Police departments across the country have studied this incident and changed their policies and procedures in the aftermath. One major change was that many police departments brought in rifles (often AR-15s) to replace or supplement shotguns. In the incident above, patrol cars pretty much only had shotguns as a backup weapon to the officer's side arm.
It wouldn't take much imagination to see even small two man teams in different population centers to disrupt the entire eastern seaboard by bombing Christmas shopping or major sports events or campaign rallies or whatever.
...a "public safety exception" voiding the constitutional right to have a lawyer.
The purpose here is intelligence to ensure there isn't another attack or more attackers. See the excellent post and link by Wrath0fb0b in reply to the same post.
Would you consider it a triumph of the criminal justice system if these two were only the known part of a larger cell of terrorists that attacked and killed a couple of thousand people at a stadium next week and it wasn't discovered beforehand because he wasn't interrogated?
Civil panic would be a horrible way to "honor" the death of one of my loved ones. Speaking only for myself -- the only person I can speak for -- I would find no offense, and perhaps even some small glimmer of comfort, in my community and country opting to follow the British war slogan: "Keep calm, and carry on".
You do know that the British took shelter during air raids, don't you? Apparently not - you would apparently consider that a cop out and civil panic. Unless you have a very good reason (antiaircraft crew, civil defense staff) you take shelter during the air raid. Unless you have a very good reason, you stay away from gun battles and man hunts. You don't keep running the buses and offer the terrorist a gift of 60 hostages to soak up the ball bearings in his suicide vest!
Here is a hint: For the ordinary person, the real test comes after the event is over. Do you return to normal life? Do you hold the next marathon? Do you ride the bus again if a suicide bomber blew himself up on your bus route yesterday. The test is not do you keep running the busses in a area of an active manhunt and firefight so you can have another memorial service after the detonation of another suicide vest.
Actually, yes they are. Because that's what the definition of a terrorist is, as opposed to just a mass murderer or revenge killer. Seriously. Look it up in a dictionary.
Yes, but they don't have to be the ones that personally establish the goal. They just "contribute" as part of the cause. And that is a key point of Islamic terrorism - they already have an established cause which is the defense of Islam. That is understood very broadly by many Muslims.
Strictly speaking, a terrorist is someone who uses terrifying acts to (they hope) further some goal.
Yes, but they don't have to be the ones that personally establish the goal. They just "contribute" as part of the cause. And that is a key point of Islamic terrorism - they already have an established cause which is the defense of Islam. That is understood very broadly by many Muslims.
If you think this is ultimately about anything America has done, you're uninformed. If you think it will stop if America is destroyed, you're willfully blind. Ultimately they will come for Europe and the rest of the world as they believe they are both entitled and destined to rule every nation.
No, they win by bankrupting us to fund the expanding police state.
That won't work. There is no way the United States will be able to free up enough money from Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and now Obamacare, that are already driving the US to bankruptcy, to create a huge, bankruptcy producing police state. A lot of the states are in a pension funding crisis so they don't have the money either.
I'll save you the suspense - you aren't getting it. The site exists to collect reports of defensive gun use by citizens. This phenomenon is claimed to not exist by some people, probably like you. Guns do more than protect people from other people with guns. They protect 80 year old men confronted by gangs, 89 year old women from home invaders, women fighting off multiple rapists, and enable a boy to save his family from kidnapping and sexual assault. This sort of thing happens regularly, but is often unreported. If you ban guns, then everyone is at the mercy of the strong and vicious. Things don't get nicer if you ban guns, you simply get more innocent victims. In fact, gun crime can increase. But then violent crime in much of Europe, including the UK, and Australia occurs at a much higher rate than in the United States anyway. The United States does have a higher murder rate than much of Europe, but there is some subtlety in that. European Americans commit murder at rates similar to other Europeans. Where do the rest come from? And no, the United States murder rate is not among the worst in the world, its actually in the middle overall, and much lower in many place in the US. Guns are a useful tool, make for pleasant sport, but they not magic as you seem to believe. I think you have a number of unexamined assumptions that aren't true.
So long as the actions in Boston are recommended and not required I don't have a problem with them and, if I were there, I would most likely follow them...but they should be voluntary.
Sort of like evacuating a burning building should be voluntary? Good grief. You're going off the deep end if you think this imminent threat type of manhunt is going to turn into some sort of mandatory permanent lock-down in Boston.
Slashdot Mirror
If you want to understand why Americans love their country so, go to a baseball game
Ah no. The IRA were terrorists. The British soldiers may have committed a crime, but they weren't terrorists.
Not so much, no. The Tamil Tigers were a secular political movement that were early practitioners of suicide bombing.
It worked well in Mumbai, but it wouldn't work out so well in the US anymore. There are a number of reasons, one of which is this:
Hollywood Shootout 1997
Police departments across the country have studied this incident and changed their policies and procedures in the aftermath. One major change was that many police departments brought in rifles (often AR-15s) to replace or supplement shotguns. In the incident above, patrol cars pretty much only had shotguns as a backup weapon to the officer's side arm.
There are other reasons of course.
A foreign company filing such a suit is a novel approach though.
Not at all, it's called, "forum shopping," and it made England a popular destination for libel lawsuits for a number of reasons.
Evidence submitted by the Media Law Resource Centre (MLRC)
New rules to discourage 'libel tourism' in Britain
Yes. But luckily, you've got plenty of guns, which once again proved their usefulness on this occasion, by... Oh, never mind.
Snark - sometimes it makes you look edgy and clever, sometimes it just makes you look stupid.
Crime soared with Mass. gun law
Joyce Lee Malcolm: Two Cautionary Tales of Gun Control
Tough Targets - When Criminals Face Armed Resistance from Citizens
It wouldn't take much imagination to see even small two man teams in different population centers to disrupt the entire eastern seaboard by bombing Christmas shopping or major sports events or campaign rallies or whatever.
They've already done that.
It might not work out so well if they tried that in the US.
How did fascism take over Germany? One perfectly justifiable step after another.
No, not so much.
...a "public safety exception" voiding the constitutional right to have a lawyer.
The purpose here is intelligence to ensure there isn't another attack or more attackers. See the excellent post and link by Wrath0fb0b in reply to the same post.
Would you consider it a triumph of the criminal justice system if these two were only the known part of a larger cell of terrorists that attacked and killed a couple of thousand people at a stadium next week and it wasn't discovered beforehand because he wasn't interrogated?
Civil panic would be a horrible way to "honor" the death of one of my loved ones. Speaking only for myself -- the only person I can speak for -- I would find no offense, and perhaps even some small glimmer of comfort, in my community and country opting to follow the British war slogan: "Keep calm, and carry on".
You do know that the British took shelter during air raids, don't you? Apparently not - you would apparently consider that a cop out and civil panic. Unless you have a very good reason (antiaircraft crew, civil defense staff) you take shelter during the air raid. Unless you have a very good reason, you stay away from gun battles and man hunts. You don't keep running the buses and offer the terrorist a gift of 60 hostages to soak up the ball bearings in his suicide vest!
Here is a hint: For the ordinary person, the real test comes after the event is over. Do you return to normal life? Do you hold the next marathon? Do you ride the bus again if a suicide bomber blew himself up on your bus route yesterday. The test is not do you keep running the busses in a area of an active manhunt and firefight so you can have another memorial service after the detonation of another suicide vest.
All I have is cops telling me he shot at them and threw explosives.
So you have what the court will have then - eye witness testimony from an officer of the law regarding the conduct of the accused.
National security questions are separate from criminal justice questions - different ends, different processes.
And no, liberty is not dying in the United States.... at least not as a result of this matter.
Actually, yes they are. Because that's what the definition of a terrorist is, as opposed to just a mass murderer or revenge killer. Seriously. Look it up in a dictionary.
Yes, but they don't have to be the ones that personally establish the goal. They just "contribute" as part of the cause. And that is a key point of Islamic terrorism - they already have an established cause which is the defense of Islam. That is understood very broadly by many Muslims.
Strictly speaking, a terrorist is someone who uses terrifying acts to (they hope) further some goal.
Yes, but they don't have to be the ones that personally establish the goal. They just "contribute" as part of the cause. And that is a key point of Islamic terrorism - they already have an established cause which is the defense of Islam. That is understood very broadly by many Muslims.
Congress might restore the money lost from sequestration, but there is no way they will double the whole DHS budget.
This will probably get fixed though: Obama Administration cut the budget for domestic bomb prevention by 45%
Exactly. Shooting a cop, running, throwing bombs out windows, more shootouts, are all things that innocent people do.
In practice they serve as an Error Correction Protocol on the arrest process.
I didn't hear about any threats or demands. So it looks so far like he's a mass murderer, but not a terrorist.
No threats or demands are needed, mass murder does just fine as justification for labeling as a terrorist.
Muslims like Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols and Eric Rudolph?
The phrase you are looking for is "pressure cooker bomb." It is a technique taught by and identified with Al Qaida and affiliates.
Fixed your bigoted American exceptionalism for you.
You don't know what you're talking about. And that is really quite astonishing since the information has been widely available for some time.
The Future of Terrorism: What al-Qaida Really Wants
If you think this is ultimately about anything America has done, you're uninformed. If you think it will stop if America is destroyed, you're willfully blind. Ultimately they will come for Europe and the rest of the world as they believe they are both entitled and destined to rule every nation.
And the kicker is that they will have help:
The Leftist-Islamist Alliance in Pictures
The Left's Unlikely Alliance with Islam
Ayaan Hirsi Ali - Leftist's Ironic Unholy Alliance with Islamists
A dangerous alliance: Faux liberals and Islamists
Islamist-Left Alliance A Growing Force
No, they win by bankrupting us to fund the expanding police state.
That won't work. There is no way the United States will be able to free up enough money from Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and now Obamacare, that are already driving the US to bankruptcy, to create a huge, bankruptcy producing police state. A lot of the states are in a pension funding crisis so they don't have the money either.
Tough Targets - When Criminals Face Armed Resistance from Citizens
What do you think?
Witness in Trayvon Martin Case Lied. Will It Even Go To Trial?
And the number of people 'saved' id dwarfed by the number of people killed.
Sorry, but no. Tough Targets - When Criminals Face Armed Resistance from Citizens
Add to that, no one else saw these 'robbers'. SO you have an old guy who fired two shots and claims there was 5 armed people that fled.
I call bull crap.
And I call Jack - as in, "You don't know...."
But here is one for you, can you figure out why that sort of thing might not be reported?
The drift I see is that most of the articles there have no proof there where other people being shot at.
Knock yourself out: Stories That Happened In TX
I'll save you the suspense - you aren't getting it. The site exists to collect reports of defensive gun use by citizens. This phenomenon is claimed to not exist by some people, probably like you. Guns do more than protect people from other people with guns. They protect 80 year old men confronted by gangs, 89 year old women from home invaders, women fighting off multiple rapists, and enable a boy to save his family from kidnapping and sexual assault. This sort of thing happens regularly, but is often unreported. If you ban guns, then everyone is at the mercy of the strong and vicious. Things don't get nicer if you ban guns, you simply get more innocent victims. In fact, gun crime can increase. But then violent crime in much of Europe, including the UK, and Australia occurs at a much higher rate than in the United States anyway. The United States does have a higher murder rate than much of Europe, but there is some subtlety in that. European Americans commit murder at rates similar to other Europeans. Where do the rest come from? And no, the United States murder rate is not among the worst in the world, its actually in the middle overall, and much lower in many place in the US. Guns are a useful tool, make for pleasant sport, but they not magic as you seem to believe. I think you have a number of unexamined assumptions that aren't true.
Part of the point is the site has many similar stories. Are you catching the drift here?
And who exactly is singing anthems?
Two days after the bombing: Bruins-Sabres National Anthem
After years of pointless jingoism, I think even the idiots know better at this point.
Apparently not - you did post after all.
Most Americans love their country. You might as well learn to deal with it.
So long as the actions in Boston are recommended and not required I don't have a problem with them and, if I were there, I would most likely follow them...but they should be voluntary.
Sort of like evacuating a burning building should be voluntary? Good grief. You're going off the deep end if you think this imminent threat type of manhunt is going to turn into some sort of mandatory permanent lock-down in Boston.