Thread: Supreme Court finds individual right to own guns

I am not sure what you are saying here. Are you agreeing that the terrorists, who happen to be prisoners of war and in no way are U.S. citizens, deserve the right to a fair trial by jury? If that is what you are saying I have to strongly disagree. Lets have the terrorists, or terrorist suspects, released and tried by a jury under the premise of innocent until proven guilty. The only problem with this is that right is reserved for U.S. citizens not anyone in the world. These people would be more than willing to kill us than to talk to us, remember 911, and are trying to use our political system against us so they can be released to go back to their sandbox and continue to kill American solders or oppress their own people. I am sorry to say that I do not agree that prisoners of war have the right to a fair democratic trial. In case anyone that disagrees with me has not been paying attention over the last few years, when they capture one of our soldiers, or civilians they cut their heads off with a machete and broadcast it on the news and the internet. Don’t believe me just Google it and I guarantee it will come up. That is not exactly the type of people I want to have a fair trial.

Originally Posted by Saylor1322

I am not sure what you are saying here. Are you agreeing that the terrorists, who happen to be prisoners of war and in no way are U.S. citizens, deserve the right to a fair trial by jury? If that is what you are saying I have to strongly disagree. Lets have the terrorists, or terrorist suspects, released and tried by a jury under the premise of innocent until proven guilty. The only problem with this is that right is reserved for U.S. citizens not anyone in the world. These people would be more than willing to kill us than to talk to us, remember 911, and are trying to use our political system against us so they can be released to go back to their sandbox and continue to kill American solders or oppress their own people. I am sorry to say that I do not agree that prisoners of war have the right to a fair democratic trial. In case anyone that disagrees with me has not been paying attention over the last few years, when they capture one of our soldiers, or civilians they cut their heads off with a machete and broadcast it on the news and the internet. Don’t believe me just Google it and I guarantee it will come up. That is not exactly the type of people I want to have a fair trial.

But you see here's the thing... they're suspected terrorists.

Let's say for some reason you became a suspect... boom, you're going to gitmo. Don't like it, too bad, you're not getting a chance to prove you shouldn't be a suspect.

I am not a prisoner of war and on top of that I am an American citizen. Why should we extend rights to suspected terrorists during a time of war? If you were caught in their country, not even suspected of anything just caught, you are more than likely going to die. One of the with this country, and I truly believe it started during Vietnam, is we are no longer willing to actually fight a war. Sure we say we are at war but we are not willing to do what it is going to take to win the war. I can guarantee you that if the same terrorist attack that happened on 9/11 would have happened in 1945 not only would we have waged war but we would have done it in a fashion that made sure it never happened again. If you don’t believe that just ask yourself why Japan has not attacked us since Pearl Harbor (atomic bomb x 2).

The reason we have won every war that we have won including the revolutionary war, the civil war, and even WWII was directly related to our willingness to do whatever was required to win. I know this might seem harsh but if you look at history there is no way you can survive as a people or a nation without being willing to defend your rights and stand up for what you believe in. I promise you if given the chance our opposition would not think twice about bombing our cities, killing innocent people (twin towers), and if they had the means necessary completely wiping us out. Now we have become a society that wants to protect our rights and have a free country, but lets also make sure that we don’t offend anyone who might disagree with our views and we surely can not wage war against people trying to kill us. If we do wage war we must be sure not to harm anyone in the process. In case you have missed it these people that we are fighting want to wipe America off the face of the earth. And if you think for a second they don’t play our media and our liberal left against our country to help ensure a victory for them you are wrong. They hide in temples and mosques and then complain when we bomb them or they contact media through the internet to make sure that it is very well known that we bombed a temple. They don’t bother to tell you that they were shooting down helicopters and killing our soldiers from the roof of the temple, they only want you to believe that we are a heartless nation that kills innocent people.

On top of this there are people in this country that would rather sympathize with these terrorists than with the American government. They seem to compoletly forget, or neglect the fact that we are fighting people who randomly attacked New York city and killed thousands of innocent people just because they disagree with democracy.

This is getting a little long winded but I think you get my point. I don’t know about you but I am sure not willing to give due process to someone who wants to kill my and everyone in my family just because I don’t have the same religious background as them. Do I believe they deserve a fair trial, probably but certainly not in a time of war. Once the war is over then we should deal with the prisoners of war and see who is actually innocent. If you don’t believe that this is how wars are fought and won just ask some of the WWII or Vietnam prisoners of war who sometimes spent years in a cage before being released.

Originally Posted by Saylor1322

I am not a prisoner of war and on top of that I am an American citizen. Why should we extend rights to suspected terrorists during a time of war?

Many of those suspects are citizens of the USA as well. If a known terrorist were to misdial and ring your house you could easily end up there. Sure it's a wrong number... thanks to the decision you can tell it to the judge.

We let the Nazis have a trial, we let Saddam have a trial, why shouldn't we allow trials for people just because they're suspected of something? They didn't say "let them go" they said "let's see if there's a reason for them to be there"

Originally Posted by Nickelking

We let the Nazis have a trial, we let Saddam have a trial, why shouldn't we allow trials for people just because they're suspected of something? They didn't say "let them go" they said "let's see if there's a reason for them to be there"

The Nazis didn't get habeus corpus. Did Saddam? I don't know

Originally Posted by Bruno

There is no war. Hence there are no provisions for invoking laws that apply to war time.

It makes one wonder what sort of war crimes Bush and his cronies have committed that so many liberals are clamoring about

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

It makes one wonder what sort of war crimes Bush and his cronies have committed that so many liberals are clamoring about

Who are these liberals? I don't know any. Do they have covert cells? Passwords? Secret handshakes and decoder rings?

They sure must be awful people, though, with all the rotten stuff they do. What is it that they believe that makes them so horrible?

j

Originally Posted by Nord Jim

Who are these liberals? I don't know any. Do they have covert cells? Passwords? Secret handshakes and decoder rings?

They sure must be awful people, though, with all the rotten stuff they do. What is it that they believe that makes them so horrible?

j

I guess I'll do some research for you- This is from democrats.com of all places: "Prosecute George Bush and Dick Cheney for War Crimes" http://archive.democrats.com/elandsl...aign=warcrimes

Originally Posted by Nickelking

Habeas Corpus - Latin for "You have the body." Most often, a writ of habeas corpus is a judicial order forcing law enforcement authorities to produce a prisoner they are holding, and to justify the prisoner's continued confinement. A petition for a writ of habeas corpus often is filed in federal courts by state prison inmates who say their state prosecutions violated federally protected rights in some way.

They all got habeas corpus.

Not really. They didn’t have the right to challenge their detention, nor request habeas corpus

This is getting to be a pretty interesting chat since it started out with gun control and has since moved into the rights of the gitmo detainees. I still find it hard to believe that there is actually a significant push to have these detainees tried and released. If you do not believe that the Iraqis were involved in terrorism you should start to look at the money trail and see where the terrorists are funded from and where they are permitted to hide and train. I am sure that there are some detainees that might be falsely accused but I do not believe that during a time of war, and YES we are at war even if congress does not want to officially declare war because they are spineless and have a fear of the repercussions of offending someone who would think that we would actually go to war. The Nazis were not given due process until well after the WWII and for the most part they didn’t even get the opportunity to become prisoners of war as they were shot on-site. Now in an effort to better protect our nation and the innocent people who enjoy our freedoms everyday we have detained suspected terrorists with the intent of gathering information and potentially preventing future terrorist attacks. I am not sure how anyone, liberal or conservative, can argue with this, it seems like common sense to me. However, I do respect everyone’s opinions and it is apparent that the supreme court wants to give these people a fair tiral, something that is specifically reserved for U.S. citizens but that’s another argument, and if there is no smoking gun let them go. I just hope it does not come back to haunt us in the same way that letting Bin Laden get away in 1997 came back to us. Just my 2 cents.

Jess

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

The Nazis didn't get habeus corpus. Did Saddam? I don't know

Habeas Corpus - Latin for "You have the body." Most often, a writ of habeas corpus is a judicial order forcing law enforcement authorities to produce a prisoner they are holding, and to justify the prisoner's continued confinement. A petition for a writ of habeas corpus often is filed in federal courts by state prison inmates who say their state prosecutions violated federally protected rights in some way.

They all got habeas corpus.

Originally Posted by Saylor1322

I am not a prisoner of war and on top of that I am an American citizen. Why should we extend rights to suspected terrorists during a time of war? If you were caught in their country, not even suspected of anything just caught, you are more than likely going to die.

May I point out that you are NOT at war, atm.
Bush likes to use the word a lot, that is true, but war is declared by congress.
There is no war. Hence there are no provisions for invoking laws that apply to war time.

And the argument 'but they would do worse' is pointless.
Yes, Kim Jong Il would take an even more extreme course of action with regard to suspected terrorists. But comparing yourself with the loewst scum in international politics does not may you look good, anymore than someone would be grateful only getting shot in the head while Hannibal lecter would disembowel you alive.