Boston Marathon Bombing Thread

[Centurion40]

Of course that could happen.  But I'd rather someone innocent get a 2nd, 3rd and 4th look if it keeps some dickhead like bomber #1 getting let loose to be able to engage in mass murder.

Furthermore (and I'm not saying that you, or anyone else feels exactly this way), I don't assume that everyone who works in law enforcement is some egocentric power-tripper who gets off on making people feel uncomfortable or helpless; nor do I think that every civil servant is some lazy, useless sociopath interested in their own amusement or goofing off at the taxpayers expense.  I don't immediately distrust people in law enforcement or other government service.  They are people who are screened and qualified to do their jobs; they are interested in protecting the innocent and doing right by their employer- the taxpayer.  There needs to be oversights, but the people (as they are real, living breathing people with homes and children) working for the government should be given every logical effective means to ensure the safety of 8 year-olds, runners, students, airline passengers, retirees, office workers, patients in hospitals, and everyone else.

[LongBlade]

or they could potentially tag perfectly fine people as bad guys by triggering single, isolated indicators from a variety of unrelated activities into an over-investigation of otherwise innocuous behavior.

Read post #56 here  http://www.wargamer.com/forums/posts.asp?t=270194&pg=3 and the rest of the discussion around it.

Let's say I play violent video games...oh, let me make something up...Call of Duty.  Let's say I buy a gun.  Now let's say I visit the airport every couple of weeks with my wife but I don't fly.  What is happening?  Actually, my wife is renting a car for business travel and the airport has the best selection of cars.  And I play games.  And I hunt.  Is this activity enough to be suspcious?  Only if you've got a couple of screws loose.  Yet from what I gather, that's precisely the line of thinking that is being proposed by expanding the Patriot Act.  Does it really take a rocket scientist to figure out that this is a waste of money and an abuse of power?  How much more incrementally safe will we be?

I thought those words looked kinda familiar. Sheesh. That was five years ago. You'd think things would have improved. I guess they have. For the worse.

[LongBlade]

Of course that could happen.  But I'd rather someone innocent get a 2nd, 3rd and 4th look if it keeps some dickhead like bomber #1 getting let loose to be able to engage in mass murder.

Furthermore (and I'm not saying that you, or anyone else feels exactly this way), I don't assume that everyone who works in law enforcement is some egocentric power-tripper who gets off on making people feel uncomfortable or helpless; nor do I think that every civil servant is some lazy, useless sociopath interested in their own amusement or goofing off at the taxpayers expense.  I don't immediately distrust people in law enforcement or other government service.  They are people who are screened and qualified to do their jobs; they are interested in protecting the innocent and doing right by their employer- the taxpayer.  There needs to be oversights, but the people (as they are real, living breathing people with homes and children) working for the government should be given every logical effective means to ensure the safety of 8 year-olds, runners, students, airline passengers, retirees, office workers, patients in hospitals, and everyone else.

I share your general respect of civil servants and law enforcement. As individuals I'm sure they're mostly fine people (with the regular exceptions all humans can have).

There are two problems. Well, probably more. But we'll start with two.

First, it's not the individuals in question, but the process being used. If it's broken, and I think many of us concluded it is, then no matter how much good faith a person puts into their job, it's still garbage-in-garbage-out.

Second, our founding fathers anticipated bureaucratic bungling in addition to the road to hell being paved with good intentions and general power grabbing. That's why they created the 4th Amendment. It says that you can't just have a reason to search someone, you have to have a *good* reason.

Let's say you've got a good reason. Yay! Take it to a judge, who will provide a healthy level of skeptical oversight, and let him (or her) concur. Then we have a system with...what's it called? Oh, yeah. Checks and balances.

Neat.

[GDS_Starfury]

I havent heard of to many skeptical judges recently.

[LongBlade]

Interesting history on the 4th that I hadn't heard before.

The Fourth Amendment, which guarantees the right to be left alone, was written largely in response to legislation Parliament enacted in the colonial era that permitted British soldiers to write their own search warrants and then use those warrants as a legal basis to enter private homes.

The ostensible purpose of doing that was to search through the colonists' papers looking for stamps, which the Stamp Act required the colonists to affix to all documents in their possession.

The laws that permitted the soldier-written search warrants and the Stamp Act were the British government's fatal political mistakes, which arguably caused a major shift in colonial opinion toward secession from Britain 10 years before the bloody part of the Revolution began.

A curious parallel.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/05/02/more-holes-in-fourth-amendment/

[Centurion40]

I guess that, in some ways, it's an apples-n-oranges comparison- as I'm looking at the issue from a different national perspective. The checks and balances exist, it's just that the processes are different.

IMHO, every system is flawed.  My only fear involves the lack of interest in making it (whatever it is) better.

[Centurion40]

I havent heard of to many skeptical judges recently.

Yeah, they're mortal human beings too!

[mirth]

Guilty on all counts

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/09/us/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-verdict-boston-marathan-bombing-trial.html?_r=0

[GDS_Starfury]

good!  hope he gets killed.

[Centurion40]

Guilty on all counts

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/09/us/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-verdict-boston-marathan-bombing-trial.html?_r=0

No surprise.  The sentencing phase will be the interesting part.  Not sure how he can avoid a death sentence.

[GDS_Starfury]

with this administration......  shit...

[bbmike]

good!  hope he gets killed.

Preferably very slowly and very painfully.

[LongBlade]

Yup. Put him to the sword.

[GDS_Starfury]

fuck the sword.  stake his ass out to an army ant hill and cover him with honey while his eyes are superglued open and hes forced to watch Barney videos while listening to Barry fucking Manilow.

[Martok]

fuck the sword.  stake his ass out to an army ant hill and cover him with honey while his eyes are superglued open and hes forced to watch Barney videos while listening to Celine Dion.

FTFY.  Manilow's too good for him.