Ron Paul: Police Manhunt For Boston Marathon Bombing Suspects, Scarier Than Attack

[paulitician]

Former Rep. Ron Paul said the law enforcement that swarmed around Boston in the days following the marathon bombings was scarier than the actual terrorist attack.

“The Boston bombing provided the opportunity for the government to turn what should have been a police investigation into a military-style occupation of an American city,” he said on the Lew Rockwell website, Politico reported. “This unprecedented move should frighten us as much or more than the attack itself.”

The terror attacks on April 15 in Boston killed three and injured 264.

Mr. Paul, a former libertarian political candidate who served in Congress as a member of the Republican Party, said the door-to-door searches police conducted in Watertown for the bombing suspects were particularly alarming.

They reminded of a “military coup in a far off banana republic,” he said, Politico reported. “Force lockdown of a city. Militarized police riding tanks in the streets. Door-to-door armed searches without warrant. Families thrown out of their homes at gunpoint to be searched without probable cause. Businesses forced to close. Transport shut down.”

Mr. Paul reminded the surviving suspect, 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, was ultimately discovered by a civilian, and not due to police crackdown, Politico reported.

“He was discovered by a private citizen, who then placed a call to the police,” he said. “And he was identified not by government surveillance cameras, but by private citizens who willingly shared their photographs with the police.”


Read more: Ron Paul: Police manhunt for Boston Marathon bombing suspect scarier than attack - Washington Times

 

[FA_Q2]

I will say that the thing that hit me the hardest when seeing the capture footage on CNN was that I see military members in full gear next to their armored vehicles. Instantly thought, WTF are they doing there. They don’t belong. It was a domestic issue in an American city, not a war zone.

I have been defending against people that are crazy enough to demand that the government is going to start using the military to crack down on citizens. I didn’t thing that it had gone that far. God, I hope I am not incorrect.

 

[KevinWestern]

“The Boston bombing provided the opportunity for the government to turn what should have been a police investigation into a military-style occupation of an American city,” he said on the Lew Rockwell website, Politico reported. “This unprecedented move should frighten us as much or more than the attack itself.”

I did find it a bit odd and disturbing that the police now (apparently) had the ability to shut down an entire city & force whomever they want out of their home (at gun point) over a search for a wounded 19 year old suspect who may or may not be armed.

What's the point of having a 'right' when it can be suspended at the first pin-drop of trouble? I mean no disrespect, but a situation where 4 are killed (in a country of 315,000,000) is not sufficient reason to give up all that we have fought for over the past 400+ years as a human society.

Many, many have died for our RIGHT to have those rights - don't forget.

.

 

[OKTexas]

I will say that the thing that hit me the hardest when seeing the capture footage on CNN was that I see military members in full gear next to their armored vehicles. Instantly thought, WTF are they doing there. They don’t belong. It was a domestic issue in an American city, not a war zone.

I have been defending against people that are crazy enough to demand that the government is going to start using the military to crack down on citizens. I didn’t thing that it had gone that far. God, I hope I am not incorrect.

Did you call your congressman and ask what they were doing there or demand change. I grantee most people didn't and silence equals acceptance. So expect to see it more often.

 

[G.T.]

“The Boston bombing provided the opportunity for the government to turn what should have been a police investigation into a military-style occupation of an American city,” he said on the Lew Rockwell website, Politico reported. “This unprecedented move should frighten us as much or more than the attack itself.”

I did find it a bit odd and disturbing that the police now (apparently) have the ability to shut down an entire city & force whomever they want out of their home (at gun point), over a search for a missing 19 year old who may or may not be armed.

What's the point of having a 'right' when it can be suspended at the first pin-drop of trouble? I mean no disrespect, but a situation where 4 are killed (in a country of 315,000,000) is not sufficient reason to give up all that we have fought for over the past 400+ years as a human society.

.

Warrantless searches with probable cause have always been legal in this country.
Amendment four.


We are at War with "terror" apparently. The Military are sworn to protect foreign and domestic. Let's see someone logically prove that this was somehow out of bounds or oppressive.

 

[paulitician]

I will say that the thing that hit me the hardest when seeing the capture footage on CNN was that I see military members in full gear next to their armored vehicles. Instantly thought, WTF are they doing there. They don’t belong. It was a domestic issue in an American city, not a war zone.

I have been defending against people that are crazy enough to demand that the government is going to start using the military to crack down on citizens. I didn’t thing that it had gone that far. God, I hope I am not incorrect.

Unfortunately, Homeland Security is hoarding and arming itself on an unprecedented level. But why? My guess is that they see mass Civil Unrest coming. That's why awful Laws like the NDAA have been passed. A catastrophic breakdown is coming.

We're in massive Debt, yet the Welfare lines grow longer & longer by the day. The hard-working Middle Class continues to be squeezed. There is no money to pay for the massive future Entitlements. The People who live off Entitlements will begin to lose them. And they will not be happy. Also, the People are beginning to notice our Government's stealthy crackdown on Freedom & Liberty. So Civil Unrest is likely. And Big Brother knows that. The dam is going to break. A monumental flood of anger & discontent will flow into our streets. God help us.

 

[OKTexas]

“The Boston bombing provided the opportunity for the government to turn what should have been a police investigation into a military-style occupation of an American city,” he said on the Lew Rockwell website, Politico reported. “This unprecedented move should frighten us as much or more than the attack itself.”

I did find it a bit odd and disturbing that the police now (apparently) have the ability to shut down an entire city & force whomever they want out of their home (at gun point), over a search for a missing 19 year old who may or may not be armed.

What's the point of having a 'right' when it can be suspended at the first pin-drop of trouble? I mean no disrespect, but a situation where 4 are killed (in a country of 315,000,000) is not sufficient reason to give up all that we have fought for over the past 400+ years as a human society.

.

Warrantless searches with probable cause have always been legal in this country.
Amendment four.


We are at War with "terror" apparently. The Military are sworn to protect foreign and domestic. Let's see someone logically prove that this was somehow out of bounds or oppressive.

4Th Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Please point out where warrentless searches are allowed with probable cause. No hurry, I'll wait.

 

[G.T.]

I did find it a bit odd and disturbing that the police now (apparently) have the ability to shut down an entire city & force whomever they want out of their home (at gun point), over a search for a missing 19 year old who may or may not be armed.

What's the point of having a 'right' when it can be suspended at the first pin-drop of trouble? I mean no disrespect, but a situation where 4 are killed (in a country of 315,000,000) is not sufficient reason to give up all that we have fought for over the past 400+ years as a human society.

.

Warrantless searches with probable cause have always been legal in this country.
Amendment four.


We are at War with "terror" apparently. The Military are sworn to protect foreign and domestic. Let's see someone logically prove that this was somehow out of bounds or oppressive.

4Th Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Please point out where warrentless searches are allowed with probable cause. No hurry, I'll wait.

Case


Law

 

[OKTexas]

Warrantless searches with probable cause have always been legal in this country.
Amendment four.


We are at War with "terror" apparently. The Military are sworn to protect foreign and domestic. Let's see someone logically prove that this was somehow out of bounds or oppressive.

4Th Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Please point out where warrentless searches are allowed with probable cause. No hurry, I'll wait.

Case


Law

There is no case law that supported the warrantless searches conducted in Boston because the police had no information that would give them a reasonable belief that the suspect was in any particular structure until the man spotted him in the boat and called them. That fact took exigent circumstances out of the picture for all the other searches.

 

[KevinWestern]

“The Boston bombing provided the opportunity for the government to turn what should have been a police investigation into a military-style occupation of an American city,” he said on the Lew Rockwell website, Politico reported. “This unprecedented move should frighten us as much or more than the attack itself.”

I did find it a bit odd and disturbing that the police now (apparently) have the ability to shut down an entire city & force whomever they want out of their home (at gun point), over a search for a missing 19 year old who may or may not be armed.

What's the point of having a 'right' when it can be suspended at the first pin-drop of trouble? I mean no disrespect, but a situation where 4 are killed (in a country of 315,000,000) is not sufficient reason to give up all that we have fought for over the past 400+ years as a human society.

.

Warrantless searches with probable cause have always been legal in this country.
Amendment four.


We are at War with "terror" apparently. The Military are sworn to protect foreign and domestic. Let's see someone logically prove that this was somehow out of bounds or oppressive.

I don't agree that the police had "probable cause" to force that many people out of their home, at gunpoint. But even with the warrant issue aside...

What about the forced lock-down of an entire city over a single wounded 19-year-old suspect? If you don't see that as being out of bounds or overly oppressive/aggressive then I guess you and I follow completely different thinking patterns and have different tyranny tolerance levels...


.

 

[G.T.]

4Th Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Please point out where warrentless searches are allowed with probable cause. No hurry, I'll wait.

Case


Law

There is no case law that supported the warrantless searches conducted in Boston because the police had no information that would give them a reasonable belief that the suspect was in any particular structure until the man spotted him in the boat and called them. That fact took exigent circumstances out of the picture for all the other searches.

No reasonable belief?


An area was quarantined off and he was hiding SOMEWHERE within it.

Not finding him posed an imminent threat.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The simple fact is that this happened because it could happen. The fact that this was thrown out as terrorism and blown completely out of proportion meant that the government could do this because the people would go along with it. Never mind the fact that this was a single criminal who was on everybody's radar and showed that he wasn't looking to kill people unnecessarily, as opposed to, say, a mysterious and unknown serial killer.

They could do it, so they did it. Eventually they're hoping it will become normalized and they'll be able to do it more often.

 

[G.T.]

I did find it a bit odd and disturbing that the police now (apparently) have the ability to shut down an entire city & force whomever they want out of their home (at gun point), over a search for a missing 19 year old who may or may not be armed.

What's the point of having a 'right' when it can be suspended at the first pin-drop of trouble? I mean no disrespect, but a situation where 4 are killed (in a country of 315,000,000) is not sufficient reason to give up all that we have fought for over the past 400+ years as a human society.

.

Warrantless searches with probable cause have always been legal in this country.
Amendment four.


We are at War with "terror" apparently. The Military are sworn to protect foreign and domestic. Let's see someone logically prove that this was somehow out of bounds or oppressive.

I don't agree that the police had "probable cause" to force that many people out of their home, at gunpoint. But even with the warrant issue aside...

What about the forced lock-down of an entire city over a single wounded 19-year-old suspect? If you don't see that as being out of bounds or overly oppressive/aggressive then I guess you and I follow completely different thinking patterns and have different tyranny tolerance levels...


.

It wasn't forced.

It was voluntary.

I saw the press conference myself where the mayor and governor asked people to "voluntarily" (word WAS used) stay in their homes.

My sister lives there.


Thousands of people swarmed out of their houses anytime the action rose back up. They were not shot or arrested or directed back home. They were told to stand outside the boundary of the developing scene.

 

[paulitician]

Just a test-run preparing for when the unrest begins. An ominous dark cloud hangs over our Country. You can feel the pot simmering and about to boil over. We cannot sustain this Welfare/Warfare State. The Bills will be due at some point. And that's when our terrible problems begin.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The simple fact is that this happened because it could happen. The fact that this was thrown out as terrorism and blown completely out of proportion meant that the government could do this because the people would go along with it. Never mind the fact that this was a single criminal who was on everybody's radar and showed that he wasn't looking to kill people unnecessarily, as opposed to, say, a mysterious and unknown serial killer.

They could do it, so they did it. Eventually they're hoping it will become normalized and they'll be able to do it more often.

It has been normalized. USA!! USA!!
Chanted teh crowd as the police captured the suspect after a citizen tipped them off.

People love the state and there is no going back. Citizens will gladly give up every single last right they have in the name of security these days, and with history as any indicator (which, it most certainly is) we know exactly where this leads.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The simple fact is that this happened because it could happen. The fact that this was thrown out as terrorism and blown completely out of proportion meant that the government could do this because the people would go along with it. Never mind the fact that this was a single criminal who was on everybody's radar and showed that he wasn't looking to kill people unnecessarily, as opposed to, say, a mysterious and unknown serial killer.

They could do it, so they did it. Eventually they're hoping it will become normalized and they'll be able to do it more often.

It has been normalized. USA!! USA!!
Chanted teh crowd as the police captured the suspect after a citizen tipped them off.

People love the state and there is no going back. Citizens will gladly give up every single last right they have in the name of security these days, and with history as any indicator (which, it most certainly is) we know exactly where this leads.

Stockholm syndrome is alive and well.

 

[KevinWestern]

Warrantless searches with probable cause have always been legal in this country.
Amendment four.


We are at War with "terror" apparently. The Military are sworn to protect foreign and domestic. Let's see someone logically prove that this was somehow out of bounds or oppressive.

I don't agree that the police had "probable cause" to force that many people out of their home, at gunpoint. But even with the warrant issue aside...

What about the forced lock-down of an entire city over a single wounded 19-year-old suspect? If you don't see that as being out of bounds or overly oppressive/aggressive then I guess you and I follow completely different thinking patterns and have different tyranny tolerance levels...


.

It wasn't forced.

It was voluntary.

I saw the press conference myself where the mayor and governor asked people to "voluntarily" (word WAS used) stay in their homes.

My sister lives there.


Thousands of people swarmed out of their houses anytime the action rose back up. They were not shot or arrested or directed back home. They were told to stand outside the boundary of the developing scene.

How about instead of basing our assumptions on stories from your sister (I'm not saying she's not credible, I just have no way of verifying), we focus instead on some primary source evidence:



Does these citizens look like they have a choice to comply?


.

 

[G.T.]

I didn't see not a single right forfeited during what happened in Boston. Not one.

The area was quarantined and they not only had probable, but definitive cause to think he was in one of the households.

People were not forced to stay inside of their homes, either. That was a request, to do so voluntarily. Many didn't even comply.

I guarantee that if you think about things past the knee jerk "ohhh we will be violently oppressed" meme all of the time, you wouldn't LIVE feeling so persecuted and can enjoy life much greater on a PERSONAL level rather than dying having cried about shit on the internetz to no real effect.

Admit it's just a hobby, or go on out and be real about it.

 

[paulitician]

The simple fact is that this happened because it could happen. The fact that this was thrown out as terrorism and blown completely out of proportion meant that the government could do this because the people would go along with it. Never mind the fact that this was a single criminal who was on everybody's radar and showed that he wasn't looking to kill people unnecessarily, as opposed to, say, a mysterious and unknown serial killer.

They could do it, so they did it. Eventually they're hoping it will become normalized and they'll be able to do it more often.

It has been normalized. USA!! USA!!
Chanted teh crowd as the police captured the suspect after a citizen tipped them off.

People love the state and there is no going back. Citizens will gladly give up every single last right they have in the name of security these days, and with history as any indicator (which, it most certainly is) we know exactly where this leads.

Yes, that was very embarrassing. It looked like one of those lame State-Organized pep rallies you see in Totalitarian Nations around the World. So sad.

 

[G.T.]

I don't agree that the police had "probable cause" to force that many people out of their home, at gunpoint. But even with the warrant issue aside...

What about the forced lock-down of an entire city over a single wounded 19-year-old suspect? If you don't see that as being out of bounds or overly oppressive/aggressive then I guess you and I follow completely different thinking patterns and have different tyranny tolerance levels...


.

It wasn't forced.

It was voluntary.

I saw the press conference myself where the mayor and governor asked people to "voluntarily" (word WAS used) stay in their homes.

My sister lives there.


Thousands of people swarmed out of their houses anytime the action rose back up. They were not shot or arrested or directed back home. They were told to stand outside the boundary of the developing scene.

How about instead of basing our assumptions on stories from your sister, we focus instead on some primary source evidence:

[ame=http://youtu.be/2LrbsUVSVl8]Police perform house-to-house raids in Watertown MA ripping innocent families from their homes - YouTube[/ame]

Does these citizens look like they have a choice to comply?


.

That video has nothing to do with the request to stay in homes - dolt.

That video was a search, I did not say the searches were voluntary. Get your head out of your ass and join the actual conversation.


The staying-in-your-homes request was VOLUNTARY, according to the mayor and governor, NOT my sister. My sister is a corroboration of what I witnessed with my own eyes.