so what's the big difference here?

S

SmarterthanYou

rebel
so many people were highly supportive of suspending the bill of rights in the manhunt and lockdown for the boston marathon bomber suspect. the media broadcast all kinds of video and pictures of the 9,000 some cops and national guard members with their armored vehicles and machine guns as they did door to door warrantless searches for the 'bomber'...

So why does this article refer to a manhunt, but there's nothing in the way of an identical response from the media or the population at large?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/3...n-edge-as-police-hunt-killer-8-year-old-girl/
A tight-knit Northern California community is on virtual lockdown as police search for a man who stabbed an 8-year-old girl to death in an apparent random killing in her home.

Sheriff's officials said Monday that investigators have collected fingerprints and what they believe is DNA from the home where Leila Fowler was stabbed to death, but haven't identified any suspects yet.

Leila's killing sparked a massive weekend manhunt, with authorities conducting a door-to-door search for the man, checking storage sheds and horse stables, and even searching attics.
Click to expand...

is the death of an 8 year old child not as important as a cop dying in a gunfight?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
so many people were highly supportive of suspending the bill of rights in the manhunt and lockdown for the boston marathon bomber suspect. the media broadcast all kinds of video and pictures of the 9,000 some cops and national guard members with their armored vehicles and machine guns as they did door to door warrantless searches for the 'bomber'...

So why does this article refer to a manhunt, but there's nothing in the way of an identical response from the media or the population at large?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/3...n-edge-as-police-hunt-killer-8-year-old-girl/


is the death of an 8 year old child not as important as a cop dying in a gunfight?
Click to expand...

Strawman....Sorry dude....apples and Oranges. The "Manhunt" in Boston was related to an act of terrorism that killed three, crippled scores and wounded hundreds. Which makes it a Federal Crime...Then they killed a cop on top of it.

The California crime is a State/local crime and there is no jurisdiction for a Federal Response.

But I do notice that your outrage of doing home to home searches isn't apparent in the California case....why is that?
 
Steelplate said:
Strawman....Sorry dude....apples and Oranges. The "Manhunt" in Boston was related to an act of terrorism that killed three, crippled scores and wounded hundreds. Which makes it a Federal Crime...Then they killed a cop on top of it.

The California crime is a State/local crime and there is no jurisdiction for a Federal Response.
Click to expand...
so you're 'logic' is that a federal crime allows the feds to override the constitution, but a simple state crime doesn't rise to that level?

Steelplate said:
But I do notice that your outrage of doing home to home searches isn't apparent in the California case....why is that?
Click to expand...
you don't notice it because you apparently weren't reading my words. I'm questioning one thing, which COULD lead to something else to question, and that is the lack of media coverage first and foremost. One would think that a massive manhunt with house to house searches would garner some media exposure.....but I guess that an 8 year olds murder isn't as sensational as a bombing or that now that house to house warrantless searches have been validated by an apathetic public, that they just don't matter anymore.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
you don't notice it because you apparently weren't reading my words. I'm questioning one thing, which COULD lead to something else to question, and that is the lack of media coverage first and foremost. One would think that a massive manhunt with house to house searches would garner some media exposure.....but I guess that an 8 year olds murder isn't as sensational as a bombing or that now that house to house warrantless searches have been validated by an apathetic public, that they just don't matter anymore.
Click to expand...

So your wondering why there is more media coverage of the active pursuit of terrorists who bombed a major athletic event in a major east cost city and which involved the murder of a cop and a shoot out on a city street (which involved IEDs) than there is for a search for a guy who stabbed an 8 year old in a small town in northern California and one of your working hypotheses is that the media doesn't care because house to house warrantless searches have been validated by an apathetic public?

Bats.
 
Last edited:
SmarterthanYou said:
so you're 'logic' is that a federal crime allows the feds to override the constitution, but a simple state crime doesn't rise to that level?

you don't notice it because you apparently weren't reading my words. I'm questioning one thing, which COULD lead to something else to question, and that is the lack of media coverage first and foremost. One would think that a massive manhunt with house to house searches would garner some media exposure.....but I guess that an 8 year olds murder isn't as sensational as a bombing or that now that house to house warrantless searches have been validated by an apathetic public, that they just don't matter anymore.
Click to expand...

So....you're telling me that house to house searches for fugitives of justice is a new thing?

Let me ask you something....unless you are harboring the said fugitive, what skin is it off your nose? What? You're worried that they'll stumble upon your meth lab?
 
Steelplate said:
Didn't want to answer....telling, eh Heisenberg?
Click to expand...
why answer the question? you've made it clear that in the face of danger, you'll wuss out and surrender not only your rights, but everyone elses as well, just so you can feel safer that terrorists are being caught, 4th Amendment be damned. Darla is laughing about it and Dung approves of surrendering rights as well.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
why answer the question? you've made it clear that in the face of danger, you'll wuss out and surrender not only your rights, but everyone elses as well, just so you can feel safer that terrorists are being caught, 4th Amendment be damned. Darla is laughing about it and Dung approves of surrendering rights as well.
Click to expand...

So....it is meth then...

Only a fool would consider a manhunt a violation of rights.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
so many people were highly supportive of suspending the bill of rights in the manhunt and lockdown for the boston marathon bomber suspect. the media broadcast all kinds of video and pictures of the 9,000 some cops and national guard members with their armored vehicles and machine guns as they did door to door warrantless searches for the 'bomber'...

So why does this article refer to a manhunt, but there's nothing in the way of an identical response from the media or the population at large?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/3...n-edge-as-police-hunt-killer-8-year-old-girl/


is the death of an 8 year old child not as important as a cop dying in a gunfight?
Click to expand...

It's a false comparison...door to door searches were done in both examples...so...tell us Carnak....what is your point.
 
Steelplate said:
It's a false comparison...door to door searches were done in both examples...so...tell us Carnak....what is your point.
Click to expand...
1) that the lamestream media doesn't seem very concerned about this particular manhunt even though police are still supposedly doing door to door warrantless searches
2) that you people still seemed to have apathetically and nonchalantly accepted the government barging in to your homes for just about any reason they can justify if it makes you feel safer.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
1) that the lamestream media doesn't seem very concerned about this particular manhunt even though police are still supposedly doing door to door warrantless searches
2) that you people still seemed to have apathetically and nonchalantly accepted the government barging in to your homes for just about any reason they can justify if it makes you feel safer.
Click to expand...

1) you lie...I've seen the case being broadcast multiple times on many channels

2) if this dangerous person broke into your basement or an out building, you might not even know it. So...why do you want to harbor criminals?
 
Chapel The Evergreen said:
If you have reason to believe he's in my house, why is a warrant so hard to get?
Click to expand...

First off...to get a warrant, you need just cause.... second, you have to go in front if a judge...third....no one is doing this thinking you are harboring someone intentionally.... they are doing it thinking he may be in your home or on your property without you knowing it. And in the case of the Boston bomber...he was in someone's property....outside the perimeter they had established...but on someone's property and in someone's property.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top