The bombers took your rights.

[WilliamPitt]

The Boston police restored them.

Discuss.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

1. They do not have such power

Anders Behring Breivik

Think about it...

[graywarrior]

2. They allowed us to participate in the capture by following their suggestions

[Enrique]

3. the 911 terrorists took your rights

Dick Cheney restored them.

[DJ13]

10. Ouch!

[marions ghost]

45. zing

whew

[Loudly]

4. Everything they did was a consequence of the claim of 2A rights.

Anonymous armed rebellion against the United States.

Highly non-sensical.

[onehandle]

8. Exactly. They should be on the cover of NRA Monthly. nt

[onehandle]

5. 300+ bullets fired at Watertown officers. Track The Guns! nt

[bobclark86]

21. My guess...

Legally purchased in a state with an AWB on the books (signed by a one Mr. Wilifred "Mittens" Romney).

I'd be shocked to learn otherwise...

[Lasher]

6. I took your rights.

PM me your bank account and routing number and I will restore them.

[elleng]

7. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness

[Bonobo]

9. My contribution.

Stupid idea. Stupid OP.

End of discussion.

[kenny blankenship]

16. But at least it was brief.

And it dissipated quickly.

[Bonobo]

18. That's a good point.

I admit I was grateful for that.

[Apophis]

26. This.

[Warren Stupidity]

11. Since you think rights should be discarded for bad guys using the ticking bomb excuse

perhaps you should discuss how your views on this differ from the torture apologists in the bush administration.

[neverforget]

12. No they did not take your rights.

They killed and maimed people but did not take your rights. Only the government can do that.

[uppityperson]

15. Wish I could rec your post. Thank you.

[progressoid]

17. yes. n/t

[Arctic Dave]

13. Niether.

But I did see a hell of lot of people want to give them away for a little imaginary safety.

[boston bean]

43. Oh yeah, the coward citizens of Watertown, just letting

authorities take all their constitutional rights, in the pursuit of a fucking terrorist.

The stupid is just too stupid.

Does anyone even think before typing out such bullshit.

[Arctic Dave]

62. Save me W!

ZOMG!

[Arctic Dave]

65. No worries, I never alert.

I am more concerned about the conversation then the terms used.

What is assholish about what I said?

The fact that I think people shouldn't eagerly give up rights?

The fact that I think the posters (not you in this instance but several on here) who are eager for a "public execution" are cowards also?

So, call me an asshole all day long. I am OK with that.

[Brother Buzz]

14. Kinda liner and circular at the same time

You done used up all my talking points so I'll just post a fine song from my youth instead

[BainsBane]

19. People seem to have a lot of trouble distinguishing convenience

from rights. Not leaving your home for a day on request is inconvenient; it isn't a loss of rights. Going through body scanners and not being allowed to bring water and large quantities of hair gel on planes is inconvenient, but it is not a loss of rights.

Suspension of habeas corpus, the denial of right to a trial, torture, being imprisoned without access to a lawyer: those are losses of rights.

[Bragi]

39. Really?

Is having your city put in lock down, and your house searched by police without a warrant, just "an inconvenience" without any loss of rights?

[marions ghost]

46. I thought you could refuse the house search

of course that might look bad...but I thought they had to ask.

Not sure how else they could search a neighborhood for a dangerous fugitive. I would be so afraid the guy might be hiding around my house (or in my boat) --I'm sure I would have considered it a public service if I were in Boston. I would have let them look in every nook & cranny.

But I did think you could refuse the search.

[Bragi]

51. Not clear you could refuse

See http://m.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/04/boston-door-to-door-searches-legal/64461/

While the legality of the search was debatable, you know what? Not a single citizen apparently told the revved up heavily armed police at their door to get a warrant. How's that for a huge consensus among fear-tuned citizens?

[marions ghost]

55. From your link it looks like the ACLU wanst to hear

from anyone who wants to talk further about the search experience.

As for consensus of citizens, what else do you do? They knew the fugitive was hiding in the neighborhood. Given the % certainty of that fact, I would have felt safer with the search if I was there. AS LONG AS everyone had the right to refuse the search, which the ACLU seems satisfied that they did.

It's ongoing. The more people who experienced it and are willing to express negs or positives about it, the better.

[BainsBane]

59. Yes, because no one was forced to stay in their home

or allow police entrance, which you know very well.

Funny of fretting about the loss of rights, not a sole actually was effected b y the situation. I would wager not a one of you live in that area.

[Bragi]

60. You wrote

"I would wager not a one of you live in that area."

Do Bostonians have different rights than other Americans? If not, what's your point?

[AnotherMcIntosh]

61. Really?

[LanternWaste]

41. Recognition of that simple yet relevant fact would deny far too many people

Recognition of that simple yet relevant fact would deny far too many people the melodramatic opportunity to scream "authoritarian police state!!!" all over social media and in their blogs (yet another irony that is conveniently overlooked).

[Lady Freedom Returns]

20. All this talk, the way it is going, is making me think I am watching a movie!

[sabrina 1]

22. No one can take your rights. You have to be willing to give them up. My rights have not been taken

despite all he efforts to do so.

[Bragi]

33. Have you an exemption from the Patriot (sic) Act?

[sabrina 1]

50. The terrorists are not responsible for the Patriot Act, Bush war criminals did that to America.

[Bragi]

56. I disagree

Americans have decided to sacrifice their rights for the promise of security. It's a bad deal that compromises everyone's rights, including yours.

But it's what Americans have chosen. Grateful citizen applause for last week's takeover of a major city for a warrantless house by house search pretty well makes the case. The deal is done.

[sabrina 1]

58. Last week's crime was dealt with, the remaining criminal is safely in jail. Support was NOT for the

the removal of rights, it was for removal of a dangerous criminal from the streets. That has been accomplished and many of us supported it. Including me. I support no removal of rights nor was that support for dealing with an armed suspect, support for the removal of rights. You are completely confusing two things.

And no, people had no say in the Bush anti-Constutional legislation that was pushed after 9/11, using fear to do so. They were lied to. When support is coerced based on lies, it is not support. Informed people never supported those policies because they understood that turning a country into a totalitarian state is infinitely more threatening than any terrorist attack.

History has certainly shown the danger of such policies.

[boston bean]

42. The terrorists made society unsafe for innocent citizens

infringing upon their lives in more ways than you seem to care to understand.

Police intervening to catch the fuckers who did it, did not take anyone's rights away.

[sabrina 1]

52. And if you read my posts you would not have seen me criticizing them for dealing with the situation

they were presented with. My objections are to the national reaction, mostly caused by Bush, to terrorism. The use of these crimes to terrorize the population into accepting the destruction of our rights. Boston police had a crime on their hands, the suspects needed to be caught, they accomplished that, now the judicial system should kick in and there is absolutely no more reason for any innocent US citizen to give up any rights in order for our judicial system to do its job.

[boston bean]

54. Well I agree with that.

But I've been reading around DU, and not your posts in particular, but the posts are coming awfully close to calling the citizens of Watertown cowards.

In fact, you will see that here in this thread, and that is what I am speaking to.

You post here in this thread, is what I was responding to, not every single thing you've ever written on the subject. Maybe we both could be a bit more clear.

[bobclark86]

23. Let's see...

Nope.

The cops locked down a city (I know, it was "voluntary," but they spread the fear just fine).
The cops shot the suspects and killed one.
The cops locked up the one survivor and denied them civil rights to a lawyer and to remain silent.

Hmm... All the bombers did was play with some black powder and a pressure cooker. Nothing a trip to Walmart couldn't handle.

Terrorists don't take freedoms. Our reactions to their actions take freedom.

[Lady Freedom Returns]

25. And the bombers killed 3 people, innocent people. And injured many, many more.

Let us not down play the crime.

[whatchamacallit]

24. Redonkulous

180° from reality.

[MannyGoldstein]

27. How 'bout Watertown's Finest?

Chopped liver?

[Marrah_G]

37. LOL no. I think people just lump them all together

I would bet alot of people think Watertown is a part of Boston, like Dorchester or Roxbury, etc.

[MannyGoldstein]

47. I, for one, think it's time for Watertown to take its place on the world stage

Great Armenian food, Super Fusion sushi, and a very nice library.

[Marrah_G]

48. You should totally become their PR man

[graham4anything]

28. The interpretation of the 2nd current took the rights. Reinterpret the 2nd and Free America

from the blackmail of the NRA

ZERO guns and zero bullets in the hands of any private individuals in all states.
And only law enforcement WHILST on duty (mandating they return them to their rightful place at the end of the Union persons shift.)

BTW, the proper militia was there. They are called the National Guard.

If one doesn't like a specific cop or fireman due to some sort of abuse, weed those out.
Don't throw away the bathtub just because a spider is in the water.

Working for an 80-20 USA instead of a 50-50 one now.

[musical_soul]

29. The rights of those in Boston were taken for a while.

Now, they're restored. I don't see any other way this man has taken away rights.

[olddots]

30. gotta get some new glasses

thought it said the boomers took your rights

[Bragi]

31. Americans chose assurances of safety over rights

As Ben Franklin observed, they will, of course, get neither liberty or security.

[boston bean]

32. Will,

you just can't reason with people who think they know better than those who live around here.

The authorities and officials, did a great job. They didn't kill innocent by standers in a blood thirsty man hunt.

They protected the citizens.

Fuck 'em.

[MindPilot]

38. no homes set ablaze, no uninvolved people gunned down by cops...

hell, that was no manhunt. LAPD knows how to conduct a REAL manhunt.

[Marrah_G]

34. I have no problem with how things were handled

I listened to everything unfold on the scanner all day and quite frankly I was very impressed.

When law enforcement does well they deserve a pat on the back.

When they fuck up they deserve to be called on that too.

The only people I hear complaining about how everyone in Boston and the affected burbs were treated are people who don't live there.

[Bragi]

44. What did law enforcement actually achieve?

The facts suggest the extreme house-to-house warrantless search achieved nothing. Once the police decided their lock down had failed., and graciously allowed people to leave their homes, only then did an alert citizen go out and find the fugitive in their backyard boat. In fact, the extreme police lock down actually kept the fugitive at large longer.

[marions ghost]

49. Hindsight's always easy

--the lockdown didn't "fail" -- for one thing any movement by the fugitive in public became severely limited. And no member of the public's life was risked in another violent shootout.

After the lockdown was lifted they knew it was only a short time before something would give. They knew he was in the neighborhood. They were ready (& how--the sheer numbers of LE does seem excessive, but that's better than not enough).

You'd be singing a different tune if the man who found Dzho in the boat had been shot to death...

[Bragi]

53. You wrote

--the lockdown didn't "fail" -- for one thing any movement by the fugitive in public became severely limited"

What kept the kid immobile was that he was wounded and bleeding out in the boat.

What lead to his discovery was ENDING the failed lock down.

[marions ghost]

57. Hindsight

you have the benefit of. If he had not been so badly wounded he could have hijacked another car. Held people hostage in a house. Taken them to paradise with him when he was eventually captured. Or have another shootout, with people out and about?

The cops knew very well that ending the lockdown would likely locate him pretty quickly. It was risky but the timing was about right IMO. They probably thought he'd be weakened by that point--from lack of food, sleep & maybe blood loss and shock (but they didnt know the extent of the injury).

Like I said--if the guy who found him in the boat had been killed by Dzho, you'd be blaming the authorities for not doing enough. Under the circumstances, I think they handled it pretty well. Maybe not perfect but I don't expect perfection in anything. You don't deal with sociopaths with logic.

You're willing to risk more lives by acting like it's business as usual, when it was not business as usual whatsoever.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

63. "You'd be singing a different tune if the man who found Dzho in the boat had been shot to death..."

Probably would say "IF he did that!"

[MindPilot]

35. Nope. We have been giving them up for some time now...

the bombers just proved it hasn't done a damn bit of good.

[Bragi]

40. +1

[cali]

36. that's a bit simple

I think it's still up in the air as to whether any agency abrogated the rights of any citizens.

One thing I know is that our rights have been more curtailed in the last 12 years by our gov't than by terrorists.

[Rex]

66. No.

Nobody took any rights away, the bombers took some peoples lives and therefore forfeit their own imo. The Boston PD sent out a PLEA for citizens to stay indoors and they did.

People are mad that the citizens of Boston did what the cops asked them to do. Maybe it is hard for them to comprehend an entire city with class?

Either way, who cares - stay classy Boston!

You got this Texans respect!