Howdy!

In article .com,
Bucky wrote:
Michael Houghton wrote:
I call bull**** on you.
First for calling it "kidnapping".

OK, "kidnapping" was overstated. Change it to "seized by force and
intimidation".

Technically accurate, but overblown rhetoric.

The raid was a consequence of the refusal to surrender custody
of the boy as directed by a competent court, and in accordance
with basic principles of child custody. The family holding Elien
seemed unable to admit that the father should have custody since
the mother was dead. No sensible reason was adduced for why the
father was incompetent to have custody. If there was any
"kidnapping" going on, it was the extended family doing it,
and the raid could be cast as a "rescue mission". Given the
posturing by the family, using a display of force to intimidate
the "kidnappers" to prevent them from resisting was not way out
of line.

Second for
misrepresenting the placement of the rifle

What part of "pointing an assault rifle inches from the boy's face" was
misrepresented?
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/images/l...an/elian_a.jpg

(and conveniently ignoring
the important (and easily seen) placement of the trigger finger).

Oh that's right, with the barrel of an assault rifle pointed inches
from his face, Elian was able to remain calm and unfrightened because
he noticed that the agent's trigger finger was one inch away from the
trigger. It was nice to know this fact afterwards, but during the
situation it was irrelevant where the trigger finger was or whether the
rifle was even loaded.

The detail of where the officer's trigger finger was placed shows that
the officer was using proper gun discipline. Eline is clearly frightened
in that picture. Who wouldn't be? Objectively, there was very little risk
of an accidental discharge of the gun. In addition, note that the gun
appears to be clearly pointed at the man holding Elien, not Elien.

You chose to use language that seriously miscast the whole affair as
some sort of abuse of authority. In point of fact and law, the raid was
most akin to a hostage rescue -- one carried off with no casualties aside,
possibly, from some underwear.

Well, you only addressed my example. So does that mean you concur with
the first part of my statement? "This kind of treatment is routine. If
this is the worst case of unnecessary force used by law enforcement,
then we're in really good shape."

I reject your thesis that that was "unnecessary force". What basis do you
have for that claim? Without that thesis, the rest of your statement has
no value.

yours,
Michael

--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/wwap/