Dubstepforum.com

ehbrums1 wrote:they got him

they shot him or arrested him?

they have him cornered in some dude's boat in a yard

live stream of the scanner:
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/ma-rt-9-window-cam

they've been mentioning movements in the boat for the last 10 minutes now

Reverb wrote:

d-T-r wrote:

yeah it makes no sense that people would be more concerned with something that hits closer to home

People are people. Doesn't matter which imaginary lines they live between. The terror the US inflicts on many countries is of far greater magnitude than the Boston bombings. Not trying to be insensitive, just saying it's true. Wonder why people want to do shit like this to US civilians? Because we do even more sadistic stuff to theirs.

terrorists from our country and/ or wherever need to get banged

Bomb shit, get banged

??

just heard "suspect in custody" on the scanner

Hope he is in custody and alive.. Couldn't handle the shit storm of conspiracy theories that would last the next decade if both suspects turned up dead.

magma wrote:Are they waiting for Prime Time to take the second one down?

I guess so.

Reverb wrote:

d-T-r wrote:

yeah it makes no sense that people would be more concerned with something that hits closer to home

Ya dude, they're not people when they from some other place.

I can see both points. Yeah, it's bad that deaths around the world are ignored, but you're just being contrary if you don't see why people are more interested in something they feel directly threatens them, people they know, people they have shared cultural experiences and values with, in places that are a lot closer to home.

ffs, "they're not people", so what, you gonna care the same amount if my parent died as if your parent died? No, because I'm just some dude somewhere else.

NiGHTS-24 wrote:

Police Intelligence!

SCope13 wrote:

Reverb wrote:

d-T-r wrote:

yeah it makes no sense that people would be more concerned with something that hits closer to home

People are people. Doesn't matter which imaginary lines they live between. The terror the US inflicts on many countries is of far greater magnitude than the Boston bombings. Not trying to be insensitive, just saying it's true. Wonder why people want to do shit like this to US civilians? Because we do even more sadistic stuff to theirs.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/1 ... 20333.html

So no Miranda rights for the suspect. Gotta love all the hypocrites who were just crying about guns under constitutional rights arguments being completely ok with this.

He still has the rights, he's just not being made aware of them afaik

Phigure wrote:He still has the rights, he's just not being made aware of them afaik

either way, i'm not sure he's gonna be particularly bothered haha.

Phigure wrote:He still has the rights, he's just not being made aware of them afaik

No they're trying to deny them under the guise of him being "an enemy combatant". Besides Miranda rights fall under the 5th amendment, if you don't get read them you can have a case thrown out.
Essentially they're trying to make "The War on Terror" a legitimate war since they're citing cases during wartime. It's a real slippery slope.

big papi with the words of wisdom

deadly habit wrote:

Phigure wrote:He still has the rights, he's just not being made aware of them afaik

No they're trying to deny them under the guise of him being "an enemy combatant". Besides Miranda rights fall under the 5th amendment, if you don't get read them you can have a case thrown out.
Essentially they're trying to make "The War on Terror" a legitimate war since they're citing cases during wartime. It's a real slippery slope.

miranda rights are not from the 5th amendment, aside from the part about not having to bear witness against one's self. the 5th amendment doesn't say anything about having the right to an attorney, etc

i havent heard anything at all about them justifying it based on him being an enemy combatant and wartime, etc. from everything i've read, the justification they're using is a 1984 supreme court ruling that said that law enforcement doesn't have to give an individual the miranda warning when the suspect has information that's of concern to public safety, i.e. if there was possibly an outstanding threat of another bomb

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... orism.html

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will not hear his Miranda rights before the FBI questions him Friday night. He will have to remember on his own that he has a right to a lawyer, and that anything he says can be used against him in court, because the government won’t tell him. This is an extension of a rule the Justice Department wrote for the FBI—without the oversight of any court—called the “public safety exception.

i'm not saying i even agree with it, but there's a monumental difference between entirely denying him miranda rights and the protection of the 5th amendment vs simply not telling him what his rights are