Yikes- 2 bombs exploded at the Boston Marathon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zoebird

but, is anyone else concerned about the martial-law look of boston in photos? and searches of homes without warrants (just going door to door and searching?). Of course, people can permit police to search their homes, which circumvents this -- but what if someone refused? then what? a shoot-out at their home? harassment? going to get a warrant?

I look at it and go "wow, americans are getting increasingly comfortable with a police state."

and that freaks me out.

and I don't even think that Alex Jones is completely on his rocker (i don't think he's completely off, either).

---

I don't think we are any more of a police state then we've ever been. Law enforcement has always been able to search a home - or car, boat, RV, person - without warrant as long as there is probable cause and they can't wait for a warrant. And the determination of probable cause is left up to the discretion of the officers on scene. So technically they can - and always have been - able to do searches even without warrants and even by force. Now what happens at trial with any arrests or evidence is A different story.

Fortunately, thanks to the original Miranda ruling and thousands of media references, I don't believe there is anyone left in this country who doesn't know "You have a right to remain silent..."

Yeah, by not issuing the suspect his Miranda rights you are actually protecting the suspect since whatever he says can,t usually be used in court. There are exceptions but in general Miranda-ising someone asap is a greater benefit to law enforcement than the suspect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by creaker

Me too. Rights aren't worth much if you can have them when you don't need them but they can be taken away whenever it's expedient.

---

Me too. But there are so many more - different - charges that can be brought to bear using military law rather than in the civilian codes. And since this guy isn't a citizen and may well be part of an international organized militant terror group, then I can see where using the military Justice codes or Geneva Convention rules may work better. Of course time will tell if he is just a disaffected radical youth or part of something larger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartana

Me too. But there are so many more - different - charges that can be brought to bear using the UCMJ rather than in the civil codes. And since this guy isn't a citizen and may well be part of an international organized militant terror group, then I can see where using the military Justice codes may work better. Of course time will tell if he is just a disaffected radical youth or part of something larger.

---

Wait--he's not a citizen? I've missed this in the endless media chatter.

He is a citizen. It was the older brother who wasn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore

He is a citizen. It was the older brother who wasn't.

---

My bad. Had heard they were both here on legal greencards as were the parents before they returned to Russia. How did he become a citizen? Although, even as a citizen he could be subjected to military law/Geneva Convention rules - if it's proven he was part of an international terror group. He also would still be subject to civilian law - both Fed and State - afterwards. The military justice system does follow procedural laws of due process but they can often be different in structure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogar

NPR had an interview with a former attorney general who gave a perspective on the Miranda rights. "The Miranda warning, which informs suspects of their rights, including the right to remain silent and to have legal counsel, is being withheld from Tsarnaev for now under the public safety exception, which U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts Carmen Ortiz has said officials are invoking due to an immediate threat to the public."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/...-the-right-one

I also under stand that there is still some debate about whether the trial will be military or civilian, which will make a difference.

---

That's a relief to me. I think part of the reason we have so much violence here is that we have too permissive of a society. I've worked in Japan, throughout Europe, and all over the US. They don't play in Germany. Officers are on the trains checking your passport. If you don't have one, they put you in jail. There's much more of an authoritive approach to foreigners there. I think America has been foolish and naive. I feel we could learn a lot from other countries with strict borders and boundaries.

A friend of mine who is English says that she thinks Russian people perceive freedom as being able to do anything they want. We studied Russian ballet together, and I left because of the opressiveness in that culture. Dictatorships really affect people. We tend to mirror our government when we travel and live somewhere else. It's in our subconscious. When I worked as an asst. director in Berlin, I ran rehearsals in a democratic way. They don't respond to that. It confused them. They are comfortable with a socialist atmosophere at work. Realizing this, I went home.

I believe part of the reason we have so much violence here is because people clash. Even family members clash and fight. Integration doesn't always work. It's hard to be around people that want to force you to see things their way. (Especially religious fanatics.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartana

My bad. Had heard they were both here on legal greencards as were the parents before they returned to Russia. How did he become a citizen? Although, even as a citizen he could be subjected to the UCMJ - military law - if it's proven he was part of an international terror group. He also would still be subject to civilian law - both Fed and State - afterwards. The military justice system does follow procedural laws of due process but they can often be different in structure.

---

I think he just went through the normal process of becoming a naturalized citizen. I've heard today he will be tried in civilian court, which I think is appropriate.

"(Especially religious fanatics.) "

I think that's the salient point.