Fed Up

[88GT]

Ok. So the abbreviation for "you are" is "you're". "Your" is a possessive.

Carry on.

Sometimes I think auto-correct is less educated that INGO posters.

 

[lucky4034]

≠

Hey... how you do dat?

 

[jbombelli]

Sometimes I think auto-correct is less educated [STRIKE]that[/STRIKE] than INGO posters.

Fixed it.

 

[Trigger Time]

Ok. So the abbreviation for "you are" is "you're". "Your" is a possessive.

Carry on.

My auto correct messes things up all the time. I don't know how it gets some words mixed up or even leaves letters split up, also capitalizes wrong. I try to go back and fix things if I see it but I don't always re-read my posts. In the end yeah it's my responsibility for the final version.

 

[buford t justice]

I know what we should do,let's have a spelling bee.

can anyone spell I don't give a s&$t

 

[jbombelli]

I know what we should do,let's have a spelling bee.

can anyone spell I don't give a s&$t

Apparently you can't.

If you had spelled that correctly, it would have appeared as ****.

 

[Trigger Time]

Apparently you can't.

If you had spelled that correctly, it would have appeared as ****.

Now that was funny ****! Lmao

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

Any reason to believe it was anything but this?

A few or more videos in threads here showing people running out of their homes with hands up and guns pointed at them.

 

[Pinchaser]

I sit here reading these posts alot of you are putting up and i am just beside myself. most of you from what i have gathered have never even faced a terrorist down in any form other than on call of duty. Boston was not in a police state. there is no conspiracy. and as far as the warantless searches go you would rather we just let these guys walk off after committing a terrosrist action? do you even love this country or are you so enamoured with your tin foil theroys that you are unable to see past your hate for the political party that isnt yours? the national gaurd was used as an outer cordon. the humvees were used by police, and why not use the national gaurd in operations as this? isnt this what they are for? the police have this guy in a nieghbor hood and need to go house to house to clear each one and try and capture this piece of **** that attacked all of us. but in your world we wouldnt do that because they might what see your sink fullof dirty dishes or that your sitting in your moms basement in three week old underwear? they werent searching the homes for anything other than this guy. and i havent heard one resident of boston say they were arrested from any of these searches. this isnt cold war russia we are fighting. we are in a dynamic fight that unfortunately has come to our doorsteps. so all you internet rambos its time to put on your big boy pants and come to the real world.

As far his miranda rights go, they invoked the public safety clause, wich is only good for 48 hours, so by now it has expired. they can declare him an enemy combatant, wich they should, and then question him after he is of able body. if he doesnt talk or confess we still have an overwhelming amount of evidence, including a marathon runner who looked this punk in the face as he was setting a bomb at his feet.

i can appriciate a cuatiousness but sometimes you guys take things way too far. unless your planning on setting off bombs in the us i dont think you will ever be subject this treatment.

DBAP

The overwhelming majority of those who are members of this online forum surely agree with you. Unfortunately, there are a handful of those who tend to post....well.....oddball stuff that likely do not agree with you.

Most of their rants stem from an amazing misunderstanding of our Constitution, to whom it applies, and, much more importantly, to whom it does not apply. As for the searches that took place in Boston, the streets lined with the local citizens applauding their police says it all; everyone agreed with the need. When the citizens don't line the streets to show their support, then there might be a need to take a closer look.

The overwhelming majority I spoke of earlier tend to just ignore these rants, as they come from the same handful over and over again. That's my advice to you.

 

[in625shooter]

The overwhelming majority of those who are members of this online forum surely agree with you. Unfortunately, there are a handful of those who tend to post....well.....oddball stuff that likely do not agree with you.

Most of their rants stem from an amazing misunderstanding of our Constitution, to whom it applies, and, much more importantly, to whom it does not apply. As for the searches that took place in Boston, the streets lined with the local citizens applauding their police says it all; everyone agreed with the need. When the citizens don't line the streets to show their support, then there might be a need to take a closer look.

The overwhelming majority I spoke of earlier tend to just ignore these rants, as they come from the same handful over and over again. That's my advice to you.

Very well said.

 

[kickbacked]

Sometimes i wonder how people actually believe they are Gods gift to earth, and everything they say should be taken as the gospel. Preach it to us op, we are just mere peasants to you. Tell us more on how we should think! After all, without your great insight where would we all be today?

 

[HenryWallace]

If we were important enough to know the LE info on this perhaps we'd gladly open our homes to be searched, but since were not, and they don't give us the opportunity to really help, we must hide our heads under the sand just like peasants are supposed to.

 

[drillsgt]

The overwhelming majority of those who are members of this online forum surely agree with you. Unfortunately, there are a handful of those who tend to post....well.....oddball stuff that likely do not agree with you.

Most of their rants stem from an amazing misunderstanding of our Constitution, to whom it applies, and, much more importantly, to whom it does not apply. As for the searches that took place in Boston, the streets lined with the local citizens applauding their police says it all; everyone agreed with the need. When the citizens don't line the streets to show their support, then there might be a need to take a closer look.

The overwhelming majority I spoke of earlier tend to just ignore these rants, as they come from the same handful over and over again. That's my advice to you.

Having a bunch of sheep out there clapping gleefully that probably don't even know the 4th amendment is hardly justification. If the govt had passed UBC or a new assault weapons ban and had a bunch of anti's outside clapping would that have meant it was justified?

 

[rockhopper46038]

Having a bunch of sheep out there clapping gleefully that probably don't even know the 4th amendment is hardly justification. If the govt had passed UBC or a new assault weapons ban and had a bunch of anti's outside clapping would that have meant it was justified?

QFT.

 

[Tombs]

I sit here reading these posts alot of you are putting up and i am just beside myself. most of you from what i have gathered have never even faced a terrorist down in any form other than on call of duty. Boston was not in a police state. there is no conspiracy. and as far as the warantless searches go you would rather we just let these guys walk off after committing a terrosrist action? do you even love this country or are you so enamoured with your tin foil theroys that you are unable to see past your hate for the political party that isnt yours? the national gaurd was used as an outer cordon. the humvees were used by police, and why not use the national gaurd in operations as this? isnt this what they are for? the police have this guy in a nieghbor hood and need to go house to house to clear each one and try and capture this piece of **** that attacked all of us. but in your world we wouldnt do that because they might what see your sink fullof dirty dishes or that your sitting in your moms basement in three week old underwear? they werent searching the homes for anything other than this guy. and i havent heard one resident of boston say they were arrested from any of these searches. this isnt cold war russia we are fighting. we are in a dynamic fight that unfortunately has come to our doorsteps. so all you internet rambos its time to put on your big boy pants and come to the real world.

As far his miranda rights go, they invoked the public safety clause, wich is only good for 48 hours, so by now it has expired. they can declare him an enemy combatant, wich they should, and then question him after he is of able body. if he doesnt talk or confess we still have an overwhelming amount of evidence, including a marathon runner who looked this punk in the face as he was setting a bomb at his feet.

i can appriciate a cuatiousness but sometimes you guys take things way too far. unless your planning on setting off bombs in the us i dont think you will ever be subject this treatment.

DBAP

I'll protect myself, thank you.

I'll take my chances regardless how grave they may be. I'd sooner walk around with the random chance of death at any second, than deal with the absolute insanity that this government seems to find acceptable on a daily basis. Because you know what? Life was a hell of a lot less stressful before the government decided they needed to control every aspect of my every day life.

If you're happy to bend over every time they pull a stunt to get more funding, please be respectful of those of us who are fed up with your kind.

 

[in625shooter]

Having a bunch of sheep out there clapping gleefully that probably don't even know the 4th amendment is hardly justification. If the govt had passed UBC or a new assault weapons ban and had a bunch of anti's outside clapping would that have meant it was justified?

Thats sort of a broad brush picture there, You (and a LOT of others here on other threads) make it sound like anyone who cooperates with any form of LE is sheeple on ANYTHING that happens.

 

[jwh20]

The Fourth Amendment doesn't go away just because it's inconvenient. If it doesn't apply to everyone, all the time, then it applies to no one, ever. You can also easily make your point without the superiority complex.

Clearly it does go away when it's inconvenient. Same problem with the 2A, it's inconvenient for Mr. Obama, Ms. Feinstein, Mr. Schumer, and the various others who believe it's outlived its usefulness.

The sick argument is:

Why should government be constrained by anything when "peace and safety" are at stake?

 

[Tombs]

Clearly it does go away when it's inconvenient. Same problem with the 2A, it's inconvenient for Mr. Obama, Ms. Feinstein, Mr. Schumer, and the various others who believe it's outlived its usefulness.

The sick argument is:

Why should government be constrained by anything when "peace and safety" are at stake?

It only goes away if you give it up when told to do so. Go read a history book.

The people who tell you to give up your rights for safety are the same people who have you hanging from the gallows the day after.
Yes, it is a serious matter of life or death, it isn't a football political issue.

 

[ModernGunner]

The Fourth Amendment has limitations. Just as the Second Amendment, the First Amendment, and ALL Amendments.

The most common example is that anyone entitled to the benefits of the U.S. Constitution may not shout "FIRE!" in a crowded theater if there is not, in fact, a fire.

There is, for example, NO 'right' in the Second Amendment to OC. Nor is there for CC for that matter. Nor is there any 'right' to OC provided in the Indiana Constitution under Article 1 Section 32.: "The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State."

Does the right to OC exist in Indiana? Yes. But it is implicit, not specific. Just as it is with the 2A.

So ANY notion that 'it MUST apply to everyone ALL the time' is nonsensical, and baseless. There ARE, and historically have been, times when even those rights outlined in the Constitution have been limited. And no doubt, will be again at some point in the future.

It's not JUST a matter of, as one poster opined, "have you even read it?". It's a matter of IF one understands the Constitution, and the limitations that even that document has.

I'm not sure where anyone would get the notion, but there appears to be an opinion that, in the case of the Boston manhunt, the LEO's "Can't search without a warrant because the Fourth Amendment says so! I have the RIGHT!"

That's NOT what the 4A says. 4A is a right against unreasonable searches (and seizures), which may not be performed without warrant and affidavit.

Searching for a madman that has already detonated multiple bombs (even after the marathon) killed at least 4 people, wounded another 180 or so, and which HE (NOT the Police nor the MA National Guard) had the Boston / Watertown areas under siege would, likely, NOT be considered "unreasonable" even IF it imposes upon those citizens.

Lest you forget, it was because of the scumbag Tsarnaeva brothers, NOT the LEO's OR National Guard that folks were 'forced' off the streets, away from their jobs, parks, and daily lives, and 'restricted' indoors.

'You' (whomever) may very well NOT be 'scared of that scumbag'. Understood. But he sure as hell isn't 'scared' of you, either. And he PROVED it by killing and wounding children, women, men, and LEO's. Dzhokhar Tsarnaeva was in TWO violent gun battles in less than 24 hours, and that p.o.s. is still here despite being shot multiple times. I think that qualifies him as having sufficient battleground credentials to be considered 'hardened'.

Probably better to subject the town to a temporary limitation of their 4A protection for the benefit of him NOT murdering more innocent lives, eh? Say, at the Indianapolis area marathons?

 

[Tombs]

The Fourth Amendment has limitations. Just as the Second Amendment, the First Amendment, and ALL Amendments.

The most common example is that one entitled to the benefits of the U.S. Constitution may not shout "FIRE!" in a crowded theater if there is not, in fact, a fire.

There is NO 'right' in the Second Amendment to OC. Nor is there for CC for that matter, but it's typically not the CC'ers complaining here about 'being harassed' by LEO's, or a citizen's complaint, or some store or restaurant (Meijer, Cracker Barrel).

Nor is there any 'right' to OC provided in the Indiana Constitution under Article 1 Section 32.: "The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State."

Does the right to OC exist in Indiana? Yes. But it is implicit, not specific. Just as it is with the 2A.

So ANY notion that 'it MUST apply to everyone ALL the time' is nonsensical, and baseless. There ARE, and historically have been, times when even those rights outlined in the Constitution have been limited. And no doubt, will be again at some point in the future.

It's not JUST a matter of, as on poster opined, "have you even read it?". It's a matter of IF one understands the Constitution, and the limitations that even that document has.

I'm not sure where anyone would get the notion, but there appears to be a opinion that, in the case of the Boston manhunt, the LEO's "Can't search without a warrant because the Fourth Amendment says so! I have the RIGHT!"

That's NOT what the 4A says. 4A is a right against unreasonable searches (and seizures), which may not be performed without warrant and affidavit.

Searching for a madman that has already detonated multiple bombs (even after the marathon) killed at least 4 people, wounded another 180 or so, and which HE (NOT the Police nor the MA National Guard) has the Boston / Watertown areas under siege would, likely, NOT be considered "unreasonable" even IF it imposes upon those citizens.

Would some prefer the alternative of letting such a maniac run loose, perhaps? Perhaps attend the Indianapolis area marathons with the same agenda?

'You' (whomever) may very well NOT be 'scared of that scumbag'. Understood. But he sure as hell isn't 'scared' of you. And he PROVED it by killing and wounding children, women, men, and LEO's.

Probably better to subject the town to a temporary limitation of their 4A protection for the benefit of him NOT murdering more innocent lives, eh?

That many coon fingers charged up on the hunt for a so called mad man are far more likely to be a threat to public safety than that individual.
Here's the kind of things those types do:

Once again, your rights don't disappear because a random person breaks a law.

Try again.