Posted on 04/29/2013 5:09:10 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Former Rep. Ron Paul said the law enforcement that swarmed around Boston in the days following the marathon bombings was scarier than the actual terrorist attack.
“The Boston bombing provided the opportunity for the government to turn what should have been a police investigation into a military-style occupation of an American city,” he said on the Lew Rockwell website, Politico reported. “This unprecedented move should frighten us as much or more than the attack itself.”
The terror attacks on April 15 in Boston killed three and injured 264.
Mr. Paul, a former libertarian political candidate who served in Congress as a member of the Republican Party, said the door-to-door searches police conducted in Watertown for the bombing suspects were particularly alarming.
They reminded of a “military coup in a far off banana republic,” he said....
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
“Some of us don’t cotton to police states.”
Seriously, you need to stop being so paranoid. We do not live in a police state. Saying so is bastardizing the term and a disservice to people who have lived in real police states throughout history.
btw, a temporary injection of police to stop a terrorist doesn’t even fit the definition of “police state”.
Maybe you should take some time to watch a few videos. In this one, there are three homes being searched with state police. In one, I counted seven or more, dressed in army gear with automatic weapons, going into a house. Here is that video:
This next video has all of the people in the house evacuated at gunpoint. I would have been worried about that police dog wanting to take a bite:
Again, lots of homes were searched and people evacuated. This shows how compliant the Boston citizens were even though their 4th Amendment rights were being trampled:
There are more video about the searches if you want to take the time.
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
So why take all the non-19 yr old males out at gun point?
Seriously what is the purpose of that?
People in Tx would never tolerate what the folks in Ma do.
And all you folks that love to give up your rights to feel safe and warm, are slowly eroding the rights of the rest of the Nation.
You under estimate yourselves as citizens.
“Even if the response was effective and justified the fact that people are cheering it is scary.”
Interesting. It’s justified and effective, but the potential victims who are no longer threatened....cheering scares you.
They can call it “Shelter in place”, but it was martial law.
The entire action has to be a procedure they have been trained to perform. This tells me there is work being done to take down any kind of civil disturbance. The methods you see are the work of that preparation.
“Interesting. It’s justified and effective, but the potential victims who are no longer threatened....cheering scares you.”
No, out of control law enforcement hopped up on steroids and donuts scare me. Especially when they have weapons of war and carte blanche to do any damn thing they want.
“I wonder how many people had their arms taken from their homes without warrants or nothin’”
Zero. And that is a fact.”
“”Source? I haven’t seen any public assertions of that.””
Why do I have to disprove your fantasies? If you have evidence to support your assertion...provide it.
Bingo.
A little lesson on the law: Allowing police to come into your home, even if it’s just for a new officer to introduce him/herself, is silent consent. If the officer sits down on your couch, feels something funny, pulls your unregistered revolver from the seat cushions, you’re in trouble. The same can happen in your vehicle. The cop pulls you over, asks you to get out, and starts going through your trunk. You have nothing to hide so why protest! You don’t say no so by doing so you’re saying yes. He finds your teenage son’s friend’s bag of weed. Guess who’s going to jail for this? I just took part in a huge Bill of Rights high school assembly. These scenarios are exactly the examples that the lawyers presented. If those cops saw anything in those houses, the fact that the residents let them in to look for a terrorist is irrelevant.
At least they didn’t burn the guy out of the boat.
I’m also surprised they admitted he didnt have a gun in the boat. So what were they shooting at?
It wasn’t my assertion. You asserted that no other weapons were taken. Prove your assertion.
We have evidence of trampling of the Constitution. Lets see just how far they went.
“And you know that for a fact? You’re sure he wasn’t someone who was going to drive #1 and #2 to New York? You’re sure? “
Yes. He fit the rough description of Tamerlan. The local cops who detained him, did not know that Tamerlan was already in custody and soon to be declared dead.
He was released when this was known.
Also their rules of engagement are less strict then the troops in Iraq or Afghanistan have to live with.
That's odd, I thought government effectively shut down the entire major city of Boston..
No?
Your post of 3 videos is a model for conspiracy mania and Alex Jones “evidence”.
In video 1 it shows very calm state police going in a house. Very professional behavior. Everybody can view it and see this.
Video 2 shows the house where a neighbor reported she thought the Terrorist was. In the full video, which you don’t show, you see several women with Islamic head scarves coming out. Police, because of the report, are much more aggressive here, but nobody is roughed up or dragged out...They are searched.
Video 3 merely shows citizens explaining support for the police tactics to neutralize the terrorist.
I was following the eye witnesses on twitter. They reported he was detained. They did not report he was released. You know for a fact he was released? There is a police report?
“It wasn’t my assertion. You asserted that no other weapons were taken. Prove your assertion.”
Your logic is flawed.
You asserted that weapons were taken. I refuted that none were taken.
You have to prove your assertion. My counter is not the subject. Your unproven assertion is the subject.
I await your supporting evidence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.