Now What?

The immediate threat of the Boston terrorist bombings is now over. The alleged bombers are now dead or captured. Now what? Let's take stock of a few things. First, and foremost, all major media outlets are reporting that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (he's the younger of the two brothers and the one that was captured) will not be read his Miranda rights before questioning. Not good. This is a precedent we don't want. The purpose behind the concept of the public safety exception to the Miranda rule is that exigent circumstances and public safety are immediate concerns. In other words, having to Mirandize and allow the suspect to clam up and demand an attorney might pose an imminent threat to law enforcement personnel or civilians in the area because their might be some sort of weapon which, if undiscovered, could bring immediate harm. Any information the suspect chooses to provide law enforcement at that time may be used against the suspect in a court of law regardless of the fact that the suspect was not Mirandized. Exigent circumstances gives law enforcement personnel the ability to quickly question a suspect, on the scene, about any potential injury which might befall innocent persons without running the risk of having that information blocked in court later on. The question in this regard is whether questioning Tsarnaev after he is sufficiently recovered in the hospital is considered exigent. There is no issue in regard to questioning him at the scene of his arrest, especially under the circumstances of the last week. Who could reasonably question any effort of law enforcement to ferret out of Tsarnaev any information on other devices or conspirators who may have been either deployed or lurking in the area - both circumstances which would pose an immediate threat to law enforcement and civilian personnel. Does anyone seriously doubt that such questioning took place? Does anyone seriously question whether his answers ought to be used against him in court, if he did answer such questions? That situation is not what is being questioned. What is being questioned is the decision to treat him, now in a position where he can do no immediate harm to anyone, as if his mere existence was a threat to the public safety. It is not. Any failure to read Tsarnaev his Miranda rights following his hospitalization ought, constitutionally, to exclude any information he gives to any government agent. Period. Why? Because he is an American citizen. The Constitution was written for all American citizens, not just some. Certainly it was not intended, nor is any such argument anything less than specious, that only good Americans ought to receive constitutional safeguards. The failure to insist that Tsarnaev be Mirandized before he is questioned is an assault on the rights of all citizens. How so? To permit this failure to follow the Constitution is to create the precedent that law enforcement (civilian or military), without heed of the Constitution and the restrictions placed on them through the courts, may determine at their own convenience what is exigent and what is not. That means that law enforcement may determine the rights of citizens. Second, marshal law was declared in the greater Boston area over the last several days and not a peep was heard. Oh, you didn't know that? Feel free to take a look at the pictures. Hundreds of heavily armed law enforcement personnel swarming the streets in combat gear. Military personnel and equipment being used in support of a law enforcement operation. Military combat vehicles and aircraft operating in support. Citizens being ordered to remain in their homes. By the way, the order to remain in place was not a suggestion. It was not a good idea. It was not a hint. It was an order. And that is the problem. This is what it will look like when the government declares marshal law across the Republic. You will be ordered to remain in your homes. You will not be permitted to walk your own

streets. Military forces will operate in conjunction with law enforcement units. Offenders will be subject to warrantless arrest and detention by military forces, incommunicado under the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA 2012). Remember that? The argument will be made by the leftists and those who are too afraid to be responsible for their own safety and that of their families, that law enforcement was merely acting to protect the citizens of the area. Tactically, the flooding of the area with so many law enforcement and military personnel was an abject failure. They accomplished nothing. This is not to denigrate the response and efforts of law enforcement in the immediate aftermath of the bombings. Many of those fine people are heroes of the first order and will always be so. It is not to criticize their response when the brothers were stopped after killing MIT Police Officer Sean Collier. There is no quibble about the death of Tsarnaev's older brother. It was not only a proper police response it was absolutely justified. What is referred to, here, as an abject failure is the subsequent operation of the government effort to locate Tsarnaev, the younger. There is no way, outside government circles, to know exactly how many law enforcement and military personnel were involved in the manhunt. There is no way, outside government circles, to know what military equipment was used during that manhunt. Most likely, we will never know. The fact remains, it was a failure. It was not the hundreds of police officers that found Tsarnaev. It was not the armored vehicles that found Tsarnaev. It was not a satellite, a helicopter, or even some fancy military gadget. It was not military that found Tsarnaev. It was a citizen who found Tsarnaev. Just an everyday American. Someone intent on making certain a prized possession was safe and secure. Someone exercising his right to choose what to do. Why? Because he could. Finally, what would have happened if the citizens of Boston and its surroundings had been armed? This is pure speculation as those citizens are not so armed. But what would they have been able to do? What would have happened to Tsarnaev if he had run across multiple, armed citizens everywhere he turned? This manhunt would not have been necessary nor would the defacto declaration of martial law. Tsarnaev would have known and understood that he had absolutely no where to go. He might have surrendered earlier. Again, this is speculation. But here is something which is not. Had he broken into someone's home in search of safety, he would have been met with people able to fight back. As it is, not many people in that area have the ability to fight back against armed intruders. They have the right. It doesn't matter what law enforcement, government (local, state, or federal) say about it. They have the right to arm themselves. So, lessons learned: 1. incremental destruction of the Constitution is accomplished through justifications for ignoring the requirements placed on government; 2. 3. martial law is easy to impose on citizens unable to physically resist such tyranny; and, it is abundantly clear that those who are forgo their rights for security have neither.

To those who still believe in the Constitution and this Republic,

Semper Fi
20Apr13
2013 americanpatriotleague.com