That's offensive. Outrageous.
Those folks wearing the uniforms work for us. They are us. And they were simply fulfilling the first duty of all government, which is to protect the lives of We the People.
They work for us?
SS Troopers worked for Germans too.
They are us?
They might be you, but they are not me.
Tyranny always comes wearing the mask of safety. Stop being a pawn.
That’s funny, I thought that governments, especially one that receives its grant of power From the people, were instituted to preserve our rights. Perhaps I was mistaken.
Yes, it may be offensive but you need to see this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=796UFHldHM4&feature=player_embedded
****** “The terrorists were wearing the police uniforms.”
“That’s offensive. Outrageous. Those folks wearing the uniforms work for us. They are us. And they were simply fulfilling the first duty of all government, which is to protect the lives of We the People.” *******
There was a period in our History when a King thought exactly the same way, his folks Uniform were red in color and they had the same respect for persons and property displayed by your folks...
We have a couple of punk terrorists and a locked down disarmed city ... what could go wrong?
You put your faith in Govt, I have other choices (I live in Texas)
TT
LMFAO, and you wanted to be POTUS?
You’re a disgrace to everything this Coundtry stand for.....puke!
Those folks wearing the uniforms work for us. They are us. And they were simply fulfilling the first duty of all government, which is to protect the lives of We the People.
The duty of all government.
And here is the head, leader, Commander in Chief of all government agents and public servants.
Obama thanks you.
You are playing fast and loose with SCOTUS rulings
“The Supreme Court stated that “’hot pursuit’ means some sort of a chase, but it need not be an extended hue and cry ‘in and about the public streets’” (United States v. Santana, 427 U.S. 38, 96 S. Ct. 2406, 49 L. Ed. 2d 300 [1976]). Hot pursuit also applies when the lives of police officers or others are in danger. Thus, the Court has recognized two specific conditions that justify warrantless searches under the rule of hot pursuit:
the need to circumvent the destruction of evidence, and the need to prevent the loss of life or serious injury.”
There is no proof anyone else was in immediate danger or at risk and there is no proof evidence was being destroyed. this was an “extended hue and cry” in the streets and IF the reports are true that the cops seized weapons and other items during these searches I hope some law firm sues the hell out of the LEO’s. Even putting some in prison for violations of 18USC,242.
People should also become familiar with Elk V. United States.
By shoving guns in the faces of American civilians, forcing out of their own homes at gunpoint and ransacking their houses to hunt for suspects?????
That's not 'protecting and serving' pal. That's raw, in-our-face tyranny under the guise of public safety. Every despotic regime in the last 100 years has done the same damn thing and for the same stated reasons.
This is conditioning. This isn't keeping us safe from an enemy that this very same government insists is NOT a threat to us.
Those who allegedly "work for us" and their media propagandists have already lectured and preached to the simple minded who the 'real' enemy is: Conservative White Christian Americans who love the Constitution. Otherwise known as Bitter Clingers
You know, the kind you see being forced out of their homes with a hundred guns sighted at their heads while the media prays that the terrorists are white Americans.
No one was 'protected' by this incident except the State and those wearing the uniform to protect the state.
Had ANY ONE civilian dared to stand his ground in his own home, he would have been shot and killed by those acting like Gestapo agents whom you say were 'protecting We The People'. That is self-evident in the videos of what went down in Watertown.
"Protecting We The People'. That's not what I see in those videos. That's not what I hear from the Statists in government. That's not what I hear and read from those who you assume 'work for us'.
You know, the ones. The one's who tell us 'we don't need to possess an assault weapon'; 'we must be willing to trade liberty for security'.
The ones who order billions of hollow point rounds and thousands of tanks and assault rifles - and then refuse to say what they are for while letting the beans slip that using drones to kill American citizens on US soil is permissible.