Boston Marathon Bombing

[jentzschman]

Those who are willing to give up their freedoms for security deserve neither and will loose both. Sums it up in my opinion.

Thank God Utah has a law that protect it's citizens from the law's reach to confiscate weapons during an emergency. I personally would not allow them in my home, even during a time like that on Boston, and would have been armed with my rifle slung over my chest and hand gun at my hip.

 

[jentzschman]

Total FUD.


In the moment that a bomb claimed Jeff's legs, Arredondo raced into the carnage. The father who had lost his own two sons and quit his job to commit his life to protesting war said he didn’t hesitate for a moment. As another volunteer helped wheel Jeff away, Arredondo can be seen seemingly pinching closed a severed artery from Jeff's thigh.

http://lightbox.time.com/2013/04/18...carlos-arredondos-story-by-eugene-richards/#1

Ok, that link freaked me out a little... wth is going on?

 

[CJ Matt]

Those who are willing to give up their freedoms for security deserve neither and will loose both. Sums it up in my opinion.

Thank God Utah has a law that protect it's citizens from the law's reach to confiscate weapons during an emergency. I personally would not allow them in my home, even during a time like that on Boston, and would have been armed with my rifle slung over my chest and hand gun at my hip.

Did they confiscate guns in Boston? I am never going to agree with that if they did. Put in the same situation I would have my gun loaded and ready (do anyway) and would not just let it be confiscated. If the cops knocked on my door and wanted a quick look inside so they could cross my house of the list I would be o.k. with it. I have nothing to hide and the cops are there for one reason only. Put in a different scenario they would need a warrant to enter my house.

Do you get your panties in a bunch and hold up the search for a very dangerous individual or do you suck it up for a few minutes and be a cooperative and supportive citizen? This is a unique situation.

 

[Herzog]

I have to disagree with this argument and I have seen it being made quite a bit. I do not agree with disarming civilians after Katrina and don't think they did that here. I have to look at the two options. One being a temporary invasion of my rights and the second being the escape of a terrorist. What would you prefer? I will go with option one and I would hope you would too. Big picture: The SOB needed to be caught!

The big picture is that the SOB got caught by a civilian that went out to have a smoke. The house raids did nothing. What these people need is to have their own firearms and know how to use them so they don't have to give up their 4th amendment rights. JMHO.

 

[Herzog]

Did they confiscate guns in Boston? I am never going to agree with that if they did. Put in the same situation I would have my gun loaded and ready (do anyway) and would not just let it be confiscated. If the cops knocked on my door and wanted a quick look inside so they could cross my house of the list I would be o.k. with it. I have nothing to hide and the cops are there for one reason only. Put in a different scenario they would need a warrant to enter my house.

Do you get your panties in a bunch and hold up the search for a very dangerous individual or do you suck it up for a few minutes and be a cooperative and supportive citizen? This is a unique situation.

I haven't heard any reports of them doing so. I just want to know how OK with it they would be if I said they couldn't come in my home. Terrorist or not. I'm capable of securing my own home and knowing if there's a terrorist in there. But from all the reports, they were pulling people out of their homes no questions asked. I think that is insane, no matter the situation.

 

[CJ Matt]

The big picture is that the SOB got caught by a civilian that went out to have a smoke. The house raids did nothing. What these people need is to have their own firearms and know how to use them so they don't have to give up their 4th amendment rights. JMHO.

I prefer them to have their own guns too. It did work out this time but criminals on the run in past have broken into houses regardless of wether they where occupied. Again a gun could prevent that.

Have the residents there complained? If so I haven't heard anything about it. That just means that the ones complaining are doing so from afar and do not know how the police treated them what questions were asked etc. Did the cops give them no option but to have them them enter their home? Tell me that they confiscated their arms and I'll be pissed too.

 

[sixstringsteve]

In my opinion, the issue isn't whether or not they were treated nicely, it's whether or not the military justifies circumventing our 4th amendment in certain situations. Once the people get used to the government circumventing the 4th amendment, nobody will protest. When the government does it for their own advantage and not ours, we will just lie down and let it happen since we're used to it. I have no doubt that law enforcement had the best of intentions in this situation, but in my mind, that doesn't justify ignoring the bill of rights. I wonder what would have happened if someone had denied them access to their home.

 

[Herzog]

[video=youtube;zq_1cyyGjb4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zq_1cyyGjb4[/video]

A lot of people are asking questions.

 

[sixstringsteve]

A lot of people are asking questions.

That makes me happy.

 

[CJ Matt]

In my opinion, the issue isn't whether or not they were treated nicely, it's whether or not the military justifies circumventing our 4th amendment in certain situations. Once the people get used to the government circumventing the 4th amendment, nobody will protest, and when the government does it for their own advantage and not ours, we will just lie down and let it happen since we're used to it. I have no doubt that law enforcement had the best of intentions, but in my mind, that doesn't justify ignoring the bill of rights. I wonder what would have happened if someone had denied them access to their home.

Of course people are getting used to it since it is happening in every major city in the U.S. as I type this.

 

[SAMI]

A right not exercised is a right lost. No, terrorist or no terrorist claimed to be in my neighborhood, you don't have a signed warrant you don't get to look inside my home.

The militarization of America's police departments is one step closer to the ultimate police state for the country. I'm sure its difficult to turn down the freshly printed Federal money that's flying out of DC to bank roll the militarization movement. It's sickening really. Can't bite the hand that fed you with all those Bearcat armored tanks, body armor, and riot gear.. if only "To protect and serve" was the truth of the big picture when it comes to law enforcement. I respect the man wearing the badge, not the position; respect must be mutual.

 

[CJ Matt]

[video=youtube;zq_1cyyGjb4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zq_1cyyGjb4[/video]

A lot of people are asking questions.

It would be easier to take seriously if the callers didn't all sound like they were saking in their boots like their meds may be running out.

 

[Herzog]

Bloomberg Says Interpretation of Constitution Will ‘Have to Change’ After Boston Bombing
http://politicker.com/2013/04/bloom...tion-of-the-constitution-will-have-to-change/

 

[TRD270]

Bloomberg Says Interpretation of Constitution Will ‘Have to Change’ After Boston Bombing
http://politicker.com/2013/04/bloom...tion-of-the-constitution-will-have-to-change/

Now thats some BS

 

[Kevin B.]

Eh. It's Bloomberg pandering to his election base (innercity liberals) and trying to be relevant.

 

[XJEEPER]

Bloomberg would be fine with the establishment of a dictatorship, giving him ultimate control over everything. That pesky Constitution is just getting in his way. He claims his restrictions of rights and freedoms are just helping the People make better choices which benefit the collective.......thank you, Karl Marx.

 

[Kevin B.]

Bloomberg is the nanny state personified. Whether it's guns or soda pop or your right to assemble, he thinks he knows what rights you don't need and by god you'll give them up and like it.

I hate that dude.

 

[CJ Matt]

This gets into some of the legality of the searches.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ertown_door_to_door_search_by_police_for.html

"In exigent circumstances, or emergency situations, police can conduct warrantless searches to protect public safety. This exception to the Fourth Amendment’s probable cause requirement normally addresses situations of “hot pursuit,” in which an escaping suspect is tracked to a private home. But it might also apply to the events unfolding in Boston if further harm or injury might be supposed to occur in the time it takes to secure a warrant. A bomber believed to be armed and planning more violence would almost certainly meet such prerequisites."

 

[sixstringsteve]

that's not the law, that's a journalist's interpretation of the law.

 

[CJ Matt]

There are exceptions to the 4th amendment like the 2nd. For instance we cannot own fully auto machine guns without going through additional steps and getting a Class 3 license. Of course those on the gun control side make it sound like you can go buy a tank or full auto machine gun now.

My issue is that this was one case where there was a terrorist on the run and had been suspected to be in an area. You all seem to prefer the option of his escape and the hazard to many others over a very short search of a house. I expect a search warrant to search my house but common sense, concern for others safety, seeing the big picture would allow me to put that aside for an extreme case. You all make it seem like they do this all time already. You're having a knee jerk reaction to this one instance.

I have a bigger issue with the gun laws there making it so that the residents were not armed to protect themselves. That is a long term infringment on their rights.