Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 286

Thread: RGIII speaks out against Jason Collins

  1. #201
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,999
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainejet View Post
    NONSENSE. You are choosing to ignore the precedent set by the supreme court. They can and have held criminals as enemy combatants in the past. The precedent is there.

    This to say nothing about how much good this could/would have done for the safety of the country. This is also a new world we are in. Terror attacks come from everywhere including american citizens as the Tsarnaev brothers demonstrated just a few weeks ago.
    Do you think terrorism by American citizens is "new".?

  2. #202
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,999
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Savage69 View Post
    I can't stand tweets of any variety.. Just a thought but is a player wrong for feeling strange if he knows the Gay guy next to him in the shower is checking out his butt??(No Sanchez jokes please) If there is nothing wrong then lets have coed locker rooms for straight people..
    Lets be real. Your butt isn't so hot.

  3. #203
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3,016
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Savage69 View Post
    +1 First thought I had as well..
    Funny. Mine too.

  4. #204
    All Pro
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    5,174
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    Do you think terrorism by American citizens is "new".?
    Meet the new world, same as the old world . . . .


    The Bath School disaster is the historical name of the violent attacks perpetrated by Andrew Kehoe on May 18, 1927 in Bath Township, Michigan that killed 38 elementary school children and six adults in total, and injured at least 58 other people. Kehoe first killed his wife, fire-bombed his farm and set off a major explosion in the Bath Consolidated School, before committing suicide by detonating a final explosion in his truck. It is the deadliest mass murder in a school in United States history.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

  5. #205
    All League
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cape Cod, MA
    Posts
    3,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Savage69;4884371]
    Quote Originally Posted by GuidoYaztremski View Post

    I know but it's a joke between me and my dead uncle..
    The more vague the reference, the funnier the joke. Well done.
    Last edited by stanner; 05-02-2013 at 08:25 PM.

  6. #206
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    13,228
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    Do you think terrorism by American citizens is "new".?
    Your full of questions, but certainly no answers.

    That's obviously a dumb question. But it is new in the sense that our country has always provided legal means for immigrants to enter this country. You never know what happens after that. In a changing world, you need to provide tighter security because of the rest of us is at stake.

  7. #207
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    13,228
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by long island leprechaun View Post
    Whole other issue. Imminent danger of further attacks takes precedence. But whatever he stated prior to Miranda Rights could not be used in court. That's the risk of this tactic. Hannity is a moron or a disingenuous lout. He knows this and he's still trying to work up an issue out of nonsense. It's really really dumb.
    Do you honestly believe this? That's a complete crock of sh*t. ANYTHING that you say can be used against you. Watch any court case where someone has been murdered and the prosecution will always introduce to the jury what the defendant has said in the past. That is a fact. It's called EVIDENCE of the accused state of mind.

    And stop talking about Hannity. I can stand on my own right, doesn't matter that Hannity was a part of one of my prior posts, I'll debate the points.

    And let me ask you the question....

    What possible harm could it have done to hold him as an enemy combatant? You tell me. I'm waiting....

  8. #208
    Waterboy
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    94
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainejet View Post
    Do you honestly believe this? That's a complete crock of sh*t. ANYTHING that you say can be used against you. Watch any court case where someone has been murdered and the prosecution will always introduce to the jury what the defendant has said in the past. That is a fact. It's called EVIDENCE of the accused state of mind.

    And stop talking about Hannity. I can stand on my own right, doesn't matter that Hannity was a part of one of my prior posts, I'll debate the points.

    And let me ask you the question....

    What possible harm could it have done to hold him as an enemy combatant? You tell me. I'm waiting....
    Innocent.

  9. #209
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    13,228
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by long island leprechaun View Post
    Not American citizens on American soil. Show me the case. There isn't one.
    The laws of war says:

    "Under the Law of War we can hold this suspect as a potential enemy combatant not entitled to Miranda warnings or the appointment of counsel. Our goal at this critical juncture should be to gather intelligence and protect our nation from further attacks."

    Is that cut and dry enough for you? What the Tsarnaev brothers did was an act of war. What part of that do you not understand?

  10. #210
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    ft lauderdale
    Posts
    1,521
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    Only where the information obtained through the violation was unlawfully used at trial.

    Oh, and Miranda rights don't protect third parties. So if I arrest you, question you without Mirandizing, and you confess that you and your brothers committed the crime, I can't use your statements against you at trial.

    Your brothers, though, are screwed.
    Not exactly true, if you are not told you have the right to an attorney while being detained and in custody, any and all statements would likely be suppressed

  11. #211
    Rookie
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    830
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainejet View Post
    Your full of questions, but certainly no answers.

    That's obviously a dumb question. But it is new in the sense that our country has always provided legal means for immigrants to enter this country. You never know what happens after that. In a changing world, you need to provide tighter security because of the rest of us is at stake.
    Our country has always provided legal means for citizens to acquire hunting rifles. You never know what happens after that. In a changing world, you need to provide tighter security because of the rest of us is at stake.

    Do you see how ridiculous your argument sounds?

  12. #212
    Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,874
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    It's war. Confusing the justice system (which is there to address crimes) and the rules of war (which address combat) isn't useful.
    Well, see, this would be where we disagree Mr. Cheney.

    Terrorism carried out by individuals not authorized by and acting for a Nation State is not War.

    It's crime.

    But if you, like your good friend Mr. Bush, see it as War, and treat it like War, and demand everyone else call it War.....whelp, it's still not War.

    It's still crime.

    There is no "War" on Terrorism. There is no "War" of Drugs.

    Better luck with that shotgun next time you're out hunting Mr. Vice President. Glad that whole heart thing worked out for you.

  13. #213
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,999
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainejet View Post
    Your full of questions, but certainly no answers.

    That's obviously a dumb question. But it is new in the sense that our country has always provided legal means for immigrants to enter this country. You never know what happens after that. In a changing world, you need to provide tighter security because of the rest of us is at stake.
    yes, agreed, the rest of us is at stake.

  14. #214
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    greenwich village, NYC
    Posts
    8,126
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainejet View Post
    The laws of war says:

    "Under the Law of War we can hold this suspect as a potential enemy combatant not entitled to Miranda warnings or the appointment of counsel. Our goal at this critical juncture should be to gather intelligence and protect our nation from further attacks."

    Is that cut and dry enough for you? What the Tsarnaev brothers did was an act of war. What part of that do you not understand?
    They withheld Miranda due to a public safety exception. Now show me where anyone actually involved in this case has declared Tsarnaev to be an enemy combatant or his actions "an act of war." If they really believed that, he'd be in Gitmo. Now you're just making stuff up.

  15. #215
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    greenwich village, NYC
    Posts
    8,126
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainejet View Post
    Do you honestly believe this? That's a complete crock of sh*t. ANYTHING that you say can be used against you. Watch any court case where someone has been murdered and the prosecution will always introduce to the jury what the defendant has said in the past. That is a fact. It's called EVIDENCE of the accused state of mind.

    And stop talking about Hannity. I can stand on my own right, doesn't matter that Hannity was a part of one of my prior posts, I'll debate the points.

    And let me ask you the question....

    What possible harm could it have done to hold him as an enemy combatant? You tell me. I'm waiting....
    Perhaps I should have said the obvious... "what he said to authorities..." and no they can't use statements he makes to authorities unless he waives his Miranda rights. He was not offered his rights and had nothing to waive. As soon as they did read him his rights, he clammed up. Now why would he do that? Because he seems to know the law better than you do. Re the last point, I think it's already been said. Regardless of how damning the case appears against him Tsarnaev is stlll innocent until proven guilty. That's his right as a citizen. You mess with that concept and the core of our Bill of Rights goes down the tubes.
    Last edited by long island leprechaun; 05-02-2013 at 10:43 PM.

  16. #216
    All League
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cape Cod, MA
    Posts
    3,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by bcess View Post
    Not exactly true, if you are not told you have the right to an attorney while being detained and in custody, any and all statements would likely be suppressed
    Custody + guilt seeking questions trigger Miranda. Spontaneous statements or responses to benign conversation are all good.

  17. #217
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    13,228
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanchez 3:16 View Post
    Our country has always provided legal means for citizens to acquire hunting rifles. You never know what happens after that. In a changing world, you need to provide tighter security because of the rest of us is at stake.

    Do you see how ridiculous your argument sounds?
    When it comes to islamic extremism, NO, I do not see anything ridiculous. And I've got a PRIME example of what I'm talking about that happened just TWO weeks ago. Or maybe you just don't watch the news?

    You are clearly the one who is ridiculous because you'd rather live in a politically correct world that's gone beyond stupidity.
    Last edited by Mainejet; 05-03-2013 at 06:36 AM.

  18. #218
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,326
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by bcess View Post
    Not exactly true, if you are not told you have the right to an attorney while being detained and in custody, any and all statements would likely be suppressed
    I believe that's incorrect. Your statement could be used against a third party.

  19. #219
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    13,228
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by long island leprechaun View Post
    They withheld Miranda due to a public safety exception. Now show me where anyone actually involved in this case has declared Tsarnaev to be an enemy combatant or his actions "an act of war." If they really believed that, he'd be in Gitmo. Now you're just making stuff up.
    Oh, it's a public safety exception.

    In other words, if you're a democrat, which you obviously are, you can do whatever you want and that's fine. Regardless, of whether it flies in the face of the constitution, puts more american lives at stake, or anything else? Right?

    And obviously you believe in things like democrats exempting themselves from the laws they pass, right? In other words, socialism is for the people, NOT for the socialist?

    I'm making stuff up, ugh? It's just me here, making up this sh*t when I just showed you that many people on the right wanted to hold him as an enemy combatant. In other words, THEY thought his actions comprised an act of war. But yet it's just me, ugh? That makes a whole lot of sense.

    And who might be the "THEY" you are talking about? You mean DEMOCRATS and our president, right? Because it certainly wasn't any common sense thinking people.

    The answer to the question that I posed to you, and you refused to answer, is it would absolutely do no harm in holding Tsarnaev as an enemy combatant for intelligence gathering purposes, then, once we are done interrogating him, mirandize him and try him in federal court.

    But yet you feel the need to argue other points and not answer the question, right? That's typical of the left.

    I think our president sucks and has done a sh*tty job, so are going to call me a racist now? That would be your typical next move and I've seen it over and over again. Because I think the president is a useless socialist, you cannot come back with any good points of argument, so you resort to saying that I am a racist.

  20. #220
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    13,228
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by bcess View Post
    Not exactly true, if you are not told you have the right to an attorney while being detained and in custody, any and all statements would likely be suppressed
    That's also not true. If the accused has not asked for an attorney at that juncture, ANYTHING that you choose to say, at any time, CAN be used against you.

    I mean if everything we say can be suppressed after getting your miranda rights, why do they tell their clients not to speak to anyone besides counsel?

    ANYTHING that you choose to open your mouth and say before or after being mirandized CAN and WILL be used against you in a court of law.

    your words are ONLY suppressed if you ask for an attorney, that's it.
    Last edited by Mainejet; 05-03-2013 at 07:16 AM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us