Bloomberg is at it again

Bloomberg Says Interpretation of Constitution Will ‘Have to Change’ After Boston Bombing
In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Monday the country’s interpretation of the Constitution will “have to change” to allow for greater security to stave off future attacks.

“The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry,” Mr. Bloomberg said during a press conference in Midtown. “But we live in a complex word where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.”

What the hell is the matter with the people who keep supporting him?????

Oh, please. What kind of police state actions could have prevented this? None. We have to address the root causes, not further abridge rights. Why are our young men so violent? How can we catch them younger, before they become violent?

chickaree wrote: Oh, please. What kind of police state actions could have prevented this? None. We have to address the root causes, not further abridge rights. Why are our young men so violent? How can we catch them younger, before they become violent?

With Bloomberg, curtailing rights is just a normal part of the Nanny State (fascism's sweet song).

Why do you have to take away my freedoms?
To protect you from terrorism.
Why do the terrorists hate us?
Because they are jealous of your freedoms.

How did Spiro Agnew say it? Americans prefer a policeman's nightstick over an anarchist's bomb.

We were all asking the same thing when they passed the (laughably-named) "Patriot Act"... And yes, I remember who voted for it; and I remember who passed the extension.

I don't give a flying flip who passed it. But I know when a lot of people said it was an assault on our constitutional rights, we were denigrated as being "un-patriotic." Now that it's possibly YOUR ox that's being gored (i.e., some sensible restrictions on guns and background checks), all of a sudden you're worried about YOUR "rights."

Sorry, but the time for being non-hypocritical is long past.

LadyJazzer wrote: We were all asking the same thing when they passed the (laughably-named) "Patriot Act"... And yes, I remember who voted for it; and I remember who passed the extension.

I don't give a flying flip who passed it. But I know when a lot of people said it was an assault on our constitutional rights, we were denigrated as being "un-patriotic." Now that it's possibly YOUR ox that's being gored (i.e., some sensible restrictions on guns and background checks), all of a sudden you're worried about YOUR "rights."

Sorry, but the time for being non-hypocritical is long past.

Now... is your comment above addressed to ALL CONSERVATIVES... or particular 285 Bound conservatives? Because if your statement is all inclusive, then I think you better start finding quotes from all those conservatives on 285 Bound if you don't want to come across as a bigot.

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: if you don't want to come across as a bigot.

Too late, that has already been established.

Now watch... she calls us all hypocritical... and our post will be moved to the Ring.

Everyone I talk to, left and right, has huuuuge issues with the "Patriot Act". This isn't a left vs, right issue, it's a government vs. citizen issue.