Rights, Freedoms and Safety in today's United States

[kvnchrist]

Politicians are all about 'appearance'. That is why we see major pushes for varying forms of legislation immediately after some tragedy or other. Sandy Hook was gun control, the Boston incident will relate directly to our right to privacy. There are numerous other examples.

 

From my point of view, most, if not ALL, of the legislation brought about by these incidents will do absolutely nothing to reduce them. The older brother, and his mother.... were both on watch lists. Yet bro manage to drag his younger brother into this plot, and carry it off. Had it not been for the security cameras liberally sprinkled about Boston, these guys probably would have gotten away with it, and moved on to another target.

 

Did the Patriot act make us safer? Does the NDAA make us safer? In my opinion, no. They do not. They just erode our rights, and give the government more power. Something that I would like to see changed.

 

Precisely. In my opinion an uneducated electorate separated by partisan quibbling, perpetrated by political punditry and media bias and not looking at their elected officials with the utmost skepticism are more dangerous to America than these terrorist ever have been.

[Graeystone]

There was once a Sheriff who had a 'no gun policy' in the town he watched over. Anyone who entered his town had to give up their gun while within the town. A day a person came into town and was of course told to hand over his gun. Now this visitor was no saint by any means of the word, but he was not causing any trouble either and in any other town he would have gone into town without trouble. He got into an argument with the Sheriff and as is the case sometimes, there was a brief shootout and the visitor was killed. Of course word got back to the visitor's friends and family and they wanted blood and were going to the town to take out the sheriff. The sheriff caught wind and formed his own group to fight back. This led to one of the most infamous gun fights within the US - The Shootout at the OK Corral.

 

Believe it or not, the most violent places in the Old/Wild West were places that had no gun policies and the safest places were those that had everyone from the sheriff to ranch hands carrying a gun.

[Boaresa]

These being how safe can we make ourselves in the U.S?

Seriosly, this is ludicrous.

A fertilizer plant exploded in the same week and there were two deads and many injured. How many americans die by car accidents or because doctors make mistakes? Thousands die by heart attacks because they eat like pigs. Cancer kills millions. This bombing thing will be exploited for political reasons and infact the government doesn't care for your safety at all.

If you getting scared because of bombings and shootings like a little baby the terrorists alreay won.

 

 

Believe it or not, the most violent places in the Old/Wild West were places that had no gun policies and the safest places were those that had everyone from the sheriff to ranch hands carrying a gun.

Very important point. How many bank robberies where there in the old west? Not even 10? As far as i know form "the not so wild west" the most criminal city there was had even years where no one was murdered. But because of italo western movies everyone things there where shootouts evry day with the tumbleweed rolling by.

Edited April 28, 2013 by Boaresa

[kvnchrist]

Seriosly, this is ludicrous.

A fertilizer plant exploded in the same week and there were two deads and many injured. How many americans die by car accidents or because doctors make mistakes? Thousands die by heart attacks because they eat like pigs. Cancer kills millions. This bombing thing will be exploited for political reasons and infact the government doesn't care for your safety at all.

If you getting scared because of bombings and shootings like a little baby the terrorists alreay won.

We are talking about deliberate calculated and conceived plots, designed to kill us not mistakes and accidents, so your argument is invalid in this case and frankly the use of the word ludicrous offensive. It was a valid question and it is at the heart of this entire debate.

 

There is no defense against terrorism except vigilance and that is universal. Everybody needs to have qa hand in this and that includes the government. They have far more resources than we as citizens, but we can't afford to trust solely in their benevolence, because they are just as human as we. Surly, there is politics in play when the government is involved. That is a reality of being the bureaucratic nightmare it has become. I don't think you can make the case that it doesn't care, since there are too many within the framework of government to have any ideal what their true goals are, other than to feed their families and to remain employed.

 

Being scared is not being a little baby. It's a natural human emotion, when faced with intentional attempts to harm us. What matters is what we do when we are fearful. Do we crawl in a hole and die? Do we arm ourselves to the teeth with every conceivable weapon imaginable? The truth is we act and react according to our nature. The strong will be strong and the meek will remain meek., but we all will be more aware of that which is going on around us, which is actually the only thing we really can do. This is true for anybody, wither you are standing in a protest line or setting in a bunker filled with a bazooka strapped to your arm.

[Boaresa]

We are talking about deliberate calculated and conceived plots, designed to kill us not mistakes and accidents, so your argument is invalid in this case and frankly the use of the word ludicrous offensive.

Uhu i'am so scarred by crazed Dschihadis cooking bombs i would give all my rights up and pay taxmoney to install CCTV Cameras in every toilet bowl. You know what? I don't care if people find that offensiv, thats the most awesome thing about the freedom of speech, i can say what i want and don't care who has a problem with that.

 

These Dschihadi Bomb cookers could not ever kill as many people as cigarets, doctors, booze and cars. Imagine people would see a muslim on the street with a schahada around his head and a backpack, everyone would freak out. But if you show them a Tobaco company manager in fine suite or a doctor they would be dignified.

 

Everybody needs to have qa hand in this and that includes the government.

What? No way. You wanna tell me what i should need together with everyone else? No, i don't care. Terrorism isn't a threat in my daily life and i'am not willingly to spend one more cent for the war against terrorism or more cameras or more police. Not at all.

 

They have far more resources than we as citizens,

Yeah because they took it from the citizens.

[bben46]

For the many, Americans as well as those from other nations. The Miranda rights are not 'given' by a police officer reading the person a phrase off of a card carried by the police. The right to remain silent and the right to a lawyer has always been there - It's in the US constitution and is not given by the reading of the rights. It is the fifth and sixth amendment to the constitution and part of what are known as the Bill of Rights. As a US citizen, this individual HAS that right, and it cannot be taken away by not reading the card. However, it is now recognized in every state that if a person is not made aware of their 5th & 6th amendment rights before questioning, then that questioning cannot be admitted as evidence in a trial.

 

That doesn't mean they cannot question him, just that he cannot be convicted only on what he said before he was reminded that he has these rights. After he has been made aware of these rights, and has stated that he does understand them, THEN anything he says can be used as evidence for or against him in a trial.

 

The purpose of reading a suspect his Miranda rights, and asking if he understands, comes from the simple fact that many accused don't know they have that right as they Skipped school or were not paying attention in their civics (or whatever that particular school called it) class when the constitution was being taught. It stems from a Arizona (Not US) Supreme Court decision, Later upheld by the US Supreme Court, based on the complaint of Ernesto Miranda - who was eventually convicted of the crime anyway even after his testimony was removed as evidence of his crime when he claimed to have been illegally questioned.

 

The bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, was read his rights, just in case he didn't know them. Anything he said to the FBI previous to the reading cannot be used as evidence in any future trial. He was questioned by the FBI based on an 'allowed' public safety exception to the rules on questioning before being told of his rights. He was writing his answers because of a throat wound that prevented him from speaking.

 

In my own opinion, to deny this man his constitutional rights would be making a mockery of the Constitution and what it stands for.

 

More on Miranda 'rights' here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning

[Ironman5000]

I don't have time to read through this whole thread properly but after speed reading I saw talk of the inevitable 'police state' and deterrent answers, but if you want be totally objective then you will realise these things do not matter to those seek to commit great acts of terror towards a civilization. Incidents like this have happened for thousands of years and making snap decisions, stating "omg we got bombed let's solve it now" is rubbish.

 

You can talk about policing/protection/awareness until the cows come home but no matter what measures the government decide to take the bad guys will be carefully observing from the sidelines to pick out flaws in any place they can and will strike just as hard as they always have.

 

If someone has a determined goal to do something they are more than capable of doing it with the right mindset and/or skills, and no amount of deterrent is ever going to stop that because likely they just do not care about the consequences.

[kvnchrist]

Uhu i'am so scarred by crazed Dschihadis cooking bombs i would give all my rights up and pay taxmoney to install CCTV Cameras in every toilet bowl. You know what? I don't care if people find that offensiv, thats the most awesome thing about the freedom of speech, i can say what i want and don't care who has a problem with that.

 

These Dschihadi Bomb cookers could not ever kill as many people as cigarets, doctors, booze and cars. Imagine people would see a muslim on the street with a schahada around his head and a backpack, everyone would freak out. But if you show them a Tobaco company manager in fine suite or a doctor they would be dignified.

What? No way. You wanna tell me what i should need together with everyone else? No, i don't care. Terrorism isn't a threat in my daily life and i'am not willingly to spend one more cent for the war against terrorism or more cameras or more police. Not at all.

These speak for themselves. I wish you peace in your ideology.

[kvnchrist]

If someone has a determined goal to do something they are more than capable of doing it with the right mindset and/or skills, and no amount of deterrent is ever going to stop that because likely they just do not care about the consequences.

 

Truly spoken. That is why we can not depend wholly on the government. We all most be vigilant. I wonder if so many people would have been harmed if someone had observed either of the two bombers dropping these backpacks and walked away.

[Boaresa]

These speak for themselves. I wish you peace in your ideology.

What? What kind of ideology? Is "i don't give a damn" now some sort of ideology?

 

That is why we can not depend wholly on the government. We all most be vigilant. I wonder if so many people would have been harmed if someone had observed either of the two bombers dropping these backpacks and walked away.

And you try to flag some kind of ideology on me when you promote a snitch system?

Hey, there were policemen and national guard all over the place and Bomb sniffing Dogs right on the finnish line, who didn't sniff the bomb. And the Guards were watching the race instead of the crowd.

Edited April 29, 2013 by Boaresa