Boston Marathon: Is terrorism ever justified?

[scottycelt]

This "right to bear arms" is a bit of an urban myth. In 2008, the US Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment "codified a pre-existing right" and that it "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home but also stated that "the right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose".

Yes, but does that not amount in practice to much the same thing ... in other words, every gun purchased by a customer is for 'self-defense within the home'?

The Newtown mass-murderer had a vast array of weaponry including those previously purchased by his own mother, apparently.

[amateur51]

Yes, but does that not amount in practice to much the same thing ... in other words, every gun purchased by a customer is for 'self-defense within the home'?

The Newtown mass-murderer had a vast array of weaponry including those previously purchased by his own mother, apparently.

Political correctness gone mad, innit :erm::winkeye:

[Mr Pee]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22303552

[scottycelt]

Instead of getting sucked into this any further, I'm going to listen to some ... Mahler.......

Are you absolutely sure you've come to the right decision ... ? :oh:

[Bryn]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22303552

The reports surrounding this latest information do now confirm that Tsarnaev was indeed interrogated extensively before the 'Miranda' rights were applied. It is reported that the information re. Time Square was given during questioning over last weekend.

This, however, raises new questions regarding the manner of his arrest.

[remdataram]

Are you absolutely sure you've come to the right decision ... ? :oh:

I'm touched by your concern!:biggrin:

Each to their own, I was trying to swing the 'discussion' towards matters musical........ Schubert ok?

[Nick Armstrong]

I'm touched by your concern!:biggrin:

Each to their own, I was trying to swing the 'discussion' towards matters musical........ Schubert ok?

A valiant effort :ok:

Maybe Ibert's "Bostoniana" would be a topical alternative?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZrwrmrCrcs

[Mr Pee]

This, however, raises new questions regarding the manner of his arrest.

You know what? I couldn't care less about the manner of his arrest. He is in custody and no longer a danger to the public.

End of. :bubbly:

[Bryn]

You know what? I couldn't care less about the manner of his arrest. He is in custody and no longer a danger to the public.

End of. :bubbly:

No surprise there. Why would you be concerned that the original reports from the relevant authorities claimed that the surviving Tsarnaev opened fire on them, and that they returned fire. They can, after all, do no wrong. Who knows, perhaps they will find the gun he used, wrapped in a sock behind a hedge, but with no trace of his fingerprints or DNA on it?

[Mr Pee]

No surprise there. Why would you be concerned that the original reports from the relevant authorities claimed that the surviving Tsarnaev opened fire on them, and that they returned fire. They can, after all, do no wrong. Who knows, perhaps they will find the gun he used, wrapped in a sock behind a hedge, but with no trace of his fingerprints or DNA on it?

Does it matter? He'd already been involved in the bombing of civilians, the death of one police officer and the critical injury of another, and it now transpires that had he not been stopped, he was planning to bomb Times Square.

Are you surprised that there are conflicting reports about his arrest? It was a fast-moving situation, and inevitably confused.

Perhaps the real problem is that everybody expects quick, tidy, and simple explanations of operations that are none of those things.

I really couldn't care less about the fine details of how they got him. I am just thankful that they did.

[teamsaint]

it certainly was fast moving, when was the trial?

[Bryn]

it certainly was fast moving, when was the trial?

I think you will find that Pee and Scotty held it the day before the bombings.

[MrGongGong]

I think you will find that Pee and Scotty held it the day before the bombings.

Seems fine to me
all we need to do is to get the baddies to wear something that everyone can see on their clothes
then it will make the job of the police much easier and, more importantly, save a vast amount of money !

(carefully avoiding Godwin, of course :cool:)

[scottycelt]

I think you will find that Pee and Scotty held it the day before the bombings.

Desperate stuff, Bryn ...

Some here would appear to have already found the Boston area police forces "guilty" of successfully catching a suspected urban bomber (to the obvious joy and relief of the terrified residents).

A truly weird and eccentric sense of "justice", imv.

Furthermore, it is somewhat difficult to have a trial without a preceding capture of a suspect, and when the legal trial does commence I feel confident the same members will howl loudly that the trial itself is "unfair" and should be halted.:whistle:

[amateur51]

Desperate stuff, Bryn ...

Some here would appear to have already found the Boston area police forces "guilty" of successfully catching a suspected urban bomber (to the obvious joy and relief of the terrified residents).

A truly weird and eccentric sense of "justice", imv.

Furthermore, it is somewhat difficult to have a trial without a preceding capture of a suspect, and when the legal trial does commence I feel confident the same members will howl loudly that the trial itself is "unfair" and should be halted.:whistle:

Well there's been so much reckless misinformation from the authorities so far I'll be surprised if the suspect's lawyers don't pursue that route (pronounced to rhyme with "doubt") during his defence.