RON PAUL: Police manhunt for Boston Marathon bombing suspect scarier than attack

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by LogicGrind

 

I should have said that a segment of our well armed individuals are idiots, not all of them.

You could also accurately say that a segment of our unarmed individuals are idiots too.
You don't have to own a firearm to be an idiot... or be dangerous.

After all, how many people were shot at the finish line of the Boston Marathon this year?
And...
Bombs are already illegal.

Idiots with firearms are more dangerous than idiots without firearms.

reply to post by LogicGrind


So does this militarised police force make you feel any safer? Are you worried about dying in a terrorist attack?
Do you require this type of protection in other areas of your life that may kill you? Like driving a car or crossing the street or being struck by lightening?

At what stage will you say no more. That's too much protection? Too late I imagine

reply to post by LogicGrind

Idiots with firearms are more dangerous than idiots without firearms.

Sounds like a challenge.

You get an assault weapon, loaded, in your hands.

and

I get a passenger sedan, engine running.

We face off, 25 feet separating us....

I'd take that challenge.

Originally posted by LogicGrind
In the end, they got both the suspects in only 4 days...kind of hard to argue with those results.

Uhm, it's only hard to argue if you neglect the fact that the CIA had Tamerlan years before the event actually occurred. The bombing itself was 100% preventable... everything which went down afterward was ass covering and unnecessary bullcrap.

Rregardless of whether they are Chechnian or government terrorists, the terrorists won AGAIN. Citizens were terrorized, inconvenienced, and freedom and liberty was, yet again, ordered to roll over and take it some more. EPIC FAIL by the system.

reply to post by CALGARIAN


Had they tried to come into my home, they would have been met by my 357 magnum, police, military, or intruder.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by LogicGrind

 

So does this militarised police force make you feel any safer? Are you worried about dying in a terrorist attack?
Do you require this type of protection in other areas of your life that may kill you? Like driving a car or crossing the street or being struck by lightening?

At what stage will you say no more. That's too much protection? Too late I imagine

No, it doesn't make me feel any safer because I am not a police officer. But that doesn't mean I don't understand the need. If I was a police officer or if a loved one of mine was a police officer, I would feel safer that the police had the equipment they needed to take on people with a lot of firepower. I don't have to be in that situation to understand it though.

I have no worries about dying in a terrorist attack.

We still live in a free society, only really really anal idiots complain about our "freedoms" being taken away. They are sheltered individuals that have no knowledge of the world outside of the United States.

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by LogicGrind
In the end, they got both the suspects in only 4 days...kind of hard to argue with those results.

Uhm, it's only hard to argue if you neglect the fact that the CIA had Tamerlan years before the event actually occurred. The bombing itself was 100% preventable... everything which went down afterward was ass covering and unnecessary bullcrap.

Rregardless of whether they are Chechnian or government terrorists, the terrorists won AGAIN. Citizens were terrorized, inconvenienced, and freedom and liberty was, yet again, ordered to roll over and take it some more. EPIC FAIL by the system.

Did they have enough evidence to take Tamerlan into custody? He was on watch, yes, but are you suggesting that the government should just go out and arrest everyone who is on a watch list? That would cause a whole other round of complaints from people. Again, damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Originally posted by auto73912621
reply to post by CALGARIAN

 

Had they tried to come into my home, they would have been met by my 357 magnum, police, military, or intruder.

LOL!!

I doubt it soooo much. They, 6+ men, would have shot you dead INSTANTLY.

Originally posted by LogicGrind
I'm sorry, but I have a low opinion of the American public...in general...they are stupid and stupid people need to be governed.

Interesting. I also have a low opinion of the American public, but apparently for the exact oposite reason as you. I see the majority of the American people appear to be perfectly happy living on their knees so long as they don't have to confront the possibility of dying on their feet. How the average American avoids spending their entire day with their head hung low with shame over what they have allowed and accepted is beyond me.

Originally posted by LogicGrind

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by LogicGrind
In the end, they got both the suspects in only 4 days...kind of hard to argue with those results.

Uhm, it's only hard to argue if you neglect the fact that the CIA had Tamerlan years before the event actually occurred. The bombing itself was 100% preventable... everything which went down afterward was ass covering and unnecessary bullcrap.

Rregardless of whether they are Chechnian or government terrorists, the terrorists won AGAIN. Citizens were terrorized, inconvenienced, and freedom and liberty was, yet again, ordered to roll over and take it some more. EPIC FAIL by the system.

Did they have enough evidence to take Tamerlan into custody? He was on watch, yes, but are you suggesting that the government should just go out and arrest everyone who is on a watch list? That would cause a whole other round of complaints from people. Again, damned if you do, damned if you don't.

If the CIA was involved, there's about a 95% chance they put him up to it. We're talking about an agency that under the cloud of 'national security' does all sorts of things with no accountablility, including money-making ventures (drugs, arms selling, etc) that make them less reliable on appropriated funds. They likely killed one of our presidents as well because he threatened, then followed up with a NSM to take away their operational capability.

Originally posted by LogicGrind
are you suggesting that the government should just go out and arrest everyone who is on a watch list?

No, I'm suggesting that the Federal government should keep a tighter leash on their pets.

Originally posted by LogicGrind

Originally posted by lynxpilot

Originally posted by LogicGrind
reply to post by woodwardjnr

 

But since we have cowboys that love their guns...our police have to be better armed than what they confront.

That's the opposite of the purpose of the Second Amendment. Defense is both a right and responsibility of individuals. Well-armed individuals means no need to have ridiculous gestapo-like domestic forces.

Except our well armed individuals are idiots.

I'm sorry, but I have a low opinion of the American public...in general...they are stupid and stupid people need to be governed.

Your first sentence does not discriminate other than 'well armed'. There are lots of well-armed people out there that are not idiots, and besides that, who are you to judge?

Your second sentence is not only a broad brush that insults any number of people solely because they are American public. This puts you on a mighty high horse. Reckon you can handle the fall?

reply to post by LogicGrind


They could have gone to his house in the morning to see if he wanted to load up his backpack and go for a picnic. No harm there. Or simply followed him that morning, it's not a violation of his rights to tail him.

It simply would have been prudent. They have a billion dollar budget with 15000 agents there are two options; they did it or allowed it. Either way heads should roll- literally.

I am not suprised that lots of folks are clueless about the american constitution. Most schools barely touch the subject. In high school we only spent about a week on it and just about eveyone forgot what it was about.

I am not kidding!

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by LogicGrind
I'm sorry, but I have a low opinion of the American public...in general...they are stupid and stupid people need to be governed.

Interesting. I also have a low opinion of the American public, but apparently for the exact oposite reason as you. I see the majority of the American people appear to be perfectly happy living on their knees so long as they don't have to confront the possibility of dying on their feet. How the average American avoids spending their entire day with their head hung low with shame over what they have allowed and accepted is beyond me.

You speak as if you aren't one of them. If you are an American, then you allowed it as well. Just because you disagree with what has happened, doesn't mean you take no responsibility in allowing it to happen.

I am free of that guilt though, because I don't see anything wrong with where our society is today. If anything, I think we need more regulations in some areas.

reply to post by lynxpilot

If the CIA was involved, there's about a 95% chance they put him up to it. We're talking about an agency that under the cloud of 'national security' does all sorts of things with no accountablility, including money-making ventures (drugs, arms selling, etc) that make them less reliable on appropriated funds. They likely killed one of our presidents as well because he threatened, then followed up with a NSM to take away their operational capability.

95% chance huh...where exactly did you pull that number out of?

Sorry, I don't buy it...you will need a little evidence to back up a claim like that, not just speculation.

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by LogicGrind
are you suggesting that the government should just go out and arrest everyone who is on a watch list?

No, I'm suggesting that the Federal government should keep a tighter leash on their pets.

So you are suggesting that the Federal Government was behind this attack?

That is surprising, I expected more.

reply to post by lynxpilot

Your first sentence does not discriminate other than 'well armed'. There are lots of well-armed people out there that are not idiots, and besides that, who are you to judge?

Your second sentence is not only a broad brush that insults any number of people solely because they are American public. This puts you on a mighty high horse. Reckon you can handle the fall?

If it makes you feel any better, I clarified my statement about armed people to not include all of them.

And for the second statement, I stand by it. I am part of the American public, by stating that the American public is stupid, it is a generalized observation. Meaning that more than not, if you encounter someone out in public...they are going to be stupid.

If it makes you feel any better, it's not just the American public...it is the entire world population. The stupid out-number the non-stupid.