Town falls udner Martial Law for over 10 days for PAROLE VIOLATION

[theDoctorisIn]

well, if it would at least be officially called then it would be LESS worrisome - if they did all they did WITHOUT it - then it is a repeated scenario with Boston yet again and it is a clear violation of the Constitution and a lot of other laws as well. If martial law WAS not called and they behaved as if it was.

And you all, defenders, seem to like it

What exactly do you think was a violation of the Constitution?

Or any other laws?

forceful evacuation of the homes as was forceful search in Boston without due procedure - for one

pointing the assault weapon at the innocent driver - is violation of his Constitutional rights as well.
He is NOT a suspect, and this is not a war. or martial law. supposedly

How do you know there was a "forceful" evacuation?

If there was a gunman who had just shot a couple of cops running around my neighborhood, I don't think I'd need to be "forced" to leave.

And what "right" says that guns can't be pointed at you?

 

[Vox]

Who is it there they have at gunpoint? Is the the DP?

-Geaux

Just some regular dude. That's why the AP took the photo.

Check out the initial posts on this thread, they LOVE being "tyrannized."

The police most likely asked the people to evacuate their homes to be safe. There was no martial law.

how about an armed to the teeth guy pointing his "assault weapon" to the head of innocent civilian driver?

you do not see it a sa violation?

if they would do it at checkpoints in Iraq - our leftard media would be whining day and night about violations of human rights.

Yet HERE, in the US, militarized police is treating innocent civilians as if they are enemy of the state - and most of you seem to be absolutely OK with that.

Are you, guys, NUTS?

This looks like Russian soldier in Chechnya - but they were at war!

 

[Vox]

What exactly do you think was a violation of the Constitution?

Or any other laws?

forceful evacuation of the homes as was forceful search in Boston without due procedure - for one

pointing the assault weapon at the innocent driver - is violation of his Constitutional rights as well.
He is NOT a suspect, and this is not a war. or martial law. supposedly

How do you know there was a "forceful" evacuation?

If there was a gunman who had just shot a couple of cops running around my neighborhood, I don't think I'd need to be "forced" to leave.

And what "right" says that guns can't be pointed at you?

are you an idiot? or are you going to kiss the boots of the militarized CIVILIAN police if they point the assault weapon into your head for NO REASON?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Just some regular dude. That's why the AP took the photo.

Check out the initial posts on this thread, they LOVE being "tyrannized."

The police most likely asked the people to evacuate their homes to be safe. There was no martial law.

how about an armed to the teeth guy pointing his "assault weapon" to the head of innocent civilian driver?

you do not see it a sa violation?

if they would do it at checkpoints in Iraq - our leftard media would be whining day and night about violations of human rights.

Yet HERE, in the US, militarized police is treating innocent civilians as if they are enemy of the state - and most of you seem to be absolutely OK with that.

Are you, guys, NUTS?

This looks like Russian soldier in Chechnya - but they were at war!

So, you're basing your entire argument around an out-of-context photograph?

Military checkpoints in war zones are significantly more intense than what is shown in that picture. I don't know where you get your information from.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

forceful evacuation of the homes as was forceful search in Boston without due procedure - for one

pointing the assault weapon at the innocent driver - is violation of his Constitutional rights as well.
He is NOT a suspect, and this is not a war. or martial law. supposedly

How do you know there was a "forceful" evacuation?

If there was a gunman who had just shot a couple of cops running around my neighborhood, I don't think I'd need to be "forced" to leave.

And what "right" says that guns can't be pointed at you?

are you an idiot? or are you going to kiss the boots of the militarized CIVILIAN police if they point the assault weapon into your head for NO REASON?

I've had guns pointed at me by police before.

It wasn't "martial law" then, and it isn't now.

 

[Vox]

The police most likely asked the people to evacuate their homes to be safe. There was no martial law.

how about an armed to the teeth guy pointing his "assault weapon" to the head of innocent civilian driver?

you do not see it a sa violation?

if they would do it at checkpoints in Iraq - our leftard media would be whining day and night about violations of human rights.

Yet HERE, in the US, militarized police is treating innocent civilians as if they are enemy of the state - and most of you seem to be absolutely OK with that.

Are you, guys, NUTS?

This looks like Russian soldier in Chechnya - but they were at war!

So, you're basing your entire argument around an out-of-context photograph?

Military checkpoints in war zones are significantly more intense than what is shown in that picture. I don't know where you get your information from.

it is not out of the context - it is right from the town and is in description of the situation. and if you do not see a pointing of the rifle to the head of the civilian driver by a police officer looking like he is fighting the on-going war on terror to be a problem - you are an idiot.

yet I don't think I can continue to argue with the voluntary slave of the government.

the likes of you make Nazi and Soviet or Mao regimes possible.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

how about an armed to the teeth guy pointing his "assault weapon" to the head of innocent civilian driver?

you do not see it a sa violation?

if they would do it at checkpoints in Iraq - our leftard media would be whining day and night about violations of human rights.

Yet HERE, in the US, militarized police is treating innocent civilians as if they are enemy of the state - and most of you seem to be absolutely OK with that.

Are you, guys, NUTS?

This looks like Russian soldier in Chechnya - but they were at war!

So, you're basing your entire argument around an out-of-context photograph?

Military checkpoints in war zones are significantly more intense than what is shown in that picture. I don't know where you get your information from.

it is not out of the context - it is right from the town and is in description of the situation

"Context" means the events that led up to the photograph.

yet I don't think I can continue to argue with the voluntary slave of the government.

the likes of you make Nazi and Soviet or Mao regimes possible.

It's no skin off my teeth if you decide you can't argue with me anymore. But that sounds like a cop-out to me.

 

[Vox]

no events justify the pointing the gun to innocent civilian in a country which is NOT at war.

NONE.ZERO. ZILCH.

and if you fail to understand that treating civilians which obviously do not pose ANY threat worse than enemy at the war zone is a violation of all possible laws and norms of a civilized society - nobody will ever change you soul of the slave.

you are ready to be ruled in the labor camp behind the barbed wire.

and you are clearly not alone.
that is how dictatorships are conceived.
"what difference does it make, it's for our safety"

 

[Pauli007001]

The police been going after thugs for the past 100 years like this.

When? The Boston Bombing (also this year) is the only other instance in United States history where an entire town was placed under paramilitary rule for a non-terrorism/non-natural-disaster dilemma.

An entire town was not placed under paramilitary rule.
A large area of the city of Watertown was illegally placed under lockdown and the residents terrorized by paramilitary police.
People, children chased from their homes at gunpoint by cursing gun pointing ranting crazed stormtroopers.

They cannot order you out of your home at gunpoint without a warrant.

But they did!!
Precedent established.

Expect it to become the norm. Just as I predicted.
April 15 and 16 the rape of Watertown hunting terrorists.

Today hunting a prison escapee ( as predicted).

Next, hunting a shoplifter? A speeder?

It's coming.

 

[Pauli007001]

What exactly do you think was a violation of the Constitution?

Or any other laws?

forceful evacuation of the homes as was forceful search in Boston without due procedure - for one

pointing the assault weapon at the innocent driver - is violation of his Constitutional rights as well.
He is NOT a suspect, and this is not a war. or martial law. supposedly

How do you know there was a "forceful" evacuation?

If there was a gunman who had just shot a couple of cops running around my neighborhood, I don't think I'd need to be "forced" to leave.

And what "right" says that guns can't be pointed at you?

Forceful evacuation.
Police terrorizing those who pay their salaries.
Illegal searches.

Boston bomber search: Moment SWAT teams ordered innocent neighbors out of their houses at GUNPOINT | Mail Online

If you point a gun at a cop he can shoot you.
Why does he have the right to point a gun at you for no reason other than it makes his dick feel bigger?

 

[Vox]

The police been going after thugs for the past 100 years like this.

When? The Boston Bombing (also this year) is the only other instance in United States history where an entire town was placed under paramilitary rule for a non-terrorism/non-natural-disaster dilemma.

An entire town was not placed under paramilitary rule.
A large area of the city of Watertown was illegally placed under lockdown and the residents terrorized by paramilitary police.
People, children chased from their homes at gunpoint by cursing gun pointing ranting crazed stormtroopers.

They cannot order you out of your home at gunpoint without a warrant.

But they did!!
Precedent established.

Expect it to become the norm. Just as I predicted.
April 15 and 16 the rape of Watertown hunting terrorists.

Today hunting a prison escapee ( as predicted).

Next, hunting a shoplifter? A speeder?

It's coming.

Sure it is.

You see people of all colors apologetic for what happened - you are getting terrified.
And those were not gust die-hard gubmint worshipers.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

how about an armed to the teeth guy pointing his "assault weapon" to the head of innocent civilian driver?

you do not see it a sa violation?

if they would do it at checkpoints in Iraq - our leftard media would be whining day and night about violations of human rights.

Yet HERE, in the US, militarized police is treating innocent civilians as if they are enemy of the state - and most of you seem to be absolutely OK with that.

Are you, guys, NUTS?

This looks like Russian soldier in Chechnya - but they were at war!

So, you're basing your entire argument around an out-of-context photograph?

Military checkpoints in war zones are significantly more intense than what is shown in that picture. I don't know where you get your information from.

But this isn't a war zone or a military checkpoint. It's Roseville, California and that was a civilian police force. I actually do find that photograph incredibly disturbing and if the OP had just focused on that aspect of this incident I'm sure he'd have gotten a lot more support, but instead he decided to go Alex Jones on everyone and make a fool of himself.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

how about an armed to the teeth guy pointing his "assault weapon" to the head of innocent civilian driver?

you do not see it a sa violation?

if they would do it at checkpoints in Iraq - our leftard media would be whining day and night about violations of human rights.

Yet HERE, in the US, militarized police is treating innocent civilians as if they are enemy of the state - and most of you seem to be absolutely OK with that.

Are you, guys, NUTS?

This looks like Russian soldier in Chechnya - but they were at war!

So, you're basing your entire argument around an out-of-context photograph?

Military checkpoints in war zones are significantly more intense than what is shown in that picture. I don't know where you get your information from.

But this isn't a war zone or a military checkpoint. It's Roseville, California and that was a civilian police force. I actually do find that photograph incredibly disturbing and if the OP had just focused on that aspect of this incident I'm sure he'd have gotten a lot more support, but instead he decided to go Alex Jones on everyone and make a fool of himself.

The picture is disturbing. But there's no context given for it, which makes me less willing to jump to the conclusions that many here already have.

In the post above, I was responding directly to the claim that "liberals would be outraged" if we conducted check points in Iraq like that - which is asinine because we do conduct check points in Iraq and other war zones just like that, and I don't know of any liberals who are outraged about it.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[The2ndAmendment]

The picture is disturbing. But there's no context given for it, which makes me less willing to jump to the conclusions that many here already have.

It was taken by the AP at the location of this story.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The picture is disturbing. But there's no context given for it, which makes me less willing to jump to the conclusions that many here already have.

It was taken by the AP at the location of this story.

That's not the context of the picture, that's who took it and where.

The context would be what was happening in the minutes or even seconds that led up to that picture being taken.

 

[auditor0007]

Exactly who was under Martial Law for ten days?

Read the article, the entire suburb was under martial law.

Oh wait, you Libtards desire this for America

 

[The2ndAmendment]

The picture is disturbing. But there's no context given for it, which makes me less willing to jump to the conclusions that many here already have.

It was taken by the AP at the location of this story.

That's not the context of the picture, that's who took it and where.

The context would be what was happening in the minutes or even seconds that led up to that picture being taken.

Looks like what happens to me:

"I don't answer questions"

That's all I say to police.

 

[JoeB131]

Do you understand what "martial law" means?

It's becoming clear that you do not.

There appears to be a lot of things he doesn't understand.

 

[Pauli007001]

The police most likely asked the people to evacuate their homes to be safe. There was no martial law.

how about an armed to the teeth guy pointing his "assault weapon" to the head of innocent civilian driver?

you do not see it a sa violation?

if they would do it at checkpoints in Iraq - our leftard media would be whining day and night about violations of human rights.

Yet HERE, in the US, militarized police is treating innocent civilians as if they are enemy of the state - and most of you seem to be absolutely OK with that.

Are you, guys, NUTS?

This looks like Russian soldier in Chechnya - but they were at war!

So, you're basing your entire argument around an out-of-context photograph?

Military checkpoints in war zones are significantly more intense than what is shown in that picture. I don't know where you get your information from.

Military checkpoints are not.
I've manned hundreds in NI, the Balkans, Africa, Iraq and Afghanistan.
I have never terrorized a civilian in such a manner.

If I had, you lot would be all over it like a rash.
Complaining about human rights violations!

Foreigners deserve human rights, why not Americans?
Self loathing liberal traitors !

 

[Pauli007001]

Do you understand what "martial law" means?

It's becoming clear that you do not.

There appears to be a lot of things he doesn't understand.

Semantics, ignore the fact that this is totalitarianism and argue the semantics.

It's a police state.
Does that work for you?
A paramilitary anti freedom police state.
California is all democrat.

Blame Bush anyone?