Why does Boston celebrate Martial Law with chants of ‘USA, USA’?

Originally posted by buckrogerstime


Serious question: How many terrorists and casualties do you need before you're willing to have a citywide lockdown for a few hours while the suspects are dangerous and active? Is 10 terrorists enough? 500?

Therein lies the root problem.

You work under the assumption that our safety and security is only the responsibility of the state, instead of being up to the individual.

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by sonnny1

 

very astute Sone
star that
remenicent of the 6 fat bubbas that tackled the lil ol lady with the unloaded .32
they added powder to the gun bill wed
the bill may have not passed this time
but powder will be on it when it does

sounds about right Neo

I do believe eventually there will be change in America.

For some, they will be on the side of Big Government.

For others, they will be on the side of Liberty.

Jefferson called it.

reply to post by sonnny1


I agree, I am rather amuse by the way people defend anything the government do in the name of "for your safety" this days.

No even an event like the tragedy In Boston helps people understand the reality of what we are facing as a nation, when it comes to the price of that security.

Still we are not safer today than we were yesterday.

reply to post by beezzer

good point BeeZ
which is why they ought to not take the guns away
but agin they added powder to the bill and said it wa in response to this boston incident

sonny1
yes
if they get rid of the founding documents
then next it will be their ideas, wisdoms, letters and quotes

For those who are missing what some of us are saying:

We are elated the Boston Bombers have been caught our issue is how it was done.

The end justifies the means doesn't fly for us.

Originally posted by beezzer


You work under the assumption that our safety and security is only the responsibility of the state, instead of being up to the individual.

I agree with this.

Individual rights have been eroded to the point that reliability on three letter Agency's has become the norm.

There is NO accountability with them. They have powers that or forefathers would cringe at.

And the average "Joe" has become complacent with it, to the point that their Tax dollars pay for the loss of Liberty. Insane.

Yes Beez, you are 100% correct.

I don't fear local Police Agency's, but I do question anything being done at the Big Government Level. You would have to be a fool not to.

reply to post by neo96


I am glad that you posted that, for some reason we got so heated up sometimes that those that disagree with us get the wrong meaning.

Is not about been glad that the criminals were taken or killed but like you say the ways that were use to go after one single person and the price to pay for that within the community or let say an entire city?

reply to post by sonnny1


Isn't it odd that common people are being held MORE accountable, yet federal agencies have the ability to operate carte blanche?

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by buckrogerstime


Serious question: How many terrorists and casualties do you need before you're willing to have a citywide lockdown for a few hours while the suspects are dangerous and active? Is 10 terrorists enough? 500?

Therein lies the root problem.

You work under the assumption that our safety and security is only the responsibility of the state, instead of being up to the individual.

Do you believe in state police forces? Do you believe in city fire stations?

I'm really interested in the Beezzer security task force. Maybe I'll consider calling you up the next time a terrorist blows up a major public event. Are you gonna identify and flush a terrorist out by hoping that department-store proprietors will voluntarily give you and your buddies all their security-video footage? And how would you like to capitalize on that footage once you've obtained it?

Originally posted by buckrogerstime


Do you believe in state police forces? Do you believe in city fire stations?

Yes. I also believe in the 2nd Amendment and having fire extinguishers at home.

I'm really interested in the Beezzer security task force. Maybe I'll consider calling you up the next time a terrorist blows up a major public event. Are you gonna identify and flush a terrorist out by hoping that department-store proprietors will voluntarily give you and your buddies all their security-video footage? And how would you like to capitalize on that footage once you've obtained it?

Hyperbole. Are you that upset that I put your progressive views in an unfavourable light?

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by sonnny1

 

Isn't it odd that common people are being held MORE accountable, yet federal agencies have the ability to operate carte blanche?

What do you expect when accountability only goes one way?

Like I said earlier. People "talk" the talk, but are unwilling to change what has been changed for them.

Its too easy.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by buckrogerstime


Do you believe in state police forces? Do you believe in city fire stations?

Yes. I also believe in the 2nd Amendment and having fire extinguishers at home.

I'm really interested in the Beezzer security task force. Maybe I'll consider calling you up the next time a terrorist blows up a major public event. Are you gonna identify and flush a terrorist out by hoping that department-store proprietors will voluntarily give you and your buddies all their security-video footage? And how would you like to capitalize on that footage once you've obtained it?

Hyperbole. Are you that upset that I put your progressive views in an unfavourable light?

OK, good. Do you think the public should have access to all crime scenes, even if it will impede arrest and possibly threaten citizens' lives? Do you think the public can be lawfully prohibited from entering dangerous construction zones? And do you think the government should be able to shut down roads and subways? I'm just unclear on what precisely you object to from yesterday.

Obviously this was more Security Theatre. 9,000 LEO's and soldiers and dozens of Humvees and other armored vehicles hunting down two young punks -- and then one young punk. It's just like with the shoe-taking-off nonsense in airports. It doesn't do anything practical, but is only suppose to give the appearance of doing something useful.

Obamination said the terrorists were not successful in intimidating us. I'd say putting 9,000+ LEO's into a manhunt for one guy and shutting down the city of Boston is being intimidated.

As for how better to have done it, well first off, why not use helicopters with IR cameras on Thursday night. They used dogs, but did they use bloodhounds? Once they got the first guy and ID'ed him and the relatives spoke out, couldn't they go to the still-on-the-loose brother's place and get some of his personal effects and let some bloodhounds sniff the stuff at the point of last contact with him?

Also, if they had this guy's description and picture, why not let people go about their business, as then there would be a lot of people on the streets looking very closely at anyone matching the description, i.e. it would have made it harder for the guy to get around. As it was, it was some homeowner that spotted signs of the guy and then found in hiding in his boat. It wasn't the AUTHORITUHS that found him. And when they did find him, they made a big, high-tech spectacle out of it. PATHETIC.

And as far as shutting the city down, what was the human cost of that? With the subways shut down, there would be people not able to get to the hospital or doctor's appoints, as well as the hospital personnel who couldn't get to work if their public transportation was closed down.

Heck, even trains into the city were kept out. This was America running scared. Boston's new nickname ought to be Chickentown. Bwock, bwock, bwock, bwock, bwock. BWWWWWOCK!

Seriously, there are armed criminals on the loose for a while in most every city in the US, and no such Security Theatre circus occurs. Remember, Boston was also the town where they made a ruckus about the LED Moonenite devices in a PR campaign that they thought were bombs. In that case they were initially going to prosecute the PR people for some ridiculous crime -- beats me what it would be.

And yes, idiot 'Murikens shouting USA!, USA! the same day that they were cowering in their homes in fear and allowing the fuzz and the feds to search their homes without a warrant. What proud patriots. Pffffft.

reply to post by beezzer
I hope this is not setting a standard. And I know it wasn't ML. But I do have some questions like why don't they use a good old blood hound? And what the heck was that boat made out of? It was either one tough boat or someone is really a bad shot. Just saying.

Originally posted by MrInquisitive


Seriously, there are armed criminals on the loose for a while in most every city in the US, and no such Security Theatre circus occurs.

Shhhh.....

Quiet.

Don't tell the other sheep living in these cities.

reply to post by buckrogerstime


I really hate "beezzer" threads. We will never know if the draconian actions helped or hurt the investigation and conclusion to the case.

What we do know is that liberties were suspended.

And that is never good. Now some may find an easy justification to cede authority to government. But any time liberties are inhibited by government, then their actions become suspect.

Simply put, you're looking for justification for doing something wrong in order to do something right.

Originally posted by beezzer

Simply put, you're looking for justification for doing something wrong in order to do something right.

That's what happens when you're "conditioned" in advance.........



That just doesn't happen overnight.

They were asking people to stay inside, they weren't arrested for going outside.

"Martial Law is not the same as "Shelter in place". Citizens who chose to walk the streets were not arrested. Countless news reporters were free to film and walk the streets as long as they did not interfere with police activity. Some far right wing media nuts like to stir the pot and call what happened Martial Law.
When the shelter in place was lifted around 6pm. many people started coming outside. When the second suspect was located, the shelter in place was put back in place around 7pm., but not as many people respected the request(key word here: request). This is why so many people were on the streets cheering the capture of the second suspect.
If Martial Law were truly in effect then those people would not have been on the streets. If they were violating a Martial Law order, they would have promptly been arrested.
In short, no Martial Law was in effect. "

Originally posted by Tarzan the apeman.
reply to post by beezzer

 

I hope this is not setting a standard. And I know it wasn't ML. But I do have some questions like why don't they use a good old blood hound? And what the heck was that boat made out of? It was either one tough boat or someone is really a bad shot. Just saying.

Using a good ol bloodhound would only cost a few bucks and a can of Alpo. They had to justify millions on this little hunt.

The boat? It was made out of AR-15's. That's why the government is so afraid of them.

reply to post by beezzer


The biggest crimes usually are.