Boston A Different Look

[NCIC105]

You see a lot of folks posting that the entire Boston incident was a Government conspiracy. Lot of folks saying "no way"....Sometimes the argument is heated....I really fall on neither side...


I think it is good to have a healthy distrust of our Government. When these folks want to force gun control, we all jumped on the wagon. We all knew they had an agenda that they were keeping undercover...


We all know Ruby Ridge was a slaughter as was Waco...


If the conspiracy theories do noting but help keep the focus ramped up, so that we are a little distrusting, then they are a good thing!

 

[ORGO]

Not a govt conspiracy if you ask me (it will end up being an Islamic radicalist group), but like so many other events our government will never tell us the whole story, and our media is too weak to get answers.

I've been involved with situations requiring security for over 30 years, and I was absolutely shocked that they were allowing people to wander around the main viewing areas with unchecked backpacks and bags. One of the highest profile sporting events in the world and they apparently had no protocol for keeping spectators safe by doing simple bag searches. Searches are so common now at public events that I was in total disbelief at how this could even be ignored.

Having said that, this event is another reason for all gun owners and pro Constitutionalists to 100% oppose gun control attempts. Massachusetts has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the U.S. and we all saw what just two people did to a city with a population of over 600,000. Next time it might be a group of 20 or 30 and there won't be enough law enforcement to keep everyone safe.

More people need to get involved politically. The next few years could very well redefine the entire country. Gun control and CISPA alone are very dangerous to individual freedom.

 

[Bikenut]

When I was a young man my eyes shined with the naive trust that the world was filled with honest and honorable folks, police first looked to see if you needed help, politicians who actually tried to do what is best for the country, and very few bad dangerous harmful people.

Now... many decades of living life later... I understand that the world is filled with bad dangerous people, the amount of honest and honorable folks is dwindling every year, entirely too many police have been seduced by the power of their authority and gone to the dark side, and it is rare to find a politician who isn't only interested in lining their own pockets while scrambling for more power and influence.

How to sort out what is a tin foil hat silly nothing behind it "conspiracy" and what has some truth in it? Follow the money and/or who is pushing an agenda in order to gain more power and influence.

After all.... who would have thought that our own government would be involved in assisting guns to get into Mexico (Fast and Furious!) just to push an anti gun agenda that would give those in government more power over it's own citizens? There were those who said such a thing was just another "conspiracy theory" at the time too......

I have learned to question everything and above all else......... be vigilant.

 

[Bikenut]

Not a govt conspiracy if you ask me (it will end up being an Islamic radicalist group), but like so many other events our government will never tell us the whole story, and our media is too weak to get answers.

I've been involved with situations requiring security for over 30 years, and I was absolutely shocked that they were allowing people to wander around the main viewing areas with unchecked backpacks and bags. One of the highest profile sporting events in the world and they apparently had no protocol for keeping spectators safe by doing simple bag searches. Searches are so common now at public events that I was in total disbelief at how this could even be ignored.

Having said that, this event is another reason for all gun owners and pro Constitutionalists to 100% oppose gun control attempts. Massachusetts has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the U.S. and we all saw what just two people did to a city with a population of over 600,000. Next time it might be a group of 20 or 30 and there won't be enough law enforcement to keep everyone safe.

More people need to get involved politically. The next few years could very well redefine the entire country. Gun control and CISPA alone are very dangerous to individual freedom.

Searching personal effects (coolers/backpacks) as a condition of entry into a private event held on private property (like a concert or ball game) is merely a person voluntarily agreeing to the search in return for the privilege of attending that event.

Searching personal effects (cooler/backpacks) at a public event held on public property just to see if someone might maybe have something to hide is against the citizen's right to be secure from searches/seizures under the 4th Amendment.

If we start searching folks' coolers/backpacks at "public events" using the excuse of public safety where will it end? Will the police start demanding to look into every damn backpack they see on the street anywhere and everywhere in the name of... public safety?

And you are correct ORGO... freedom is under attack from many different angles.. gun control, privacy, search and seizures, requiring ID, the list of areas that the progressives want to use to control "we the people" is very long.

But what is insidious is the psychological conditioning going on. Boston just proved that people will allow their homes to be searched by the police because, after all, the police are there to protect them and folks have been conditioned to believe that ... "If I have nothing to hide then I have nothing to fear."

And... if I have nothing to hide then I have nothing to fear if the cops want to look in my backpack... or see my "papers".

 

[ORGO]

Searching personal effects (coolers/backpacks) as a condition of entry into a private event held on private property (like a concert or ball game) is merely a person voluntarily agreeing to the search in return for the privilege of attending that event.

Searching personal effects (cooler/backpacks) at a public event held on public property just to see if someone might maybe have something to hide is against the citizen's right to be secure from searches/seizures under the 4th Amendment.



They can have temporarily designated areas and get exemptions under the special needs doctrine of 4a. My guess is they will do just that from now on.

 

[Bikenut]

Searching personal effects (coolers/backpacks) as a condition of entry into a private event held on private property (like a concert or ball game) is merely a person voluntarily agreeing to the search in return for the privilege of attending that event.

Searching personal effects (cooler/backpacks) at a public event held on public property just to see if someone might maybe have something to hide is against the citizen's right to be secure from searches/seizures under the 4th Amendment.

They can have temporarily designated areas and get exemptions under the special needs doctrine of 4a. My guess is they will do just that from now on.

Sadly I suspect that you are correct yet I believe this "special needs" thing is just another unconstitutional power grab.

From:

The "special needs" exception to the warrant requirement. - Free Online Library

The "special needs" exception to the warrant requirement.

The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. (1) To be reasonable, a search generally must be supported by a warrant issued upon probable cause. (2) But, there are exceptions to this general rule. (3) One such exception applies when a search serves "special government needs" beyond the normal needs of law enforcement; in which case, the search may be reasonable despite the absence of a warrant, probable cause, or even individualized suspicion. (4) The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that, in certain limited circumstances, the government's need to discover latent or hidden conditions, or to prevent their development, is sufficiently compelling to justify the intrusion on privacy entailed by conducting a search without any measure of individualized suspicion. (5) A critical factor in the validity of suspicionless searching is the non-law enforcement nature of the special need asserted as a justification. (6) General crime control programs designed to ferret out criminal activity and gather evidence must be distinguished from those that have another particular purpose, such as the protection of citizens against special hazards. (7)
-snip-

Edited to fix the quote thingy.

 

[MartyH]

We can probably agree that keeping bombs out of crowded events is a good idea. It might even be reasonable to search bags being carried into those designated areas. (No one is forcing you to attend such an event, so the search is easily avoidable.)

But what about people with concealed carry permits (or who openly carry in states when it's permitted)? Do those events then become gun-free zones?

It seems like this is going to get very complex.

 

[Bikenut]

We can probably agree that keeping bombs out of crowded events is a good idea. It might even be reasonable to search bags being carried into those designated areas. (No one is forcing you to attend such an event, so the search is easily avoidable.)

But what about people with concealed carry permits (or who openly carry in states when it's permitted)? Do those events then become gun-free zones?

It seems like this is going to get very complex.

I do NOT agree that I should submit to a search "just in case someone might bring in a bomb". Where does that end? Should we agree it is a good idea to randomly stop and search people as they drive to work? Hey... they might be transporting a bomb to a crowded event.

The idea that submitting to searches will result in people being safer from bombs is an illusion just as stupid as the idea that controlling guns will result in people never getting shot.

 

[golocx4]

Here is what I am saying is a conspiracy!
Any thinking person realized that this was Islamic Jihad as soon as the suspects were identified as Muslim, I actually figured it out at the first report of the incident.

The conspiracy was in our wonderful friends in the media.
They realized the opportunity here for 24 hour hypnotism as people will be glued to the story, and so they began,
Every time some used the word terrorist it would be spun so that the following words could be used. LONE WOLF - RIGHT WING - TIMOTHY MCVEIGH just to name a few.
The word Muslim was spoken softly and in passing and was printed rarely.

Even as late a today the Media is asking about MOTIVE. and still trying to paint the perps as victims of someone else s radicalization.
All of this was done, and is being done to give their lord and savior Barack Obama wriggle room, to keep the not on my watch record clean and keep this from messing up the gun control debate and upcoming amnesty for immigrants (of which the perps were) with facts.

Instead of talking seriously now we will waste time making the wearing of backpacks illegal at functions. The reporting of anyone purchasing a Pressure Cooker to the FBI database and the like. And we will all be told over and over again how much safer we are because of the new laws.

So when you hears one of these talking heads that live inside the belt way mention Motive they are trying to hypnotize you into beveling that the current administrations soft and effeminate approach to Islamic Jihad had nothing to do with the mayhem and death in Boston.

Even Barack Omaba asked "how kids who live and study here in the US (with a trailing whistle on the S) could become radicalized". Really Barack you allegedly taught in College you don't know how a radical professor can radicalize kids while the kid parents are actually paying them to do it?
Give me a break.

 

[golocx4]

(3) One such exception applies when a search serves "special government needs" beyond the normal needs of law enforcement; in which case, the search may be reasonable despite the absence of a warrant, probable cause, or even individualized suspicion. (4) The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that, in certain limited circumstances, the government's need to discover latent or hidden conditions, or to prevent their development, is sufficiently compelling to justify the intrusion on privacy entailed by conducting a search without any measure of individualized suspicion. (5) A critical factor in the validity of suspicionless searching is the non-law enforcement nature of the special need asserted as a justification. (6) General crime control programs designed to ferret out criminal activity and gather evidence must be distinguished from those that have another particular purpose, such as the protection of citizens against special hazards. (7)
-snip-

Edited to fix the quote thingy.

A critical factor in the validity of suspicion-less searching is the non-law enforcement nature of the special need asserted as a justification.

National Security is one of those factors and US Customs is the only Government Agency that and search without Probable Cause as long as it is in the National Interest.

A critical factor in the validity of suspicion-less searching is the non-law enforcement nature of the special need asserted as a justification. Trade and Tariff, copyright and trademark, textile protection for example. Did you ever see the little tags that say "Do not remove under penalty of law"

Immigration Control, making you open your trunk at the Border for example. In days gone by a Federal Task Force always had a CBP guy assigned just for that reason.

This also explains why CBP Customs and Border Patrol were merged together and then became the major part of DHS.

 

[revjen45]

Whether Leviathan had anything to do with the Boston Marathon bombing I don't know. Whether it WOULD engage in such I don't doubt.

 

[kerb]

Not a govt conspiracy if you ask me (it will end up being an Islamic radicalist group), but like so many other events our government will never tell us the whole story, and our media is too weak to get answers.

I've been involved with situations requiring security for over 30 years, and I was absolutely shocked that they were allowing people to wander around the main viewing areas with unchecked backpacks and bags. One of the highest profile sporting events in the world and they apparently had no protocol for keeping spectators safe by doing simple bag searches. Searches are so common now at public events that I was in total disbelief at how this could even be ignored.

Having said that, this event is another reason for all gun owners and pro Constitutionalists to 100% oppose gun control attempts. Massachusetts has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the U.S. and we all saw what just two people did to a city with a population of over 600,000. Next time it might be a group of 20 or 30 and there won't be enough law enforcement to keep everyone safe.

More people need to get involved politically. The next few years could very well redefine the entire country. Gun control and CISPA alone are very dangerous to individual freedom.

You don't seem to know your rights very well. Police can't just go searching people who are in a public place.

Makes security all but impossible.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

 

[gunnerbob]

'Confusion and inconsistencies': How US plans to distract public from real truth about Boston ? RT Op-Edge

 

[gunnerbob]

?Boston Bombers? Tsarnaev brothers: Where the dots won't connect ? RT Op-Edge