Boston is a Farce to Take your Rights Away

Originally posted by cavscout11cav

Originally posted by muzzleflash
They are wearing military gear, have military grade weaponry, and have armored vehicles with air support.
That's the Military operating as if they were Police in the USA, and that's prohibited according to our founding principles.

I don't care that your paper says you are a cop, your gear and weapons say you are a totalitarian military man here to squash my nation and it's liberty. Sadly you officers fail to realize this most simple fact.

Actually your opinion does matter, you state that even though they say they're are cops, they are acting in as a military which is forbidden in the constitution. You did not say how they are acting, you say the gear and weapons make them the totalitarian man. You say they are here to squash OUR nation, and its liberty.

edit on 19-4-2013 by cavscout11cav because: (no reason given)

Ok you win.
There is no police state, nothing to see here!
No ones liberties are in any danger.

Freaking hilarious.

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by redtic
I believe the MSM definitely hypes most of its stories - they shouldn't, but they do. And I believe that the gov't has a duty to protect its citizens and react to exceptional circumstances with exceptional response. Are you suggesting that the MSM is in cahoots with the gov't and the gov't response to this situation is a "show" for the MSM to "put on"? No, of course not - that'd be ridiculous - what's going on is that the gov't is responding to an exceptional circumstance and the MSM is covering that response. The integrity of the MSM is what's debatable (see NY Post, CNN, etc).

That's not the point.

The point is that with the way things are now, anyone can become a world famous terrorist in what two hours or less? Anyone can do it, its extremely easy with this automatic ultra-hyped publicity paradigm.

Do we really want it to stay like this?

I guess I'm still confused. If the gov't response is appropriate (I don't know how else they should respond) and the MSM is protected via the 1st amendment, what do you want to be different in this situation? As I've said, the MSM definitely hypes, but even if they were only supplying objective facts, we'd still get a clear sense of the chaos that is and has ensued.

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by TorqueyThePig
reply to post by cavscout11cav

 

I guess I will just start carrying a revolver at work and substitute my semi auto AR 15 for a remington 870. Who cares if criminals have better weaponry.

I the innocent citizen, am more worried about how you think everyone is a criminal, and point those guns at us and don't care at all how we feel.

I am most interested in disarming your pro-violence solution to problems in life.

Wow so now I think everyone is a criminal? Thanks for pre judging me. Are you racist too?

I have never pointed a gun at anyone where it wasn't justified.

Pro violence solutions to life? What are you talking about? So if I encounter an armed bank robber I shouldn't draw my gun on him? If he fires at me or innocent people I shouldn't shoot him. You confuse me.

reply to post by TorqueyThePig


Give me a break, modern American cops draw their guns when a mouse whimpers.

The biggest prison population in the world, yet we call ourselves free.

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by cavscout11cav

Originally posted by muzzleflash
They are wearing military gear, have military grade weaponry, and have armored vehicles with air support.
That's the Military operating as if they were Police in the USA, and that's prohibited according to our founding principles.

I don't care that your paper says you are a cop, your gear and weapons say you are a totalitarian military man here to squash my nation and it's liberty. Sadly you officers fail to realize this most simple fact.

Actually your opinion does matter, you state that even though they say they're are cops, they are acting in as a military which is forbidden in the constitution. You did not say how they are acting, you say the gear and weapons make them the totalitarian man. You say they are here to squash OUR nation, and its liberty.

edit on 19-4-2013 by cavscout11cav because: (no reason given)

Ok you win.
There is no police state, nothing to see here!
No ones liberties are in any danger.

Freaking hilarious.

Not letting you get off so easy, I dont want you to just roll over. Im not saying I win. I want you to explain what you meant as the creator of this topic

Originally posted by TorqueyThePig

Wow so now I think everyone is a criminal?

You are trained to treat everyone as a potential criminal, yes.

Do you deny the easily proven facts of your training?

reply to post by muzzleflash


I was flipping between CNN and FOX last night before I went to bed and it's what I'm doing while I drink my morning coffee.

Most of what you said is exactly what I was thinking. I think it's a test or a training exercise. The government has Boston under siege and they didn't even fire a shot. (today)

Originally posted by billy565
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

I was flipping between CNN and FOX last night before I went to bed and it's what I'm doing while I drink my morning coffee.

Most of what you said is exactly what I was thinking. I think it's a test or a training excercise. The government has Boston under siege and they didn't even fire a shot. (today)

Yes it is quite amazing what happened.

I do agree I think it is likely a test to see how easily they can do this type of operation.

reply to post by cavscout11cav


I already explained myself in full, quite well.

The confusion over a subjective semantic issue should be cleared now.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by TorqueyThePig

 

Give me a break, modern American cops draw their guns when a mouse whimpers.

The biggest prison population in the world, yet we call ourselves free.

Again using blanket statements. Of course it happens. But to judge every single police officer out there is kind of ignorant. You seem very intelligent. I would expect more from you.

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by TorqueyThePig

Wow so now I think everyone is a criminal?

You are trained to treat everyone as a potential criminal, yes.

Do you deny the easily proven facts of your training?

Do I deny being trained to treat everyone as a criminal. Uh yeah. That is completely assinine. Can you please provide the "easily proven facts of my training" please?

Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Most Americans are too lazy to stand up for freedom!! It would take the government taking away dancing with the stars and American Idol to make people mad!!

As long as they can sit in a puddle of sweat on the couch with a bag of potato chips and a 2 liter of Pepsi, then people are happy, unfortunately!!

The government knows this and will push us to our limits very soon......

I missed this one earlier sorry.

Good post, and factually correct.

Sad state of affairs indeed.

reply to post by muzzleflash


Also just for fun. Hell maybe you can teach me something I don't know or a better way to handle a situation like the current one. How would you have handled the current situation in Boston? Specfically the part where the police confronted the suspects who already killed and injured citizens, shot and killed a police officer and were in the possession of more bombs?

I am honeslty intrigued at how you would handle it.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by cavscout11cav

 

I already explained myself in full, quite well.

The confusion over a subjective semantic issue should be cleared now.

No you created this topic, and you wrote that. I am trying to get your thinking on it. What equipment do you think makes a police officer a soldier...which is forbidden by the Constitution

You also say that the press is over reporting (which I agree with you) and that is adding to the fear mongering. But you do not address that the Constitution grants the press freedom to report as they see fit.

You can not use the Constitution to argue one point, then ignore it to argue another

Originally posted by TorqueyThePig

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by TorqueyThePig

Wow so now I think everyone is a criminal?

You are trained to treat everyone as a potential criminal, yes.

Do you deny the easily proven facts of your training?

Do I deny being trained to treat everyone as a criminal. Uh yeah. That is completely assinine. Can you please provide the "easily proven facts of my training" please?

I said POTENTIAL.

Or what do you close your eyes and pretend no one ever speeds?
How do you know if the radar says they are speeding or not if you refuse to believe anyone is a potential criminal?

Originally posted by cavscout11cav

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by cavscout11cav

 

I already explained myself in full, quite well.

The confusion over a subjective semantic issue should be cleared now.

No you created this topic, and you wrote that. I am trying to get your thinking on it. What equipment do you think makes a police officer a soldier...which is forbidden by the Constitution

You also say that the press is over reporting (which I agree with you) and that is adding to the fear mongering. But you do not address that the Constitution grants the press freedom to report as they see fit.

You can not use the Constitution to argue one point, then ignore it to argue another

So one guy has the freedom to buy up all the news agencies, and have his point of view expressed globally?

You don't have the freedom to take over Earth and enslave everyone.
Oh and the media doesn't have the right to spread lies that lead to war, that's illegal (but allowed apparently).

Who's heads rolled for the Iraq WMD crap? If anyone it wasn't the people who fabricated it.

Yes you heard it folks, the MSM has the FREEDOM and RIGHT to lie to you all day long, fabricate complete forgeries, and faces no repercussions because everyone keeps watching and believing it.

But if you dare lie to a cop, you will go down big time.
You heard me?

Do as I say, not as I do.

reply to post by muzzleflash


Do I deny being trained to treat everyone as a POTENTIAL criminal. Uh yeah. That is completely assinine. Can you please provide the "easily proven facts of my training" please?

Well speeding is not a criminal offense. It is a civil infraction. Even if I believed everyone violated the speed limit (which I don't) I wouldn't see them as a criminal because it is not a criminal offense. Next arguement please.

PS I am still waiting for those "easily proven facts of my training."

Originally posted by TorqueyThePig
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Also just for fun. Hell maybe you can teach me something I don't know or a better way to handle a situation like the current one. How would you have handled the current situation in Boston? Specfically the part where the police confronted the suspects who already killed and injured citizens, shot and killed a police officer and were in the possession of more bombs?

I am honeslty intrigued at how you would handle it.

edit on 19-4-2013 by TorqueyThePig because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-4-2013 by TorqueyThePig because: (no reason given)

I don't know anything about those claims as they are claims of specific physical events without any evidence to make judgments from.

Also considering that since 2am last night, I have seen so many conflicting stories and no one seems to make their mind up about whats going on (in the media).

So I decided if I cared about specific facts of specific people doing specific instances, I would wait until the facts about those instances became available.

And in the meantime, I will just analyze and criticize this event in a geopolitical and human rights standpoint where it is much easier to make determinations because the facts are in our history books for review at any time.

So one guy has the freedom to buy up all the news agencies, and have his point of view expressed globally?

Honestly yes, someone has the right to BUY news agencies. You have the right to create a news source and report. The people choose what news source they want to follow.

You don't have the freedom to take over Earth and enslave everyone.

Dont worry Im not

Oh and the media doesn't have the right to spread lies that lead to war, that's illegal (but allowed apparently).

The news reported on the lies that the government told them. This is their fault? Even if wrong, Freedom of the press is still in effect

Who's heads rolled for the Iraq WMD crap? If anyone it wasn't the people who fabricated it.

Not going to deny this, Bush pardoned everyone which I believe should be undone. I lost 14 friends in Iraq so yeah my friends paid the price for those lies