decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Boston Bomber Captured - World Cheers - Many Cherished Rights Suspended - What Price Freedom? | 116 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Boston Bomber Captured - World Cheers - Many Cherished Rights Suspended - What Price Freedom?
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 20 2013 @ 07:05 PM EDT
Who fired most of the 200 rounds?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Boston Bomber Captured - World Cheers - Many Cherished Rights Suspended - What Price Freedom?
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 20 2013 @ 07:59 PM EDT
While I do not agree that no rights are absolute, I do believe that no rights
violated by the lockdown and searches are. I do believe however that these
rights where violated without anywhere near sufficient cause, and that this is a
case where the police crossed the line by a very large distance.

Your argument using the amount of bullets fired and an improvised bomb being
thrown is plain wrong in my opinion for two reasons, the first being as pointed
out in another response to you, those 200 bullets were almost entirely fired by
police, not the suspects. The second being the suspects were defending
themselves, as is their right (an absolute right in my opinion), and not
engaging the police aggressively (from what I know).

Your underlying argument that it was for the peoples protection is also highly
flawed in many ways in my opinion. People have the right to do many things such
as travel freely, congregate/assemble, ect. and those rights were violated by
the lock down, there is however no duty to remain safe, there is no cause for
violating their rights therefore, so while it would be appropriate to warn
people of the terrorist in the area, threatening anyone who tried to go outside
until they returned inside (with how it might escalate being unclear as no one
tested it but as they have assault rifles all over...) is a clear violation of
their rights. Further, as donut shop workers (and to my knowledge ONLY donut
shop workers) were encouraged to still go to work (to feed the police....
because donuts are the best food to work on) there is clear evidence that at the
time the police knew that they were over-reacting, either that or they were
encouraging civilians to put themselves into highly dangerous situations, either
of which, shows a highly immoral decision (in my opinion).

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )