Yup, it's actually not easy to distinguish at a glance police in tactical gear and soldiers...at this distance we can make out the state police wordings and the MA state police badge, but further out? yeah.
Anyway the guys in the humvee pic are very very likely these guys too.
I do know how to spell
AniThyng is merely the name I gave to what became my favourite Baldur's Gate II mage character
Context may be lacking without being able to hear all involved parties, but they're right in saying that doesn't look very voluntary.
Is there confirmation that this was taken from the Boston manhunt, or describes what it claims is happening, in context? The source - in fact, the only source reporting on it that I found - is a kid from YouTube and a site headed by a bible-right wingnut from the halls of Drudge Report, so I kind of want them to please show their work.
Don't get me wrong, I am sure the video *could* be honest, but I'd like to know for sure before I go off on someone unjustifiably.
Note: I'm semi-retired from the board, so if you need something, please be patient.
AniThyng wrote:
Yup, it's actually not easy to distinguish at a glance police in tactical gear and soldiers...at this distance we can make out the state police wordings and the MA state police badge, but further out? yeah.
In this case its rather easy, because regular US Army/Marine personal would never have M16/M4s which are not black for that beloved blend of optimal cheapness and good camo anywhere but the arctic. SOCOM guys might, but almost all SOCOM units are federal and could not be used without a public request for aid from the state. In other cases, yes, it can be very hard at a glance.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
It is consistent with case law. Basically, civil rights are very important but life is more important than those rights.
That is a red herring. Without this exception you can still interrogate him to find where the ticking time bomb is without reading him his rights. You can still go find the bomb and disarm it after he tells you. The only thing you can't do is use this interrogation as evidence in court.
I'm pointing out a fact that civil rights have limitations and this is nothing new. This exemption has been on the books since the 1980s.
I find it interesting that some are interested in limiting or abolishing the second amendment in the interest of saving lives but when we talk about exemptions to the first and fourth amendments in extreme cases with the primary purpose being to save lives the same people are like "oh hell no!".
1st Amendment - Shouting fire in a crowded theater and causing a panic can result in charges. If someone is injured or killed those charges will be more severe. The press isn't allowed in every location. If your religion demands human sacrifice, injury, rape, whatever you can't do it. Those probably make you say "no shit" but the point is that those limitations exist because life is more important and because of that they don't get a free pass either.
2nd Amendment - If you carry in a place where firearms are prohibited such as a federal building, church, school, etc you can be charged.
4th Amendment - Apparently the public safety exemption also exists for the fourth amendment as well. (assuming the information I've been reading is accurate I still am looking for the case law).
5th Amendment - Public safety exemption.
6th Amendment - Trial in absentia; Which can be done for something as tame as continuous disruptive behavior.
"How can I wait unknowing?
This is the price of war,
We rise with noble intentions,
And we risk all that is pure..." - Angela & Jeff van Dyck, Forever (Rome: Total War)
"On and on, through the years,
The war continues on..." - Angela & Jeff van Dyck, We Are All One (Medieval 2: Total War)
"Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the judgment that something else is more important than fear." - Ambrose Redmoon
"You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain." - Harvey Dent, The Dark Knight
Kamakazie Sith wrote:I find it interesting that some are interested in limiting or abolishing the second amendment in the interest of saving lives but when we talk about exemptions to the first and fourth amendments in extreme cases with the primary purpose being to save lives the same people are like "oh hell no!".
The only thing that this exception does, does not save lives. If anything, it is actively harmful to that goal, because it forces the suspect to use their Miranda rights to protect themselves (even if you refuse to tell them what those rights are), instead of telling you what you want to know, off the record.
Kamakazie Sith wrote:I find it interesting that some are interested in limiting or abolishing the second amendment in the interest of saving lives but when we talk about exemptions to the first and fourth amendments in extreme cases with the primary purpose being to save lives the same people are like "oh hell no!".
The only thing that this exception does, does not save lives. If anything, it is actively harmful to that goal, because it forces the suspect to use their Miranda rights to protect themselves (even if you refuse to tell them what those rights are), instead of telling you what you want to know, off the record.
Sure, making them a deal and telling them they won't be charged if they cooperate would probably yield better results then not saying anything. Of course, that's only if this person trusts you which seems highly unlikely. I think this should be saved if he is not cooperative and you need something to bargain with. It depends on what type of person you are talking with.
That being said I disagree that this exemption does anything but save lives. I already explained that depending on the type of person he is. If he's the talking type then it will saves lives. If not then it will depend on whether or not he gives a shit about avoiding additional charges.
Kamakazie Sith wrote:I think this should be saved if he is not cooperative and you need something to bargain with. It depends on what type of person you are talking with.
I forgot to add that in this case they should probably just offer a deal and agree not to add any additional charges if he helps them. They practically already have a conviction for the most serious charges.
My understanding is the the immediate danger exception to the doctrine of stating Miranda rights before questioning applies usually to questions like "Do you have a gun on you still?" and "Do you have anything sharp in your pockets that might stab me if I do a quick clothing search?" Questions like "Are there any other bombs out there on timers ready to explode?" might fall under the exemption, but they aren't the sort of thing for which it was originally carved out.
I'm not sure. I think in this specific circumstance, following the alternate strategy where the police attempt to bargain for such information in exchange for leniency is a moot point. If this young man is guilty, and found guilty in court, of the things police and media have alleged (co-conspirator in a bombing where hundreds were injured, several died; killed and injured police attempting to apprehend, etc.), he's going to jail for the rest of his natural life. He has to know that, and know that any imputation of going easy on him by the criminal justice system is a ploy. I mean, he tried to commit suicide rather than be captured.
Just in case anyone was wondering - Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was formally Mirandized on Monday afternoon. They also brought a judge to his hospital room, appointed a public defender for him, and formally charged him with two Federal offenses. This means that the death penalty is on the table, and that he is NOT being tried as an "enemy combatant" regardless of what some loud-mouthed US members of Congress have said. This stays within the civilian justice system.
Dzhokhar's condition has been upgraded to "fair", so he's improving.
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory.Leonard Nimoy.
Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.
If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy
Terralthra wrote:I'm not sure. I think in this specific circumstance, following the alternate strategy where the police attempt to bargain for such information in exchange for leniency is a moot point. If this young man is guilty, and found guilty in court, of the things police and media have alleged (co-conspirator in a bombing where hundreds were injured, several died; killed and injured police attempting to apprehend, etc.), he's going to jail for the rest of his natural life. He has to know that, and know that any imputation of going easy on him by the criminal justice system is a ploy. I mean, he tried to commit suicide rather than be captured.
In the abstract? I have to think about it.
He may be going to jail for the rest of his life, but a plea deal might let him avoid the death penalty.
Edit: although not executing him would result in outrage, especially from the Right, and he may not care about dying since he tried to kill himself.
I'm not sure you can apply the mental state of someone who, over the course of the prior 24 hours, saw his brother die, has been chased by a massive number of law officers, lacked adequate food and water, been in two shoot outs, and severely wounded and possibly in shock from blood loss with said person's base-line mental state when not hunted, not wounded, adequately fed and hydrated, and not in imminent danger of violent death.
How he felt in a time of despair on a spring evening is not a reliable indicator of how he will feel for the rest of his life. Arguably, at the time of capture he was not in a rational or normal state of mind.
---------------------
Meanwhile, it seems the boys' mother was under the notice of the FBI and possibly Russia authorities (I'm not clear if she was on a "watch list" of some sort or just someone they had noted potentially radical) and also will not be coming to the US due to outstanding shop lifting and property damage charges severe enough to rank as felonies. Hmm.... wonder if the mother was somehow involved in all this? Perhaps encouraging the growing extremism of Tamerlane?
Their father was apparently taken to the hospital with some sort of sudden illness. Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if stress alone might have precipitated something.
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory.Leonard Nimoy.
Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.
If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy
PeZook wrote:
He has optics on his rifle ; He was probably just looking through them to check out the person peeking out of the window. There's an added bonus that he could shoot if it turned out that yes it WAS the suspect preparing to hand grenade him in the face.
You don't point your weapon at anything you don't expect to have to kill, this is basic military deadly force training. Using your mounted scope to scan windows is not appropriate when your expectation for danger is near zero. Notice the rest of those other soldiers and officers are searching just as well without pointing their weapons in windows and are more exposed than the mounted soldier.
These are National Guard types perhaps and I am sure their habits and reactions are informed by there experiances in war where normal patrols had a very far from zero expectation for danger nor are they used to patroling peaceful civilian neighborhoods in a solely law enforcement capacity, so I am a bit understanding but hand waving it is not the correct reaction.
Patroklos wrote:
You don't point your weapon at anything you don't expect to have to kill, this is basic military deadly force training.
I know snipers commonly use their scopes as telescopes for scouting, etc. Do you have any reliable source that indicates this is an incredibly egregious practice in this situation? I can't find anything on Google.
Patroklos wrote:Using your mounted scope to scan windows is not appropriate when your expectation for danger is near zero.
How was their expectation of danger "near zero" given the circumstances? They were after a fugitive who had already blown up some civilians and fired at police officers (in fact, executing one and injuring another severely). And realize, too, this was in broad daylight - meaning that due to glare they would be basically unable to see through windows in any detail unaided.
Ziggy Stardust wrote:How was their expectation of danger "near zero" given the circumstances? They were after a fugitive who had already blown up some civilians and fired at police officers (in fact, executing one and injuring another severely). And realize, too, this was in broad daylight - meaning that due to glare they would be basically unable to see through windows in any detail unaided.
They were searching thousands of homes containing tens of thousands of citizens. Operating with combat type posture where guns are drawn and constantly searching windows for any threat seems like a recipe for disaster. I would argue it is blind luck that no innocent people got killed. Unless the police were operating under explicit rules saying they could not fire first.
This type of posture gets innocent people killed all the time. Because a lot of innocent activities can look threatening from the wrong perspective.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Alyeska wrote:
They were searching thousands of homes containing tens of thousands of citizens. Operating with combat type posture where guns are drawn and constantly searching windows for any threat seems like a recipe for disaster. I would argue it is blind luck that no innocent people got killed. Unless the police were operating under explicit rules saying they could not fire first.
This type of posture gets innocent people killed all the time. Because a lot of innocent activities can look threatening from the wrong perspective.
Fair enough. Though I stand by that the threat level was "near zero" as Patroklos implied.
What would standard military procedure/protocol be in a situation like this?
Ziggy Stardust wrote:How was their expectation of danger "near zero" given the circumstances? They were after a fugitive who had already blown up some civilians and fired at police officers (in fact, executing one and injuring another severely). And realize, too, this was in broad daylight - meaning that due to glare they would be basically unable to see through windows in any detail unaided.
The window glare was what probably spooked him, from the outside it probably looked like someone in an upper story window with a device pointing at them. If anything the civilian should have known tensions are high and maybe take into account what's going on and try to film them in a less sneaky way. Was the house they were currently searching the one with the boat, that could make it even worse if the boat shootout already happened or they got the call someone was in the backyard. If you were a cop or soldier and the call comes in that the armed fugitive is in that area, and right across the street someone with possibly a detonator is pointed at your team's direction, what would you do? Heard other videos of them yelling at people to get out of the windows, we don't know if he got an verbal warning already. Show some understanding to their situation instead of crying about freedom to film whatever, it's just common sense it's a dangerous situation and try to make their job easier by being helpful.
"Somehow I feel, that in the long run, Thanos of Titan came out ahead in this particular deal."
Jesus fuck. I knew my brother in law's best friend was in Boston, but I didn't know that the surveillance camera footage of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev also included a glimpse of his pedicab...or that he was on the receiving end of a glare from them because he was unwittingly parked by one of the bombs that didn't explode.
To Absent Friends
Dalton | Admin Smash | Knight of the Order of SDN
"y = mx + bro" - Surlethe
"You try THAT shit again, kid, and I will mod you. I will
mod you so hard, you'll wish I were Dalton." - Lagmonster
:
