WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to but not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.
Looking at this from the question of marshal law. They had 10,000 people looking for one and spent all day trying to find him and he wan't even in the area they had blocked off. If the folks that called it in no telling how long it would have took. Multiply that across the county with all the rural areas. I just don't see if being that effective, short of bring in massive numbers of troops ( most likely forigen since I don't think our troops would back it for an extended period).
Wow I gotta disagree
“Shelter in Place” is a statement that is used by Red Cross, Homeland Security and other Public Authorities. (Changed due to further research)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelter_in_place
It means all but first responders and medical personnel, must stay at home until an all-clear signal is given.
This has been done by Boston 2 times one for a large snow storm and the latest event.
The way I see it is if the people are asked to remain indoors until a certain result is accomplished.
Wait a minute this is a free country right? Should we hunker down and wait until we are given the ok?
Ok this is not a true Marshall Law... but it seems that a free people are expected to become more compliant.
Any society that gives up a little freedom for a little security deserves neither and loses both – Benjamin Franklin
Ok, I think we need to all remember a few things (or get everyone on the same page in the first place) about Miranda.
I'm not a LEO, nor am I an attorney but this is something I've looked into as I do have LEOs in my family. Miranda, although commonly referred to as a "right", is nothing of the sort. It is a warning and a notification to a suspect in custody of their 5th and 6th Amendment rights (those are the rights).
Officers can, if the situation calls for it, decline to offer the Miranda warning and question or interrogate the suspect and even act on anything that they learn. What they cannot do is a) use anything they learn during that time as evidence against the suspect in court, b) use anything they learn _because_ of anything they learned as evidence against the suspect in court, or c) use anything they learn during this set of questioning as the basis for future questioning after the Miranda warning has been given.
The exemption we are discussing now goes one step further and allows the investigators to ask VERY specific questions that are related to, in this case National Security, without informing (or reminding) the suspect in custody of his 5th and 6th Amendment rights (via Miranda) but still use any information they obtain in court to incriminate him.
Miranda is just to make sure the suspect knows and remembers that they have rights during a stressful time and to make sure that LEOs and investigators don't get too over zealous.
Bookmarks