0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I feel safe knowing that 'freak42 is on the case.
in the end, EMAW will always win.
Thoughts on this violation of the United States Constitution?
Quote from: kstatefreak42 on July 05, 2013, 01:12:12 PMThoughts on this violation of the United States Constitution?How would it be un-Constitutional?
Quote from: Shacks on July 05, 2013, 07:32:04 PMQuote from: kstatefreak42 on July 05, 2013, 01:12:12 PMThoughts on this violation of the United States Constitution?How would it be un-Constitutional?
Sometimes Infowars is pretty much spot on, but many other times they take little smidgens of a story and blow it up way out of proportion, and this was one story I didn't buy at all from the start. Many of their other stories about DHS (for example) have been spot on . . . watching DHS fumble and stumble around about why they needed to purchase millions upon millions of rounds of ammunition was hilarious but scary. Infowars has been all over the militarization of the domestic police forces and the growing co-mingling of the U.S. military and domestic law enforcement, as well the growing number of DHS operated Internal Checkpoints.
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting
Quote from: scottwildcat on July 05, 2013, 09:05:42 PMQuote from: Shacks on July 05, 2013, 07:32:04 PMQuote from: kstatefreak42 on July 05, 2013, 01:12:12 PMThoughts on this violation of the United States Constitution?How would it be un-Constitutional? I hear the term "un-Constitutional" used a lot to describe things. I'd just like to know why exactly this scenario violates the Constitution.
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on July 06, 2013, 09:24:13 AMSometimes Infowars is pretty much spot on, but many other times they take little smidgens of a story and blow it up way out of proportion, and this was one story I didn't buy at all from the start. Many of their other stories about DHS (for example) have been spot on . . . watching DHS fumble and stumble around about why they needed to purchase millions upon millions of rounds of ammunition was hilarious but scary. Infowars has been all over the militarization of the domestic police forces and the growing co-mingling of the U.S. military and domestic law enforcement, as well the growing number of DHS operated Internal Checkpoints.You clearly have no grasp on the facts of these situations than. Also the checkpoints aren't really DHS, but rather CBP. Furthermore, when people complain about police 'militarization' it shows the complete lack of knowledge for the challenges law enforcement faces and what the military actually uses.
Yeah, weave and bop their way through posse comitatus just like the current and previous administrations and congress.
It figures the indoctrinated too cool for schoolers wouldn't think think it was a big deal. I mean a couple of guys with pressure cooker bombs brought a whole major city to a standstill, so you better conduct those 7 figure drills with Blackhawks dropping special forces on to roof tops at 3 am. You just never know when the Islamic Fundamentalist version of Hans Gruber is gonna try and still a few billion dollars worth of Bearer Bonds.
The lines between the military and civilian law enforcement have become extremely blurred. Thankfully the absurd change to the insurrection act in 2006 was put back into the bottle in 2008. However NDAA 2012 has possible significant implications in terms of the use of the U.S. military in domestic operations, particularly in the areas of indefinite detention and the ability of the federal gov't (the executive branch) to deem an individual(s) enemy combatants. It has the potential to be an extremely slippery slope.
Seems like the military and police could learn from each other. Maybe swap some "pro tips".
