Door to Door search for active terrorist in Boston

[Texan2]

Apparently the cops in Boston would make that choice and it was based on the "He killed a cop....Let's get him!" macho bullshit. That sucks and it's way out of line!

I guess I completely disagree with your assesment.

 

[Texan2]

That is disturbing to me on many levels.

The idea that you think that an unarmed person who is badly wounded is ok to be executed in the street because you suspect that he did something bad half a day before, yet have zero proof he is still a threat is scary. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? He did not pose a threat to them during that time did he? He if had posed a real threat with a weapon, pipe bomb, etc. then defend yourself properly.

Just because you feel the need to demean another poster for his lack of understanding police tactics does not make those police tactics correct and right. These police tactics you have knowledge of and a fondness for have been infringing on American liberties for years now and attitudes like that perpetuate those dangerous ideas.

I know we all know for a fact he was guilty, so they should have allowed the cameras to roll as they pulled him to the center of the street and shot the shit out of him, right??? Is that the America you want to live in? No need for a trial, right? Hell we knew he had a gun once, good enough to issue a kill on site order huh??

Exactly what did he do to not be taken alive as you suggest?

Thank god they did not get to live out their fantasy and kill him. Maybe now we can learn more about what and who brought him to this point. The majority of folks will be happy with just taking care of him. A smaller percentage will like to do that and find out why. Lets find out who to blame and deal with the clerics, friends, relatives, etc that might have put him up to it, who might be perfectly safe without his testimony. It's just too narrow minded to kill him on site, lets go after those more dangerous people who put young, easily influenced men up to those things and make him help us get them.

Between the searches at gun point in Boston, the police shooting the shit out of the innocent ladies in the truck in CA, and 'police tactics' expressed here does no good for my faith in the abilities of current law enforcement officers who see nothing wrong with those actions. I feel that we are inexorably on a dangerous path to a police state that Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, Kim Jong-un and others would envy.

The answers to your questions are in my previous post. Your flair for the dramatic is entertaining, but a bit over the top. I regularly take issue with certain things that certain police officers do under the color of law, but you are correct that I have zero issue with them shooting the guy in the boat. It was not an execution as you would like to portray, nor was it infringing on any of his rights.
They had no "Fantasy" of killing him. They had ample opportunity to kill him and didn't. Based on his actions over the previous 24 hours, the suspects actions of murdering people and throwing explosives at people in public areas and his reluctance to show his hands or himself after being given AMPLE opprtunity totally justifies the police actions.
Dragging him into the street and shooting him? Don't think I ever sanctioned that.
I question those things that our government does on a pretty constant basis, I just analyze each incident on its own merits. It seems some will always bash the police/government/courts automatically, even when its not warranted.

Its always easy to Monday morning quarterback something when you weren't there and didn't have to make those split second decisions.

 

[TheDan]

being given MAPLE opprtunity

I smell pancakes now for some reason.

 

[Texan2]

Texan2 took my statement out of context from a whole series of posts so I'll clarify.

What really gripes me is when they were pulling people out of their homes at gunpoint without warrants to get this piss ant, I would NOT comply with their orders and they would have been perfectly fine with killing me to search for this 19 year old kid. No warrants....just open fire and kill me because they want to.

I'm easy to understand. Don't plan on coming in my house. You won't enter while I live. It's not a threat it's just a fact. I do not suffer from any delusion that I'll survive that kind of confrontation. It just doesn't matter.

Would you as an LEO force a confrontation like that to search for this dick head? Apparently the cops in Boston would make that choice and it was based on the "He killed a cop....Let's get him!" macho bullshit. That sucks and it's way out of line!

I hope that clarifies.

Whoever said the police were going to kill people in order to search their house? Gimme a break. That didn't happen. Its that type of added dramatic license that makes these threads go into the anti-govt tinfoil realm.

I agree with you Roger, that your home is sacred, but so is my family and many other things. If the police are out of line there are ways to recitify it and pehaps get rich in doing so or at least remove people from their jobs that violated your rights. But to say you are ok with dying to prevent a search of your house is a bit absurd in my estimation. I want the police to act in a legal manner, but I am not going to leave my wife a widow and my kids fatherless, and all of the horrible emotional trauma that goes with that, to beat on my chest and wave my copy of the Constitution around. I mean, that is what you are saying if I read your post correctly.
All of these "cut off your nose to spite your face" posts are hilarious.
"Yep, I'd be dead but they would know where I stood on the issue"....LMAO. Guys, use a little horse sense here. Pick your battles. Get the last laugh.
Pull a gun on the police and you will likely get shot. You won't be a hero. You won't be a poster child for the small government movement or the ACLU. You will just be dead. And you will be remembered as the guy who wanted to/did shoot at the police. Use your head, make good choices even if the police don't and you will come out on top in the end. If the police are wrong, prove up your case, make people pay for their actions and end up a hero....not a dead guy.

 

[Acera]

So Texan you believe it's ok to shoot an unarmed man on site just because sometime in the recent past he was a threat???

How much time to you believe is reasonable between the time of being an imminent threat and being unarmed is necessary to justify getting to shoot him? 1 minute, 1 hour, 1 day, 1 week, 1 month???? Not saying don't take precautions, but do you really want to live in a 'shoot first, ask questions later' type of society??? Was that wounded man really going to get out of that boat and make his way through the encirclement? How would any CHL holder on this board be treated if they had done what those cops did? Blindly shoot at an unarmed person they had never seen before that did not display a weapon, based solely on what they had been told about that individual??? (Thank god their incompetence in not killing him will lead to others getting prosecuted for assisting and participating with him from his testimony.)

Would you shoot a surrendering soldier on the battlefield who had been trying to kill you a few minutes before?

You misread what I posted, you said:

A good shrink, or Barbara Streisand could fix him right up.

I never insinuated that he could be fixed, or we need to spend money to do so since he will never know life outside of a cage. Re-read my post again (you have quoted it twice, so I thought you would have gotten it the points by now). They need to find out what he knows (legally and ethically of course) so that they may track down those that are also responsible for this crime.

These cops just fantasize constantly about taking out people. smh....

Drop the word constantly, and tell me you don't believe that there are folks like that on every sizable police force in the US?????

Out of control folks who happen to wear uniforms (or direct those that do) are more dangerous to our way of life than terrorists, as their tactics, antics, etc. infringe upon a much greater population. Not cop bashing, but bashing a system that is beginning to show signs of being dangerously misdirected and becoming more and more competent at covering up questionable actions with policy as an excuse.

Don't take this as a personal affront, I trust you are one of the good guys that would not willingly behave in the manner we have seen lately from panicked, less professional individuals.

Our American liberties have taken such a drastic (and I feel irreversible) hit in the last few decades, all in small, expertly justified, incremental steps, for one reason for another making this country more and more unrecognizable from the shining castle on a hill it once was.

(I am glad I entertain you, will try to continue in the future. Let me know if my flair for the dramatic is lacking in this post )

 

[Texanjoker]

Pretty entertaining updates... Lets remember this was real life and not a tv show. The guy could have surrendered at ANY point. He choose to run, kill a cop, shoot another, toss explosives, blow people up, ect. He was considered armed and dangerous, based on his actions over a 24 hour period. He choose to hide and was the cause of this incident. He was also taken alive which was pretty good. I think that swat team should get life saving medal as they could have just waited him out to surrender or die from his wounds, but choose to move in at considerable risk and get him to keep him alive.

...

 

[Texan2]

Pretty entertaining updates... Lets remember this was real life and not a tv show. The guy could have surrendered at ANY point. He choose to run, kill a cop, shoot another, toss explosives, blow people up, ect. He was considered armed and dangerous, based on his actions over a 24 hour period. He choose to hide and was the cause of this incident. He was also taken alive which was pretty good. I think that swat team should get life saving medal as they could have just waited him out to surrender or die from his wounds, but choose to move in at considerable risk and get him to keep him alive.

...

Agreed.

 

[Texan2]

I smell pancakes now for some reason.

opps...fixed.

 

[Texan2]

So Texan you believe it's ok to shoot an unarmed man on site just because sometime in the recent past he was a threat???

How much time to you believe is reasonable between the time of being an imminent threat and being unarmed is necessary to justify getting to shoot him? 1 minute, 1 hour, 1 day, 1 week, 1 month???? Not saying don't take precautions, but do you really want to live in a 'shoot first, ask questions later' type of society??? Was that wounded man really going to get out of that boat and make his way through the encirclement? How would any CHL holder on this board be treated if they had done what those cops did? Blindly shoot at an unarmed person they had never seen before that did not display a weapon, based solely on what they had been told about that individual??? (Thank god their incompetence in not killing him will lead to others getting prosecuted for assisting and participating with him from his testimony.)

Would you shoot a surrendering soldier on the battlefield who had been trying to kill you a few minutes before?

You misread what I posted, you said: I never insinuated that he could be fixed, or we need to spend money to do so since he will never know life outside of a cage. Re-read my post again (you have quoted it twice, so I thought you would have gotten it the points by now). They need to find out what he knows (legally and ethically of course) so that they may track down those that are also responsible for this crime.

Drop the word constantly, and tell me you don't believe that there are folks like that on every sizable police force in the US?????

Out of control folks who happen to wear uniforms (or direct those that do) are more dangerous to our way of life than terrorists, as their tactics, antics, etc. infringe upon a much greater population. Not cop bashing, but bashing a system that is beginning to show signs of being dangerously misdirected and becoming more and more competent at covering up questionable actions with policy as an excuse.

Don't take this as a personal affront, I trust you are one of the good guys that would not willingly behave in the manner we have seen lately from panicked, less professional individuals.

Our American liberties have taken such a drastic (and I feel irreversible) hit in the last few decades, all in small, expertly justified, incremental steps, for one reason for another making this country more and more unrecognizable from the shining castle on a hill it once was.

(I am glad I entertain you, will try to continue in the future. Let me know if my flair for the dramatic is lacking in this post )

I believe that if he is still a threat based on what is known AT THAT TIME, then deadly force is justified. the time frame doesn't matter. I don't even think this is a grey area in this case. As Texan joker said. HE could have given up at any time. HE is the one that was on an active murder spree. The authorities saved his life when he obviously would have rather died.
We aren't anywhere near a "Shoot first..." society.
He had displayed a weapon several times in his murder spree and demonstrated his willingness to use it.
Yes, I would shoot at someone based on what I had been told, if the information was credible. So would you.
I didn't see any incompetence displayed by police in that incident.
I don't see our system as one that is "dangerously misdirected". I believe most officers are very respectful of people's rights....almost to a fault in many cases.
In many casees your rights are MUCH better protected now than in the 50's or 60's . Video that officers use for instance, clears or hangs them in many claims of police brutality.
I am not personally offended. Monday morning QBing is somewhat irritating, when done by those who were not there and are only privy to the info that the news has given you. It is also ironic that most who claim violation of rights NEVER trust the media unless the media shows the cops doing something they don't like...then they love the media. Irony.
(I'm glad that you are glad. Your dramatic flair was a bit toned down in this post, but still detectable.) Just remember we are both on the same side.

 

[Acera]

I didn't see any incompetence displayed by police in that incident.

So that many rounds fired into a small confined area at an unarmed man and not killing him is ok marksmanship? The idea that I hear shots, so I might as well fire my gun also is ok, even when I don't know where the shots are coming from, is what you are saying is acceptable?

The authorities saved his life when he obviously would have rather died.

Where we getting this? He stuck is hand up and did not appear to offer any resistance. Not obvious, he was probably nothing more than a hurt, scared kid at that point.

Yes, I would shoot at someone based on what I had been told, if the information was credible. So would you.

I hope that would not be my action. I would not shoot based on the assumption that he was armed, only on knowledge that he was armed and a threat. I can't hide behind a badge and justify shooting an unarmed person due to what a third party told me about him without fear of prosecution. (Plus there is a difference with information coming from a credible person and the information being credible. Proven the information was not credible, as he did not have all those weapons 'credible' sources said he had.)

I am not personally offended. Monday morning QBing is somewhat irritating, when done by those who were not there and are only privy to the info that the news has given you.

Good, I am glad of that. But you also are Monday morning QBing, as I don't think you were there either, and the only difference is you rely on a different background set and life experiences to make you determination. I fear that because you may be closer and more focused, you are missing the bigger picture that I see.

We aren't anywhere near a "Shoot first..." society.

From the actions I have seen in the last few months we seem to be on that path, and the population seems to accept the official justification of it.

In many casees your rights are MUCH better protected now than in the 50's or 60's . Video that officers use for instance, clears or hangs them in many claims of police brutality.

Please......... you don't seriously believe that do you? For every one thing piece of technology like police camera's catching an officer doing something bad, I can show you fundamental policies and laws that have eroded our liberties. That however would be a really long thread that would include the decades long assault on the 4th amendment and many other things. While you will probably want to talk about all the restrictions you guys are placed under, it's all in response to larger liberties that have been confiscated and diminished.


(sorry for lack of flair and drama in this post, beginning to lose interest as we both seem to be set in our ways........)

 

[Texan2]

So that many rounds fired into a small confined area at an unarmed man and not killing him is ok marksmanship? The idea that I hear shots, so I might as well fire my gun also is ok, even when I don't know where the shots are coming from, is what you are saying is acceptable?



Where we getting this? He stuck is hand up and did not appear to offer any resistance. Not obvious, he was probably nothing more than a hurt, scared kid at that point.



I hope that would not be my action. I would not shoot based on the assumption that he was armed, only on knowledge that he was armed and a threat. I can't hide behind a badge and justify shooting an unarmed person due to what a third party told me about him without fear of prosecution. (Plus there is a difference with information coming from a credible person and the information being credible. Proven the information was not credible, as he did not have all those weapons 'credible' sources said he had.)



Good, I am glad of that. But you also are Monday morning QBing, as I don't think you were there either, and the only difference is you rely on a different background set and life experiences to make you determination. I fear that because you may be closer and more focused, you are missing the bigger picture that I see.


From the actions I have seen in the last few months we seem to be on that path, and the population seems to accept the official justification of it.



Please......... you don't seriously believe that do you? For every one thing piece of technology like police camera's catching an officer doing something bad, I can show you fundamental policies and laws that have eroded our liberties. That however would be a really long thread that would include the decades long assault on the 4th amendment and many other things. While you will probably want to talk about all the restrictions you guys are placed under, it's all in response to larger liberties that have been confiscated and diminished.


(sorry for lack of flair and drama in this post, beginning to lose interest as we both seem to be set in our ways........)

No one is hiding behind a badge. At least not in this case. If a civilian had shot this guy under the same circumstances, he would not be prosecuted.


If you think at any point he was nothing but a "scared kid", you are kidding yourself.

You are right, I wasn't there, and therefore won't and can't determine that what was done was wrong. I am not missing the big picture. In fact I think I am looking at the totality of the circumstances in this case more than many. I have to analyze the big picture everyday. I am merely removing emotion from my analysis. And ironically, I often side against idiot cops. Just not in this shooting case.

Part of my job is to read court cases and how they may change police policy. In the overwhelming majority of cases, the courts err on the side of the defendent and his rights.

I do believe and am concerned about the direction in which certain government agencies are headed, but police in this country do have enormous constraints put on them. That's not a bad thing. Of all my worries, having police abuse my rights is WAY WAY down the list.

Bottom line is I doubt you will ever see my point of view and I think your analysis of this shooting is based on limited training/experience in the legal or law enforcement profession. That's not a bad thing, nor am I condescending to you, its just the way it is.

We will probably have to agree to disagree.

 

[Acera]

I get you Texan2, and understand a lot of what you are saying.

But you are talking about particular things in single cases you work with and defendants. I am talking about things like NYC's stop and frisk. No knock warrants. The fact that I am not safe in my papers from a un-warranted search as a US citizen, standing on US soil when I come back from overseas and the customs agent wants me to give him my password so he can check my laptop or other electronic device for porn, etc. without any probable cause. I am talking about the 2nd amendment being a government granted privilege in Illinois where you have to have a permission slip from the state to possess a firearm. I am talking about the idea that the government can order the killing of a US citizen without due process. I am talking about how the government can go directly into your bank account and withdraw funds without a court order, and not even tell you about it. I am talking about how they can seize cash from you and make you prove you are legally entitled to it as opposed to them proving you got it nefariously, all the while waiting years to get it back, if ever, when proven innocent of any wrong doing. The FBI and it's Magic Lantern. Patriot act allows conversations to be monitored between prisoners and their attorneys, when will that extend to the general public? The explosion of information that authorities can now request about a single person without warrants. How procedures that were originally designed and approved for very narrow and specific cases of RICO, terrorism, money laundering, drug trafficking etc. have been expanded to everyday use well beyond their original and closely monitored intent. Freedom of speech is being limited, can't even protest, or voice dissent within a given distance of the president now. We could fill pages with the evils of the health care law. When was the last time you refereed to a person as a 'peace officer' and not an 'enforcement officer' subtle differences, but carry a lot of weight in attitude. Refer back to earlier parts of this thread where folks are driven out of their houses at gun point so they could be searched. Did any of those families look like the terrorist? Were all those searches given of free will, not intimidated or coerced by LE? If no, will any punishment for the guilty parties follow? All this done to make us safer, but at what long term cost?

This board is all about gun rights, and how 'shall not be infringed' has been drug through the mud and what is left of it is constantly under attack. It's not the only one that is taking a beating. How about the 4th? Damn is the 10th even valid anymore???



We could carry this string of thought on for days..........................

 

[winchster]

Damn is the 10th even valid anymore???



We could carry this string of thought on for days..........................

We shall soon see. Being discussed here.

http://www.texasguntalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46494

 

[Texan2]

I get you Texan2, and understand a lot of what you are saying.

But you are talking about particular things in single cases you work with and defendants. I am talking about things like NYC's stop and frisk. No knock warrants. The fact that I am not safe in my papers from a un-warranted search as a US citizen, standing on US soil when I come back from overseas and the customs agent wants me to give him my password so he can check my laptop or other electronic device for porn, etc. without any probable cause. I am talking about the 2nd amendment being a government granted privilege in Illinois where you have to have a permission slip from the state to possess a firearm. I am talking about the idea that the government can order the killing of a US citizen without due process. I am talking about how the government can go directly into your bank account and withdraw funds without a court order, and not even tell you about it. I am talking about how they can seize cash from you and make you prove you are legally entitled to it as opposed to them proving you got it nefariously, all the while waiting years to get it back, if ever, when proven innocent of any wrong doing. The FBI and it's Magic Lantern. Patriot act allows conversations to be monitored between prisoners and their attorneys, when will that extend to the general public? The explosion of information that authorities can now request about a single person without warrants. How procedures that were originally designed and approved for very narrow and specific cases of RICO, terrorism, money laundering, drug trafficking etc. have been expanded to everyday use well beyond their original and closely monitored intent. Freedom of speech is being limited, can't even protest, or voice dissent within a given distance of the president now. We could fill pages with the evils of the health care law. When was the last time you refereed to a person as a 'peace officer' and not an 'enforcement officer' subtle differences, but carry a lot of weight in attitude. Refer back to earlier parts of this thread where folks are driven out of their houses at gun point so they could be searched. Did any of those families look like the terrorist? Were all those searches given of free will, not intimidated or coerced by LE? If no, will any punishment for the guilty parties follow? All this done to make us safer, but at what long term cost?

This board is all about gun rights, and how 'shall not be infringed' has been drug through the mud and what is left of it is constantly under attack. It's not the only one that is taking a beating. How about the 4th? Damn is the 10th even valid anymore???



We could carry this string of thought on for days..........................

I hear you...and on many of those issues we probably agree 100%.

 

[ROGER4314]

Texan, what the Hell....did you sit on a tack? If I open fire to protect my home....what the Hell do you care and frankly, I don't care what you think. I have lived my life MY OWN WAY and I've been on my own since I was 17. When I'm threatened, I attack. Always have & always will. That Boston shit isn't going to work with me.

No one gets out of this world alive.

That's how it is.

Flash

 

[inceptor]

I get you Texan2, and understand a lot of what you are saying.

But you are talking about particular things in single cases you work with and defendants. I am talking about things like NYC's stop and frisk. No knock warrants. The fact that I am not safe in my papers from a un-warranted search as a US citizen, standing on US soil when I come back from overseas and the customs agent wants me to give him my password so he can check my laptop or other electronic device for porn, etc. without any probable cause. I am talking about the 2nd amendment being a government granted privilege in Illinois where you have to have a permission slip from the state to possess a firearm. I am talking about the idea that the government can order the killing of a US citizen without due process. I am talking about how the government can go directly into your bank account and withdraw funds without a court order, and not even tell you about it. I am talking about how they can seize cash from you and make you prove you are legally entitled to it as opposed to them proving you got it nefariously, all the while waiting years to get it back, if ever, when proven innocent of any wrong doing. The FBI and it's Magic Lantern. Patriot act allows conversations to be monitored between prisoners and their attorneys, when will that extend to the general public? The explosion of information that authorities can now request about a single person without warrants. How procedures that were originally designed and approved for very narrow and specific cases of RICO, terrorism, money laundering, drug trafficking etc. have been expanded to everyday use well beyond their original and closely monitored intent. Freedom of speech is being limited, can't even protest, or voice dissent within a given distance of the president now. We could fill pages with the evils of the health care law. When was the last time you refereed to a person as a 'peace officer' and not an 'enforcement officer' subtle differences, but carry a lot of weight in attitude. Refer back to earlier parts of this thread where folks are driven out of their houses at gun point so they could be searched. Did any of those families look like the terrorist? Were all those searches given of free will, not intimidated or coerced by LE? If no, will any punishment for the guilty parties follow? All this done to make us safer, but at what long term cost?

This board is all about gun rights, and how 'shall not be infringed' has been drug through the mud and what is left of it is constantly under attack. It's not the only one that is taking a beating. How about the 4th? Damn is the 10th even valid anymore???



We could carry this string of thought on for days..........................

First, a lot of what you copied earlier was from me, not Texan2.

What you posted here I can disagree with little. We are loosing our rights slowly but surely. Recently they have picked up the pace and I don't like one bit what is happening. We are being herded into a socialist state and most of the sheep don't really care. We have a police state growing around us but that is a major part of a socialist government.

But you are talking apples and oranges. I am not a LEO. Never have been one. I have no idea what happened in the Boston house searches. I have no info there. But I don't disagree with how the police handled the pursuit and apprehension of the terrorist. That is what he is, pure and simple. He made his choices and must live with them. He probably hoped he would be killed. It's a common desire among Jihadists.

One thing you did mention that I strongly agree with is the amount of rounds sent and few hit. This seems to be a common thing I see on the news. Many rounds fired and few hit the target. To me gun control is hitting what you aim at.

 

[M. Sage]

Exactly how much does he have to do before deadly force would be authorized in your world?

Going off what I was told at the CHL class... present what a reasonable person in the same situation would interpret as an imminent threat of death or great bodily injury?

 

[Texan2]

Texan, what the Hell....did you sit on a tack? If I open fire to protect my home....what the Hell do you care and frankly, I don't care what you think. I have lived my life MY OWN WAY and I've been on my own since I was 17. When I'm threatened, I attack. Always have & always will. That Boston shit isn't going to work with me.

No one gets out of this world alive.

That's how it is.

Flash

To each his own. I try to consider all of the reprecussions of my actions (on myself and others) and the long term effects of using deadly force. You are obviously free to do as you wish.

 

[Acera]

First, a lot of what you copied earlier was from me, not Texan2.

Yeah, I realize that now and apologize to both you and Texan2 for not appropriately contributing the comments to the correct persons thoughts and writings. No valid excuse other than.....................well no valid excuse, LOL.

Our power as a people is proportional to what we give to the government. Any increase in government power comes at the expense of the population. Now I am willing to give up significant amounts of said power in return for living in a governed society like we all are. However I feel that we have been on a path where that balance is tipping against us. What is more disturbing, while I understand each and every American has a slightly different view, is that many are pushing harder and momentum is starting to carry us far away from the balance I desire.

 

[ROGER4314]

People who fight in packs are cowards. When they come at you in a group, they may be powerful together but taken as individuals, they are weak and cowardly. When they threaten and you refuse to cower, respond immediately with an attack, the fight advantage switches to you. I've faced that situation many times and while I can't claim to have won in every case, they never forgot me and 100% never f ' ed with me again. Survival cannot be your objective. Stopping the cowardly attacks must be your only goal.

If you f with me, win, lose or draw, you WILL fight....or run.

That is the ONLY way these cowardly attacks on our homes will stop and it matters not who is doing the assault.

Flash