Comments on: Crime-Riddled Town Takes Debatable Action

Are Small Town's Safety Measures, Including A 24-Hour Curfew, Constitutional?

[jennmarikp]

I think the citizens of the town have to make a choice about what''s more important. Either deal with the crime with no end in sight or deal with the authorities checking every move. At least with the police watching everything there is an end in sight, hopefully.

[mandylou4u]

The police can only do so much in their line of duty. They are limited by laws too. You cry out if a officer abuses someone who just shot a little kid, yet when you are getting abused, you want the cops to do anything to keep you safe. This poor town is over run with crime. It''s not a bad thing to enforce a curfew for a little while. It won''t be in place forever, they are just trying to show the criminals in the city that they are not welcome. What do you all mean by "do their jobs in the first place?" They have been trying to do their jobs, i''ve seen it first hand. The criminals get away with alot of stuff out here.

[r9119111]

r9119111,
Please tell me what freedom you have when the thugs control your freedom.
We all saw what a liberal government will do for you in New Orleans.
Please start your own country and take your liberalism with you.

Posted by gunfighter51 at 09:55 AM : Aug 16, 2008


gunfighter51: Thank you for your comment. I never gave leaving the country a thought. Maybe you are right. I always thought that if you disagreed with proceedings you had the right to say so. Everyone is supposed to have a voice and be represented. I could be wrong. Your approach is exactlty what I think America should be afraid of. Our diversity is our strength and always has been. Since when did it change? I''m waiting for you honest reply. Thanks again.

[ofbyfor1]

Posted by gunfighter51 at 10:06 AM : Aug 16, 2008

Am I a ''liberal'' because I expect that my hard-earned tax dollars should be well-spent and expect the police to do their jobs competently?

Again, if they have the force to create a curfew, then they have the force to do their original jobs! What is difficult for you to understand about that?

If you want to call me a ''lib'', my friend, make sure that you know that it stands for LIBERTARIAN!

[patriot12436]

Back inthe early 80''s they had the same situation in Houston with an apartment complex. The city came in put up a high fence around the place and eviction orders to all residents to be moved in 30 days. At the end of thirty daysd the city bulldozed the complex and turned it into a city park, end of problem.

[patriot12436]

dkhorse1
Your right you won''t see any of the aclu walking around those streets at any time. They will sit back where it is safe and make their comments.

[ofbyfor1]

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.--Ben Franklin

[ofbyfor1]

Posted by mydiatribe at 09:37 AM : Aug 16, 2008

Do YOU do a half-a$$ed job just because you don''t make mega-bucks? Make the police do their JOB and this nonsense wouldn''t be necessary! If they have the force necessary to enforce a CURFEW, then they have the force necessary to do their original JOB!

[patriot12436]

offby1
The problem is a town of 15k has a very limited expense account for anything including law enforcement. The criminals out number the police probably by 20 to 1 and also have a lot more money and firepower, plus they have already intimidated the citizens of the town. This situation calls for drastic measures. I would seriously consider calling in the national guard and do a complete sweep of the town.

[mydiatribe]

=="...if the citizens allow this to happen in one place it will happen again and again." ==

It has, that''s PRECISELY why STRONGER MEASURES are REQUIRED!

CRIMINALS ARE LAZY COWARDS! They will react well when you make life difficult for them. Duh??
That usually requires a show of force.

[mydiatribe]

Posted by ofbyfor1 at 09:29 AM : Yeah, right???

And the governor could call up the National Guard, too.
I guess you missed the part where this is a POOR town.
Fire the Police Shief, yeah that''s good.

Just who do you think will want to replace him?

ANS: One of the gang members, maybe??

[ofbyfor1]

Here''''s what Founding Father Benjamin Franklin had to say about the people of this town:

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

So, the frightened little pinheads who argue in favor of enacting a police state so they can feel "safe" are NOT true americans.

Posted by IDNNSG at 07:41 AM : Aug 16, 2008

Worth repeating.

If the police in this town were doing their jobs properly, extreme tactics like this wouldn''t be necessary.

[ofbyfor1]

This is plain and simple a case where because the police failed to perform their jobs as is expected, and proper, the citizens pay with their loss of rights. Seems to me that the logical solution would have been to fire the police chief, and get a chief who could handle the situation, without having to take every citizens rights.

Believe me, if the citizens allow this to happen in one place it will happen again and again. We are getting closer and closer to a complete police state, is that what you all really want? The time is near where you must decide if a little safety more important than freedom. You better think about what you are getting, because it maybe a lot more than what you are bargaining for.

Posted by renrivers at 11:46 PM : Aug 15, 2008

The most sensible post I''ve seen in response to this story.

''Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.''--Ben Franklin

Unfortunately, that seems to describe too much of this country these days. Our founding fathers would be disgusted!

[lewiston14]

Watch the video 10 times. It should become abruptly clear what the problem is. The Bain of so many other towns

[mydiatribe]

The ACLU spews more misinformation and does more to corrupt American society than Vladamir Putin and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ever will.

Since when is the individual''s right to skulk around after dark to freely commit their crimes supercede the rights of innocent citizens to live in safety???

The ACLU is always, and I do mean ALWAYS on the side of criminals.
If the ACLU were operational during the reign of the 3rd Reich, they would likely be suing Jews for smudging the bootshine of their SS oppressors with their faces.

This totally AMORAL group of LOONIE LIBERAL COMMUNIST attorneys (ACLU) ought to be prosecuted for this heinous hoax they are contining to perpetrate on the American culture.

This organization is the proverbial Trojan Horse. They are disgusing their true purpose. Never do they take the side of law abiding citizens, ask yourself why that is?

[r9119111]

Say hello the the early indications of an OLIGARCHY (Police State). You voted for it when you voted Republican (neo-conservative) in recent elections. Let''s see if you are willing to give up more of your freedom for security? Vote Republican again, if you must, but know that in the process you are voting to give up your freedom for security.

[pollroller1]

Those poor people. Having to live in fear of those thugs. Man, that is terrible. I sure hope that the honest people can take back their town.

[idnnsg]

Here''s what Founding Father Benjamin Franklin had to say about the people of this town:

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

So, the frightened little pinheads who argue in favor of enacting a police state so they can feel "safe" are NOT true americans.

[closethippy1]

As an ACLU supporter I wish they would keep quiet on this one and let the town be for the moment.
I''m sure the 24 hour curfew and the other measures they''re taking is going to work.
Unfortunately human nature being what it is these measures will only work for so long before the trouble makers will find a way around them.
It''s then when the ACLU should speak up and the town should get serious about finding a rational solution to their crime problems.

[baicas]

SISTATEE, If they are law abiding they don''t have anything to fear, and they wouldn''t need to worry about a warrant. However, as someone else just mentioned, if marshall law is enacted your rights for that warrant goes right out the window. I would rather let them search without a warrant, than have marshall law invoked. Let them do what it takes to restore Law and ORder into their community.