Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 53

Thread: Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

  1. #41
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,698

    Re: Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

    Quote Originally Posted by solletica View Post
    Nope, because unlike the brainwashed masses, I know better than to consider someone a valid suspect simply because my gummint says he's a suspect.

    For one to be considered a suspect, he/she must have

    1) Opportunity
    2) Motive

    The individual in question only has #1, not #2.

    He doesn't have #2 because assuming he even assuming wanted to "make jihad" (as the gummint claims, but has yet to prove), there would be no motivation for him to simply attack random civilians (since it wouldn't help his jihad) and even if there were, it wouldn't make sense for him to attack a country whose gummint mostly supported his people's side in their ethno-religious conflict w/Russia.

    In a nutshell, logic beats gummint propoganda .
    You give the worst advice.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  2. #42
    Sage

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    10-10-16 @ 10:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    6,073

    Re: Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    You give the worst advice.
    Nope, I give the logical advice. Although it needn't be said that logical options are generally considered the worst, notably by the right.

  3. #43
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,698

    Re: Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

    Quote Originally Posted by solletica View Post
    Nope, I give the logical advice. Although it needn't be said that logical options are generally considered the worst, notably by the right.
    No one would listen to you, sorry.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  4. #44
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,985

    Re: Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

    Quote Originally Posted by WCH View Post
    You are weird. Please don't respond to me any longer and I'll do the same.
    I don't blame you, I wouldn't want people going around pointing out my overzealous intent to blame either. But it's a deal. You don't respond to me, I won't respond to you.
    Quote Originally Posted by solletica View Post
    The big idiot in this whole thing was the boat owner who stupidly turned the dude over to the (corrupt) feds instead of trying to question the suspect himself. If he was bleeding and unarmed, he certainly wasn't going to put up any resistance, and we would've been much closer to the truth today.

    But Mr. Boathead didn't think and decided to be another submissive bitch for his gummint, and now, we'll never actually know what happened.
    Worst. Advice. Ever.

    For anyone who might possibly believe this, never ever attempt to interrogate someone who is considered armed, dangerous and suspected of killing and maiming hundreds of people, especially if doing so requires you to obstruct a federal investigation.

  5. #45
    Sage

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    10-10-16 @ 10:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    6,073

    Re: Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    never ever attempt to interrogate someone who is considered armed, dangerous and suspected of killing and maiming hundreds of people,
    And never attempt to talk sense into someone childish/naive enough to believe that one is armed and dangerous simply because his gummint claims he's "armed and dangerous". . .

    Now officials claim Boston bombing suspect was NOT armed in boat showdown - despite police account of firefight and him 'shooting himself' | Mail Online

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    especially if doing so requires you to obstruct a federal investigation.
    And slyfox will now explain to us how simply questioning an individual found bleeding in a boat is tantamount to obstruction of justice (esp. since there's no way to prove that the boat owner should have known that the individual found is the same person the cops are looking for. . .)

    He will also explain to us how the gummint could possibly know whether an attempt to question the individual was made if both the individual (and the one questioning him) lied about it.

  6. #46
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

    Tsarnaev family received $100G in benefits | Boston Herald

    Typical Obama "47%er" supporter.



    j/k
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  7. #47
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,985

    Re: Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

    Quote Originally Posted by solletica View Post
    And never attempt to talk sense into someone childish/naive enough to believe that one is armed and dangerous simply because his gummint claims he's "armed and dangerous". . .
    Who give a flying rat's rear end if he actually was armed or not, the fact is he was CONSIDERED armed a dangerous. You call me childish, and you don't bother to understand the words I use.

    And slyfox will now explain to us how simply questioning an individual found bleeding in a boat is tantamount to obstruction of justice (esp. since there's no way to prove that the boat owner should have known that the individual found is the same person the cops are looking for. . .)
    Yeah, the guy hiding in the boat gushing blood in the same area as one of the largest manhunts in history was simply a coincidence.

    It would be considered obstruction because you have no right to interrogate the man at all, and any attempt to play along with his hiding from law enforcement would make you a party to his actions. I could not tell you what specific laws you'd be breaking (aiding and abetting? obstruction? conspiracy? harboring a fugitive? all of the above?) but there is absolutely zero reason for you to try to play judge and jury. Turn him over, let the legal system work things out.

    He will also explain to us how the gummint could possibly know whether an attempt to question the individual was made if both the individual (and the one questioning him) lied about it.
    First of all, what is gummint? Is that an uneducated pronunciation of government, in your attempt to criticize the legal process? Second of all....what? Are you really now claiming the person who found the suspect in the boat should have interrogated the suspect and then LIED to the police about interrogating him? And you really don't see how that would put you at odds with the law?

    Like I said before...Worst. Advice. Ever.

  8. #48
    Sage

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    10-10-16 @ 10:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    6,073

    Re: Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    Who give a flying rat's rear end if he actually was armed or not, the fact is he was CONSIDERED armed a dangerous.
    So anyone considered "armed and dangerous" is more likely to be armed and dangerous? ?

    Here's a a journalist that says that NRA members are "armed and dangerous". . .

    Inside the NRA: Armed and Dangerous--An Expose: Jack Anderson: 9780787106775: Amazon.com: Books

    So by slyfox's reasoning, we should stay from NRA members and report them to the police.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    You call me childish, and you don't bother to understand the words I use.
    No, merely noted that it's characteristic of the pre-adolescent stage of intellectual development to blindly accord a high degree of credibility to one's government in spite of its penchant for lying.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    Yeah, the guy hiding in the boat gushing blood in the same area as one of the largest manhunts in history was simply a coincidence.
    No need for coincidence. Boston is a large city w/several gun owners (legal or otherwise), so it's possible that one of several individuals recently shot by a gun would've tried to run away but have been unable to reach help before collapsing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    It would be considered obstruction because you have no right to interrogate the man at all
    Wrong. Obstruction of justice entails a deliberate attempt to obscure and/or eliminate evidence; merely questioning a person you found in a boat bleeding does neither, so it doesn't count.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    , and any attempt to play along with his hiding from law enforcement would make you a party to his actions. I could not tell you what specific laws you'd be breaking (aiding and abetting? obstruction? conspiracy? harboring a fugitive? all of the above?)
    You can't tell us because you made it up and now can't back up what you posted.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    but there is absolutely zero reason for you to try to play judge and jury. Turn him over, let the legal system work things out.
    The legal system doesn't work unless the accused has a decent lawyer and there's investigation of evidence by someone other than the prosecuting side (i. e. the gummint).

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    First of all, what is gummint? Is that an uneducated pronunciation of government, in your attempt to criticize the legal process? Second of all....what? Are you really now claiming the person who found the suspect in the boat should have interrogated the suspect and then LIED to the police about interrogating him?
    Correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    And you really don't see how that would put you at odds with the law?
    The law becomes irrelevant when it can't be enforced. When the victim and the person questioning him both lie about what happened, the law can do nothing until that questioning is revealed because there's no evidence that any questioning ever took place.

  9. #49
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,293

    Re: Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

    Quote Originally Posted by solletica View Post
    So anyone considered "armed and dangerous" is more likely to be armed and dangerous? ?

    Here's a a journalist that says that NRA members are "armed and dangerous". . .

    Inside the NRA: Armed and Dangerous--An Expose: Jack Anderson: 9780787106775: Amazon.com: Books

    ...
    Jack Anderson died a half dozen years ago.
    His muckraking days are over but the NRA is still around.

  10. #50
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,985

    Re: Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

    Quote Originally Posted by solletica View Post
    So anyone considered "armed and dangerous" is more likely to be armed and dangerous? ?
    No, a person who is armed and dangerous is considered to be armed and dangerous. Are you really resorting to playing ignorant to sell your ridiculousness?

    So by slyfox's reasoning, we should stay from NRA members and report them to the police.
    If the first part of their name is "La" and the second part of the name is "Pierre", it might not be a bad idea.

    No, merely noted that it's characteristic of the pre-adolescent stage of intellectual development to blindly accord a high degree of credibility to one's government in spite of its penchant for lying.
    Blindly? So...there wasn't a bomb set off in Boston? An MIT officer wasn't killed?

    No need for coincidence. Boston is a large city w/several gun owners (legal or otherwise), so it's possible that one of several individuals recently shot by a gun would've tried to run away but have been unable to reach help before collapsing.
    Yes, because with all of those law enforcement officers in the area looking for a dangerous, it's TOTALLY believable another incident in which someone got shot happened and the police didn't know about it. Good call.

    Wrong. Obstruction of justice entails a deliberate attempt to obscure and/or eliminate evidence
    Like, oh I don't know, not informing law enforcement the main suspect in the murders of four people is in your back yard? Yeah, that's not important at all.

    You can't tell us because you made it up and now can't back up what you posted.
    No, I cannot tell you because I'm not a lawyer. I do have a cousin who is a prosecuting attorney, if you'd like me to ask her and let you know which criminal offenses would be applicable in that situation, just let me know. I did give a couple of possibilities.

    The legal system doesn't work unless the accused has a decent lawyer and there's investigation of evidence by someone other than the prosecuting side (i. e. the gummint).
    Yes...that IS how the legal system works...what are you talking about? That's exactly what should happen here.

    Correct.
    Gotcha...so your advice is to approach a possible desparate serial killer who might have a gun when he's hiding in your boat during one of the largest manhunts in history, and then later lie to the police about doing so.

    Worst. Advice. Ever.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •