was similarly suspected of killing a police officer after assassinating the President of the United States, Dallas was not put under martial law. No tanks rolled through the streets. Oswald was armed at the time of his arrest and attempted to shoot the arresting officer, whose thumb stopped the hammer of Oswald’s pistol from discharging the weapon at point blank range.

    It is noteworthy that the military siege was called off several hours before Tsarnaev was captured. In the end, he was found and taken into custody by the same methods that any other criminal has been for most of U.S. history.

    So, there was no cause and effect relationship between the state show of power and the apprehension of the suspect.

    Now, the DOJ has announced that Tsarnaev will not be read his Miranda rights, citing the “public danger” exception in the 5th Amendment. But the language in the amendment doesn’t remotely apply to this situation, nor is it even related to the protection against being a witness against oneself. It reads,

    “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

    First of all, Tsarnaev is not in the Army, Navy or militia. Even if he were, the language would only have applied if Tsarnaev had been observed with the bomb in his hands just before committing the crime. The exception gives law enforcement the power to arrest him without first getting a Grand Jury indictment under those circumstances. It doesn’t release the government from the prohibition against compelling Tsarnaev to be a witness against himself after his arrest, which is the basis for Miranda.

    If Tsarnaev is guilty, then the public danger was over once he was arrested. The government has no authority to waive any of its obligations for due process. He should be read his rights and allowed to remain silent without molestation. He should have an arraignment where he is given the opportunity to hear the charges against him and enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. If he is unable to afford a lawyer, one should be assigned to him at public expense. His guilt should be decided by a jury of his peers, not the government or the media.

    The Bill of Rights was written for Dzhokar Tsarnaev. It wasn’t written for those suspected of minor violations.

    The Boston Marathon bombing was a particularly heinous crime. No one with a pulse could help but feel deeply for the parents of an eight-year-old boy killed by this senseless act or the others killed or permanently maimed. Most red-blooded men would have liked nothing better than to have been the one who found Dzhokar Tsarnaev, praying he’d resist arrest.

    Those are perfectly healthy feelings, but the awful power of the state is not supposed to be set loose based upon feelings. It is supposed to be restrained by reason. God help us if we forget.

    Tom Mullen is the author of A Return to Common Sense: Reawakening Liberty in the Inhabitants of America.

  7. #7
    Banned!!!
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    2,537


    Why are we always so concerned with the perpetrator of such a heinous crime? These two brother's should never been allowed to come here at all. Not to mention that they were maybe terrorists and members of the muslim group. When the older brother returned to Russia for 6 months, no one checked into what he was doing there. He was probably being trained in bomb making, anti American sentiment. If he wasn't a terrorist when he went, he sure as hell was when he returned to America.

    Meanwhile, his parents who are living in Russia, state how wonderful their sons are. They never hurt a flea. Bullshit. They live 6,000 miles away and had had very little contact with their "wonderful" children. They say that they are both innocent. How do they know this? They don't have a clue. They act like it's an American conspiracy against them. Show them all of the camera videos & pictures.

    Listen to what people who knew them here had to say about their conversations. Maybe their parents will come here to stir up their twisted views. Luckily, we can't understand one word of what they are saying, and who cares anyway. Hopefully, we will conduct a swift and firm court case against them, and put this piece of shit to death. Too bad, our government is too lame to put them in front of a military tribunal, which would be much better. Then they will put him in front of a firing squad quicker.

    What about the fact that they blew up a beautiful 8 year old boy. We only hope that he felt no pain. Look at the number of Americans who had legs blown off of them. Who is paying for all of this? Who gives a shit about this bastards Miranda rights, due process. Screw all of that. Lets concern ourselves with the murdering and injury of our innocent citizens. We shouldn't even talk about those two terrorist jackasses. Americans first, terrorists last. Tell him that he has the right to remain unconscious!

  8. #8
    Administrator Tracy Rainwater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    18,070


    Last report that I heard was they he was going to be tried under civil laws, in civil courts. Did something change?

  9. #9
    Senior Member TrippleJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    6,713


    Since he is a U.S. Citizen, he can't be an "Enemy combatant" so he is being taken to Federal court instead of a military court. A U.S. Citizen has constitutional rights..

    I am sure with the evidence, etc., the jury will find him guilty and it is just a matter of the sentence - death punishment or life in max solitary confinement that is the only unanswered question..
    Last edited by TrippleJ; 04-23-2013 at 12:21 PM.

  10. #10
    Banned!!!
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    2,537


    TrippleJ: I hope you are right. I was watching CNN and they had an experienced lawyer who said that this terrorist actually has a good chance of going free. God forbid; I hope not. They have changed Boston forever. Imagine the suffering they have caused these innocent people. The blood is on their hands. It cannot be washed away.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Luxury Publishing Group Inc.
15332 Antioch Street | Pacific Palisades, CA 90272 | 310.860.9988
©2011 Luxury Publishing Group. All Rights Reserved
For our Privacy Poliicy, ad specs and contact
info please click here