Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Firearm Discussion' started by chariot13, Apr 19, 2013.
Just ranting .. saw it on the news that they lifted a (temporary martial law equivalent) order in boston.
Boston lifts 'stay indoors' order, police ask suspect to give self up[/url]. They also said something about finding 200 empty shell casings in the suspects home earlier. Stating that it was an "enormous amount of ammunition they had stockpiled"
Boston lifts 'stay indoors' order, police ask suspect to give self up
Back in effect
Boston Staying Boston Strong... except when cops are setting up armed camps looking for a teenager with a handgun.
Cowards.. what would the Founders do?
Nothing suitable to put on the internet. You know, 5th amendment and all.
I find it shocking that the standard for declaring defacto martial law on a city of a million+ has been reduced to one armed and dangerous fugitive. Scary times we live in.
What do you all suggest they do!? Keep things "business as usual" and allow a armed man who has proven access to explosives to run free on public transportation in rush hour? Imagine the backlash if they did as some would suggest and just do the usual search and this guy boarded a bus and killed 20 more...
And there are no signs of forcing anyone to stay inside. They asked for people to stay inside and for businesses to stay closed. Watch the coverage, people milling around in almost every camera shot.
I find it appalling that dman would call this terrorist a "teenager with a handgun".
Um yeah pretty much business as usual outside of the immediate search area, is the casualty count involved here substantially different than a typical day in Chicago's ganglands or LA's freeway system? Anybody could bomb a bus any time, life is inherently risky, why spend it paranoid and/or petrified? If we hugely overreact to every threat then the terrorists have indeed won.
Surprise they didn't pul a NOLA and start confiscating guns..
By parity of argument, every American city should be under lockdown 24/7, because neocons always talk about how there are terrorists everywhere and they all have access to guns and explosives if they don't yet have a record. Oh wait, never mind, we're already in a police state.
And as I recall, after 9/11, it wasn't the civil libertarians complaining about government's lackadaisical attitude towards terrorism. It was the same old R/D totalitarians who then used the tragedy to implement the treasonous Patriot Act. So, next time you want to talk about backlash, don't point your fingers at us libertarians.
And I find it appalling that people actually use government manufactured pseudo-words like "terrorist". :laugh:
I can't get over the pictures of houses full of bullets holes. How many times did the police shoot at these two it's amazing they didn't kill anyone they forced to stay locked away in their homes.
I hope this reminds citizens of Boston that staying home with a loaded gun in those circumstances is better than staying home with some kitchen cutlery.
You anti government folks are too funny. There is nothing they could have done that would have satisfied any of you. I thank god they don't care what you all think, and just do their job protecting the public. You think it might be a little dangerous if they had to engage in another firefight with this guy that they thought was still in the neighborhood if all the folks were out gawking at the emergency vehicles, or working in their gardens?
Anyway the guy is in custody now, and the law enforcement folks in Boston deserve some credit for the tough job they had to do.
You understand that in 1989, the SCOTUS ruled that the police have NO duty to "protect" the public, right?
How's that Kool-Aid?
Lemme dig that troll spray back out.
No troll. I happen to disagree with you. You may want me to crawl back in my hole, and let your conspiracy theories have room to flourish, but I believe these guys did a hell of a job, a job you watched on TV, and I don't think you are right accusing them of taking advantage of the situation to control the people. They did what they felt was needed given the situation they had to deal with. No conspiracy, just getting the job done. People in Massachusetts can still own firearms, by the way. Now if I was a police Officer searching for someone who had already shot at my team, and likely had explosives too, how many civilians would I want to help hunt for him. Think about that, no lines of communication, no command and control. Sure, that would work.
Here, let me emphasize what you typed.
I never, ever said that they did not do a good job, nor did I ever say that they were taking advantage of a situation in order to control people, although, that is EXACTLY what martial law is.
I simply wanted to educate you on a point that you are dead wrong about, as well as pointing out the fact that you responded to this thread for the sole purpose of getting a response.
Thanks for coming.
I guess you may have a line on a legal definition that says that is not what their job is, but I'll bet that is what most of them see their job as. I am not going to look it up. I might read about it if you provide a link, just so I know what you are talking about.