Agreed. That's why it is essential that the electorate remain informed and engaged. We can't maintain protection against a swing to either side unless we are vigilant.
Of course, this is why I now fear for our republic.
It's tough, but I really would have to come down on the side of these poor little girls that 50 year old perverted men impregnating. It is morally reprehensible.
This should be a no-brainer. It's disturbing that we have to have any doubt that the sheriff/judge took appropriate care before issuing an appropriate warrant, but experience with overzealous government means that we have to always be wary.
“Agreed. That’s why it is essential that the electorate remain informed and engaged. We can’t maintain protection against a swing to either side unless we are vigilant.”
This is why I am concerned over reporting that the public, and even mothers, were not allowed to get anywhere near all of this. If the authorities are aboveboard, they should be able to find a way to allow scrutiny of their actions while maintaining security needs.
I am not sure but that a thousand citizens watching might have led to a different outcome in Waco, or with Terri Schiavo. If the authorities feel they can not act safely in such a public eye, they should find actions that will work better.
This is not to condone any alleged actions of these groups, but to simply say that I want my government to do its best to seek and apply the most peaceful solutions to problems (e.g., arresting an individual on a shopping trip and foregoing the need for a raid altogether), and walk very carefully, because we are watching and will hold them accountable, immediately, if necessary to save lives of citizens. Of course, this is a pipe dream... anyone actually trying to do such a thing would probably be in violation of RICO laws and anti-terroroism statutes, interfering...
~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080414/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat
From AP today, it seems that a judge has ordered the cell phones of several of the mothers confiscated:
“lawyers said the phones should be confiscated “to prevent improper communication, tampering with witnesses and to ensure no outside inhibitors to the attorney-client relationship.””
All for their own good, I see. This disturbs me. If they are not arrested, what is the difference between cell phones and other communication. Will this become common practice?