No, that's not what triggered the call. The package burst open while being delivered, revealing legal items, and the FBI was called.
Can we agree that someone from UPS called the authorities after a package holding some number and types of firearms was opened? Whatever was seen by that person concerned them enough to make the call. Most likely because it was potentially illegal in some way. It is not legal for someone to recieve shipment of a firearm(s). It can only be delivered through an FFL dealer. For instance it would be illegal for me to ship a gun to you personally unless you possess an FFL license. My understanding is that the package in question was a crate, not really declared as firearms. Of which there were quite a few guns of the assault rifle family. Our current government policies wouldnt require a warrant at all to undertake the same actions. And it would allow the military to partake.
Ah, there you go - when the government makes an armed assault on a religious compound in a context of the government wanting to crackdown on "cults", it's an uh ... er ... ah ... "mistake". Maybe the Koresh people made a mistake about what guns were legal to have? Uh, no ..... no...they're a "cult", ie good for target practice.
Oh give us all a break on the "good for target practice stuff", you wouldnt buy that garbage if someone said it about an American soldier in Iraq.
They were a religious group. I dont think anyone cares what was going on for the most part, until of course it comes to having a box full of guns and grenades break open, probably in violation of federal law...Enough to alarm a UPS delivery man to make a call. Enough to have a magistrate issue a warrant. Its not illegal to be a member of a cult. It is illegal, of course to violate federal law.
You are confused. The list of weapons was turned up AFTER the final raid and burning down of the compound and death of its inhabitants - the fact remains that they raided the compound not knowing what was there and acting on an warrant obtained by misleading a magistrate, in wholesale violation of fourth amendment rights.
That list of weapons is proof that they were justified in getting that warrant. Of course they didnt know what was in there prior to conducting the raid, that is why they conducted it. They had probable cause, that later turned out to be very true, which was that they were heavily armed.
Absolutely false - Koresh was a frequent vistor to downtown Waco, and they could have nabbed him any time. And now you're just once again brushing past the fact that it's not known who fired first in the attempted search.
OK, lets pick him up on the street. Then what? Did you expect for him to be toting around his M-16A-1 while checking the mail? Surely you can be objective enough to see they had to search the compound. Bringing Koresh down to the station doesnt resolve a thing.
As for who fired first. I dont know. But lets even assume it was the cops who fired first. The davidians participated in a firefight with law enforcement. Something would have caused the ATF to fire. If you point a gun at someone, especially a cop, you have shown by your actions a willingness to employ deadly force. Thereby making it justifable for someone to take similar actions to defend themselves.
What a laugh. What a wildly warped view of events. During the Clinton administration, illegal aliens were coming in over the mexican border at full tilt with no particular interest from the Clinton administration. But a refugee from Cuba arrives here (not "smuggled"). The "kidnap" charge is totally ridiculous. A mother escaping communism and wishing a better life for her son is a KIDNAPPER?? I guess you'd call people escaping over the Berlin wall during the cold war "passport law violators".
Bill Clinton this Janet Reno that...
Why even mention Mexico? Or Elian Gonzalez in the first place, to get some totally irrelevant dig into Clinton. But hey, Mexico, Clinton didnt do anything, Niether did Reagan, or Bush 41,43. So why mention him?
As for Elian, the mother took her son out of the country without permission or knowledge of the father. If someone did that in America, it would be called kidnapping.
So it is alright for someone to come to America from Cuba "wishing for a better life", but not ok if they are from Mexico? hmmmm thanks for that clarification.
You see Lib, you have no consistency when it comes to being so anti-liberal. You blame the libs for stuff that every does, and often times is even worse at.
In both of those cases, those people were given fair warning. They had ample opportunity to follow the demands of law enforcement. In both cases, an amazing amount of restraint was shown on thier parts, I think to thier own detriment.
Waco is a tragedy no doubt. There is plenty of blame to go around. But those people had 51 days to come out with thier hands up. I am appalled the parents there would subject thier children to those horrors.
And I agree who would want more than one wife. I sure wouldn’t if I was a guy but if our constitution really does mean what it says then they should be able to follow their religion. But again I think it’s fair not to allow violent behavior even if it is part of a religion.
