I both agree and disagree.
Cops should try do de-escalate when possible, but also should not allow felonies to continue unabated and/or felons to just walk away from the violent crimes they just committed in front of officers, as they did.

Like you said, if Wesley Snipes had called out the crips and bloods (not to be racist, it's an extreme example) to protect his right to not pay taxes, the cops would almost certainly NOT have 'backed off'...I would like equal treatment across the board. They didn't back down in Waco, or Boston, or Pakistan, or Afghanistan, or Iraq....why start now to 'save lives', especially the lives of admitted traitors to the USA? (if you proclaim your readiness and willingness to fight an armed battle against the federal government that you publicly denounce, and ask others to join your armed insurgency, you ARE a traitor to the USA, period, in my opinion...look up "the whiskey rebellion" for historical context.)
EDIT: I think they should have called the national guard to restore order, since the local officers were so outmatched. A couple of heavy armored vehicles and a few hundred machine guns and/or a few attack helicopters buzzing about would have made them think twice about advancing, unlike the smattering of officers with pistols that backed away and allowed the theft (and killing) of confiscated cattle.

Some human lives need to end. :-) In this situation it's not about putting one person away, it's about upholding the rule of law, which is being publicly broken not only by one jackhole, but by all the armed 'terrorists' that have proclaimed 'war' on the federal government with him, and therefore on the USA.

It does 'blow a hole' in that 'tyrannical state' argument, but that argument was so full of holes to begin with it didn't need another to prove it wrong. He doesn't even believe in the federal 'state', so how can it be tyrannical? :-)

I'm also certain this isn't over, the first time he or his wife go to town without their private army they'll likely be going to the pokey. I also assume their accounts have been frozen (I hope so anyway) and the title to their family land has a federal lien on it. I also hope all federal welfare support for his family has dried up, along with his mail service and any other federal program(s) they take advantage of. He has no right to federal services, he's a tax cheat and felon.

How fast do you think the army/national guard would be involved if that happened in the USA? That said, if things were as bad in Oakland as they were in Mexico, I might change my stance. I don't think they're anywhere near that bad, they're just not good
I don't know about you, but between a well regulated and trained police force (ours needs better regulating and training, agreed) and a mob of random untrained angry armed strangers, I will trust the police. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. (and make no mistake, I don't trust the police much at all) That's just me.

NDAA 2007 basically overrode Posse Comitatus, even though it's overreach was repealed later. NDAA 2012 extended the definition of covered persons to include " any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities." A covered person is someone that is subject to martial law and exempt from Posse Comitatus. Of course, it's kinda hard to declare martial law on just one person which is why you saw martial law in full effect following the Boston bombing.

However, to answer your question, this was a military exercise, not US Armed Forces (with the exception for the National Guard and Coast Guard) enforcing domestic law. Of course, extrapolating from @chingalera 's tags, this exercise serves a more sinister purpose. I'll leave it up to him to expound on that.

there's a key word in my explanation (which the definition is posted in another comment); Under exigent circumstances, meaning using the excuse of "oh.. we're just looking for someone" isn't considered under that label. Also, probable cause can be used in a search without a warrant (i.e. shots reported in a building etc..).

Secondly, the entire city of Boston was on lockdown under a Public Safety measure (no martial law was called at the time), but national guard was patrolling the search area and aiding local enforcement. Anyone found on the streets walking around was instantly stopped and carded for info.

Again, the searches were not unwarranted and they were not illegal. They only searched the houses in the search area, they proceeded with by the book maneuvers. No one was mishandled in the searches from what I see in that video or any other account.

1. The 2nd Amendment calls for a WELL REGULATED MILITIA. Emphasis on WELL REGULATED. The majority of Americans are in favor of at least some form of gun control. The idea is to get the most dangerous weapons we have out there out of the hands of those most likely to misuse/abuse them. And personally, I think accountability should be factored in. Gun owners should be required to have background checks, inspections of homes with required gun safes, ammunition limits, mandatory certification in gun safety courses, with regular testing, marksman training, and insurance to cover any damage done by weapons they own. And honestly, I wouldn't mind if people were required to join their State Militia or National Guard in order to own more than a hunting rifle.

2. The Constitution was never intended to be sacrosanct. It's a living, breathing work in progress. Hell, the ink was barely dry before the Bill of Rights was introduced. We "amend" the Constitution as needed to address issues that were never foreseen by our forefathers.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'confiscation, fourth amendment, illegal, national gaurd, FEMA, test run' to 'confiscation, fourth amendment, illegal, national guard, FEMA, test run' - edited by calvados

Yeah Katrina is something no one should forget and we're not talking about what FEMA didn't do for the people there-It's what they did with the National Guard TO the people of Louisiana. Forced entry and confiscation of firearms. Illegal and criminal.

I don't see why any city would want the Olympics, especially big established cities. It seems like when it's over it all goes to shit because it costs too much to operate or there's not enough people to use it and willing to pay to make it worth operating.

And during the time of it being there and leading up to, all transportation would be overloaded, the rest of the city would experience strains on everything. And then when all the extra population leaves, you have to clean up which adds more artificial burden.

Atlanta would be the one to look to. And I haven't heard anything overly negative about it, they broke even. But overall it wasn't any huge plus to the city, aside from intangible feel-good things. And it had impacts across the country, like the National Guard being called in to help police the event and all the work they left behind when they were gone for weeks.

Can think of lots of other things a city could decide they want to do and actually create something useful and long lasting, not something they spend 4-5 years on and end up with some TV footage and memories and maybe a lot of debt.

The only point where we disagree is the actual size of government. Everything else I am in total agreement.

>> ^jimnms:

>> ^bobknight33:
I believe in a government as small and limited as possible. The corruption over the years have lead us to what we have. I would gather that more that 90% of elected official receive gains from groups for policies that don't serve the public. AS such such we can't trust our politicians to be honest I just assume a small government to limit the corruption and damage to the American people.

I agree with everything you said except the small government part. The government is supposed to work for us, but they're working for their highest contributors. Shrinking the government and limiting powers won't fix the corruption. I believe the best solution to fix the corruption is a term limit for EVERY elected office. Corporations, PACs, and super PACs would go broke trying to buy elections and politicians. Take it one step farther and only allow limited public funds for campaigns. Serving in an elected public office should be like serving in the national guard, part time and not a career.

>> ^bobknight33:

I believe in a government as small and limited as possible. The corruption over the years have lead us to what we have. I would gather that more that 90% of elected official receive gains from groups for policies that don't serve the public. AS such such we can't trust our politicians to be honest I just assume a small government to limit the corruption and damage to the American people.


I agree with everything you said except the small government part. The government is supposed to work for us, but they're working for their highest contributors. Shrinking the government and limiting powers won't fix the corruption. I believe the best solution to fix the corruption is a term limit for EVERY elected office. Corporations, PACs, and super PACs would go broke trying to buy elections and politicians. Take it one step farther and only allow limited public funds for campaigns. Serving in an elected public office should be like serving in the national guard, part time and not a career.

wrong, the boy is a thug, long wrap sheet, from trespassing, breaking an entering, robbery and drug dealing...

the boys record shows just how much a thug he is and his profile nearly proves the thug was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

actions speak louder than words, and Travon's thug wrap sheet is a mile long, the thug didn't even live in the neighborhood and had been stalking it before. And had been arrested for robbery with a weapon just 6 months prior to his getting shot.

the thug deserved it.

trespassers will be shot on sight. Zimmerman is a hero, and deserves a medal for being a true American that uses his rights and doesn't get brainwashed by political correctness or media propaganda that spins lies to turn everyone against gun users.

Hell the media and political correct movements have even spun the word militia to mean hate group nowdays. Even though I was both a member of militia and national guard.

Trayvon was and is a thug, the boy had a wrap sheet a mile long, and had already been busted for robbery with a weapon before. Case closed, only reason Zimmerman is on trial is all the political correct retards spamming.

they picked it up outta the snow....should they call in the national guard to avoid 30 seconds of waiting ... inconceivable! >> ^Legion99:

shame on them. clearly the cat was distressed. taking pleasure at watching innocent animals suffer is intolerable.

@Morganth
I titled this video, to link it to OWS, as I thought it put the current movement in perspective. When Obama calls out the national guard, we'll know where we are.

OK, above doesn't make any sense. Let me rephrase it.
By looking at where a previous anti-war movement has been, we can see how far OWS has to go.

>> ^CreamK:

These people need to to stay on course. Nonviolent protests against a violent oppression works, it just is going to be very tough on individuals. Think Gandhi, he libreated a whole country and shed no blood. But protesters need to obey the law, even when it is going to hurt.
The police once again was powerless, giving contradictive orders and finally started to create chaos. That way they can manipulate the crowds to breaking the law and then arrest you. The only thing keeping deaths out of this is the use of cameras, otherwise they would've beaten them from the start. But all it takes is one martyr and this will blow over very quickly. Then comes national guard, the army and martial laws.


I was with you until the two sentences at the end.
I would agree with this change.

"But all it takes is one martyr and this will blow up very quickly. Then comes national guard, the army and martial laws and the Occupy Movement will expand exponentially."

These people need to to stay on course. Nonviolent protests against a violent oppression works, it just is going to be very tough on individuals. Think Gandhi, he libreated a whole country and shed no blood. But protesters need to obey the law, even when it is going to hurt.

The police once again was powerless, giving contradictive orders and finally started to create chaos. That way they can manipulate the crowds to breaking the law and then arrest you. The only thing keeping deaths out of this is the use of cameras, otherwise they would've beaten them from the start. But all it takes is one martyr and this will blow over very quickly. Then comes national guard, the army and martial laws.