Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 04-21-2013, 8:40 PM
urbancommando urbancommando is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 879
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

He took the oath to become an americqn citizen under false pretense and therefore the oath is null in void i highly doubt that within the past few months since his swearing in he suddenly decided to blow up an 8 year old. He is a red herring and so his claim to US citizenship is void.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 04-21-2013, 8:42 PM
urbancommando urbancommando is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 879
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/usc...00b92ca60aRCRD

Here is the oath he took, take particular attention to the last line..
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 04-21-2013, 8:59 PM
Kolo589 Kolo589 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 296
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbancommando View Post
He took the oath to become an americqn citizen under false pretense and therefore the oath is null in void i highly doubt that within the past few months since his swearing in he suddenly decided to blow up an 8 year old. He is a red herring and so his claim to US citizenship is void.
Nothing he did required him to be a US Citizen. Why go through that entire process, background checks, paperwork, and years of waiting... just so you can commit an act of terror?
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 04-22-2013, 4:45 PM
xrayoneone xrayoneone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 360
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolo589 View Post
Nothing he did required him to be a US Citizen. Why go through that entire process, background checks, paperwork, and years of waiting... just so you can commit an act of terror?
You ask why and they ask why not. He's a terrorist f him.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 04-22-2013, 6:39 PM
ja308 ja308 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,049
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Sad part is he could be teaching at the University of Chicago and lecturing about education in say 20 plus years ! If in fact he is guilty ,which so far legally he is not .

It would not be the 1st time a murdering terrorist was later forgiven and embraced by big education !

As for Miranda , a person too lazy or stupid to understand the 5 th amendment should not be informed of it at time of arrest !
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 04-22-2013, 7:11 PM
vc_emt's Avatar
vc_emt vc_emt is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I'm not sure that some of you are aware of how miranda rights work... If they have enough physical evidence and or eye witness testimony to convict him without even being interrogated they do not need to read him anything. Yes they can ask him all they want without them reading his miranda rights but none of that will be admissible in court, but as I stated earlier with sufficient evidence for the latter it does not matte to them. Anything after his miranda rights are read can be used in court, anything before CAN be asked but cannot be presented against him during his trial. If they are just seeking information from him (are there others involved etc) he will be much more willing to tell them knowing that it cannot be used against him in court.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 04-22-2013, 8:01 PM
fd15k fd15k is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,044
iTrader: 59 / 100%
Default

I've been on this board for a few year now. I spent countless hours here while residing in California, then once I moved to Oregon I kept on coming here for valuable information on laws, politics and other firearms related stuff.

This firearms community is invaluable (at least to me) mainly for two reasons. First, it represents the largest state by population, and maybe even by absolute number of gun owners. Second, it is the home to the group of individuals who are the one of the most important forces in the nation fighting the gun rights (civil rights).

Now one thing that gets me every single time in here, in the political section, is that whenever there is a thread on some government, perhaps even "leftist" conspiracy being suspected, never I see any comments from that group of individuals. I say you guys take a minute, and think why it could be the case
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 04-22-2013, 9:46 PM
Patrick Aherne Patrick Aherne is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SF Bay Area - Peninsula
Posts: 1,046
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

So, take all your tinfoil off, he was arraigned to day in front of a magistrate.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 04-22-2013, 9:47 PM
five.five-six's Avatar
five.five-six five.five-six is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 28,359
iTrader: 52 / 100%
Default

Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 04-22-2013, 9:58 PM
Kolo589 Kolo589 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 296
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vc_emt View Post
I'm not sure that some of you are aware of how miranda rights work... If they have enough physical evidence and or eye witness testimony to convict him without even being interrogated they do not need to read him anything. Yes they can ask him all they want without them reading his miranda rights but none of that will be admissible in court, but as I stated earlier with sufficient evidence for the latter it does not matte to them. Anything after his miranda rights are read can be used in court, anything before CAN be asked but cannot be presented against him during his trial. If they are just seeking information from him (are there others involved etc) he will be much more willing to tell them knowing that it cannot be used against him in court.
So this has been repeated several times in this thread (and the other thread in OT)... I've tried, in previous posts, to clarify the issue. Here it goes again:

Everything you've stated is technically correct, but it doesn't accurately represent the situation. Right now he has been Mirandized, so this entire argument is moot, but here's the problem with what happened:

It's not the fact that they didn't Mirandize him that's the issue. That happens all the time and there's seemingly plenty of sufficient evidence to still get a solid conviction. What happened was they didn't Mirandize him claiming the Public Safety Exception which means all the testimony that he gives is still admissible in court. It's the expansion of the Public Safety Exception for use in Terrorism cases by the FBI in 2010 that causes concern for those that take issue with what's happened.

If the FBI or Police want to question him right when he's taken in to custody to make sure there aren't any other unexploded devices in the area, I have no issue with that. That would clearly fall under the Public Safety Exception and should still be allowed in court.

If the intelligence services want to interrogate him to get information about other possible cells or foreign involvement, I have no problem with that either, however in my opinion (and I'm just some guy on the interwebs), that line of questioning would fall outside the Public Safety Exception and should not be admissible in court.

By openly stating that they're claiming the Public Safety Exception to Mirandization and then sending in intelligence service interrogators, that leads me to believe that their questions weren't going to be limited to immediate public safety which is how the Public Safety Exception was originally intended to be used. The memo from the FBI that outlined the expanded Exception uses in terrorism cases falls outside of any judicial or legislative review... which is deeply troubling.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 04-23-2013, 8:21 AM
mud99 mud99 is offline
Make Calguns Great Again
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,077
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

This has less to do with "reading him his rights" as it does with the police wanting to question him at length about where the bombs are without him having the ability to get a lawyer.

Even if he asked for a lawyer they aren't going to give him one.

This has been one epic media reporting fail.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 2:30 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.