Roadblocks to catch a murderer, cooperate with being searched or not.

Primus said:

Not for nothing..... but they caught the guy because they were going door to door and that homeowner said hey look in my back yard.

Not saying ripping people out of their houses is ok at all. Not remotely.

But also has anyone spoken with those people in the photos? Did they allow them in? What was the story? You just have a photo and if can be construed however you want to.

Think about this for one second.... we talk about anti gun people using photos of full auto guns or scenes of mass shooting to twist and fit their agenda.... right? So why is it ok to to do that with this agenda?

That's all I'm saying. Again NOT justifying or belittling or minimizing or doing anything people want to assign. I'm pointing out some hypocrisy that's all.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Invoking a right is hypocrisy. Got it.

[video=youtube;2LrbsUVSVl8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LrbsUVSVl8[/video]

Submitting at the point of a "patrol rifle" isn't the same as "warmly welcomed in".

The first 25 seconds of this video fairly well describes to me what the inhabitants were dealing with. Pay attention to the "knock" on the door. Treat my property like that and one of us will need a doctor.

At 29 seconds, the guy who answered the door is seized outside his door, a commando rushes into the house. The guy who was forced out appears to ordered to run into the street where a hunted terrorist is loose, from the safety of his home. Then the occupants are frisked at gunpoint. On a positive note, no reports have surfaced that the invaders "needed" to shoot the dog.

Primus said:

I was referring to photos of the aftermath they use to instill fear and bring emotions ...

Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with using TRUTH to remind us not to forget that are supposed to not just be pissed off about it, but that SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ABOUT IT, because so far, nothing has changed.

Propaganda. Right. The guy at 40 seconds....the one that says "They banged on the door, I was shocked. Then, there was a gun. Or two guns what ever, pointing down at me and the guys said GET OUT GET OUT and I said Ok, and I wanted to know do I get my shoes or...and the guys says GET OUT GET OUT." He just didn't have that...what would you call it..."convincing conviction" in his voice about his gratitude about what he had just been subjected to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ1-ZUN3Li0

Dude up against the garage door with all those patrol rifles pointed at him had to be thankful.

The lady at the end...never mind. The guy in the beginning, the one the ninja clads were pointing their "big guns" at...he and his daughter.....saw nothing particularly wrong with low impulse, low accountability occupying forces assuming it was alright to put his daughter out in the street with a loose terrorist. At gun point.

Note to self: Do not drink the water in Massachusetts.

Primus said:

I was referring to photos of the aftermath they use to instill fear and bring emotions and away "this is why you should ban guns" etc. Or photos/videos of guns firing to show how "scary" they are.

No lies. Some guns were used to kill people. Some guns do fire full auto and that scares some people. They aren't lies but its TWISTED by antis for their propaganda.

Same as the above photos. No lies. Police did go door to door. But now they are being posted up to SCARE people about police or the .gov. they are being used to instill rage or other emotions. So.... a form of propaganda.



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Have you watched the videos? The police did more than "go door to door." They used force to obtain compliance with illegal searches. Bostonians let it happen. The people who once gave us the "shot heard 'round the world" gave us the "whimper heard 'round the world."

Shame on those LEAs. More shame on the people who let it happen.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Primus said:

I was referring to photos of the aftermath they use to instill fear and bring emotions and away "this is why you should ban guns" etc. Or photos/videos of guns firing to show how "scary" they are.

No lies. Some guns were used to kill people. Some guns do fire full auto and that scares some people. They aren't lies but its TWISTED by antis for their propaganda.

Same as the above photos. No lies. Police did go door to door. But now they are being posted up to SCARE people about police or the .gov. they are being used to instill rage or other emotions. So.... a form of propaganda.



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

The photos posted here are not twisted. I do have an emotional response to them, but I don't allow that to cloud my judgment, nor is it the intention of the poster to cloud anyone's judgment by posting the pictures. Anger (the emotional response) at immorality (the events that the pictures posted have captured) is perfectly righteous - blind hysteria is ludicrous. That is the difference between the pictures posted, and the pictures to which you are referring posted by anti-gun fanatics. The difference is that our position is founded on rationality, logic, fact.. And in such a case, yes, it is perfectly acceptable to be angry at injustice. You do not have to be emotionless to be rational, nor does criticizing decision making based on emotional response alone make you a hypocrite for having emotion yourself. The problem arises when your "rationality" and your "emotion" become out of order.

Don't construe it into something it isn't.

Click to expand...

Did you misconstrue that I purposefully misconstrued your post? Perhaps, purposefully? I genuinely was asking for clarification. Thank you for providing it, I was genuinely concerned that you might have somehow thought that in some unholy way you thought that those searches might have been humorous. With your clarification, I see that is not the case.

eye95 said:

... The people who once gave us the "shot heard 'round the world" gave us the "whimper heard 'round the world."
...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

Wow. I didn't even think about that. What a thing to consider... What a profound observation.

MAC702 said:

There is nothing wrong with using TRUTH to remind us not to forget that are supposed to not just be pissed off about it, but that SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ABOUT IT, because so far, nothing has changed.

Click to expand...

Mac I agree.... but that's the SAME thing antis say. They say "oh look guns kill kids we need to change that" and they use photos of flowers and grieving families as examples to invoke emotion then say.... ban them. Or w/e their agenda is.

They then say "oh another shooting nothing is being done pass more dumb laws".

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Primus said:

Mac I agree.... but that's the SAME thing antis say. They say "oh look guns kill kids we need to change that" and they use photos of flowers and grieving families as examples to invoke emotion then say.... ban them. Or w/e their agenda is.

They then say "oh another shooting nothing is being done pass more dumb laws".

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

The Antis are the ones who support the door to door violation of rights though. They claim that more wrongs make a right so long as the state commits the wrongs.

Where as us gun owners say that it's not the guns but the criminals who commit crimes and the idiots who wanted the LAC to be unarmed victims. That is what us guns owners gripe about.

Primus said:

Mac I agree.... but that's the SAME thing antis say. They say "oh look guns kill kids we need to change that" and they use photos of flowers and grieving families as examples to invoke emotion then say.... ban them. Or w/e their agenda is.

They then say "oh another shooting nothing is being done pass more dumb laws"

Click to expand...

Very significant differences. One uses purposeful exaggeration of some facts and purposeful omission of other facts to instill its emotional responses. One uses outright examples of violations of rights in a very obviously illegal manner, with zero discipline afterward, nor training to prevent it from happening again. We are being put on notice that this is hereby SOP.

We can't just poo-poo it away.

Primus said:

Not for nothing..... but they caught the guy because they were going door to door and that homeowner said hey look in my back yard.

Click to expand...

Cool story, bro.



If I recall, the homeowner called 911.

CBS Local

The standoff began just before 7 p.m., minutes after Massachusetts State Police announced that they had completed their door-to-door search in Watertown without locating Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

A homeowner on Franklin Street went into his yard after being inside all day. According to police, he noticed a rip in the tarp that covered his boat and saw blood on the boat. Upon looking inside, he saw a man covered in blood.

The homeowner then called 911

Click to expand...

NY Times

“A man had gone out of his house after being inside the house all day, abiding by our request to stay inside,” Mr. Davis said, referring to the advice officials gave to residents to remain behind locked doors. “He walked outside and saw blood on a boat in the backyard. He then opened the tarp on the top of the boat, and he looked in and saw a man covered with blood. He retreated and called us.”

Click to expand...

If we can learn anything from these quotes it's that the police may actually have hindered the apprehension of Tsarnaev; the man may have noticed his boat cover ripped earlier if he had not been told to 'shelter in place.' It was only after the police completed their house-to-house search and scaled back their search area that citizens were free to go about their business and it was such a citizen that found him.

ron73440 said:

I was watching a crime show on the ID channel and a murderer had killed three people in three towns. While on the run he stole a car from a woman he contacted because her car was for sale. At this point they showed news coverage of the manhunt and police were stopping cars and checking the backseat and trunks.

I looked at my wife and said "Hell no, they're not lo oking in my trunk." My wife disagreed and said you should help them find the killer and if you refuse they will waste time on you, andtherefore you are helping him escape.

I argue that looking in my trunk will not help them, and if they waste time with me it's their own stupidity and not my fault. I also don't think we should give up our rights just to help the police, and as responsible citizens we should be more resistant to this kind of tactic being used.

Usally my wife agrees with me on these issues, but we could not agree on this, so I am wondering what do other people think, I respect my wife's opinion and the fact she was so adamant that I am crazy on this issue has me second guessing myself a little.

Click to expand...

A crucial point here is that police are not the sole determiner of your innocence. You also know whether you are innocent. This touches the very heart of the 4th and 5th Amendment. If you have an obligation to "help" the police determine your innocence, then police become the determiners, and then you have to be able to prove you are innocent. And, of course, the amount of "proof" that is persuasive is entirely up to the determiner--the cop.

Also, if you have to prove your innocence to the state agent's satisfaction, then the state is senior to you, not your servant.

Primus said:

Not for nothing..... but they caught the guy because they were going door to door and that homeowner said hey look in my back yard.

Not saying ripping people out of their houses is ok at all. Not remotely.

But also has anyone spoken with those people in the photos? Did they allow them in? What was the story? You just have a photo and if can be construed however you want to.

Think about this for one second.... we talk about anti gun people using photos of full auto guns or scenes of mass shooting to twist and fit their agenda.... right? So why is it ok to to do that with this agenda?

That's all I'm saying. Again NOT justifying or belittling or minimizing or doing anything people want to assign. I'm pointing out some hypocrisy that's all.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Readers,

Notice the subtle and insidious shift. He goes from (red) uncertain, to (blue) a declaration that it is occurring.


Note: some residents of the illegally searched neighborhoods came out and said the police didn't give them a choice. Homes were warrantlessly searched without consent.

Primus said:

Negative my friend not the actions in the photos but the use of the photos. Specifically by this poster in general. Don't construe it into something it isn't.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

What issue do you have with this poster using those particular photo images as an example of an unwarranted invasion of homes based on a hunch?

Or was it opportunity?

MAC702 said:

There is nothing wrong with using TRUTH to remind us not to forget that are supposed to not just be pissed off about it, but that SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ABOUT IT, because so far, nothing has changed.

Click to expand...

What have you done? I filed a notice of trespass to my local authorities long before this happening...I foresaw this type of behavior years ago.

My local PD knows what's what ... not in their best interest to enter my land let alone pound on my door with a bunch of armed thugs.

Everyone should chk their state laws and issue out notices of trespass against the authorities if they can. It may put you in a stronger position in a legal sense.

Of course, as always, might makes right....

Primus, your contention, that I was incorrect saying that the door-to-door did not help in locating the terrorist, has been dispatched by many other posters.

Care to acknowledge that my statement was, in fact, correct?

eye95 said:

Primus, your contention, that I was incorrect saying that the door-to-door did not help in locating the terrorist, has been dispatched by many other posters.

Care to acknowledge that my statement was, in fact, correct?

Click to expand...

Rumor is that he penciled in the second Tuesday of next week for that acknowledgement.

eye95 said:

Primus, your contention, that I was incorrect saying that the door-to-door did not help in locating the terrorist, has been dispatched by many other posters.

Care to acknowledge that my statement was, in fact, correct?

Click to expand...

You are correct and I agree that the door to door didn't find him.

I stated that. I stated that the citizen found him NOT the team. My point was that they were in the area due to the searches. Instead of him calling and them sending a patrol car they had immediate response.

Also, anyone have any suggestion what they should have done? I mean after blowing up 2 IEDs. Wounding 250ish killing several (to include a small child) then murdering an officer, car jacking someone (with the threat of death obviously), then getting into a full blown shootout....

Should they have just gone home? Ahhhh we'll put a bolo out for him hell turn up......

I honestly don't know how/why people were forces from their home. That's why I ASKED if anyone had the story. Did they have some reason to believe those homes had him in there?

From a legal perspective I'd say yod have exigent circumstances if you could articulate why you thought the dude was in any one of those houses. And again did they give permission? Were there any lawsuits after this?

Guys Monday morning quarterback but what about the people involved. Those citizens that had guns pointed at them. Where is their outrage? Maybe they knew something you or I don't?

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Primus said:

I was referring to photos of the aftermath they use to instill fear and bring emotions and away "this is why you should ban guns" etc. Or photos/videos of guns firing to show how "scary" they are.

No lies. Some guns were used to kill people. Some guns do fire full auto and that scares some people. They aren't lies but its TWISTED by antis for their propaganda.

Same as the above photos. No lies. Police did go door to door. But now they are being posted up to SCARE people about police or the .gov. they are being used to instill rage or other emotions. So.... a form of propaganda.

Click to expand...

Utter hogwash, especially from the person who has used appeal to the emotive and cry of safety over and over again on justification for unconstitutional proactive policing in the USA and abroad.

Guns are inanimate objects, simply put they are tools.

Are you saying cops are tools?

And... I would like to humbly point out this is a good/needed discussion but its completely wrecked the thread.

Doing checkpoints for an alleged murderer is much different then what happened up here. Especially the circumstances that the OP put out.

For example if say there is no exigent circumstances for the MV searches. But there was for houses. We have no details on the alleged murderer other then it was multiple victims (but not over 200)

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Please cite the constitutional authority that it is the number of victims that would erase the restrictions put on government?