Massachussets Images

[FaninAma]

Watching the images on CNN and Fox are a bit disturbing on a visceral level because I am sort of shocked at the level of paramilitary response mounted against this 19 year old terrorist. The guy certainly deserves punishment to the full extent of the law but it is, IMO, a sad state of affairs that our police force has become this militarized.

Some will trust the government to use this level of force wisely. I do not. It sort of conjured up images of Waco when the government used tanks against women and children.

Again, if the guy is guilty he deserves punishment to the full extent of the law but I can't help but feel this country is becoming ever increasingly a police state reminiscent of those in totalitarian countries around the world.

edit: apparently there is some concern the suspect has explosives or may even be wired to blow himself up so I understand the response more. Still, it is weird to see what our country is devolving into.

[Sooner Eclipse]

The entire response is disproportionate to the threat level. How many millions of dollars of damage have the authorities done to the Boston economy today? Over a 19 year old? That level of armed men roaming the streets of Boston haven't been seen since the Revolutionary War. They seem far more dangerous and threatening to me than a 19 YO with a pipe bomb & a gun.

[Soonerjeepman]

crap just let tell the thugs, $10K reward dead and any forgiveness for any previous crimes.....he'd be dead in a few hours.

[SicEmBaylor]

Considering the date, the irony is thick enough to choke on.

[jkjsooner]

Watching the images on CNN and Fox are a bit disturbing on a visceral level because I am sort of shocked at the level of paramilitary response mounted against this 19 year old terrorist. The guy certainly deserves punishment to the full extent of the law but it is, IMO, a sad state of affairs that our police force has become this militarized.

Some will trust the government to use this level of force wisely. I do not. It sort of conjured up images of Waco when the government used tanks against women and children.

Again, if the guy is guilty he deserves punishment to the full extent of the law but I can't help but feel this country is becoming ever increasingly a police state reminiscent of those in totalitarian countries around the world.

edit: apparently there is some concern the suspect has explosives or may even be wired to blow himself up so I understand the response more. Still, it is weird to see what our country is devolving into.

Well, I'll tell you what. Why don't you join the police force and chase down a bomber who likely has bombs strapped to himself (considering his brother did) and has shown intentions of blowing up civilians and killing policemen. And please do it without any "military" like equipment to protect yourself.

Or we can go back to the day where the LA police didn't have the firepower to handle an armed gunman who had body armor. Remember how they had to go to the gun store to buy higher caliber rifles because their shots were just bouncing off of him and he had a much more powerful weapon than they had?

Here's the video. I'm frankly glad that most police forces have learned their lesson from this incident.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVeb_zZdliw

[FaninAma]

Jk, I said that extra military style tactics were understandable since the suspects might be strapped to bombs. I do think the camaflouge is over the top.

I don't think the trend to militarize local police forces is a totally benign trend or that this new type of local police fire power will never be used against civilian populations.

[Soonerjeepman]

I know for certain cops are now trained in how to handle "civil unrest"..and it isn't just about handling protests. BUT I would hope that IF it came down to cops coming to control unruly legal citizens with force they would say no...but who knows.

[SicEmBaylor]

I know for certain cops are now trained in how to handle "civil unrest"..and it isn't just about handling protests. BUT I would hope that IF it came down to cops coming to control unruly legal citizens with force they would say no...but who knows.

You're naive. They'll do their "job" and claim afterward that they were, "just following orders."

[FaninAma]

You're naive. They'll do their "job" and claim afterward that they were, "just following orders."
The old Nuremberg defense. That is exactly my concern.

[Sooner Eclipse]

You're naive. They'll do their "job" and claim afterward that they were, "just following orders."
This is the problem. There are plenty of cases where these so called defenders of the public perform no knock warrants on the wrong house and then try to justify their misdeeds by saying they were just doing their job. The whole no knock warrant thing pisses me off to no end.

[ouwasp]

Here's something that came to mind, and that I hope I'm right about: I predict the Mosques in Boston are completely safe tonight.

[cleller]

Its just a normal efficiency increase within an occupation. These are not military personnel, simply police officers assembled into tactical teams. The same guys, different uniforms. The fatigues are more in-line with carrying out a tactical operation where ease of movement and the ability to carry more equipment are important.

Also, there is a little bit of a psychological element at play. Just as you assumed these were military-commando-killers, their adversary may have a moment where he is unnerved, or intimidated to the point that he surrenders.

All part of the big picture so that the bad guys lose.

[Soonerjeepman]

You're naive. They'll do their "job" and claim afterward that they were, "just following orders."

I said I HOPE...and actually my buddy's nephew is a cop and he has said if $hit hits the fan he's headed to his uncle's place with all his guns and we are all welcome!

[rock on sooner]

Watching the images on CNN and Fox are a bit disturbing on a visceral level because I am sort of shocked at the level of paramilitary response mounted against this 19 year old terrorist. The guy certainly deserves punishment to the full extent of the law but it is, IMO, a sad state of affairs that our police force has become this militarized.

Some will trust the government to use this level of force wisely. I do not. It sort of conjured up images of Waco when the government used tanks against women and children.

Again, if the guy is guilty he deserves punishment to the full extent of the law but I can't help but feel this country is becoming ever increasingly a police state reminiscent of those in totalitarian countries around the world.

edit: apparently there is some concern the suspect has explosives or may even be wired to blow himself up so I understand the response more. Still, it is weird to see what our country is devolving into.

Given the fact that it was unknown how heavily armed the 19 yo
was (many of our finest in the army and marines are 19 and heavily
armed in the field) and the fact that 3 (then four) were dead and
almost 180 injured, many severely, and that nobody knew the purpose
of the attack and that no one was certain how many were involved,
IMO, the Powell Doctrine (Overwhelming force!) was the correct call.
Had I been in the area and affected by what was happening, I would
be (and am) grateful that no one was taking anything for granted.

Is hindsight good? It is always 20/20. Err on the side of caution.
As an aside, did you see or hear the video/audio of the 4:00 A.M.
gun battle? Sounded like a lot of shooters on both sides (plus a
big bomb!)

I think I understand your thought process, but, I guess I'd want
more, rather than less.

[SicEmBaylor]

It should be said that the guy was actually found by a private citizen and not one of the hundreds (if not closer to a thousand or more) law enforcement officers that were running around Boston in their paramilitary gear like it was Munich circa 1936.

[Sooner Eclipse]

It should be said that the guy was actually found by a private citizen and not one of the hundreds (if not closer to a thousand or more) law enforcement officers that were running around Boston in their paramilitary gear like it was Munich circa 1936.

It should also be pointed out that he likely would have been found much earlier if they hadn't implemented defacto martial law.

[SCOUT]

It should also be pointed out that he likely would have been found much earlier if they hadn't implemented defacto martial law.

How so?

[SCOUT]

It should be said that the guy was actually found by a private citizen and not one of the hundreds (if not closer to a thousand or more) law enforcement officers that were running around Boston in their paramilitary gear like it was Munich circa 1936.

People who are armed and throwing grenades and pipe bombs are a bit different than what Barney Fife's uniform was intended for. Head gear and kevlar makes a lot of sense, given the circumstance.

[cleller]

It should be said that the guy was actually found by a private citizen and not one of the hundreds (if not closer to a thousand or more) law enforcement officers that were running around Boston in their paramilitary gear like it was Munich circa 1936.


It should also be pointed out that he likely would have been found much earlier if they hadn't implemented defacto martial law.

What actually caught him was a tight perimeter by those hundreds of police, and the heightened awareness. Had it been business as usual, the kid would have hidden for a short time, then simply walked out, mingling with the crowds. No one would have paid him any attention.

As it was, he was driven to ground, and found directly as a result of the perimeter and search. He'd have got away otherwise.

Don't know what the hang up on fashion is. It may look goofy to some, but they are the same police that patrol Boston every day, just wearing clothes and protection to match the event. If it panics the bad guy some, isn't that a plus?

[XingTheRubicon]

If you lay a backpack bomb behind an 8 year old boy, then you're gonna be made an example of. Have to side with the libtards on this one...it basically couldn't have been more perfectly handled.

[XingTheRubicon]

It should be said that the guy was actually found by a private citizen and not one of the hundreds (if not closer to a thousand or more) law enforcement officers that were running around Boston in their paramilitary gear like it was Munich circa 1936.

Did the private citizen apprehend him?

[SicEmBaylor]

Did the private citizen apprehend him?

He probably could have.

[cleller]

He probably could have.

Now its gettin deep. Not EVERYTHING that is done by anyone working for a govt (municipal in this case) is bad. We've do have to have police, water, roads and the like.

Boston may be a liberal stinkhole, but there's nothing wrong with them organizing their own police force to catch guys like these. Its not like this was a bunch of revenuers chasing a moonshiner thru the hills.

Its almost like you think the bomber shouldn't be pursued. Or, if they do chase him it should only be one man per block armed with a sword.

[olevetonahill]

Boston may be a liberal stinkhole, but there's nothing wrong with them organizing their own police force to catch guys like these. Its not like this was a bunch of revenuers chasing a moonshiner thru the hills.



Bastards

[SicEmBaylor]

The problem I have is the increased militarization of American police. They have everything from kevlar to APCs to military small arms and explosives. That is very troubling to me.

[rock on sooner]

Bastards

Aw Vet, that's just a figger of speech, them revenuers couldn't
catch a cold runnin naked in February!

[olevetonahill]

Aw Vet, that's just a figger of speech, them revenuers couldn't
catch a cold runnin naked in February!

:pirate:

[Sooner Eclipse]

How so?

Really? The goon squad running around for 12 hours scaring the crap out of everybody, couldn't find him. But thirty minutes after the citizens of Watertown were graciously allowed back out of their homes, they found and reported him. The owner stated that her property had been searched earlier. Obviously the goon squad missed him.

[Sooner Eclipse]

The problem I have is the increased militarization of American police. They have everything from kevlar to APCs to military small arms and explosives. That is very troubling to me.

This - given the expansion of military tactics and equipment into domestic police forces, we now live in a police state.

[Sooner Eclipse]

Now its gettin deep. Not EVERYTHING that is done by anyone working for a govt (municipal in this case) is bad. We've do have to have police, water, roads and the like.

Boston may be a liberal stinkhole, but there's nothing wrong with them organizing their own police force to catch guys like these. Its not like this was a bunch of revenuers chasing a moonshiner thru the hills.

Its almost like you think the bomber shouldn't be pursued. Or, if they do chase him it should only be one man per block armed with a sword.

Their response was completely over the top, given they were looking for 1 19yo that was on the run with a gun and the possibility of a pipe bomb. I'm not willing to give up my freedoms for the statist's vision of a condom covered Amerika.

They sent in an occupying force the size of the Patton’s 3rd Army to look for a punk. It’s creepy & ridiculous.

[SicEmBaylor]

Their response was completely over the top, given they were looking for 1 19yo that was on the run with a gun and the possibility of a pipe bomb. I'm not willing to give up my freedoms for the statist's vision of a condom covered Amerika.

They sent in an occupying force the size of the Patton’s 3rd Army to look for a punk. It’s creepy & ridiculous.

Couldn't have said it better.

[rock on sooner]

Couldn't have said it better.

I understand where you guys are coming from, but, let me put
this out front...Using the Powell Doctrine in a civilian situation just
might give a bunch of terrorist knuckleheads pause, knowing that
they can't/won't get away. Being fully aware that there are those
who will martyr themselves to "kill the infidels", I'll repeat myself
from earlier, I'd rather have more than less.

[XingTheRubicon]

Exactly, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

it's not so much about "we need all of this to catch this kid"...

it's more of a "see what happens, Larry?"

[Breadburner]

Cops are ****ed no matter what they do......

[Sooner Eclipse]

I understand where you guys are coming from, but, let me put
this out front...Using the Powell Doctrine in a civilian situation just
might give a bunch of terrorist knuckleheads pause, knowing that
they can't/won't get away. Being fully aware that there are those
who will martyr themselves to "kill the infidels", I'll repeat myself
from earlier, I'd rather have more than less.

Once again, the ends justifies the means with the statists. Where rights are concerned, the gov't is no better than the terrorist. Either you are willing to stand up for individual rights and freedoms against a tyrannical government or you're not.

The Powell doctrine is a military strategy that should not be applied domestically. Its a violation of Posse Comitatus if its being used regardless of whether the uniform says Police or US Army.

[rock on sooner]

Once again, the ends justifies the means with the statists. Where rights are concerned, the gov't is no better than the terrorist. Either you are willing to stand up for individual rights and freedoms against a tyrannical government or you're not.

The Powell doctrine is a military strategy that should not be applied domestically. Its a violation of Posse Comitatus if its being used regardless of whether the uniform says Police or US Army.

Only military involved was the National Guard and the Posse Comitatus Act specifically
excludes the National Guard. As to the strategy, I used the Powell Doctrine to merely
point out the "overwhelming force strategy". Are you advocating that the police shouldn't
be allowed to do what they feel is necessary to handle a terrorist threat of unknown size
or origin?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The problem I have is the increased militarization of American police. They have everything from kevlar to APCs to military small arms and explosives. That is very troubling to me. Think of it what you will

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s

[SicEmBaylor]

Think of it what you will

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s
i make of it that he's continuing the policy started by Bush after 9/11.

[jkjsooner]

Their response was completely over the top, given they were looking for 1 19yo that was on the run with a gun and the possibility of a pipe bomb. I'm not willing to give up my freedoms for the statist's vision of a condom covered Amerika.

They sent in an occupying force the size of the Patton’s 3rd Army to look for a punk. It’s creepy & ridiculous.

Why does everyone mention that he's a 19 year old as if a 19 year old with explosives and other weapons can't be a serious threat? Seems to be an appeal to emotion which has no basis in fact.

[SCOUT]

Really? The goon squad running around for 12 hours scaring the crap out of everybody, couldn't find him. But thirty minutes after the citizens of Watertown were graciously allowed back out of their homes, they found and reported him. The owner stated that her property had been searched earlier. Obviously the goon squad missed him.

Actually, they said he wasn't there when the goon squad searched the boat. He ducked in there later. Having less people roaming about during a man hunt seems like a pretty prudent thing to do. I am sorry they scare you so much.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

i make of it that he's continuing the policy started by Bush after 9/11.Then you must have thought He was going to do a good job as president, in '08 and '12, by voting 3rd party, thereby casting a half vote for him each time.. GREAT MOVE. haha

[SicEmBaylor]

Then you must have thought He was going to do a good job as president, in '08 and '12, by voting 3rd party, thereby casting a half vote for him each time.. GREAT MOVE. haha

McCain is even more hawkish than either Bush or Obama and would have doubled down on the police state. Mitt Romney as well. So please tell me exactly why exactly McCain or Romney would have been better in regard to the militant police state.

Christ...especially McCain. McCain would have made both Bush and Obama look like peaceniks. ****, McCain makes Mussolini look like a peacenik. So please dispense with your nonsense.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

McCain is even more hawkish than either Bush or Obama and would have doubled down on the police state. Mitt Romney as well. So please tell me exactly why exactly McCain or Romney would have been better in regard to the militant police state.

Christ...especially McCain. McCain would have made both Bush and Obama look like peaceniks. ****, McCain makes Mussolini look like a peacenik. So please dispense with your nonsense.Yes, we disagree on this . Nuff said. you welcomed Obear to the control of America. We've got him now, and all the tyranny He brings, and will continue to bring. Congrats, Mr. champion of freedom!

[SicEmBaylor]

Yes, we disagree on this . Nuff said. you welcomed Obear to the control of America. We've got him now, and all the tyranny He brings, and will continue to bring. Congrats, Mr. champion of freedom!

So, just to recap, you think I should have voted for one statist who supports the militarization of the police in order to prevent another statist who supports the militarization of the police from getting elected.

That's a crackerjack idea. You do what you want -- I'm going to vote for the person who actually believes in freedom, liberty, individual rights, civil liberties, and limited-government.

But you keep on doing what you're doing because the results have thus far been phenomenal.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

So, just to recap, you think I should have voted for one statist who supports the militarization of the police in order to prevent another statist who supports the militarization of the police from getting elected.

That's a crackerjack idea. You do what you want -- I'm going to vote for the person who actually believes in freedom, liberty, individual rights, civil liberties, and limited-government.

But you keep on doing what you're doing because the results have thus far been phenomenal.It is your opinion that McCain and Romney are as big as statists as Obeary. It is not mine, and I consider you wrong, FWIW. No, you keep on doing what you're doing, if you like the results you've helped create.

[cleller]

It is your opinion that McCain and Romney are as big as statists as Obeary. It is not mine, and I consider you wrong, FWIW. No, you keep on doing what you're doing, if you like the results you've helped create.

Amen. Its like voting for Tupac Shakur over Chuck Norris, because you're afraid Norris would be too law and order.

[diverdog]

Good lord there is a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking by our resident antigovernment crowd.

How about this. Why don't some of you guys STFU and be thankful that we have such brave men and women who are willing to risk life and limb to protect us against terrorist azzholes. I am pretty sure the people of Boston are thankful and that it is money well spent.

[SicEmBaylor]

Good lord there is a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking by our resident antigovernment crowd.

How about this. Why don't some of you guys STFU and be thankful that we have such brave men and women who are willing to risk life and limb to protect us against terrorist azzholes. I am pretty sure the people of Boston are thankful and that it is money well spent.

Sit down. Shut up. Don't complain. Civil liberties don't matter. Do as the government says and just accept it.

Got it.

[cleller]

When you have to sign three waivers just to get a flu shot, I don't think our civil liberties are greatly in danger.

[SicEmBaylor]

When you have to sign three waivers just to get a flu shot, I don't think our civil liberties are greatly in danger.

Different situation. That's not the government compelling you to do something via force. That's also not even close to being an example of a constitutional right being violated.

And if you don't think our civil liberties are in danger then you're blind.

[MR2-Sooner86]

I want to say I'm surprised at the amount of people I'm seeing openly support the recent show of force by the police state but I'm not. I'm just sad this country has so many bootlickers in it.

Also if you don't think the Republicans are very pro-police state then you got elephant dick so far down your throat it's coming out your @sshole.

[OU_Sooners75]

A whole lot of stupid in this thread.

[OU_Sooners75]

Sicem your conspiracy ideals are really getting old. I may not agree with how our nation is going today, but I thought Boston Police handled it perfectly. Paramilitary gear and all!

[diverdog]

Sit down. Shut up. Don't complain. Civil liberties don't matter. Do as the government says and just accept it.

Got it.

When you got ****** bags running around the street throwing anti personnel grenades and homemade bombs it is usually a pretty damn good idea to lock down the streets. In case you forgot those same bombs killed 3 people and injured 150+ people. On top of that the police had no idea if these guys were wearing explosive vest which have killed thousands in the ME and Afghanistan.

So far this year 38 officers have died in the line of duty and 16 of those were by gunfire. I have absolutely no problem with the police using state of the art equipment and tactics to protect themselves.

Finally, to throw a monkey wrench into you anti government hysteria the police tried to take both men alive. The oldest brother was tackled by a cop when he tried to reload and the other was talked out by a hostage negotiator. I have a lot of friends who are cops and the absolute last thing they want to do is draw a gun and kill someone.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Also if you don't think the Republicans are very pro-police state then you got elephant dick so far down your throat it's coming out your @sshole.Those kind of beliefs keep getting democrats elected, and we keep going downhill fast.

[sappstuf]

I want to say I'm surprised at the amount of people I'm seeing openly support the recent show of force by the police state but I'm not. I'm just sad this country has so many bootlickers in it.

Also if you don't think the Republicans are very pro-police state then you got elephant dick so far down your throat it's coming out your @sshole.

TTIWWOP

[Sooner Eclipse]

Good lord there is a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking by our resident antigovernment crowd.

How about this. Why don't some of you guys STFU and be thankful that we have such brave men and women who are willing to risk life and limb to protect us against terrorist azzholes. I am pretty sure the people of Boston are thankful and that it is money well spent.

In 10 or 15 years, when they're knocking down your door, and performing a cavity search with a shot gun barrel without a search warrant, I'll know that you're ok and thankful. I have no doubt that you see no problem with militarizing the police in this country.

[FaninAma]

Where do i sign up to trade some of my civil liberties for a little more promised security? Maybe daily flyovers by unmanned drones will really thrill you pro-statists.

The GOP is the pro-warfare party.

The Democrats are the pro-welfare party.

Both are in favor of bigger government and more government control over our lives.

How many people in this world have died at the hands of foreign or domestic terrorists?

How many have died at the hands of their own government's military or police forces?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Hear hear! Join the principled but mathematically challenged Sicem camp of voting third party in order to get more democrats elected.

[SicEmBaylor]

Sicem your conspiracy ideals are really getting old. I may not agree with how our nation is going today, but I thought Boston Police handled it perfectly. Paramilitary gear and all!

What conspiracy? I'm not big on conspiracy theories. This isn't a "conspiracy" theory -- it's a policy issue.

[cleller]

In 10 or 15 years, when they're knocking down your door, and performing a cavity search with a shot gun barrel without a search warrant, I'll know that you're ok and thankful. I have no doubt that you see no problem with militarizing the police in this country.

You believe this is a possibility? Really? Our constitution would have to be summarily scrapped by our Congress, with the approval of the US Supreme Court. People have spent decades trying to amend the constitution just to change one or two words with no success.

Living in a world with no rules sounds very romantic until you actually have to live it. You're either a warlord, a serf, or a punching bag.

And all of this lunacy is the result of the successful capture of two murderous terrorists. No one has alleged or complained of any overuse of police force, but somehow the use of BDUs vs wool has inflamed a few here.

[SicEmBaylor]

Living in a world with no rules sounds very romantic until you actually have to live it. You're either a warlord, a serf, or a punching bag.

That's rich. What we're talking about here is a government increasingly hostile to civil liberties and the constitution and you're lecturing me on living in a romanticized world with no rules? Please. Everything I'm arguing here is adhering to the rules. Nobody here has suggested otherwise.

[Midtowner]

Hear hear! Join the principled but mathematically challenged Sicem camp of voting third party in order to get more democrats elected.

For now. The sooner the Republican Party becomes irrelevant, the sooner a third party will have a shot.

[okie52]

For now. The sooner the Republican Party becomes irrelevant, the sooner a third party will have a shot.

Heh...still wanting to vote for Jill stein, aren't you?

[cleller]

That's rich. What we're talking about here is a government increasingly hostile to civil liberties and the constitution and you're lecturing me on living in a romanticized world with no rules? Please. Everything I'm arguing here is adhering to the rules. Nobody here has suggested otherwise.

Lordy, you complain about anything the gov does. The only way you'd quit is if it didn't exist.
The clothing and equipment the police have in Boston are too military. Someone can terrorize you wearing polyester and carrying a 22 just as easily.
There's too many of them. Bombings, murder and manhunts tend to bring out lots of people to stop the bad guys. Do you decide how many firemen should show up in Waco/West?
You're fine with rules, but not enforcement? What exactly is it you fear the government is going to do to you? Which civil liberties have YOU been deprived of? Is it just efficiency that upsets you?

Look at the IRS, Federal Justices and certain Presidents and Senators if you want to see who really has the power to take you stuff away.

[Midtowner]

Heh...still wanting to vote for Jill stein, aren't you?

Yes.

[Curly Bill]

Their response was completely over the top, given they were looking for 1 19yo that was on the run with a gun and the possibility of a pipe bomb. I'm not willing to give up my freedoms for the statist's vision of a condom covered Amerika.

They sent in an occupying force the size of the Patton’s 3rd Army to look for a punk. It’s creepy & ridiculous.

I'm a little late, as I'm just getting around to reading this thread, but you are exactly right!

[okie52]

Yes.

She's going to have to do better than 1/3 of 1%...maybe 2016 will be her year.

[SicEmBaylor]

Lordy, you complain about anything the gov does. The only way you'd quit is if it didn't exist.
No, the only way I'm going to be happy is when the Federal government restricts its activities to those actions it is constitutionally mandated to perform.


The clothing and equipment the police have in Boston are too military. Someone can terrorize you wearing polyester and carrying a 22 just as easily.
As I've said, our police were never intended to be military. Our Founders wanted strict separation. It isn't just about clothing -- it's about tactics, policies, rules of engagement, etc. etc. Anyone who denies that police (both Federal and state) are becoming increasingly more "military-like" is clearly not paying attention. This trend is disturbing to me.


There's too many of them. Bombings, murder and manhunts tend to bring out lots of people to stop the bad guys.
This is a good point. At what point does a manhunt become excessive? Nearly the entire city of Boston was locked down with thousands of heavily armed Federal and state police along with some national guard patrolling the streets and going door to door for a single wounded 19 year old.

What I really want to know is what crime and to what magnitude warrantless searches become justified? At what does it become okay to lock down a city? When is it okay to violate the civil liberties of innocent Americans? For that matter, when is it okay to deny a suspect his due process as he is constitutionally entitled?

Do you decide how many firemen should show up in West?
Fire Departments are not law enforcement agencies the last time I checked.

You're fine with rules, but not enforcement?
I expect rules to be enforced within the limits of the Constitution. I don't expect law to be enforced at all costs up to and including declaring martial law and violating civil liberties.

What exactly is it you fear the government is going to do to you?
To me personally? Nothing. I fear the government in general increasingly takes an "ends justify the means" approach to security whereby the standards by which they violate or fudge on certain rights is justified under the auspices of fighting the war on terror. This is hardly debatable. The Patriot Act and NDAA are two excellent examples. When the government has the authority to define a "terrorist" as whatever it wants to define it as and it further has the authority to permanently detain American citizens if they are classified as a terrorist, yes, I start to fear what the government can do.

Which civil liberties have YOU been deprived of?I haven't -- yet. I don't exactly live in a hot spot for terrorism. But, if I lived in a place like D.C., NYC, Boston, etc. then that would be another matter entirely.


Is it just efficiency that upsets you?
EFFICIENCY? LOL!!! There were more than a thousand Federal and state law enforcement officials combing the streets going door to door to find ONE untrained 19 year old kid who was bleeding from head to toe after a shootout with police the previous evening that he escaped from. Not to mention the fact that they never really found the guy at all....a private citizen did. You call that efficient?


Look at the IRS, Federal Justices and certain Presidents and Senators if you want to see who really has the power to take you stuff away.
Yes, all of that too. Do I seem to be suggesting that these law enforcement agencies are making policy on the fly? Hardly, they're implementing policy crafted and approved by the aforementioned parties.

[jkjsooner]

Living in a world with no rules sounds very romantic until you actually have to live it. You're either a warlord, a serf, or a punching bag.

This is such an underappreciated point. I think this is something the anarchists (not that there are any on this board) just don't get.


The clothing and equipment the police have in Boston are too military.

Another great point. It's not the only point that SicEm and others have made but they're clearly upset by the appearance of the police. It's funny in light of their comments about how irrational liberals are when it comes to mean looking guns (which is a valid criticism but they seem to fall prey to the same logic).

[jkjsooner]

This is a good point. At what point does a manhunt become excessive? Nearly the entire city of Boston was locked down with thousands of heavily armed Federal and state police along with some national guard patrolling the streets and going door to door for a single wounded 19 year old.


Again with the 19 year old. At what age does a criminal with bombs become dangerous to you? Can you logically justify the continued reference to the man's age?

And to my knowledge nobody knew he was injured so that is entirely irrelevant.

I expect more from you.


The older brother had a suicide vest. The police asked people to stay indoors for their own safety. They did not want restaurants full of potential targets for a suicide bomber. It seems entirely logical to me.

In the TV footage I saw cars driving around so I'm pretty sure had you been there you would have had every opportunity to go out and make yourself a potential suicide bomber's target.

[jkjsooner]

What gets me is that when I first started caring more about politics it was the late '80s and early '90s. In this era the Republicans presented themselves as the pro law enforcement law and order party. People who were worried about police abuses were labelled as pansy liberals. That's what I grew up with. There was a resurgence of this after 9/11.

It seems to me that there's a segment of our population that switches sides on this issue based on who is in charge. RLIMC is a prime example. And, yes, there are plenty on the liberal side that do the same thing.

Of course I exclude the libertarians and some others who seem to be more consistent on this issue.

[SicEmBaylor]

Again with the 19 year old. At what age does a criminal with bombs become dangerous to you? Can you logically justify the continued reference to the man's age?
I mention his age as an issue of experience. He had thousands of well trained and highly skilled law enforcement personnel looking for him. He was an idiot 19 year old who may or may not have had some rudimentary training but certainly nothing that equals the life careers of that many Federal and state agents.


And to my knowledge nobody knew he was injured so that is entirely irrelevant.

I expect more from you.
True, they didn't know. However, the fact that he was makes the fact that he successfully evaded police even more astounding.


The older brother had a suicide vest. The police asked people to stay indoors for their own safety. They did not want restaurants full of potential targets for a suicide bomber. It seems entirely logical to me.

In the TV footage I saw cars driving around so I'm pretty sure had you been there you would have had every opportunity to go out and make yourself a potential suicide bomber's target.
I wouldn't have gone anywhere. I'd have stayed indoors on my own volition. There are more than a few reports of people who decided to go out and about being harassed by cops for doing absolutely nothing wrong other than failing to obey their order...err...suggestion to stay inside.

[SicEmBaylor]

Judge-N is one of the best. I'm going to leave this here:
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/04/22/judge-napolitano-dangerous-start-talking-about-suspending-constitutional-liberties

[Curly Bill]

Judge-N is one of the best. I'm going to leave this here:
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/04/22/judge-napolitano-dangerous-start-talking-about-suspending-constitutional-liberties

Judge N would be correct! I'm not in favor of granting our government anymore freedom than it feels it already has to violate people's constitutional rights, and like it or not the still living bomber was a US citizen.

[olevetonahill]

Judge N would be correct! I'm not in favor of granting our government anymore freedom than it feels it already has to violate people's constitutional rights, and like it or not the still living bomber was a US citizen.

You sure?

My bad, Dint realize he was a Naturalized citizen.:jaded:

[Curly Bill]

You sure?

I haven't personally researched it, but I've heard it a zillion times on the news that he'd become a citizen in the last year or two.

[SicEmBaylor]

I haven't personally researched it, but I've heard it a zillion times on the news that he'd become a citizen in the last year or two.

Longer than that I think -- Everything I've heard is that he got his citizenship on Sept. 11th, 2002.

However, unless you're prepared to consider the homeland a "war zone" even if he didn't have his citizenship he should still be treated correctly under civil law.

[olevetonahill]

I haven't personally researched it, but I've heard it a zillion times on the news that he'd become a citizen in the last year or two.

See my edit. . Why would someone who wants to do this kinda Crazy even bother?

[Curly Bill]

See my edit. . Why would someone who wants to do this kinda Crazy even bother?

Crazy is crazy....who knows why crazy does what it does???

[Curly Bill]

Longer than that I think -- Everything I've heard is that he got his citizenship on Sept. 11th, 2002.

However, unless you're prepared to consider the homeland a "war zone" even if he didn't have his citizenship he should still be treated correctly under civil law.

Hmmmmm...gotta think about that one.

[olevetonahill]

Longer than that I think -- Everything I've heard is that he got his citizenship on Sept. 11th, 2002.

However, unless you're prepared to consider the homeland a "war zone" even if he didn't have his citizenship he should still be treated correctly under civil law.


Nope just last year

Became naturalized US citizen on September 11, 2012 - 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2311580/Dzhokhar-Tsarnaev-Boston-bomber-brother-partied-college-friends-days-AFTER-marathon-massacre.html#ixzz2RD5JgC6y
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

an opinion from one of the power crazed right:
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/mukasey-boston-bombings-jihad/2013/04/21/id/500610?s=al&promo_code=1338C-1

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Different situation. That's not the government compelling you to do something via force. That's also not even close to being an example of a constitutional right being violated.

And if you don't think our civil liberties are in danger then you're blind.

Sic'em, Is mining the border an act of small government?

[Bourbon St Sooner]

When you got ****** bags running around the street throwing anti personnel grenades and homemade bombs it is usually a pretty damn good idea to lock down the streets. In case you forgot those same bombs killed 3 people and injured 150+ people. On top of that the police had no idea if these guys were wearing explosive vest which have killed thousands in the ME and Afghanistan.

So far this year 38 officers have died in the line of duty and 16 of those were by gunfire. I have absolutely no problem with the police using state of the art equipment and tactics to protect themselves.

Finally, to throw a monkey wrench into you anti government hysteria the police tried to take both men alive. The oldest brother was tackled by a cop when he tried to reload and the other was talked out by a hostage negotiator. I have a lot of friends who are cops and the absolute last thing they want to do is draw a gun and kill someone.

I can't believe I'm agreeing with dd against Fan, but this is some over the top hysteria. I also find it hard to believe that folks can be worried about police wearing kevlar vests to catch a bomb chucking terrorist in one thread and call for militarizing the border in another thread. If you want to see a police state go to Russia and see how they deal with the Chechens.

[jkjsooner]

I mention his age as an issue of experience. He had thousands of well trained and highly skilled law enforcement personnel looking for him. He was an idiot 19 year old who may or may not have had some rudimentary training but certainly nothing that equals the life careers of that many Federal and state agents.

You don't have to be Rambo to be a threat. If you want to take out the police or other civilians you have the element of surprise.

Is this some type of sporting event? Are we trying to make it fair or something? Are we throwing a flag for too many men on the field?


True, they didn't know. However, the fact that he was makes the fact that he successfully evaded police even more astounding.

It would be a fun game to play (assuming everyonen knew it was a game) but I doubt it's very hard to evade police for a period of time in an urban environment - unless they have your scent and can use dogs there are lots of places to hide.

Maybe they needed more police on the search... ;-)

[Curly Bill]

With all the overkill of military and law enforcement assets there, why didn't they fly out some drones, maybe arm a few with missles while they were at it?

[StoopTroup]

crap just let tell the thugs, $10K reward dead and any forgiveness for any previous crimes.....he'd be dead in a few hours.


The old Nuremberg defense. That is exactly my concern.

I never thought I'd see you and SicEm finally become Dirty Leftist Liberals. Wow!

[jkjsooner]

With all the overkill of military and law enforcement assets there, why didn't they fly out some drones, maybe arm a few with missles while they were at it?

Probably because:


They have no intent on using drones in the US in that manner.
Unlike some areas that are not friendly the US interests, our police can operate normally here.
This is not a situation that posed an imminent threat AND an armed drone would be the only alternative to save hundreds of lives.



I guess you're still thinking about what you feared Holder said than what he actually said.

[C&CDean]

My only beef is having cops who run around going "it's wicked pissah! we busted his chops! go sox!"

I took a cruise out of Boston that was full of Boston cops/firefighters. Even their wives had Red Sox/Celtics/Bruins tattoos all over them. Obnoxious, loud, and it seeme like every one of them smoked. It was a terrible cruise.

[Curly Bill]

Probably because:


They have no intent on using drones in the US in that manner.
Unlike some areas that are not friendly the US interests, our police can operate normally here.
This is not a situation that posed an imminent threat AND an armed drone would be the only alternative to save hundreds of lives.



I guess you're still thinking about what you feared Holder said than what he actually said.

Naw, I'm really just poking fun at the overkill of law enforcement assets they used on this dealio, not to mention like many have pointed out - the increasing militarization of civilian law enforcement assets.

So...in line with that could we not have broke out some drones, maybe an M-1 Abrams or two?

[SicEmBaylor]

Does it look like this guy gave consent? And look at that bozo climbing over the railing like a ****ing retard. Gestapo tactics at its finest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2LrbsUVSVl8

[OU_Sooners75]

What conspiracy? I'm not big on conspiracy theories. This isn't a "conspiracy" theory -- it's a policy issue.

Im just trying to figure out what the **** you are wanting. What would you be saying had the the suspects gotten away and did it again?

What would you be saying had the suspects had high powered rifles (semi-auto or not) while the police had just plain Jane uniforms and pistols, et al the Burbank, CA bank robbery of the mid 1990s?

I am not even close to being a statist when talking about this. I unless given permission or a warrant, I don't agree with the door to door searches. However, there were 14 people killed and 180+ injured in a very heinous attack...one of the victims an 8 year old boy. And the police and law enforcement handled it superbly IMO.

All that said, I am against big government. I am against many things you are as well sicem. But at what point is it okay for the police to equip themselves well enough to handle almost any threat against them and the public?

[cleller]

^^ Yes, brother. If we're going to have to listen to a bunch of wallflowers whine every time a murderer gets arrested by anyone other than a single-handed Marshall Dillon, its going to get pretty tiring.

Must be a some Billy the Kid sympathizers. He was around 19 when he was shooting everyone in sight, killed 21 people by age 21. Some folks here would probably break down in tears if a posse was sent after him.

The same folks would be screaming like banshees if the bombers had got away, wondering how on earth the police couldn't have fielded a team big enough or bad enough to catch him.

Its the same old story, some people are never happy unless they're complaining.

[rock on sooner]

Naw, I'm really just poking fun at the overkill of law enforcement assets they used on this dealio, not to mention like many have pointed out - the increasing militarization of civilian law enforcement assets.

So...in line with that could we not have broke out some drones, maybe an M-1 Abrams or two?

I doubt they had Abrams close enough, how do you know the thermal images didn't come from
a drone? They SAID it was a chopper, but do ya really know fer sure?:biggrin:

[jkjsooner]

On another note, the oldest had a pretty hot wife and an even hotter sister-in-law.

I shake my head every time I see an American Christian convert to Islam - especially when they're good looking and female.

Funny thing, every time I've gone to visit my aunt in Rhode Island I make a comment to myself how a lot of the girls are cute and all sort of look alike. They're all Portuguese apparently. Makes me want to go to Portugal sometime.

[SicEmBaylor]

Sic'em, Is mining the border an act of small government?

Completely different situation. I want snipers every 5' at the border to pickoff anyone trying to trespass. What you're talking about there is protecting a national border from foreigners and what is essentially a mass civil invasion of our country.

There's a huge difference between protecting an international border which is an enumerated power of the Federal government and turning an American city into a police state by forcing American citizens to stay in their homes while they violate the civil liberties of even more Americans.

Apples v. Oranges.

[OU_Sooners75]

And I guaranfukintee you had anything like this happened against you or your loved ones, you would be singing a very different tune on how the police handled this situation.

[rock on sooner]

^^ Yes, brother. If we're going to have to listen to a bunch of wallflowers whine every time a murderer gets arrested by anyone other than a single-handed Marshall Dillon, its going to get pretty tiring.

Must be a some Billy the Kid sympathizers. He was around 19 when he was shooting everyone in sight, killed 21 people by age 21. Some folks here would probably break down in tears if a posse was sent after him.

The same folks would be screaming like banshees if the bombers had got away, wondering how on earth the police couldn't have fielded a team big enough or bad enough to catch him.

Its the same old story, some people are never happy unless they're complaining.

Legend has it that Billy was 12 when he kilt his first one...

[jkjsooner]

Naw, I'm really just poking fun at the overkill of law enforcement assets they used on this dealio, not to mention like many have pointed out - the increasing militarization of civilian law enforcement assets.

So...in line with that could we not have broke out some drones, maybe an M-1 Abrams or two?

Fair enough. Misunderstood your angle there.

[Curly Bill]

On another note. The oldest had a pretty hot wife and an even hotter sister-in-law.

I shake my head every time I see an American Christian convert to Islam - especially when they're good looking and female.

Funny thing, every time I've gone to visit my aunt in Rhode Island I make a comment to myself how a lot of the girls are cute and all sort of look alike. They're all Portugese apparently. Makes me want to go to Portugal sometime.

Me too, me too!!

[OU_Sooners75]

^^ Yes, brother. If we're going to have to listen to a bunch of wallflowers whine every time a murderer gets arrested by anyone other than a single-handed Marshall Dillon, its going to get pretty tiring.

Must be a some Billy the Kid sympathizers. He was around 19 when he was shooting everyone in sight, killed 21 people by age 21. Some folks here would probably break down in tears if a posse was sent after him.

The same folks would be screaming like banshees if the bombers had got away, wondering how on earth the police couldn't have fielded a team big enough or bad enough to catch him.

Its the same old story, some people are never happy unless they're complaining.

It is the same old story....its just some people have a huge hatred for our very government that they blame everything on the government.

"The government intell didnt stop the attack. Why didnt the intell get to those on the streets to help thwart such an attack?"

Had the killers gotten away: "Why couldn't the government start a man hunt large enough where he couldn't have gotten away?"

The catch the killers: "Why in the hell does the government allow the police to have paramilitary equipment such as Kevlar gear(vests and helmets), water cannons, very light APC's, and semi-auto assault rifles? That is taking it too far!"

Im with you cleller, some people aren't happy unless they are bitching and moaning about something. And it seems those libertarian fukstix like to bitch about how the government does everything.

Tell you what you 3rd partiers...produce a better overall candidate with as much financial backing as the two major parties and maybe you can get more than a handful into congress and maybe even one in the White House. Until then STFU and keep trying like the rest of us!

[SanJoaquinSooner]

Please, a moment of silence for all those abused homeowners.

[OU_Sooners75]

Completely different situation. I want snipers every 5' at the border to pickoff anyone trying to trespass. What you're talking about there is protecting a national border from foreigners and what is essentially a mass civil invasion of our country.

There's a huge difference between protecting an international border which is an enumerated power of the Federal government and turning an American city into a police state by forcing American citizens to stay in their homes while they violate the civil liberties of even more Americans.

Apples v. Oranges.

Well those are high powered rifles and full camo and gilley suited soldiers/law enforcement officers...Thought you didn't want our law enforcement to have paramilitary gear?

[cleller]

Naw, I'm really just poking fun at the overkill of law enforcement assets they used on this dealio, not to mention like many have pointed out - the increasing militarization of civilian law enforcement assets.

So...in line with that could we not have broke out some drones, maybe an M-1 Abrams or two?

What's truly ironic is so many people are complaining that the police are starting to act too military in their handling of situations. This type of tactics originated on the west coast in the late 60's and early 70s, mostly with LAPD and LASO. It spread quickly to SWAT teams across the land. So the tactics originated with the police, not the military. The military then picked it up during the 80s when they realized they would be fighting more in urban areas.

The real crossover point was Columbine. After that poor showing, and the loud outcry of a too soft response by the police up there, the use of urban assault style tactics was pushed very hard across the country, so that there would be a basic groundwork and understanding of how to handle these school shootings. So you can criticize that, too.

What bred all these current little robo-cops was the show COPS in the 80s. When that came out, all the suck-up studs that were laughed at on their own departments got on TV, because they were always capering up stuff to feel like a big shot. Kids grew up seeing that on TV, and then they wanted to be the same kind of cops.

Its a little disappointing. The cops from the 60s and 70s were truly the cream. Learned how to do a tough job with low pay, and low prestige, but still thrived at outsmarting the criminals while putting up with the whiners.

[MR2-Sooner86]

We once rounded up Japanese American citizens without due process. Perhaps many of you statist in denial would love to go back to that.

When you sacrificed liberty for freedom, you lose both. Either you get that or you just don't care about it.

I just feel sad for men like my grandfather who stormed the beaches Normandy only to have folks, like the ones on this board, take a giant dump on his grave going "that freedom you fought for? Yeah...we'd rather have the illusion of safety."

[OU_Sooners75]

Here is an idea, stop using your grandfather as a pawn!

My Grandfather was also involved with WWII then Korea (as a USAF Para-rescuer).

That said, I never use my loved ones as pawns to get my point across.


Finally, where is the evidence that teh government did illegal search and seizures of any homes in Boston?

If a citizen gives permission to search without a warrant then it isnt a violation of rights.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I want snipers every 5' at the border to pick off anyone trying to trespass. What you're talking about there is protecting a national border from foreigners and what is essentially a mass civil invasion of our country.

There's a huge difference between protecting an international border which IS an enumerated power of the Federal government and turning an American city into a police state by forcing American citizens to stay in their homes while they violate the civil liberties of even more Americans.
Apples v. Oranges.I wonder why he doesn't see the difference?

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Completely different situation. I want snipers every 5' at the border to pickoff anyone trying to trespass. What you're talking about there is protecting a national border from foreigners and what is essentially a mass civil invasion of our country.

There's a huge difference between protecting an international border which is an enumerated power of the Federal government and turning an American city into a police state by forcing American citizens to stay in their homes while they violate the civil liberties of even more Americans.

Apples v. Oranges.

Really, So the ranchers on the border that get their livestock blown up by landmines, where are their civil rights? Or should these ranchers forfeit their land in the name of small government? These people that are "invading" the Home Depot parking lot, they are a bigger national security threat than a guy that's already killed 4 people and has shown a willingness to kill more?

Also, I'm not aware that the Boston police were arresting people that left their homes in Watertown. To my knowledge it was a request for people to stay indoors not an enforceable curfew. Can you show me where people were arrested for leaving their homes?

[OU_Sooners75]

Unfortunately imminent domain is a regular occurrence in this nation.

[MR2-Sooner86]

Here is an idea, stop using your grandfather as a pawn!

My Grandfather was also involved with WWII then Korea (as a USAF Para-rescuer).

That said, I never use my loved ones as pawns to get my point across.


Finally, where is the evidence that teh government did illegal search and seizures of any homes in Boston?

If a citizen gives permission to search without a warrant then it isnt a violation of rights.

You were the one going "they killed children!" Congratulations you're no better than Obama hiding behind the Sandy Hook victims. Not so fun when the emotional argument is turned back around on you.

Oh yeah...


http://youtu.be/2LrbsUVSVl8

Enjoy your safety serfs.

[OU_Sooners75]

You were the one going "they killed children!" Congratulations you're no better than Obama hiding behind the Sandy Hook victims. Not so fun when the emotional argument is turned back around on you.

Oh yeah...


http://youtu.be/2LrbsUVSVl8

Enjoy your safety serfs.

And youre the one scared of our own government.

Maybe if you werent so hell bent and blinded against our government, then maybe you would realize just how ****ing pathetic you come across!

Again, can you show me evidence where the Boston police violated rights by illegal search and seizures? No you cant.
Can you show me where the police used excessive force when apprehending suspect #2? No you cant.
In fact, you cannot show me any evidence that the government of Boston committed any violations against our constitution.

I have children...and I would expect the authorities to do everything in their power to find someone that harmed one of my kids!
If that means they must wear paramilitary equipment...then go for it.

Fact is, you are arguing for a ****ing criminal....you act as if the criminal is being wronged in all of this simply because the municipal government of Boston requested people to stay inside...they didnt put in place a curfew. They didnt bust down doors...they asked if it was okay to search property.

So you are the one being pathetic!

So enjoy your doom and gloom outlook of this nation and your life.

[MR2-Sooner86]

And youre the one scared of our own government.

Maybe if you werent so hell bent and blinded against our government, then maybe you would realize just how ****ing pathetic you come across!

Again, can you show me evidence where the Boston police violated rights by illegal search and seizures? No you cant.
Can you show me where the police used excessive force when apprehending suspect #2? No you cant.
In fact, you cannot show me any evidence that the government of Boston committed any violations against our constitution.

I have children...and I would expect the authorities to do everything in their power to find someone that harmed one of my kids!
If that means they must wear paramilitary equipment...then go for it.

Fact is, you are arguing for a ****ing criminal....you act as if the criminal is being wronged in all of this simply because the municipal government of Boston requested people to stay inside...they didnt put in place a curfew. They didnt bust down doors...they asked if it was okay to search property.

So you are the one being pathetic!

So enjoy your doom and gloom outlook of this nation and your life.

People with your attitude allowed this to happen once already:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Posted_Japanese_American_Exclusion_Order.jpg

[C&CDean]

People with your attitude allowed this to happen once already:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Posted_Japanese_American_Exclusion_Order.jpg

We needed to round up the Japanese during WWII. We were at war against their country and nobody knew wtf was going on. It ain't like we just locked them up and threw away the key or executed them or something. Hell, I wouldn't have a problem rounding up all the ****ing muslims right now. We'd all be a hell of a lot safer.

[StoopTroup]

And I guaranfukintee you had anything like this happened against you or your loved ones, you would be singing a very different tune on how the police handled this situation.

I guaranfukintee you that had one of your family had killed 14 and injured say 160 people at the Boston Marathon, you'd be hiding in your basement trying to find a way to get out of Boston and hide from the press and anyone that knew you were related to those two **** sticks.

[StoopTroup]

We needed to round up the Japanese during WWII. We were at war against their country and nobody knew wtf was going on. It ain't like we just locked them up and threw away the key or executed them or something. Hell, I wouldn't have a problem rounding up all the ****ing muslims right now. We'd all be a hell of a lot safer.

Why do you hate the Constitution?

[olevetonahill]

You were the one going "they killed children!" Congratulations you're no better than Obama hiding behind the Sandy Hook victims. Not so fun when the emotional argument is turned back around on you.

Oh yeah...


http://youtu.be/2LrbsUVSVl8

Enjoy your safety serfs.

I said this at the Hide out , I'll say it here, Did you watch that vid thru ?
That was NOT a part of the House to house search. Not sure what was going on but its being distorted.
If it was House to house, Why did they stop with that one house?
Something is fishy about that whole deal.

[SicEmBaylor]

I said this at the Hide out , I'll say it here, Did you watch that vid thru ?
That was NOT a part of the House to house search. Not sure what was going on but its being distorted.
If it was House to house, Why did they stop with that one house?
Something is fishy about that whole deal.
Because from what I understand they didn't get to every single house in a row. One woman in the neighborhood said that her house was searched but not her neighbor's so there seems to be some jumping around and randomness to it.

[olevetonahill]

Because from what I understand they didn't get to every single house in a row. One woman in the neighborhood said that her house was searched but not her neighbor's so there seems to be some jumping around and randomness to it.

No way.
I'll need see moren ONE vid. They took those folks out of there as SUSPECTS of something. Like I said Not sure what. But that was not a part of Door to door searching.

[OU_Sooners75]

People with your attitude allowed this to happen once already:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Posted_Japanese_American_Exclusion_Order.jpg

What does this have to do with Boston?

Your approach is lame and quite pathetic really.

I believe in the right to bear arms.
I believe in the right to free speech.
I believe in the right to assemble and protest.
I believe in the right to vote.
I believe in the rest of the constitution and bill of rights.

What I don't believe is that this nation is as bad as you think it is.

Let me put it in layman's terms, for better understanding.

If you are going to mass murder people in this nation, then the full might of our law enforcement should be brought to bare!

That said, I never once said round up all Chechen nationals in order to stop further attack. I never once said to round anyone up. In fact, the only thing I did say that the municipal government of Boston handled the Marathon Bombings and the aftermath superbly.

I am not scared of the government, in particular the law enforcement for having APC's and paramilitary gear and equipment. And as long as the government follows the constitution, I am not worried what they do.

I go about trying to live my life the way God wants me too. I don't worry about things I cannot control.

[OU_Sooners75]

I guaranfukintee you that had one of your family had killed 14 and injured say 160 people at the Boston Marathon, you'd be hiding in your basement trying to find a way to get out of Boston and hide from the press and anyone that knew you were related to those two **** sticks.

Had one of my family members done something as heinous as what happened in Boston, or any other terror attack, I would help law enforcement anyway I can to find my family member, all while pleading for my family member to turn him/herself in.

[cleller]

People with your attitude allowed this to happen once already:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Posted_Japanese_American_Exclusion_Order.jpg

This is a little perplexing. You are now upset because Japanese people were rounded up during WWII. I supposed you are trying to make the point that "guilt by association" is something that only small minded and stupid people resort to. How could any intelligent and rational person lump together people and punish them based upon some common trait?

A couple of months ago you were advocating the killing of police officers because of their common profession without a thought to their individuality. (The term used was "Godspeed, Mr. Dorner" when Christopher Dorner was on a rampage ambushing police officers and young women as they sat in their cars)

Lets face it. Only two kinds of people talk like that.
1. Some of the 1% Hells Angels types sitting in a very rough bar in California.
2. Childish people so desperate for attention they try to inflate themselves with outlandish statements.

I don't think many Hells Angels have Jerry Lewis avatars.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

We needed to round up the Japanese during WWII. We were at war against their country and nobody knew wtf was going on. It ain't like we just locked them up and threw away the key or executed them or something. Hell, I wouldn't have a problem rounding up all the ****ing muslims right now. We'd all be a hell of a lot safer.Well, if we were going to confine Japanese heritage people, we should prolly have done the same with German heritage people, but we didn't. No doubt we didn't know what exactly was going on. But, we really shouldn't have confined the Japanese Americans, either...however, it was a war.

There also is a big difference between ethnic(Japanese or German) and behavioral traits, such as a muslim religious belief. I think non-muslims would be a lot friendlier and open to them if the muslims would be more involved in denouncing those among them who are the terrorists and vociferous haters of things American, capitalistic, and all the others who are infidels in their views. Very seldom do we see non-terrorist muslims come out and passionately condemn those who do commit the atrocities.

In today's America, we condemn the wrong people, and coddle the wrong people. No wonder we've blown a gasket. The parts store seems to be closed, too.

[StoopTroup]

Had one of my family members done something as heinous as what happened in Boston, or any other terror attack, I would help law enforcement anyway I can to find my family member, all while pleading for my family member to turn him/herself in.

Nobody would give a **** and matter of fact, I can't believe they didnt pick up his Brother and detain him instead of him holding his own little Press Conference in the Streets of Boston like he did. The longer that guy tried to explain how he was outraged by what his Brother did and that he or his Family hadn't had any contact with those two killers, the more that something didn't seem quite right about why he was standing in the Streets of Boston telling the Press his story instead of down at a Police Station telling them that the two guys in the pictures on TV were estranged Family members.

[OU_Sooners75]

Nobody would give a **** and matter of fact, I can't believe they didnt pick up his Brother and detain him instead of him holding his own little Press Conference in the Streets of Boston like he did. The longer that guy tried to explain how he was outraged by what his Brother did and that he or his Family hadn't had any contact with those two killers, the more that something didn't seem quite right about why he was standing in the Streets of Boston telling the Press his story instead of down at a Police Station telling them that the two guys in the pictures on TV were estranged Family members.

How the hell do you know he wasnt down at the police station before or after?

Your rationale, or lack thereof, is sad....but why am I surprised?

[StoopTroup]

He never said he went down there and he was asked about it.

[diverdog]

In 10 or 15 years, when they're knocking down your door, and performing a cavity search with a shot gun barrel without a search warrant, I'll know that you're ok and thankful.

If you honestly believe that then you are truly paranoid.

[OU_Sooners75]

Ok...so he was asked...I havent watched the interview. But what makes you think he didnt go afterward. What makes you think the law didnt show up and do questioning at his home?

hmmm....try knowing everything before creating or passing judgment.

[MR2-Sooner86]

Serious post is serious. (Even though it's really fun to push your guy's buttons)

Fear.

The government uses it and uses it well.

No gun control and your kids will be shot in school.
No TSA and planes will be hijacked left and right.
No bailout and the economy will collapse.
No cuts to Social Security or old people will die in the streets.
No cuts to Medicaid or people will be killing over in ERs.

The left loves fear because they can use it. It's really all they have since they can't argue with facts.

The problem with fear is logic and reason are thrown to the side for over generalizations, hyperbole and jumping to quick conclusions.

Example, I saw the comments on a New York Times article discussing gun laws. Here's what I saw. There are people in this country, more than I'd like to admit, who think anybody who owns a gun is a time bomb waiting to go off and must be watched at all times. There are people who think only racist anti-government (KKK/Aryan Nation) folks own guns and they're plotting to commit acts of terror against the government Timothy McVeigh style.

Now you're going to say, "But these people are a minority!"

We have one sitting in the White House. Don't believe me? Look at his DOJ list of "suspicious" people who could be a terrorist.
- gun owner
- outdoorsman/survivalist
- ex military
- supports third parties
- very critical of the federal government
- have over a weeks worth of food
- pay with cash

It's all fine and dandy if it's a Muslim terrorist but what if it were a domestic right-wing (which the media was praying for) terrorist? What then?

Remember Bloomberg's Time Square Bombing comment? "Probably somebody angry about Obamacare."

Now what if, just what if, they get the wrong guy? What if you're connected? You and the suspect went to local NRA meetings together. You both discussed your distrust of the Federal Reserves' handling of the economy.

Now you're told you have no rights because suspect X committed a terrorist attack, they know he's guilty even with no trial, they think you were involved and you better talk or they'll water board you until you talk.

"That'll never happen!"

Why do you think I brought up the Japanese Camps.

Just when these American citizens needed their Constitutional rights the most, they were given one right: right this way.

Timothy McVeigh did worse than the Boston bombers. He was given due process and dealt with in the judicial system.

The Constitution is what separates us from the rest. Let's not become a lynch mob like the theocratic, Marxist, sh*tholes these people come from.


I am not scared of the government, in particular the law enforcement for having APC's and paramilitary gear and equipment. And as long as the government follows the constitution, I am not worried what they do.

What was done in Boston is the same thing they did at Ruby Ridge. It's the same thing they did at Waco. It's the same thing they do with TSA. It's the same thing did with that recently, failed, gun control bill.

It's nothing more than political theatre to make you think they're in charge and have the power. In reality, it's useless and used as a tool of control.

Gun control is not about helping others. It's about control.
TSA is not about helping others. It's about control.
Obamacare is not about helping others. It's about control.
A paramilitary police force is not about helping others. It's about control.

We had:
APCs with mounted machine guns
Blackhawk helicopters
Road blocks
Grenade launchers
Snipers on rooftops

We shut down an American city costing, at least, $300 million.

All this for...*drumroll*

A 19 year old kid with, probably, a pistol and maybe a pipe bomb.

Some of our inner city gangs are better armed and it's just cops in squad cars going in there.

Finally, after this show of force, and the all clear was given, the kid was found by a guy going out for a smoke in an area they had either searched or missed.

It's obvious the measures taken failed.

Just like the shoe and underwear bombers made TSA fail.

Armed American citizens can do far more for security and the greater good than any militarized police force.

/end of serious post that is serious


This is a little perplexing. You are now upset because Japanese people were rounded up during WWII. I supposed you are trying to make the point that "guilt by association" is something that only small minded and stupid people resort to. How could any intelligent and rational person lump together people and punish them based upon some common trait?

A couple of months ago you were advocating the killing of police officers because of their common profession without a thought to their individuality. (The term used was "Godspeed, Mr. Dorner" when Christopher Dorner was on a rampage ambushing police officers and young women as they sat in their cars) Is that something your grandpa would be proud of?

Lets face it. Only two kinds of people talk like that.
1. Some of the 1% Hells Angels types sitting in a very rough bar in California.
2. Childish people so desperate for attention they try to inflate themselves with outlandish statements.

I don't think many Hells Angels have Jerry Lewis avatars.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Who_Watches_the_Watchmen.jpg

[OU_Sooners75]

Okay...how was it the same as Waco or Ruby Ridge?

Good Lord, you are one paranoid person.

Whats even more sad is that you are trying to make a match of a manhunt in Boston to gun control.

LOL

[MR2-Sooner86]

Okay...how was it the same as Waco or Ruby Ridge?

Good Lord, you are one paranoid person.

Whats even more sad is that you are trying to make a match of a manhunt in Boston to gun control.

LOL

Reading comprehenzion, you gotz to have it.

[StoopTroup]

Ok...so he was asked...I havent watched the interview. But what makes you think he didnt go afterward. What makes you think the law didnt show up and do questioning at his home?

hmmm....try knowing everything before creating or passing judgment.

I think that once the Press was on him and asking him questions that the FBI should have been asking him...a couple of Boston Police Officers realized just how much danger he was in and they basically got his attention and escorted him back to his vehicle. CNN then went back to their reporter at the scene and Im not sure what happened after that. He could have been taken into custody for his own safety or taken in for questioning. Still, IMHO if it took him being mobbed by the Press and saved by a few Cops....his 1st thoughts weren't anything to do with the welfare of the General Public and seeing that the FBI captured his Brother and his Nephew. Matter of fact the extra time they had possibly led to them preparing even more for a standoff with the Police or an exit from the US or possibly a getaway to somewhere safe to avoid capture.

The reports coming in tonight are saying that they were planning more bombings. So...I find it hard to see how his Brother isn't at least guilty of being a moron who aided them in avoiding capture.

[OU_Sooners75]

Reading comprehenzion, you gotz to have it.

Dictation...you gotz to have it.

That said, your drivel is absurd and irrational to say the least.

What happened in Boston wasn't even close to what happened in Waco or Ruby Ridge...to even think they are similar is failing to know what happened in both locations...and in both, I totally disagree with how the government and law enforcement handled both situations..

What happened in Boston was apparently two young males setting off two pressure cooker bombs. Killing 14 and injuring 180+.
What happened in Boston was a tragedy against innocence. And seeing how Islamic extremists want to do all kinds of harm against the west, the law enforcement had a duty to keep the public safe.

They didnt call for martial law. They didnt do illegal search and seizures. They didnt detain a whole ethnic group.

They (the law) showed up in force, well equipped and ready for whatever the assailants could throw at them.

They didnt go in with guns "ablazin" so to speak. They were doing a search...and they did it superbly. They killed one suspect, and captured the other.

Not even close to Ruby Ridge or Waco...to think they are remotely close it just showing ignorance and/or stupidity!

[OU_Sooners75]

I havent heard of anything from a 3rd brother, but a Uncle.

IDK...i did away with television until football season so I can be more productive in life this summer...LOL

So the only thing I got to go by is online...and I am not actively searching it right now.

All I got to say is if there are more involved, then I hope they all fry!

[cleller]

That said, your drivel is absurd and irrational to say the least.


You bothered with it? Idle baloney.

[MR2-Sooner86]

Dictation...you gotz to have it.

Your own material, you needz to getz it.


That said, your drivel is absurd and irrational to say the least.

Try reading this (http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html).

It'll help you understand better.


What happened in Boston wasn't even close to what happened in Waco or Ruby Ridge...to even think they are similar is failing to know what happened in both locations...and in both, I totally disagree with how the government and law enforcement handled both situations..

Political theater to show who's boss, who's in charge and to show force to the American public.


What happened in Boston was apparently two young males setting off two pressure cooker bombs. Killing 14 and injuring 180+.
What happened in Boston was a tragedy against innocence. And seeing how Islamic extremists want to do all kinds of harm against the west, the law enforcement had a duty to keep the public safe.

Four were killed (three in the bombing and the MIT officer)

Also, they didn't keep the public safe. They didn't do anything. He was in a boat the whole time.

"What happened in New Orleans was a tragedy. And seeing how looters want to do all kinds of harm against civilians, the law enforcement had a duty to disarm the public."

See how that works?


They didnt call for martial law. They didnt do illegal search and seizures. They didnt detain a whole ethnic group.

They shut down a city.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BIOFYzWCYAEOl2w.jpg

Looks rather police statey to me.


They (the law) showed up in force, well equipped and ready for whatever the assailants could throw at them.

A handgun against a grenade launcher and M60 machine gun.

Yup, that's not an overuse of force.


They didnt go in with guns "ablazin" so to speak. They were doing a search...and they did it superbly. They killed one suspect, and captured the other.

They killed the first suspect before they called in the Gestapo. It was just regular officers in non-APC cop cars.


Not even close to Ruby Ridge or Waco...to think they are remotely close it just showing ignorance and/or stupidity!

You're trying to find links while ignoring the actual similarities I pointed out.


You bothered with it? Idle baloney.

Hush now baby, baby don't you cry
Mama's gonna make all of your
Nightmares come true
Mama's gonna put all of her fears into you
Mama's gonna keep you right here
Under her wing
She won't let you fly but she might let you sing
Mama will keep baby cosy and warm
Ooooh Babe Ooooh Babe Ooooh Babe
Of course Mama's gonna help build the wall

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5108/5565612259_eaa2de5d7d_z.jpg

[OU_Sooners75]

You go out of your way to look a fool don't you?

Look...You think I am for the government...fine...but I think you are just an anti-government fool...so lets leave it at that.

Your disdain for the government and everything it does is noted.

Outside of that, im through trying to be logical with someone with such disdain for his own country.

[MR2-Sooner86]

You go out of your way to look a fool don't you?

Look...You think I am for the government...fine...but I think you are just an anti-government fool...so lets leave it at that.

Your disdain for the government and everything it does is noted.

Outside of that, im through trying to be logical with someone with such disdain for his own country.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7082/7281321924_a3fd37e9eb_z.jpg

[cleller]

That's the first time I've seen someone try to impress people with a love of muslim bombers and an unresolved Oedipus complex.:congratulatory:

[Blue]

I agree with MR-2. I don't like seeing soldiers patrol american streets.

The media and our govt love these events. Gives them a chance to tighten the vice.

[cleller]

I agree with MR-2. I don't like seeing soldiers patrol american streets.

The media and our govt love these events. Gives them a chance to tighten the vice.

Agree with him that police officers should be murdered?

There weren't soldiers patrolling the streets in Boston.

[MR2-Sooner86]

Agree with him that police officers should be murdered?

There weren't soldiers patrolling the streets in Boston.

Subject change, for when you can't debate the subject at hand.

You talking about the "Godspeed Mr. Dorner?" I like people who stand up to police brutality.

Besides these are the same police that did this:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef017d40da0bf1970c-640wi

If they get a pass, so does Mr. Dorner.

[Blue]

Agree with him that police officers should be murdered?

There weren't soldiers patrolling the streets in Boston.

Yeah, that's what I said. :rolleyes

[cleller]

Subject change, for when you can't debate the subject at hand.

You talking about the "Godspeed Mr. Dorner?" I like people who stand up to police brutality.

Besides these are the same police that did this:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef017d40da0bf1970c-640wi

If they get a pass, so does Mr. Dorner.

All because of Dorner. The chicken-liver that "stood up" to the police by sneaking up and shooting them in cars, or just shooting their children.

Great heroes you got there.

[MR2-Sooner86]

All because of Dorner. The chicken-liver that "stood up" to the police by sneaking up and shooting them in cars, or just shooting their children.

Great heroes you got there.

Because of Dorner? Yes because a blue Toyota Tacoma looks exactly like a gray Nissan Titan.

As for the killing of the cop's children, I didn't agree with that. As for cowardly, well we have drone pilots do the same cowardly thing (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/8695679/168-children-killed-in-drone-strikes-in-Pakistan-since-start-of-campaign.html) and they get a pass.

You have to judge the whole work, not the little individual pieces.

I'd rather cops kill each other than the alternative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathryn_Johnston).

Cops are like politicians. There are a few Ron Pauls out there but most are Chuck Schumers and Ted Kennedys.

[Sooner Eclipse]

You go out of your way to look a fool don't you?

Look...You think I am for the government...fine...but I think you are just an anti-government fool...so lets leave it at that.

Your disdain for the government and everything it does is noted.

Outside of that, im through trying to be logical with someone with such disdain for his own country.

What part of specific enumerated powers don't you understand. The beauty of the Constitution is that you don't need a law degree to understand the meaning and intent. The fed gov't of the last 80~ years has spent more time trying to free itself from the Constitution than performing those powers intended for it.

MR2, Sic'em and I are not anti gov't. But the Constitution is intended to be a chain around the neck of the gov't. However, modern administrations continually try to subvert it, some more than others. I have no problem with a lot of the things the feds try to do. But its not their responsibility or jurisdiction. Those powers not enumerated belong to the states.

[okie52]

Longer than that I think -- Everything I've heard is that he got his citizenship on Sept. 11th, 2002.

However, unless you're prepared to consider the homeland a "war zone" even if he didn't have his citizenship he should still be treated correctly under civil law.

September 11th, 2012.

[SicEmBaylor]

September 11th, 2012.

My bad, but an American citizen nonetheless.

[okie52]

My bad, but an American citizen nonetheless.

Yes he is.

Felt so good about being a citizen he decided to blow up Americans.

[Curly Bill]

Does 75 think he gets bonus points for the number of times a poster uses words like: fool, pathetic, stupid, idiotic??? Just wondering because it seems he's not been able to go more than a couple of words without using those???

[SicEmBaylor]

Yes he is.

Felt so good about being a citizen he decided to blow up Americans.
I never suggested otherwise.

[Midtowner]

Yes he is.

Felt so good about being a citizen he decided to blow up Americans.

He still gets his day in court, the right to a jury and to a defense attorney.

[rock on sooner]

He still gets his day in court, the right to a jury and to a defense attorney.

Don't think I'd want to be his court appointed defense attorney. (He said
that he couldn't afford an attorney...heard it on ABC this A.M.)

[jkjsooner]

You were the one going "they killed children!" Congratulations you're no better than Obama hiding behind the Sandy Hook victims. Not so fun when the emotional argument is turned back around on you.

Oh yeah...


http://youtu.be/2LrbsUVSVl8

Enjoy your safety serfs.

If this is legitimate then it is troublesome.

My guess is that this is not what it is presented to be. There has to be something more to the story.

Edit: Vet beat me to it.


I said this at the Hide out , I'll say it here, Did you watch that vid thru ?
That was NOT a part of the House to house search. Not sure what was going on but its being distorted.
If it was House to house, Why did they stop with that one house?
Something is fishy about that whole deal.

[jkjsooner]

Ok...so he was asked...I havent watched the interview. But what makes you think he didnt go afterward. What makes you think the law didnt show up and do questioning at his home?

hmmm....try knowing everything before creating or passing judgment.



He didn't even know what state the guy was in. The dude was in Maryland.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

NM

[okie52]

I never suggested otherwise.

Didn't say you did. But for a guy that just went through the exhileration of becoming a citizen 6 months earlier it didn't seem to have a lasting effect.

[okie52]

He still gets his day in court, the right to a jury and to a defense attorney.

So?

[SicEmBaylor]

Didn't say you did. But for a guy that just went through the exhileration of becoming a citizen 6 months earlier it didn't seem to have a lasting effect.

Agreed, but this is precisely why we need strict immigration control (or outright ban in my opinion) rather than some argument as to why he shouldn't be afforded all of his civil and constitutional liberties and rights.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

He still gets his day in court, the right to a jury and to a defense attorney.It makes sense for an islamist terrorist to become an American citizen before doing their murdering.

[OU_Sooners75]

Does 75 think he gets bonus points for the number of times a poster uses words like: fool, pathetic, stupid, idiotic??? Just wondering because it seems he's not been able to go more than a couple of words without using those???

Nah, just the nicer way of putting what I feel in type. :)

[SanJoaquinSooner]

http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2013/04/22/1226625/511858-boston-police-sean-collier-red-sox.jpg

[cleller]

http://i701.photobucket.com/albums/ww14/cs6000/362px-Minute_Man_Statue_Lexington_Massachusetts_cropped_ zpsfe7ca722.jpg (http://s701.photobucket.com/user/cs6000/media/362px-Minute_Man_Statue_Lexington_Massachusetts_cropped_ zpsfe7ca722.jpg.html)

[SicEmBaylor]

http://i701.photobucket.com/albums/ww14/cs6000/362px-Minute_Man_Statue_Lexington_Massachusetts_cropped_ zpsfe7ca722.jpg (http://s701.photobucket.com/user/cs6000/media/362px-Minute_Man_Statue_Lexington_Massachusetts_cropped_ zpsfe7ca722.jpg.html)

I was just in front of that statue a few months ago.

I'm glad I was there at that time and not when there were APC's on every street corner and para-military government troops breaking down doors. It probably would have spoiled the moment.

[cleller]

I was just in front of that statue a few months ago.

I'm glad I was there at that time and not when there were APC's on every street corner and para-military government troops breaking down doors. It probably would have spoiled the moment.

Were it 1775, this guy's existence would have spoiled the moment for you.

[rock on sooner]

Were it 1775, this guy's existence would have spoiled the moment for you.

Rumor has it...those guys were pretty damn good shots with those
front loading flintlocks!

[SicEmBaylor]

Were it 1775, this guy's existence would have spoiled the moment for you.

That doesn't even make sense.

[cleller]

That doesn't even make sense.

Armed men, stalking the streets of US cities in search of combatants intent on causing harm to our country. Don't you have a fear of such things?

Wouldn't Paul Revere parading down the streets of Boston upset you?

[SicEmBaylor]

Armed men, stalking the streets of US cities in search of combatants intent on causing harm to our country. Don't you have a fear of such things?

Wouldn't Paul Revere parading down the streets of Boston upset you?
Oh, you're trying to draw a correlation when there is none between average citizens taking up arms against a tyrannical government and thousands of government militarized police shutting down a city and violating civil liberties. Forgive me for not drawing the connection. :eyeroll:

Do you think armed men scare me? If I had my way, everyone would be armed 24/7. There is not a single restriction on any weapon that I consider to be a legitimate or Constitutional restriction up to and including building a nuke in your basement (so long as you don't use it). So you think armed men scare me? Hahahaha. My belief in the 2nd Amendment would make Heston look like a pinko-gun grabber.

Try again. Or don't because you're really f'n stretching at this point.

[jkjsooner]

Oh, you're trying to draw a correlation when there is none between average citizens taking up arms against a tyrannical government and thousands of government militarized police shutting down a city and violating civil liberties. Forgive me for not drawing the connection. :eyeroll:

Do you think armed men scare me? If I had my way, everyone would be armed 24/7. There is not a single restriction on any weapon that I consider to be a legitimate or Constitutional restriction up to and including building a nuke in your basement (so long as you don't use it). So you think armed men scare me? Hahahaha. My belief in the 2nd Amendment would make Heston look like a pinko-gun grabber.

Try again. Or don't because you're really f'n stretching at this point.

thank God you're not in charge and nuclear weapons aren't exactly easy to create.

And there are impulsive people who know that arming themselves is not a good idea. Glad to hear you want them armed against their better judgement.

One day I bet you'll grow up and join the real world.

[SicEmBaylor]

thank God you're not in charge and nuclear weapons aren't exactly easy to create.
Then there's no need to worry about it.


And there are impulsive people who know that arming themselves is not a good idea. Glad to hear you want them armed against their better judgement.
If they don't want to own a gun then fine. I couldn't care less. I said what I said as emphasis but clearly I'm not going to force people to carry. I don't even own a gun.


One day I bet you'll grow up and join the real world.

[cleller]

Oh, you're trying to draw a correlation when there is none between average citizens taking up arms against a tyrannical government and thousands of government militarized police shutting down a city and violating civil liberties. Forgive me for not drawing the connection. :eyeroll:

Do you think armed men scare me? If I had my way, everyone would be armed 24/7. There is not a single restriction on any weapon that I consider to be a legitimate or Constitutional restriction up to and including building a nuke in your basement (so long as you don't use it). So you think armed men scare me? Hahahaha. My belief in the 2nd Amendment would make Heston look like a pinko-gun grabber.

Try again. Or don't because you're really f'n stretching at this point.

You're just trying to hedge your bets so that you can sit on the sidelines, and carp about whoever is winning the game. Whether its Crips, Cops, or Minutemen, you'll have a bone to pick.

You watch a few minutes of TV footage about an event that transpired over a few hours in a city across the country, then cast out condemnations and judgements about events you've never experienced. The bombing in Boston seems to mean nothing you, except an opportunity to sow discord.

You'd be better off if you got out into the environment and became a participant instead of living this vicarious virtual existence thru your TV and computer.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

Originally Posted by SicEmBaylor: There is not a single restriction on any weapon that I consider to be a legitimate or Constitutional restriction up to and including building a nuke in your basement (so long as you don't use it).

No mention of creating biological weapons in the basement? *****.

[SicEmBaylor]

You're just trying to hedge your bets so that you can sit on the sidelines, and carp about whoever is winning the game. Whether its Crips, Cops, or Minutemen, you'll have a bone to pick.
lol, this is such a bizarre accusation that I truly don't know where to begin. Essentially, you think I'm just being purposely contrary? Hoookay.


You watch a few minutes of TV footage about an event that transpired over a few hours in a city across the country, then cast out condemnations and judgements about events you've never experienced. The bombing in Boston seems to mean nothing you, except an opportunity to sow discord.

You'd be better off if you got out into the environment and became a participant instead of living this vicarious virtual existence thru your TV and computer.

And with this post I think we've reached the last sinews of your argument. That last paragraph is utterly insensible. A participant in what, exactly? The bombing? Should I have hopped on a plane for Boston after the first breaking news report so I could get to experience all of this first hand? Utterly ridiculous.

And let me ask you not to accuse me of not caring about the bombing itself. I don't mind you disagreeing with me as a matter of policy, but accusing me of caring nothing about the bombing steps a toe over the line. So take a gentle step back on that one. Of course I care. I want the SOB terrorist to get the death penalty. I hate that we live in a world where you can barely have a public event without someone trying to kill you.

[SicEmBaylor]

Originally Posted by SicEmBaylor: There is not a single restriction on any weapon that I consider to be a legitimate or Constitutional restriction up to and including building a nuke in your basement (so long as you don't use it).

No mention of creating biological weapons in the basement? *****.

I think I have an old pizza box in the basement that may be considered a biological weapon at this point.

[okie52]

Agreed, but this is precisely why we need strict immigration control (or outright ban in my opinion) rather than some argument as to why he shouldn't be afforded all of his civil and constitutional liberties and rights.

Heh heh...you're preaching to the choir on that one.

[cleller]

lol, this is such a bizarre accusation that I truly don't know where to begin. Essentially, you think I'm just being purposely contrary? Hoookay.



And with this post I think we've reached the last sinews of your argument. That last paragraph is utterly insensible. A participant in what, exactly? The bombing? Should I have hopped on a plane for Boston after the first breaking news report so I could get to experience all of this first hand? Utterly ridiculous.

And let me ask you not to accuse me of not caring about the bombing itself. I don't mind you disagreeing with me as a matter of policy, but accusing me of caring nothing about the bombing steps a toe over the line. So take a gentle step back on that one. Of course I care. I want the SOB terrorist to get the death penalty. I hate that we live in a world where you can barely have a public event without someone trying to kill you.


Basically I was trying to avoid publicly calling you a wet behind the ears inexperienced blowhard, yet suggest you to get out and live a life which included some substantial history of work and life experience before you assert yourself as an expert on how the world should operate.

I'll give ground on the bombing topic, but your breathless horror and denunciations of the efforts capture of the suspect could easily lead someone to believe otherwise.

[SicEmBaylor]

Basically I was trying to avoid publicly calling you a wet behind the ears inexperienced blowhard, yet suggest you to get out and live a life which included some substantial history of work and life experience before you assert yourself as an expert on how the world should operate.
Clearly it's easier to go after me personally than actually address any of these issues. That's cool -- it's always my first indication that I've won. But I'm going to placate you a little but delving a little deeper into this nonsense. Real world experience? What, precisely? Does one need to be a Federal law enforcement officer and have that experience in order to talk about these issues? Does one need to be an elected official? A policy analyst at a national think tank? Actually, it can't be that one since that work is purely academic and not "real world." Further, what precisely is your life experience v. mine that makes your opinion on issues of Constitutional theory/rights and national security issues any more valid than mine are? I don't know what you do for a living so that is an honest question. The only thing that I can say is that while some kids were reading comics growing up, I was reading every book I could get my hands on about early American history, constitutional theory, political philosophy, military history, and even national security journals. It probably doesn't mean too much but I was also a National Youth Leadership Forum on Defense, Intelligence, and Diplomacy scholar. Like I said, all of that doesn't mean a whole lot but I'd stack that up against someone who has "real world experience" in some field that has absolutely nothing to do with anything we're discussing. But, like I said, if you are actually a professional in any of those fields then please let me know I'll legitimately bow to your wisdom.

So maybe we can dispense with the personal attacks or questioning my motives. If you think that anything I believe is born of a desire to be contrary rather than decades of meticulous study I've devoted to these subjects then hopefully I've now educated you otherwise.


I'll give ground on the bombing topic, but your breathless horror and denunciations of the efforts capture of the suspect could easily lead someone to believe otherwise.

I'd question the intelligence of someone who couldn't tell the difference between a legitimate concern regarding national policy in regard to constitutional rights and civil liberties born of internal and external security threats on the one hand and a psychopathic narcissist on the other.

[StoopTroup]

Also SicEm, I seen many a poster here who think that if you didn't experience what they did...or hadn't been there...Then you don't know squat. I believe folks can learn from others and these days we even have access to so much History and raw footage and interviews from grunts to 5 star Generals that I think it's not to difficult to put history in perspective.

So, if you're a Dinosaur expert, that's cool. :D

[StoopTroup]

Originally Posted by SicEmBaylor: There is not a single restriction on any weapon that I consider to be a legitimate or Constitutional restriction up to and including building a nuke in your basement (so long as you don't use it).

No mention of creating biological weapons in the basement? *****.

Or storing depleted Uranium Ordinance or Illegal Talon Type Ammo (Street name was cop killers back in the day).

Just all sorts of stupid considering he's an expert on that 1968 Gun Law we evidently don't enforce.

[SicEmBaylor]

Also SicEm, I seen many a poster here who think that if you didn't experience what they did...or hadn't been there...Then you don't know squat. I believe folks can learn from others and these days we even have access to so much History and raw footage and interviews from grunts to 5 star Generals that I think it's not to difficult to put history in perspective.

So, if you're a Dinosaur expert, that's cool. :D

And, yet, you said the exact same thing a few hours ago when you asked if I was alive when Carter was in office.

[cleller]

Clearly it's easier to go after me personally than actually address any of these issues. That's cool -- it's always my first indication that I've won. But I'm going to placate you a little but delving a little deeper into this nonsense. Real world experience? What, precisely? Does one need to be a Federal law enforcement officer and have that experience in order to talk about these issues? Does one need to be an elected official? A policy analyst at a national think tank? Actually, it can't be that one since that work is purely academic and not "real world." Further, what precisely is your life experience v. mine that makes your opinion on issues of Constitutional theory/rights and national security issues any more valid than mine are? I don't know what you do for a living so that is an honest question. The only thing that I can say is that while some kids were reading comics growing up, I was reading every book I could get my hands on about early American history, constitutional theory, political philosophy, military history, and even national security journals. It probably doesn't mean too much but I was also a National Youth Leadership Forum on Defense, Intelligence, and Diplomacy scholar. Like I said, all of that doesn't mean a whole lot but I'd stack that up against someone who has "real world experience" in some field that has absolutely nothing to do with anything we're discussing. But, like I said, if you are actually a professional in any of those fields then please let me know I'll legitimately bow to your wisdom.

So maybe we can dispense with the personal attacks or questioning my motives. If you think that anything I believe is born of a desire to be contrary rather than decades of meticulous study I've devoted to these subjects then hopefully I've now educated you otherwise.



I'd question the intelligence of someone who couldn't tell the difference between a legitimate concern regarding national policy in regard to constitutional rights and civil liberties born of internal and external security threats on the one hand and a psychopathic narcissist on the other.

We've already covered the other issues, explained why things happened they way they did, and brought about the successful outcome, you just won't acknowledge it. You've convinced yourself otherwise in spite of the facts. Its no use.

Like I've tried to get across before, if the big issue of the Boston Bombing to you is the search and capture of the bombers, you are thinking as a child. The bombs are the bigger threat. Allowing them to increase, or allowing the bombers any avenue of escape will spawn further bombings, which will require more of a clampdown that you want to avoid.

In answer to your question, I'm not trying to call myself and expert, but I was a Tulsa police officer for 25 years. The last 16 of those years a K-9 handler. So I'm at least familiar with what can bring about a successful capture of someone running from the police. A tight perimeter.

I also know all about people that criticize everything the police do without ever trying to do it themselves. Its the same old story, they might as well be college professors.

"Decades of meticulous study". Oh boy, that sounds likely.
More from the ivory tower.

[SicEmBaylor]

We've already covered the other issues, explained why things happened they way they did, and brought about the successful outcome, you just won't acknowledge it. You've convinced yourself otherwise in spite of the facts. Its no use.

Like I've tried to get across before, if the big issue of the Boston Bombing to you is the search and capture of the bombers, you are thinking as a child. The bombs are the bigger threat. Allowing them to increase, or allowing the bombers any avenue of escape will spawn further bombings, which will require more of a clampdown that you want to avoid.

In answer to your question, I'm not trying to call myself and expert, but I was a Tulsa police officer for 25 years. The last 16 of those years a K-9 handler. So I'm at least familiar with what can bring about a successful capture of someone running from the police. A tight perimeter.

I also know all about people that criticize everything the police do without ever trying to do it themselves. Its the same old story, they might as well be college professors.

"Decades of meticulous study". Oh boy, that sounds likely.
More from the ivory tower.

Look, honestly, do not get the impression that I am opposed to the police. I'm not some anti-cop bozo. I know they have a tough job to do, and I generally support them in that effort to the extent that they respect the law and a person's rights. Hell, half of my family going back 4-5 generations is police and/or military. My uncle was a Pushmataha county Sheriff for years. My cousin is with Tulsa SWAT. My great-uncle is FBI -- his brother is a former CIA field agent. My bestfriend from Baylor is a former Waco PD cop and now a Texas Game Warden. Etc. Etc. Etc.

I don't want to see people's rights violated for the sake of a manhunt. I don't trust the government to decide when it's acceptable to violate a person's rights, and I have a difficult time figuring out exactly where the line should be drawn as to when it's acceptable to lock a city down and do door-to-door searches. Let's say it was a serial killer who had killed not 3 people in a bomb blast but 12 people with a knife. Would it be acceptable to lock the city down at that point? Is a bomb the only thing that warrants such action? And if so, why? Why does the implement of death matter as to the degree to which law enforcement officials lock a city down and do door-to-door searches? Who decides that? These are the questions that bother me and that should bother anyone. It isn't because I sympathize with the piece of **** they're looking for -- it's because I'm sensitive to the protection and safeguarding of our rights.

Further, opposing the militarization of the police doesn't mean I don't support the police or their effort to catch the guy. I don't think a person should be expected to either accept thousands of armed Federal agents shutting a city down with APC's on every street corner or otherwise be accused of not supporting cops and being sympathetic to terrorism. I don't believe that putting APC's and Humvees all over the streets kept anyone safe nor do I believe it aided in finding and apprehending the guy.

I honestly believe they could have done things in a slightly different way that would not have altered the outcome and would not have made an American city look like it was under martial law.

[jkjsooner]

Let's say it was a serial killer who had killed not 3 people in a bomb blast but 12 people with a knife. Would it be acceptable to lock the city down at that point? Is a bomb the only thing that warrants such action? And if so, why? Why does the implement of death matter as to the degree to which law enforcement officials lock a city down and do door-to-door searches?

That's a really bad example.


Serial killers usually space their killings out somewhat so there isn't the immediate threat.
We usually don't know who they are.
Once we find out who they are, they're usually apprehended quickly or at least the threat is mitigated by their discovery.


This situation was very different. We knew who the suspect was. They had a good idea that they could keep him in a fairly confined area as long as they had the forces to do so. Since the brothers had other bombs, they figured there was a high potential for another attack if the suspect got away.


I honestly believe they could have done things in a slightly different way that would not have altered the outcome and would not have made an American city look like it was under martial law.

Assuming the guy was shot in the initial shootout, you're probably right. I doubt he was going far. However, that's a little hindsight logic.

[OU_Sooners75]

Hell sicem, the day you were born in this nation was the day you lost some of your civil liberties and rights!

[cleller]

Ah, this is exhausting Sic. Its 2013 and muslims will be bombing any western country that shows a weakness from now until the end of time.

You're going to either see more APCs or more bombs. Our country will undoubtedly choose the APCs. Every average-sized major city has about one. It gets rolled out about once every year or two.

Its going to be just miserable.

[FaninAma]

You go out of your way to look a fool don't you?

Look...You think I am for the government...fine...but I think you are just an anti-government fool...so lets leave it at that.

Your disdain for the government and everything it does is noted.

Outside of that, im through trying to be logical with someone with such disdain for his own country.

Quit engaging in emotional hyperbole. It is disingenous and lazy.

Some of us understand that power corrupts and I have seen enough of human nature to understand that even the best societies founded on laudable principles will fall prey to power hungry corrupt individuals and groups who will use their position and power to benfit themselves. If you don't see this happening with federal beaurocrats and the elite ruling class entrenching themselves in DC then your are either blind or a fool.....or both.

[jkjsooner]

Then there's no need to worry about it.

Just as a reminder, you said the following.


There is not a single restriction on any weapon that I consider to be a legitimate or Constitutional restriction up to and including building a nuke in your basement (so long as you don't use it).


I don't care how unlikely this scenario is, if you're going to make this statement you should be able to defend your position. There is no rational reason that private citizens should have weapons of mass destruction (and I mean real weapons of mass destruction - nuclear, biological, chemical, radiological).

You can't just say"so long as you don't use it" since once it's used it's too litttle too late.

I suspect that one day you will become a little less idealistic and a little more pragmatic in your thinking. It's okay. We all go through a stage of idealism.

And, yes, I realize that a discussion on nuclear weapons is not a pragmatic discussion but I didn't bring it up.

[SicEmBaylor]

Just as a reminder, you said the following.




I don't care how unlikely this scenario is, if you're going to make this statement you should be able to defend your position. There is no rational reason that private citizens should have weapons of mass destruction (and I mean real weapons of mass destruction - nuclear, biological, chemical, radiological).

You can't just say"so long as you don't use it" since once it's used it's too litttle too late.

I suspect that one day you will become a little less idealistic and a little more pragmatic in your thinking. It's okay. We all go through a stage of idealism.

And, yes, I realize that a discussion on nuclear weapons is not a pragmatic discussion but I didn't bring it up.
First, did you consider that I might have been slightly exaggerating (but only slightly) in order to make my point? No. Well, I was slightly (but only slightly) exaggerating in order to make my point.

Second, as far as no compelling reason to own a WMD. Well, t here is somewhat of a compelling reason having to do with why the 2nd amendment exists in the first place. The reason I'm only slightly exaggerating is because I believe, in theory, that the citizenry ought to have some parity in firepower with the government for the obvious reason. As a practical matter, if the government were ever to become truly tyrannical then it's difficult to fight a revolution with just rifles when your opponent has tanks, APCs, and everything else up to and including nukes. Now, would I really have no problem with my neighbor building a nuke? Probably not but that wasn't the point of the statement. As for chemical and biological weapons, I think it's safe to say the United States government isn't going to use either. Not that they'd use that one either, but it's somewhat more likely than the latter two examples.

Third, I went through my pragmatic phase long ago.

[cleller]

^^
So you wouldn't have a problem if your neighbor had a nuclear weapon, but you do worry if the government has APCs?

Maybe you should devote some time the study of probabilities.

Also, has it occurred to you that this increased weapon-ization of the police that you so dislike is a result of the increased weapon-ization of the public? If you want Bobbies with whistles, you'll never get it by letting your neighbor set up an ack-ack gun in his yard.

[Ton Loc]

Whole bunch of scared honkies in here...

All because the Boston PD shoved themselves into some Military grade costumes and jumped on the back of a scary vehicle on their way to find a 19 year old. A bit ridiculous, but not worth the 10 pages of paranoia.

[C&CDean]

Whole bunch of scared honkies in here...

All because the Boston PD shoved themselves into some Military grade costumes and jumped on the back of a scary vehicle on their way to find a 19 year old. A bit ridiculous, but not worth the 10 pages of paranoia.

This pretty much.

[MR2-Sooner86]

It took over 100,000 people and nearly $30 billion to make the first atomic bomb. The United States' nuclear arsenal cost close to $10 trillion when you consider research, maintenance, development, manufacturing, and everything thrown in.

Who has that type of money? The state.
Who has actually built, used and tested such weapons? The state.
Who are the folks trying to obtain such weapons? Leaders of states.
All those weapons of war, who funded them? The state.
Who ordered those weapons to be built? The state.
Who funds and supplies the weapons industry? The state.

As for chemical weapons, I can go to the store and make homemade poisonous gas. People do it with meth labs all the time. We've had private companies make very bad chemicals weapons, like VX, by accident or for use in like a pesticide. They pull it but then the state comes along and goes "that'd make a great weapon!"

I have yet to see weapons of war, like nukes or chemical weapons, be used between private companies or private individuals with their privately funded armies.

And you think us anti-government folks are bad? You f*ckers are going into Neo-Marxist territory with this "the private individual cannot be trusted" rhetoric.

[jkjsooner]

And you think us anti-government folks are bad? You f*ckers are going into Neo-Marxist territory with this "the private individual cannot be trusted" rhetoric.

The WMD discussion is a little over the top but I didn't bring it up. And, no, a private individual can't be trusted with a WMD. First I'd question the sanity of anyone who would want one. And, secondly, people in general are not that trustworthy. It's one thing when a person snaps and kills one or ten people. It's another when they snap and kill thousands.

I'm not sure how being distrustful of individuals is related to Marxism unless you conveniently define any position that differs with your's to be a Marxist position.

[MR2-Sooner86]

The WMD discussion is a little over the top but I didn't bring it up. And, no, a private individual can't be trusted with a WMD. First I'd question the sanity of anyone who would want one. And, secondly, people in general are not that trustworthy. It's one thing when a person snaps and kills one or ten people. It's another when they snap and kill thousands.

I'm not sure how being distrustful of individuals is related to Marxism unless you conveniently define any position that differs with your's to be a Marxist position.

Please point out where private individuals or companies are actively seeking WMDs.

I bring up Marxist due to the "government can be trusted, private individuals can't."

Again, it has been nothing but governments that have sought, built and used WMDs. I don't see any evidence to suggest armed individuals are any more dangerous.

[StoopTroup]

This pretty much.

The funny thing is that nearly anyone can go down to a supply place and buy a bunch of scary black canvas clothing with Velcro folds and cool elastic snaps and black synthetic gun holsters. You can even buy crime scene tape I think.

[jkjsooner]

Please point out where private individuals or companies are actively seeking WMDs.

I bring up Marxist due to the "government can be trusted, private individuals can't."

Again, it has been nothing but governments that have sought, built and used WMDs. I don't see any evidence to suggest armed individuals are any more dangerous.

Here you go.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/01/25/al_qaedas_pursuit_of_weapons_of_mass_destruction


As far as a reference to them getting close to obtaining one or a non-terrorist trying to obtain one, I don't have it. I don't need it either because I didn't bring this topic up. SicEm did. If SicEm was going to claim that there's no problem with neighbors having nukes (which he has now backtracked on) he or you can't turn around and claim that it's improbable. If he's willing to make that claim then he needs to back it up. Understand?

If I said that I had no problem with my neighbor obtaining an antimatter weapon, I can't just turn around and hide behind the fact that an antimatter weapon has not yet been developed. My proposal assumes that one exists and my neighbor has the ability to obtain one. I have to be willing to back up my statement under those assumptions.


As for private citizens vs government, I'd much rather my government have nukes than they be spread out amongst private citizen. Atrocities do happen but governments have a lot more checks and balances than private citizens. It takes a lot more than one wacko neighbor (or worse a terrorist across town) to cause a catastophe. How that isn't obvious to you is beyond me...


It also depends on what you call a WMD. Private groups have obtained and used chemical weapons. Remember the Tokyo subway incident?

If we're talking nukes, well, they're really really really hard to obtain/build so private groups don't really have access to them. Al Qaeda has shown interest in obtaining one and don't think for a moment that they wouldn't love to use one.

[jkjsooner]

The funny thing is that nearly anyone can go down to a supply place and buy a bunch of scary black canvas clothing with Velcro folds and cool elastic snaps and black synthetic gun holsters. You can even buy crime scene tape I think.

Let's be clear here. If you have a problem with a rifle because it's scarry looking you're being irrational. If you think a police uniform is scarry looking you're a patriot. MR2 logic 101.

[FaninAma]

It took over 100,000 people and nearly $30 billion to make the first atomic bomb. The United States' nuclear arsenal cost close to $10 trillion when you consider research, maintenance, development, manufacturing, and everything thrown in.

Who has that type of money? The state.
Who has actually built, used and tested such weapons? The state.
Who are the folks trying to obtain such weapons? Leaders of states.
All those weapons of war, who funded them? The state.
Who ordered those weapons to be built? The state.
Who funds and supplies the weapons industry? The state.

As for chemical weapons, I can go to the store and make homemade poisonous gas. People do it with meth labs all the time. We've had private companies make very bad chemicals weapons, like VX, by accident or for use in like a pesticide. They pull it but then the state comes along and goes "that'd make a great weapon!"

I have yet to see weapons of war, like nukes or chemical weapons, be used between private companies or private individuals with their privately funded armies.

And you think us anti-government folks are bad? You f*ckers are going into Neo-Marxist territory with this "the private individual cannot be trusted" rhetoric.

Good post. Again, how many people have terrorists killed and imprisoned? How many people have legitimately recognized governments murdered and imprisoned? Can the statists really not see the danger of a federal government that continues to increase the strength and armament of its police force in the guise of promoting national security? Truly incredible.

[FaninAma]

This pretty much.
Dean, you need to recall how the Founding Fathers viewed national governments and their fear that they tend to become tyrannical unless kept in check by the private citizenry.

I honestly think there will a point in the not too distant future that the mechanism put in place to "fight terrorism" will be used to intimidate any organized dissent against government policies such as tax increases, using tax payer money to bail out crony banks, or forcing social changes down our throats through judicial and executive fiat.

[FaninAma]

I was just in front of that statue a few months ago.

I'm glad I was there at that time and not when there were APC's on every street corner and para-military government troops breaking down doors. It probably would have spoiled the moment.

and according to many on this thread the British would have been justified in using that type of force had they had it. The British were the recognized legitimate government of the colonies. They were justified in using whatever force necessary to crush the uprising against their authority.

[FaninAma]

Let's be clear here. If you have a problem with a rifle because it's scarry looking you're being irrational. If you think a police uniform is scarry looking you're a patriot. MR2 logic 101.

That's not what he said. The thread is about militarization of local and federal police forces across the country. That includes weaponry, tactics and the tendency to use Marshal Law attitudes toward civil liberties to cover for failures in prevention.

Boston was about a massive failure to uphold current immigration laws and then over reaching to correct that failure after the fact.

[jkjsooner]

Good post. Again, how many people have terrorists killed and imprisoned? How many people have legitimately recognized governments murdered and imprisoned? Can the statists really not see the danger of a federal government that continues to increase the strength and armament of its police force in the guise of promoting national security? Truly incredible.

That's not a fair comparison because our government is not like those governments. Let's compare deaths in the US. Can you think of an incident where our government intentionally killed 3000 citizens?

If you believe our government is like the Syrian government then we'll just agree to disagree. If not then what they or other similar governments have done isn't really relevant.

I believe we have a system (and a culture) that is set up with checks and balances that make it improbable that we will have true tyranny. Violent resistance is not the only methodmwe have to hold our government accountable.

Here's a question for you. In history does insurrections have a good track record of producing civil rights? In many cases these tyrannical governments arose from just the insurrections you refer to. Our own independence is really an aberration. I have almost no faith that a militia group that fights for my rights would ultimately protect them.

[OU_Sooners75]

That's not what he said. The thread is about militarization of local and federal police forces across the country. That includes weaponry, tactics and the tendency to use Marshal Law attitudes toward civil liberties to cover for failures in prevention.

Boston was about a massive failure to uphold current immigration laws and then over reaching to correct that failure after the fact.

How so?