shades
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 343
- Reaction score
- 71
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
This isn't the only travesty to happen to the civil rights and civil liberties of American citizens since 9/11.
To be perfectly fair, the kid did say that Obama should "watch out for suicide bombers." The Secret Service should at least follow up anything that is remotely a threat to the President. If they didn't, and Obama did get killed, we'd be berating them for not doing their job.
(and I think that's true no matter what party the President belongs to.)
you dont question my child without me being there.
period
and its interesting that both posts so far mention a political affiliation having something to do with it
What if they're being questioned about you?
and its interesting that both posts so far mention a political affiliation having something to do with it
I guess it depends on the approach.
"hey kid, did you post this status on facebook?"
"that? yeah...I just thought he was at risk, ya know?"
"Right. And you're attending (whatever school) and the records say you're 13?"
"Yes sir".
"Alright, thanks for your concern for Obama, have a nice day"
and
"tell us what you know, maggot scum!!! f*cking talk!!!"
Completely different.
To be perfectly fair, the kid did say that Obama should "watch out for suicide bombers." The Secret Service should at least follow up anything that is remotely a threat to the President. If they didn't, and Obama did get killed, we'd be berating them for not doing their job.
(and I think that's true no matter what party the President belongs to.)
I guess it depends on the approach.
"hey kid, did you post this status on facebook?"
"that? yeah...I just thought he was at risk, ya know?"
"Right. And you're attending (whatever school) and the records say you're 13?"
"Yes sir".
"Alright, thanks for your concern for Obama, have a nice day"
and
"tell us what you know, maggot scum!!! f*cking talk!!!"
Completely different.
I don't think it matters. Parents are incredibly protective of their children. And considering how harsh our criminal system is, I understand why a parent would be angry that their child was questioned without their presence.
They should have either waited for a parent or issued a guardian ad litem to be present with the child. It doesn't matter if it was a friendly questioning or a harsh interrogation. They should do it at the very least to cover their asses against lawsuits like this agent opened up to them.
I would say that many parents are incredibly protective, and another significant handful act as if a child is a goldfish who requires little attention or care.
Either way, it really doesn't matter. Children are considered legally minors because they don't fully understand their rights and liberties nor their civic responsibilities. Regardless of what kind of parenting they get they should not be questioned by a law enforcement authority without a guardian present to protect the interests of the child.
Since we're discussing their best interest let me ask this: Do you support a 13 year old girl having access to abortion services without the guidance/awareness of her guardian? Just trying to grasp the big picture, here.
Law enforcement agencies still have laws and guidelines to follow, they had no right to question a minor without parents being present.To be perfectly fair, the kid did say that Obama should "watch out for suicide bombers." The Secret Service should at least follow up anything that is remotely a threat to the President. If they didn't, and Obama did get killed, we'd be berating them for not doing their job.
(and I think that's true no matter what party the President belongs to.)
Law enforcement agencies still have laws and guidelines to follow, they had no right to question a minor without parents being present.
Law enforcement agencies still have laws and guidelines to follow, they had no right to question a minor without parents being present.
Why not?
What if this was a child of one of the 9/11 attackers? In retrospect - if one of them had a child, their child said something that hinted at a possible issue happenening, and we did nothing - then that would have been wrapped up in the 9/11 investigatoin, report - and no one would be giving a **** about whether or not the kid's parents were 'there' - instead, people would be wondering why no one looked into anything.
I'm sorry - but parents aren't always the best people ot have present because parents aren't perfect.
But having an investigator alone with a child isn't wise, either. So I do feel that if a parent isn't preferred to be present because he/she might be a concern then a human-services or other some such individual should be present to ensure that the child's rights aren't being trampled in the process.
Umm, your far fetched scenario still isn't a good excuse to give law enforcement an excuse to tread on a citizens civil liberties. Why people like you make excuses for our government to discard all regard for our laws completely baffles me.
And this has to do with law enforcement disregarding civil liberties, how? Your "what if" senarios are comical.What - terrorists and people who might want to kill the president CAN'T possibly have kids or something?
Of course they can.
So all parents want to murder their children, and shouldn't be present when law enforcement interrogates their children? Wow, you got some brilliant logic going on.Meanwhile - a crazed mother murdered here 6 year old son and dumped his body on the roadside in Maine to be found by passerby's.