Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
Miranda Rights!
Page <<first <prev 5 of 17 next> last>>
Apr 21, 2013 10:59:48   #
docrob Loc: Durango, Colorado
 
well because just in case another 19 yr old declares war on america we the good need to have all the fire power we can to defend ourselves from
them.

Reply
Apr 21, 2013 11:03:33   #
matt thomas
 
Has this guy been in any condition that would allow anyone to read him the Miranda script or have the authorities actually announced that they will deny him?

Reply
Apr 21, 2013 11:03:42   #
Fat Gregory Loc: Southern New Jersey
 
Fortunately the rest of us should be represented by the Federal Government and if Holder does his job the Federal charges will warrant the death penalty.

Reply
 
 
Apr 21, 2013 11:06:18   #
RichardSM Loc: Back in Texas
 
As misguided as they were and he that is still alive declared war on the USA by his actions, and whatever they get out of questioning him should and will be used against him in a court of law, I think he will be put to death and rightfully so! For now he is an enemy of the state and so charged!

Reply
Apr 21, 2013 11:08:48   #
Twardlow Loc: Arkansas
 
ted45 wrote:
The 'enemy combatant' concept is from the Geneva Convention. Since the U. S. and the U. K. are almost the only countries left that adhere to the formal "rules of war" I suppose it is "silly" as you put it. Unfortunately, the Geneva Convention is still part of International law and applies to the "War on Terror".


"Formal rules of war?"...you must jest. It is too serious a subject to joke about.

Did you know it is against international law to go to war just to depose a foreign leader?

We arrested many of these at gitmo on a bounty program that required no proof...get rid of your enemy or competitor forever, for cash in your pocket.

After we radicalized them with torture, we can't let them go, and no one else wants them.

Thanks, George. Smart!

Reply
Apr 21, 2013 11:14:42   #
Bruce with a Canon Loc: Islip
 
BigBear wrote:
But as a citizen, his rights are still binding. That is the dilemma.



The act of taking arms against country spares him of the privilege of citizenship, citizens practicing treason are to be considered enemy combatants,
In my opinion he fine folks at GITMO ought to be doing the questioning.
This punk brought his war to America. let him pay the soldiers price in full.

Reply
Apr 21, 2013 11:18:24   #
Bruce with a Canon Loc: Islip
 
Fat Gregory wrote:
Fortunately the rest of us should be represented by the Federal Government and if Holder does his job the Federal charges will warrant the death penalty.



Holder? the man responsible for giving ASSUALT WEAPONS TO MEXICAN TERRORISTS?

Somehow I am not encouraged. Seeing the last actions of this administration, the lies, the cover ups, the Muslim arse kissing.

No comfort what so ever in these people doing what is right.

Remember scumbag Asan? Muslim terrorist at Ft Hood.
Obama refers to this as WORKLACE VIOLENCE.

IMHO Obama could not lead the dysentery ward to the latrine

Reply
 
 
Apr 21, 2013 11:38:41   #
UP-2-IT Loc: RED STICK, LA
 
Blurryeyed wrote:
I am very interested in the fact that Miranda rights were denied to the bombing suspect in Boston... Don't get me wrong, this guy needs to be burning in hell asap, but that does not negate his constitutionally guaranteed rights as a citizen of our country... Just so people don't think that I am bashing the administration, that is not what this post is about, several republicans are strong advocates for not allowing Miranda rights in this particular case John McCain and Lindsey Graham have both been outspoken on the subject...

But is this not what our constitution is all about, preserving our individual rights against the events of any given period of time and the tyranny of the collective good in such times?
I am very interested in the fact that Miranda righ... (show quote)


This is the official reason, it makes sense when one considers the gravity of the crime commited.

A Justice Department official says the Boston Marathon bombing suspect will not be read his Miranda rights because the government is invoking a public safety exception.

The public safety exception permits law enforcement officials to engage in a limited and focused unwarned interrogation of a suspect and allows the government to introduce the statement as evidence in court. The public safety exception is triggered when police officers have an objectively reasonable need to protect the police or the public from immediate danger.

It was not done to deny the suspects rights but again, due to the gravity of the crime.

Reply
Apr 21, 2013 11:56:45   #
ted45 Loc: Delaware
 
Twardlow wrote:
"Formal rules of war?"...you must jest. It is too serious a subject to joke about.

Did you know it is against international law to go to war just to depose a foreign leader?

We arrested many of these at gitmo on a bounty program that required no proof...get rid of your enemy or competitor forever, for cash in your pocket.

After we radicalized them with torture, we can't let them go, and no one else wants them.

Thanks, George. Smart!


You have never been in the military. I don't know for certain about any branch but the one I was in, the Marine Corp. We were required to memorize the rules dictated by the Geneva Convention. In fact we were given a card listing the rules that we were supposed to carry in Viet Nam. There are formal rules of war and it is no joke. Look it up. Almost every army we have fought has violated the rules with impunity so I'm not sure what value they have. I do know that if you are American and you violate the rules, you will be prosecuted. Perhaps you heard of Lt. Calley and the My Lai incident.

The people listed on the infamous "deck of cards" with Saddam being the Ace of Spades had bounties on their heads. That is true. However, the guys with bounties on their heads were known to be leaders of the opposing force. Both sides do it. There are still bounties offered on every American soldier in the Middle East.

"Did you know it is against international law to go to war just to depose a foreign leader?" I don't know what you are referring to with this statement. Perhaps you are using the liberal attitude that Bush went to war to depose Saddam? Look at the history; the invasion of Iraq was sanctioned by the UN. It was legally a UN force that invaded Iraq. Whether or not it was right or warranted is another discussion.

Reply
Apr 21, 2013 11:59:03   #
BigBear Loc: Northern CT
 
Bruce with a Canon wrote:
The act of taking arms against country spares him of the privilege of citizenship, citizens practicing treason are to be considered enemy combatants,
In my opinion he fine folks at GITMO ought to be doing the questioning.
This punk brought his war to America. let him pay the soldiers price in full.


As it's written, the rights of a citizen are inalienable. Which means that we have to change the citizenship program to further scrutinize who we give rights to.
But in this case he is in the margin connecting his rights and being treated as a terrorist.

Reply
Apr 21, 2013 12:00:36   #
jeking Loc: Northern Illinois
 
I totally agree with you Gidgette!! The killer(s) took away the rights of their victims.
Gidgette wrote:
I'm sorry, I always think of the people killed or hurt that didn't have a choice to live or be hurt. That was taken away from them without any "Rights" being read to them.

Reply
 
 
Apr 21, 2013 12:01:07   #
BigBear Loc: Northern CT
 
Fat Gregory wrote:
Fortunately the rest of us should be represented by the Federal Government and if Holder does his job the Federal charges will warrant the death penalty.


Since when does Holder do his job ??
Unless it includes Fast n' Furious, the cover up of Benghazi and other plots.

Reply
Apr 21, 2013 12:05:41   #
BigBear Loc: Northern CT
 
jeking wrote:
I totally agree with you Gidgette!! The killer(s) took away the rights of their victims.


That's why they are called bad guys. They don't obey laws.

Reply
Apr 21, 2013 12:06:55   #
TimS Loc: GA
 
ted45 wrote:
They hyjacked a car and held the owner hostage for a brief time. They bragged to him about setting the bombs. How does that fit your senario?


Just saying that it is possible, no matter how unlikely it may be, that he is not guilty of terrorism. In this country, people are still presumed innocent.

Reply
Apr 21, 2013 12:10:36   #
BigBear Loc: Northern CT
 
TimS wrote:
Just saying that it is possible, no matter how unlikely it may be, that he is not guilty of terrorism. In this country, people are still presumed innocent.


Presumed innocent only applies to the bad guys.
The law abiding people are penalized for what they do through the stupid laws that are put in effect after the bad guys do what they do.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 17 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.