Kennedy

Get it through your skull. Not all killing is murder, and not all striking is battery. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

It'd be just as high or worse. Also, if someone waved a magical wand and made all firearms disappear, there would be more within days. Even if you secured the borders and prevented all smuggling and importation, there would be guns within weeks. From your basic zip gun to rough cut derringers, guns would be on the scene in short order. Skipping all that, pretending the magic wand is powerful enough to get rid of guns and keep them from reemerging, that wouldn't stop violent crime as committed with guns today. For evidence I offer the entirety of human history. The only difference is that guns allow weak and frail to defend against larger attackers more effectively than most any other weapon. Taking away guns not only removes all firearms related violent crimes, it also removes every defensive gun use (DGU), and there are a lot more DGUs than there are gun crimes. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Your logic is faulty. Striking someone is not always battery. Ask a boxer or a mma fighter (prearranged). Ask a hockey player. Similarly not all homicides are murder. Soldiers in war, police and/or citizens acting in self defense or defense of others, etc. Or, in your view, abortions. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Ok, so what IS true? witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

None legally available, or none physically available? witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

A visible mark, counselor. Visible. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

I've heard more than one judge convict someone in this sort of case, saying "Your rights weren't violated. Their rights are irrelevant to this case. Guilty." witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Wow, you sounds awful full of hate. You also haven't responded to my post. You are trying to make this R vs D. It isn't. It's about hating waste. I hated the trillion dollar porkulous, and I hate this. You seem to be ok with one but not the other. Sounds like hypocrisy to me. I posted this before your last response, and never heard from you. Anything to say? ***So it's no coincidence that the champions for more tanks are Rep. Jim Jordan and Sen. Rob Portman, two of Capitol's Hill most prominent deficit hawks, as well as Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown. Yeah, so, you were saying? Is a a reading comprehension issue, or a failure to read? witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Wouldn't it be worth it to check with other countries who want to share intelligence on threats? We've established that Russia sent two warnings, first to the FBI, and when that failed to accomplish anything, to the CIA. Also, Saudi Arabia not only sent us written warning about Tamerlan, they actually denied him an entry visa. EXCLUSIVE: Saudi Arabia 'warned the United States IN WRITING about Boston Bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev in 2012 Meanwhile we hadn't even denied him citizenship, let alone investigated him. We really need to get past all this pussyfooting when it comes to investigating threats. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

True some are going to be right and some wrong. But the photo (that you are referring to) isn't conclusive either because it shows him on the ground--not on the boat. Who moved him from the boat to the ground? Do we know? It doesn't look like he was capable of moving under his own power by that point. Someone I know who lives in the neighborhood says that he saw local police--and later state police from NH who were called in to help--but not federal agents. I don't know that my friend could see the actual house/boat, though--so that's not conclusive either. Boston PD said he was in custody. Did they ever say he was in their custody? Do you have any valid reason for believing he was ever in state/county/local custody? I never claimed that MA law enforcement has him. Even if they did briefly, they clearly don't any more. I just would have preferred that MA have had jurisdiction/custody from the beginning. I'm not expecting that to happen now. It sure sounded like you did. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Sure there is. Darwin explained it. Stupid is less likely to reproduce and create more stupidity. You could argue that better medical, legal, and social services have undone some of what natural selection would take care of, but would you want to change those fields? witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Actually it is a great gift for a child. The problem isn't telling the child it's theirs. The problem is fuckwit parents who (A) clearly failed to instill respect or rules concerning the rifle (B) left it lying around unsecured (C) left ammunition not only available, but in the rifle and (D) left the child unsupervised. Some states have a child access law. North Carolina does - see 14-315. Texas does. I'm not sure about Kentucky. Here is a summary, though uncited. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/04/29/i-team-website-allows-users-to-rate-prostitutes/ This is a pretty good article. It's got a good hook, but then goes on to discuss the issue, concerns, and what some folks want to do to fix things. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

lean six sigma Seems like they just repackaged and resold the work of others. Then again, what management consultant or motivational speaker doesn't? witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

So while saying they were liars, you're using their statements to support an argument? [Shrink voice] Interesting. Tell me about your father. [/voice] Ah, so you believe all the comments about war profiteering, Halliburton, wanting revenge for Daddy, etc were wrong. That's good. How is/was your relationship with your mother? witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Isn't that redundantly repetitive? Drunk Irish. Dumb Pollaks. Arrogant Americans. Cheese eating surrender monkey French. Etc. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Actually, weren't the complaints that Bush DID know what was and wasn't there, but he misled the public? You revising history, or claiming that Bush didn't lie? Is it the same pile of shit? Was there a threat that jihadi types were going to get their hands on NBC weapons in Iraq? [/stirring] witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

That link means fuckall. They don't name an agency, and plenty of reporters use "police custody" to mean law enforcement custody. google image search for dzhokhar Tsarnaevs arrest Differing opinions just means some people are wrong I this case, because the facts are what they are. The thread is about what status he should have, now that he is in federal custody. If you think the feds have no claim and should release him to Mass authorities, say so, but don't claim that Mass LEOs have him. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

I'm sorry, but who elected you the Mayor of Speaker's Corner which means you get to demand such a thing? It's my opinion. You can disagree with it and defend the bigoted and sick point of view if you wish, but I'm under NO obligation to play your little mind games. Wow, full of hate much? I asked you to explain your point of view. If you'd said it was sickening, I never would have opened my mouth, so to speak. Sickening means it makes you sick. Fine. That's how you react to it. No right or wrong there. Folks react differently, some reasonably, some not so much. However you didn't talk about how turtle's comment made you feel or how you thought others would react. You characterized it as bad in and of itself by calling it "sick". If you can't or won't support your judgment of the comments, don't be surprised if you get slapped down, and don't spew venom at those who do. nb - I never said I agreed with turtle or thought he was correct. I merely explained to pops what some were saying, and then tried having a back and forth with jakee. He apparently can't tell me from other posters and his comments make a rats' nest seen clear and logical. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

You're just factually wrong, and that is derailing a quality discussion. He was taken into custody by federal agents. Look at the picture where he's on his back next for the boat with his belly showing. Who is there arresting searching and treating him? ATF and FBI. Look at who guarded him at the hispital. Look at who charged him. Look at what facility is housing him now. I understand why you don't want it to be so, but that doesn't make it not so. And if you think the feds are ever going to let a state take a criminal to trial before they try him federally (if they want to) you're insane. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

I would put it slightly differently. I would say that this case should have involved an American and Massachusetts citizen, a Massachusetts resident, accused of criminal conduct on Massachusetts soil and safely in Massachusetts custody. There's no such thing as Massachusetts citizenship. He is a US citizen. I don't see how residency applies, but you were correct that he lived in Mass. The reason I said US soil and not Mass soil is because we are discussing issues concerning the us constitution. I don't know much about Mass law, but I haven't heard people complaining that his rights under state law were violated. Finally, he is not in Mass custody. I was specific. He is in us custody. The Feds arrested him and haven't released him to anyone. He was arrested and charged, and will be tried, at the federal level. You do know there are federal laws, and he's been charged with violating them, right? While I don't entirely disagree with you (see above posts), it is not only state business. There are plenty of crimes that are addressed by both state and federal law. Just look at possession of firearms by convicted felons. You are completely wrong. I'm not saying you're desires are wrong, but that's not what's going to happen. He will face federal charges and federal sentencing. He will not spend a minute in state prison. He will go into the federal prison system (assuming he is convicted). witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

You like that? Try getting him to define "nutter" in terms of denying them rights. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

FIFY. I agree, especially when it is a American citizen, accused of criminal conduct on US soil and safely in US custody. What grinds my "hypothetical situation" gears is wondering what they would have told him if he'd told them to fuck off until his lawyer arrived. Can you think of any case law that allows investigators to continue questioning a person in custody if they have no intention of introducing the conversation as evidence? I can't. But since it isn't an inadmissible evidence issue, where does it fall? witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

I'm sure you're familiar with New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649 (1984). While I disagree with SCOTUS allowing the statement to be admitted as evidence at trial, I don't have a problem with asking questions that would be excluded during trial about imminent dangers (like guns in playgrounds, somewhere children can find them, etc). The sticking point for me is the one you mentioned: what to do when they specifically ask for a lawyer. Everything in my head says STOP. SCOTUS on the other hand says public safety outweighs the normal procedure of reminding arrestees of Miranda in some instances, but that only matters when you are worried about statements being admissible in court. Do you know of any federal case law outside of FISA that covers denying access to counsel for questions not related to charges? eta http://reason.com/archives/2013/04/24/the-bogus-public-safety-exception I thought this article laid it out clearly and accurately, but did not mention #2's specific request for counsel witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Please explain which specifically applies to turtle and his assumption. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*