Our Rights

Spiri7o

Active member
People are becoming to complacent with the actions of the government. No, I am not a conspiracy theorist, I am talking facts, talking about how the NSA is spying on citizens. Not just those who are suspected to be terrorist but everyone.

Drones are currently flying around major citizens, too high for anyone to even see. Spying on what everyone is doing. Unconstitutionally, Police Officers in New York can pull people over for random pat downs.

For what? Our Safety?

“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

- Benjamin Franklin

I am concerned that this is just the beginning, that peoples rights will continue to be taken advantage of and that it will escalate to a level that will be more unconstitutional than it already is. OUR rights is what separates us from other countries, why the U.S. is so great. That is slowly being diminished for our "safety" .

As harsh as it may sound, you let 10 planes crash into buildings. That should not diminish our rights. You can make as many rules as possible to keep safety in check but not at the expense of people's rights. With Freedom comes consequences but that is what the U.S. is.

This is also not a 911 bash. My thoughts go out to everyone and their loved ones who were lost. It was terrible.

Every phone call, text, picture taken is noted, by the government. The government recently paid Verizon for information that many would deem unconstitutional.

I am not anti-government by any means, I am concerned strictly with the our rights, how the constitution has been stretched, and where this could lead in the future.

The Boston bomber was not read his Miranda Rights, does anyone else have a problem with that? Sure he did a horrible things, but he still has rights, the right to an attorney. 10 years ago people were let off on technicalities. This is the start to the government being able to do whatever they want, with anyone.

 
My brother wasn't read his Miranda Rights when he got arrested for some petty crime shit and it didn't matter. Another friend of mine didnt get em read to him and his lawyer used that to get him off with no charges.

OP All I hear from you is complaining, much like I hear from everyone else in this country about this crap. Where I don't agree with it either, nor do I know what to do. Do you have a call to action? What should we do about this problem? Or is complaining on an online skiing forum you way of fighting back.
 
Because they waived his miranda rights using a public safety exception of some kind. First of all, the exception only allows for certain statements to be obtained. Second of all, this makes sense. If there were planned bombings in all major cities, certainly this is something we would want to know about immediately, rather than allowing the suspect to keep quiet while other attacks took place. Secondly, if there is a such thing as a "public safety clause" in which miranda rights can be waived, then it was legal to do so. So your issue is not that they invoked it on this suspect-- your issue is that the ability to waive the rights even exists? Do you know why it exists or when it came into action? It was introduced in 1984--so it isn't something new.

The public safety exception derives from New York v. Quarles (1984), a case in which the Supreme Court considered the admissibility of a statement elicited by a police officer who apprehended a rape suspect who was thought to be carrying a firearm. The arrest took place during the middle of the night in a supermarket that was open to the public but apparently deserted except for the clerks at the checkout counter. When the officer arrested the suspect, he found an empty shoulder holster, handcuffed the suspect, and asked him where the gun was. The suspect nodded in the direction of the gun (which was near some empty cartons) and said, "The gun is over there". The Supreme Court found that such an unadvised statement was admissible in evidence because "n a kaleidoscopic situation such as the one confronting these officers, where spontaneity rather than adherence to a police manual is necessarily the order of the day, the application of the exception we recognize today should not be made to depend on post hoc findings at a suppression hearing concerning the subjective motivation of the police officer".[10] Thus, the jurisprudential rule of Miranda must yield in "a situation where concern for public safety must be paramount to adherence to the literal language of the prophylactic rules enunciated in Miranda".

The rule of Miranda is not, therefore, absolute and can be a bit more elastic in cases of public safety.[9] Under this exception, to be admissible in the government's direct case at a trial, the questioning must not be "actually compelled by police conduct which overcame his will to resist", and must be focused and limited, involving a situation "in which police officers ask questions reasonably prompted by a concern for the public safety".[11]

In 2010, the Federal Bureau of Investigation encouraged agents to use a broad interpretation of public safety-related questions in terrorism cases, stating that the "magnitude and complexity" of terrorist threats justified "a significantly more extensive public safety interrogation without Miranda warnings than would be permissible in an ordinary criminal case", continuing to list such examples as: "questions about possible impending or coordinated terrorist attacks; the location, nature and threat posed by weapons that might pose an imminent danger to the public; and the identities, locations, and activities or intentions of accomplices who may be plotting additional imminent attacks". A Department of Justice spokesman described this position as not altering the constitutional right, but as clarifying existing flexibility in the rule.[12]
 
The lawyer using it to get him off with no charges is an indicator it was wrong. I am not complaining, I am bringing arguable points together, informing and seeking opinions.

Not dumb ass comments from dumb ass people like yourself. Is that just because you on an online skiing website? Or are you really that stupid?
 
...and what exactly do you think they should have charged him with?

Also the Miranda Rights debate comes from misinformation in the general public. Real arrests and police work isn't like TV or movies.

You must give the miranda rights before questioning/interrogation. Not simply because you're arresting someone

Police can also intentionally not read your miranda rights and still question you, and use any information you provide. They just can't directly quote you to incriminate you.
 
exactly this-- there are certain criteria that need to exist for miranda to even become relevant. As you stated, you don't necessarily get read miranda rights when arrested.

 
What will opinions do for this problem? How will they change the way the government abuses our rights and take advantage of the American public just allowing anything "for our safety".

I am not disagreeing with you that we have a problem, I just wonder what you have in mind for a solution. No need to be calling people a dumb ass or trying to make anyone sound stupid.
 
Ok-- first of all-- you definitely aren't informing anyone. Your post doesn't have any solid concrete evidence or sources, and quite frankly is poorly written.

Second, you aren't seeking opinions, because when i gave you mine you claimed that I "clearly don't get it."

Third, your post about him being "tried as a terrorist" wasn't even accurate. I just looked it up (I admit I didn't follow it too closely while it was going on), and from everything I could find, Obama decided not to try him as an enemy combatant but as a citizen through the court system?

And last, you shouldn't be an asshole to the only people willing to entertain your thread. This should clearly go without saying.
 
Although I agree with what you're saying, you presented your argument like a 15 year old who just learned that things aren't fair in the world and is angry about it.
 


I fully agree with your statements, although a little bit vague. The espionage on American

citizens has been going on for a little over 50 years. However, recently people have become

more aware of this issue because of whistleblowers including Eric Snowden and Bradley

Manning. Snowdon is perceived as a traitor; he is wanted for espionage, yet he exposes the

traitors infiltrated within our government, (the spying that they conduct), oh the irony.

Moreover, my parents are the leftists of liberals. They blindly accept information disgorged by

CNN, possibly because listening is less of a burden than researching independently. This

left/right-wing nonsense seems to be a theoretical acceptance or hereditary trait engrained

through generations of family views’. Follow your elders, as they know best.

In all honesty, I stop and stare at the sheer consumerism and the insanity that fuels the

system. Consumers who, much like you and I, will likely buy a 450 dollar pocketbook that

costs 10 dollars or less to make in a sweatshop. The implementation of this world’s system

omits good and human need and instead replaces these words with evil and wants. This

system is a game, utilized for self-interest, self-maximization, self-gratification and the likes.

This is why people will starve to death and nothing can fully stop the suffering if in fact the

system runs.

The media is the conditioning. The media expels disinformation, exploits events and people

and pushes specific agendas. It is no secret that the media is controlled by a mere 6

corporations. Link- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dguiAWrUGMM. The scary part is most

are local news channels. Hence, Government controls media for its own benefit, media controls

government for its own benefit, together they control the people for their own benefit, and the

productive class gets screwed. You cannot argue that corporations have an imbalance of power

and influence, so something needs to change to help with this disparity before we end up the

same as china or north korea. But this is America, nothing bad could ever happen here? A

totalitarian state? In any case, the masses know full well that they are being lied to, yet the

burden to stand up for their rights or discomfiture of doing so stops them from effectuating

the goal of change. Instead, they blindly accept the narrative and go about face booking

(federal bureauing) and tweeting.

You my friend are complaining more than anything, as mentioned by another poster. Make a

change, be rebellious and enlighten those who are unaware. Action sets into motion change,

participate in protests such as occupy wall street. Or you could just whine, while corporations

wastefully throw away products, products you use, (perfectly good products) because of over

production or planned obsolescence. You could whine, while the world runs dry, and whine

some more.

This is how our world runs: inefficiency and wasteful systems create profit. Your inefficiency in

doing so is the reason why the powers that be can get away with what is known as treason.

The approval of the National Defense Authorization Act is a great threat to our civil liberties.

The cornerstone of liberal democracy is the notion that free speech allows us to create a

marketplace of ideas, from which we can use the political process to collectively choose the

society we want. Most critiques of this system tend to focus on the ways in which this

marketplace of ideas isn’t totally free, such as the ways in which some actors have

substantially more influence over what information is distributed than others. The NDAA

places domestic terror investigations and interrogations into the hands of the military and in

turn would open the door for trial-free, indefinite detention of anyone, including that of an

American citizen, so long as the government calls them terrorists. If everyone’s every action

were being recorded, and everyone technically violates some obscure law at some time, then

punishment becomes purely selective. This is where we are heading. We let our freedoms

crumble because of a false perception of security, in the name of protection from this so called

terror. Many are unaware simply because they are conditioned to believe the MSM and do not

have the criticial thinking skills needed to see what is happening before their very eyes. In fact,

all of this could lead to greater encroachment on our liberties in the future. In any case, it is

rather meaningless that Obama has promised not to use his powers against the citizens of the

U.S in view of the fact that he still has the legal authority to do so. It is uncertain that incoming

administrations will refrain from detaining or killing citizens of the U.S who speak out against

the government. This can happen in America! These tasks can be completed by simply labeling

the activists or protesters as terrorists, avoiding the mechanisms of the judicial process

guaranteed by the Constitution.

Now our government want to introduce new gun laws. Understand, that numerous variables

come into play and the straight-shooting fact is that the media does not

constitute for said variables. In short, yes the US has a higher murder

rate, however the UK has a higher violent crime rate. The UK also only counts illegal

killings as homicides where as the US counts all killings no matter how it happens. So the

actual murder rate is much lower then the US statistics would have you think. If I would

of constituted nearly all classified crimes, the UK would sit at 2034 violent crimes per. 100,000

people. However, violent crime definitions are not the same for the US and UK.

That said violent crime sits at between 900 and 1361. The UK still has

a violent crime rate higher than that of the US's 386.3 per. 100,000 per capita, just not the 5

1/2 claimed by some, but between 2 1/2 and 3 1/2 times more. The AR-15 is a

subset of a rifle and RIFLES CAUSE ONLY 3.5% OF GUN-RELATED HOMICIDES!! The question is,

why pinpoint the sub-set of a rifle? REMEMBER, FBI statistics US- 1992- violent crime rate of

757.7 per 100,000 and a murder rate of specifically 9.3. Almost twenty years later, 2011 US

has a violent crime rate of 386.3 a 50% reduction in violent crime and a murder rate of 4.7 a

54% reduction! It's better than you are conditioned to believe and violent crime has decreased

significantly. The problem lies within METROPOLITAN AREAS with a population of

greater than 200,000 people. In order to fix these problems, instead of banning

guns we have to try to figure out how to improve the POVERTY

LEVEL, HOW TO IMPROVE THE EDUCATION SYSTEM AND HOW TO CREATE JOBS, THAT IS HOW

YOU WILL IMPROVE THE VIOLENT CRIME RATE AND MURDER RATE!!!!

Our society often attempts to find solutions from within the problem. This is why bullying will

never be eradicated under this social order. This is why sexism thrives, this

is why class warfare is fed from the teet of propaganda. It's really quite

simple. Convince a classroom that bullying is wrong and you should stand up against someone

being bullied, and almost instantly, you have a room full of children that will openly bully each

other under the false visage of their anti-bullying principles. Christians do this all the time! In

sioux falls, Donald Moehler was executed for the rape and murder of a 9 year old girl.

regardless of what he "deserved" for his crimes (i strongly disagree with the US justice system)

the outlash from the community was truly a spectacle. never ever before in my life did i think it

was possible for so many innocent people to pray to god for his death, to proclaim their faith

in god then openly parade around cheering for the death of a man. so much for thou shalt not

kill. All because an entire cultural realm is hellbent on finding solutions from within the

problem. How to eliminate bullying and most forms of social decay? Teach children to embrace

their humanity rather than tell them not to bully. Teach boys and girls to value their humanity

more than the differences between sexes. Teach people to value their humanity more than

they cherish their beliefs.

Cheers,

Dr. Phil
 
Don't swear, also when you hear someone such as Sean M say, "If I'm not doing anything

wrong I have nothing to worry about." What Sean is actually saying is, "If I'm not doing

anything wrong, I don't need to have rights. "
 
The Boston bombing 'SUSPECT' was a citizen of the United States, he wasn't read his Miranda

rights, and he is being treated like an enemy combatant. The very evidence against him is

weak. The only evidence people have seen is he and his brother walking with a backpack,

different than that of the one pictured after bombings. Everything is still heresy and faith

based. If you like Erin Burnett, cause she is hot, I like to believe what she says, even though I

really don't know and have not been shown one conclusive piece of evidence. "He wrote a

letter with marker in the boat stating he was guilty. I believe this because they told me so."

I am in no way stating that he is innocent or guilty, just that the next time you read about an

unjustified conviction that resulted from a false confession, think about why we have Miranda

in the first place. It's simply to stop law enforcement authorities from committing abuses of

power. When these authorities can make their own rules, the naturally will. Innocent until

proven guilty! Due process!

 
The answer is obviously to be as paranoid as possible every second of every day because everyone is out to get you and is against you.

Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it doesn't happen just like just because something is legal means it happens.
 
First of all, I did not start the name calling.

As far as fixing it, there is nothing we can do but be aware, and vote for the right people. I do not have the source as of now but my Global Affairs teacher told me that it was something like 25% of Americans actual cast educated votes. That is another problem
 
I did not just learn, but more and more information is appearing leading to what is happening NOW in present day
 
OP i fully agree with you i hate how at any moment the government could just kill me without any evidence of undone crimes when i get a chance im becoming a canadian citizen
 
Your post was not your opinion but a long article you clearly copy and pasted. Also, MEDIA BIAS.

Listen to foodbuffet11 if you want sources
 
600px-Anarchy-symbol.svg.png


 
i never payed attention to what evidence he had to be the true bomber. what exactly was the true evidence? america just needs to calm down, i cant imagine how much other shit we do to places here and across the ocean
 
Who gives a fuck. If your rights are being violated they will always have and always will this thread is deemed fucking retarded.
 
The "article" I copy and pasted was just information on the public safety exception of the Miranda rights from Wikipedia. No media bias. The whole reason I even posted was to answer your question of "why?" when I said that it didn't bother me. To which I replied with my opinion.

"this makes sense. If there were planned bombings in all major cities, certainly this is something we would want to know about immediately, rather than allowing the suspect to keep quiet while other attacks took place."
 
And you know there were planned bombings in other cities? Or is that what you were told? I like the part where they state he attempted to commit suicide with a pistol while stationed in the boat. Never mind, he never had a gun. The suspect and officers exchanged fire for close to two hours, stated by chief. Never mind he never had a gun. He shot him self in the throat, never mind. Actually, he wrote a confession note in the boat. Pictures declassified by now fired Boston police officer clearly shows that he was not bleeding profusely from anywhere around his neck. Cops during interview state that it looked to be a knife slice. All look at each other worried. If anything his neck wound, which retained him from speaking was after he left the boat and was detained.

They lied and for that reason I have distrust.

If I see any conclusive evidence, I will then make statement in regards to whether he is innocent or guilty.
 
No, you didn't get my point. My point was that, I agree that the public safety exception is necessary, in order to prevent a situation like the one I mentioned-- catching a bomber who had intel about other bombings or some other imminent threat. I have no idea if this particular guy had any knowledge of any other threat, but I believe that our government had the right to forego what may be more typical protocol in less dangerous situations to find out.

My post was simply about why I don't have a problem with the use of the public safety exception. That was my original reply, as well as my other reply. Your talking about a bunch of misinformation in the media-- which may or may have been presented to them by law enforcement? I'm not sure, but I don't know enough to have an opinion on the things that you stated. Other than to say that I believe the neck injury that you're speaking of is the gun shot wound that entered his mouth and left through the left side of his cheek/throat. I have no idea when this gun shot wound happened, or if it was self inflicted.

Is it your belief that after being detained, the police stuck a gun in his mouth and pulled the trigger to the side? I'm genuinely asking, I don't know what happened. I only read the report on his injuries. There are a bunch of articles on his injuries that were recently released including the one below-- I just pulled up an example. Are you saying that the reports of his injuries are incorrect? Again, I have no idea.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/20/20103906-boston-bombing-suspect-tsarnaev-had-gunshot-wounds-to-the-mouth-extremities?lite

 
Back
Top