The National Rifle Association

[I REALLY HATE POKEMON!]

Deku always breaks everything down nicely, and plays one hell of a mediator.

[Saria Dragon of the Rain Wilds]

IRHP, I'm not sure if you meant to imply that racial profiling should be a key component in security measures, but that's what I took it as. Frankly, it shouldn't hold much weight in any situation. If someone is giving warning signs, it does not matter what their race is. Period. End of story. Security persons cannot afford to focus on any one specific race when they observe the masses; that's not the warning sign. There are accurate readings on a person, and their race isn't one of them. So, I appreciate that you understand what I said, and just reiterate that racial profiling isn't "common sense", because it's too highly flawed. There are too many ways it can be wrong and cause distraction from real threats. :)



MM, if you're serious about acknowledging you were in the wrong, it was a misunderstanding, you're apologetic, you would probably do well to just go back and edit those posts. I mean, it was uncalled for and uncomfortably overdone, so we can all feel better about it if you edited it out; after all, if you're recanting now, they don't need to remain, right?

[Luck-God]

guns are sweet, they get the job done fast & easy. NO RUSSIAN!!!!!! RUN!!!!! :0

[I REALLY HATE POKEMON!]

IRHP, I'm not sure if you meant to imply that racial profiling should be a key component in security measures, but that's what I took it as. Frankly, it shouldn't hold much weight in any situation. If someone is giving warning signs, it does not matter what their race is. Period. End of story. Security persons cannot afford to focus on any one specific race when they observe the masses; that's not the warning sign. There are accurate readings on a person, and their race isn't one of them. So, I appreciate that you understand what I said, and just reiterate that racial profiling isn't "common sense", because it's too highly flawed. There are too many ways it can be wrong and cause distraction from real threats. :)

Maybe not a "key component" if they can find several more efficient methods, but it seems that a significant portion of terrorist activity is caused by guys named Akmid bin Jihad or the like. It isn't a completely useless tool; few things are when dealing with security, probably.

To me it seems like a similar situation to the illegal immigration issue in another topic. From what I see and hear, people from Mexico outnumber probably every other countries illegal immigrants coming here from like Canada, but many just don't want to say it. I don't have the numbers for any conclusive opinion, but it would seem as though Middle-Eastern people likely contribute a significant portion of terrorism.

Anyway, if I'm wrong that's fine, but I can't find any numbers to show how many from each group of people contribute to terrorism here, so I'm just going by what I hear.

Sounds reasonable.

[Metal Man]

MM, if you're serious about acknowledging you were in the wrong, it was a misunderstanding, you're apologetic, you would probably do well to just go back and edit those posts. I mean, it was uncalled for and uncomfortably overdone, so we can all feel better about it if you edited it out; after all, if you're recanting now, they don't need to remain, right?

I already edited the first one, but I can edit the other ones. I just don't want to be accused of revising history to pretend it never happened, or alternatively, succeed in doing so and thus learn nothing.

But on the side, Loot's name-calling was uncalled for. Unlike 2007, I'm not just going to let it fly by so he can just pop in and call me names because he thinks it's lynch-mob time, either. By the same reason Boo got angry at me, I ask him to remove his statement, as it was no more my intent to attack Boo than it was Boo's intent to attack CSM.

[ZeldaGirl]

From what I see and hear, people from Mexico outnumber probably every other countries illegal immigrants coming here from like Canada, but many just don't want to say it. I don't have the numbers for any conclusive opinion, but it would seem as though Middle-Eastern people likely contribute a significant portion of terrorism.

Many illegal immigrants are Mexicans. Not all Mexicans are illegal immigrants. Same with terrorists. Some terrorists are Middle-Eastern. Not all Middle-Easterners are terrorists. When you racially profile, you are targeting just as many innocent people as you are guilty. Is it really worth it to infringe upon their rights, or endanger themselves or others just because you go by race alone?

[spoiler]Um, I'm going to say no. [/spoiler]

[Metal Man]

Yes, the problem with racial profiling is that race alone is not a decent factor. Plenty of people--mentioned repeatedly earlier--who were not Arabs still did significant terrorism and killed plenty of people.

In fact, I might suggest that racial profiling does the opposite of what it is intended for--terrorists discover racial profiling is being done, so then all they have to do is find someone of a race that isn't being targeted and BAM! It's that much easier to slip through the radar with bombs, because if you're only targeting people of one race, then you're not likely to pay as much attention to all the other ones...

[I REALLY HATE POKEMON!]

If I say yes...I probably shouldn't say yes. >_> But if I say no, I go against what it is I think.

How about this one, I'll dodge a bullet and ask a question; what do you guys think about terrorists being read their Miranda rights?

Yes, the problem with racial profiling is that race alone is not a decent factor. Plenty of people--mentioned repeatedly earlier--who were not Arabs still did significant terrorism and killed plenty of people.

What's the ratio on this?

I think stopping all Middle Easterners and any otherwise suspicious persons through all other means could work, but it'd piss everyone off and take a lot more manpower.

[Crazyswordsman]

IRHP, a lot of the terrorists we caught since 9/11 aren't Middle Eastern. The underwear bomber was Nigerian and the Times Square bomber was Pakistani. -CSM

[I REALLY HATE POKEMON!]

And I'm sure there's been an Asian/American Indian/African/Eskimo hybrid terrorist from North Korea at one point as well, CSM. =/

[CaptHayfever]

How about this one, I'll dodge a bullet and ask a question; what do you guys think about terrorists being read their Miranda rights?

If a law-enforcement official in the United States of America makes the collar, then yeah. Heck, those guys should be reciting Miranda as a reflex when they make arrests, no matter the crime.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

[I REALLY HATE POKEMON!]

But it allows these people who may be working in a group on multiple attacks planned within a close time frame to shut up, get a lawyer and threaten the safety of the American people. If I recall, I believe even non-citizen terrorists have been read their rights.

If you ask me, that's a bad idea, anyway you cut it.

[Apiary Tazy]

What's worse, the terrorist being mirandized and allow him to lawyer up and fight, or have him go scot free because he wasn't mirandized.

Miranda Rights are not just to let the criminal know they can get a lawyer, they state that anything he or she says or does can be used in court. Therefore, if they interrogate him and get him to confess, this can be used in court. Otherwise, any lawyer with half a brain can say "Hey, he wasn't given his Miranda Rights", and depending how the evidence was gathered, could cause the entire case to ber thrown out. Regardless of what people will think, it is "innocent until proven guilty" not "Innocent unless branded a traitor", and regardless of the circumstances, I'd rather not have a repeat of calling people "communists" or "witches" haphazardly to get rid of people.

So, yeah. Rading people their Miranda Rights can only help an investigation, because if they really were a terrorist, we should probably be able to prove it using our laws.

[Metal Man]

My question to you, IRHP, is if all these things are necessary to prevent America from being exploded...

...How did we go all these years pre-Bush without these restrictions without exploding, again?

[Apiary Tazy]

I was about to attack IRHP for changing subject just now, but I realized that CSM brought up NRA's support of Racial Profiling.

Just putting it out there that in a way this topic is still on topic.

[I REALLY HATE POKEMON!]

What's worse, the terrorist being mirandized and allow him to lawyer up and fight, or have him go scot free because he wasn't mirandized.

Change the laws so we don't have to under those circumstances.

Um, if he confesses to upcoming attacks not yet made, I think that the important issue is now preventing them.

Current laws take too much time with what issues I'm presenting.

A miracle? Dunno.

[Apiary Tazy]

Change the laws so we don't have to under those circumstances.

Good luck with that.

Um, if he confesses to upcoming attacks not yet made, I think that the important issue is now preventing them.

Can't use it if he's not proven to actually be a Terrorist. One can easily write it off as a some shmoe trying to get attention if he's cleared.

Current laws take too much time with what issues I'm presenting.

So, you'd rather send a bunch of people to prison and possibly death to catch a handful of terrorists because he need to hastily move through cases?

[CaptHayfever]

Can't just change the laws; it's a constitutional issue. Gotta change the constitution.
Also, don't change the constitution for that; it'll end up screwing over the innocent. Our entire legal system, while it sadly fails in this goal from time to time, is based around the goal of NOT screwing over the innocent.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

[Metal Man]

See, methinks that the problem with terrorism now was in part caused to our response to 9/11.

Had we just picked up and went on as usual, with the exception of sacking Al Qaeda's leadership (that we could get at) for doing that crime, I would suspect we'd have less terrorism going on--for instead, we gave many, maaany people a good reason to attack us, for invading their homeland.

Take it any way you want, the issue they have was expanded from the extremist only "DIE AMERICAN PIGS" to "DIE PEOPLE WHO INVADED MY HOMELAND AND KILLED MY FAMILY" which... you know... there's more than enough casualties which died for no reason.

So instead of constantly upping the security measures until little remains of the constitution, my opinion would be that we need to just pull out of that mess, consign the affair to history, and let the thing die and stay dead, removing our interference from the Middle East entirely.

It's no more our business than back in the olden days when Britain ruled India. The people of those countries have a certain right to be POed at us for stomping in and trying to make them more like us; we need to get rid of their reasons to be angry and attack us more than just killing off the extremists, as extremists will always exist, no matter how many you kill.

[Crazyswordsman]

The Times Square bomber was Mirandized and he cooperated fully. That's what plea bargains are for. And if conservatives had their way these people, regardless of citizenship, would not be processed; they would be held indefinitely WITHOUT trial, which would slow the process down, not speed it up. And if they caught the wrong guy and he's being honest about being innocent and he gets beaten to death over it, what say you, IRHP?

He who sacrifices liberty for security deserves neither. -Benjamin Franklin

-CSM