Boston Tragedy: 1 Suspect Dead, 1 in Custody.

[I.K.W.T]

When did this turn into a Jason movie?

What i comes down to is-- it is MY Constitutional right to make that decision for myself.

You honestly believe that? Is this the 1700's?

Crazy talk.

 

[WellYouNeednt]

You honestly believe that? Is this the 1700's?

Crazy talk.

I absolutely do brother.

It is all a matter of opinion my friend. I may not agree with yours, but i must clarify--i still respect it.

 

[southernflyer]

You honestly believe that? Is this the 1700's?

Crazy talk.

Please don't vote. Really, don't. I hear there are some protests in Seattle you might like right about now. Make sure you have the beard growing.

 

[Jack Brickman]

When did this turn into a Jason movie?

Jason wouldn't hide in a closet with a knife to your daughter's throat. That's not his style. He'd just barge in and machete the hell out of everyone.

 

[I.K.W.T]

I absolutely do brother.

It is all a matter of opinion my friend. I may not agree with yours, but i must clarify--i still respect it.

I understand where you come from. I just get really frustrated sometimes because I really understand people want to still try and make the Constitution relevant in today's world, but i'm not sure if it's applicable to every situation. Time has changed, motives have changes, equipment and dangers have changed over time, and i don't know how to approach it.

I think the Constitution is great, but not applicable to every situation, especially today.

 

[I.K.W.T]

Please don't vote. Really, don't. I hear there are some protests in Seattle you might like right about now. Make sure you have the beard growing.

Getting my masters in Applied Politics. I'll be doing more than voting sir.

 

[The Oi]

You honestly believe that? Is this the 1700's?

Crazy talk.

What the fuck world are you living in?

 

[southernflyer]

Since illegal search isn't relevant, do you think police have the right to search every white Toyota in Akron and interrogate their white male driver because a woman was robbed at an ATM and all she could describe was a white male and white Toyota, it happened so quick? The problem is once you start picking and choosing what is and is not relevent, someone else decides what you chose as relevant really isn't, and what isn't ... is.

How about we skip the 7th and 8th amendment and have it back in the days of the French revolution, shall we? Oh, you were wrongly convicted of trumped up charges and are going to the electric chair tomorrow, what a shame. I'm sure in a few years we will find out you were innocent and build a nice statue to the memory of the travesty that occured.

 

[Soda]

I understand where you come from. I just get really frustrated sometimes because I really understand people want to still try and make the Constitution relevant in today's world, but i'm not sure if it's applicable to every situation. Time has changed, motives have changes, equipment and dangers have changed over time, and i don't know how to approach it.

I think the Constitution is great, but not applicable to every situation, especially today.

Couldn't agree more. The constitution is a great piece of framework to help the United States keep close to their roots and mission. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison had no idea of what was to be 250 years after creating the document and I'm sure ratification of law would have happened. I'm sure that everything was all hunky-dory back then too and nobody's rights were infringed upon in desperate times... We don't think the constitution is a piece of garbage, we think that in times where the constitution could not have foreshadowed events that unfold, some desperate measures need to be taken.

And lets not act like this kid had the Police on the run so much... He got a head start, bunkered in a boat and stayed there until he got pulled out. To boot, he didn't have the opportunity to manufacture any weapons and was cornered in. Please don't even start with the "Boston PD and SWAT don't know what they're doing" stuff, its garbage. People whom's homes were raided by SWAT were for a good reason and those human police officers don't want to see innocent people under control of a terrorist. Some people act like when you join the government, you swallow a pill that blinds you from common sense and human empathy. Still think the argument is kinda dated.

 

[Coyote850]

Rappsoda, common sense is not a common commodity in this world today, thats the biggest problem.

Most if not all of the searches that were conducted that day were done WITH the occupants permission. We had a terrorist suspect on the loose. He was suspected to be responsible for the first terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11. This was not some asshole that ran a redlight or even robbed a bank. These terrorist tired to kill HUNDREDS of innocent Americans. It was by miracle/luck that only 3 died. I for one believe the police/swat forces did an amazing job. People seem to think its easy to search damn near an entire city.

 

[The Oi]

Jesus Christ guys. It's not that hard to get. Nobody has a problem with them REQUESTING to enter the premises to search if there's reason to believe the POS is hiding out in their houses. A lot of people would probably be more than happy to have a professional search conducted on their homes, especially if they understand nothing found can be held against them and if there's nooks and crannies someone could hide in that they might not have access to.

Nobody is saying they're not satisfied with the job these guys did to catch the kid. We're all ELATED that they did and Boston and the rest of the nation are very proud that they managed to do so.

The ONE AND ONLY concern is if they're entering houses against the home-owner's wishes. Coyote, you yourself say MOST. The point is that a SINGLE occasion of them entering an individual's domicile against their wishes with no real reason to believe the kid is in there worries us for the future. It's the slow-boil concept.

That's it. Understand that people get nervous when they feel that their constitutional rights are being violated and move on, I guess.

You don't believe in The Constitution...fine. Go rip on the Christians that get offended when people violate the rules set forth in the Bible, which makes significantly less sense than the Constitution does. But considering that it's a document that the entire goddamn country is based off of, you're going to get some weird looks from people.

People who believe in The Constitution are going to think you're nuts when you suggest parts of it doesn't matter. And people are going to get nervous when the government demonstrates that it might not care about it either. Then you guys call those people crazy.

Makes zero sense to me for you and IKWT to feel the way that you do and frankly it worries people that are neither paranoid nor stupid, because it makes us feel like you could give a shit less about the power balance between the government and the people it's supposed to represent.

 

[bob2the2nd]

steps back slowly

 

[Coyote850]

Jesus Christ guys. It's not that hard to get. Nobody has a problem with them REQUESTING to enter the premises to search if there's reason to believe the POS is hiding out in their houses. A lot of people would probably be more than happy to have a professional search conducted on their homes, especially if they understand nothing found can be held against them and if there's nooks and crannies someone could hide in that they might not have access to.

Nobody is saying they're not satisfied with the job these guys did to catch the kid. We're all ELATED that they did and Boston and the rest of the nation are very proud that they managed to do so.

The ONE AND ONLY concern is if they're entering houses against the home-owner's wishes. Coyote, you yourself say MOST. The point is that a SINGLE occasion of them entering an individual's domicile against their wishes with no real reason to believe the kid is in there worries us for the future. It's the slow-boil concept.

That's it. Understand that people get nervous when they feel that their constitutional rights are being violated and move on, I guess.

You don't believe in The Constitution...fine. Go rip on the Christians that get offended when people violate the rules set forth in the Bible, which makes significantly less sense than the Constitution does. But considering that it's a document that the entire goddamn country is based off of, you're going to get some weird looks from people.

People who believe in The Constitution are going to think you're nuts when you suggest parts of it doesn't matter. And people are going to get nervous when the government demonstrates that it might not care about it either. Then you guys call those people crazy.

Makes zero sense to me for you and IKWT to feel the way that you do and frankly it worries people that are neither paranoid nor stupid, because it makes us feel like you could give a shit less about the power balance between the government and the people it's supposed to represent.

I said MOST because I don't know for sure if they had to enter a house without permission. Yes I believe in the Constitution and all the laws there within. I love this country (as do we all) and would die to defend it, as I'm sure all of us would. What I don't get is why people go over the top when a situation like this occurs. (And I'm not directing this at you Jigg or any one person on this board.) People hear about or see the police do an illegal search or make a mistake and all the sudden people act like SWAT teams are going door to door like the Gestapo, dragging people outa their homes and asking for their IDs. THAT'S what irritates the shit outa me. I guess I've read so many ain't government posts on this and other boards that I wonder why those people even live here.
Yes there has to be checks and balances both within the government and between the government and the people. Its when I see people taking things way to the right or way to the left, thats what bothers me. And I see/read that kinda shit way too much.

 

[bigfoot5415]

Seth MacFarlene said it best when poking fun at the constitution:
"The right to bear arms. How can people misinterpret it?"

As for the constitution, Ive always thought of it as a USA Bible. While it has a great framework for our rights, its should be open to interpretation. Look at the bible, Im a pretty big catholic, but I dont care who you marry nor do I believe a senior citizen built an ark and managed to get 2 of every animal on board. The Bible, like our constitution should not be taken literally. Too many people have too many different perspectives to take our consitution word for word, and then force their ideology on everyone else. No one is right, and no one is wrong when it comes to interpretation. We are humans, we think differently because of nature.


However, when its taken word for word and people go to live by the extremes is when it gets annoying. Not sure, who said what in this thread, but our interpretation should evolve as time does. Its like the 2nd ammendment.

Some say, we have the right to defend ourselves with a gun.

Ok....Cool, when that was written muskets were still being used. Have fun trying to go postal with that. You would get tackled after taking out a person or two. Our guns evolved into fully automatic weapons that can fire a ridiculous amount of ammo per second. Since they evolved, why shouldnt our interpretation of that ammendment? Or any others?

 

[Maximus]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/_MezLoczjfY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

My understanding is that the house in that video was searched twice...both times with permission from the owner. As of a week ago that ACLU said they had a lot of calls from people outside of Watertown complaining that rights were being violated, but they hadn't received any complaints from Watertown residents saying their rights had been violated.

Have there been any official complaints about illegal searches that I'm missing? I see a lot of speculation that rights were violated, I just haven't seen any proof yet.