From the U.S. Constitution:
Let’s see, 5:15 AM, government agents use a battering ram to break down your doors, climb in through your windows, point automatic weapons at a six-year-old child hiding in a closet, and then snatch him away.
[sarcasm on]Sure, sounds reasonable to me.[/saracasm off]
Any thoughts?
The kid was not relitives’, he was a Cuban and not amarican his only parent wanted him. There was no evidence that he would be a bad father and there for international laws dictate that he belongs with his father. As for breaking in to the house the 4th dosnt aply in a hostige.They were breaking th law. How would you like it if you 6 year old son was in Cuba and you had every right to be with him but couldn’t?
The agents knocked and declared their identity (3 times), and returned Elian to his father according to law. Frankly, I don’t see much difference between this and knocking down the door of kidnappers to rescue a hostage. If the Gonzales family had firearms with them and used them, it would prbably be perfectly legal to shoot them right on the spot too.
The Gonzales family also said they’d give up Elian if the agents came up and asked them to, but obviously they changed their mind. Sure sounds predictable to me…
Perhaps I don’t have all the facts at hand, but from the reports I can see on papers, TV, and online, the INS agents did not do anything wrong, and I don’t see anyone arguing that point either.
What the Clinton administration did this morning is nothing less than jackbooted thuggery. The utter contempt and disregard that Clinton and his bottomfeeding, bootlicking sycophants (with Janet Reno leading the charge) display for the U.S. Constitution is sickening. If you really want your stomach turned, check out the photo at the Drudge Report–the fear on Elian’s face as he looks down the barrel of an assault rifle is just heart-wrenching. I think he belongs with his dad, but not through federal agents breaking down the door in the middle of the night. And there’s no way the reunion has been a joyful one–it it had been, the Clinton thugs would have have the media involved from the word go. The whole thing makes me sick. So, yes, I think some serious civil rights violations occurred this morning, although I’m sure numerous Clinton apologists will brand Elian’s Miami relatives as criminals for “kidnapping” Elian.
KSO,
They’re working on the First Amendment now as well. About a half hour ago (11 AM CST)I saw on CNN a news reporter/photographer getting arrested. For what? Taking pictures of the cops and what they were doing?
Jeepers!
Yo, milroy! The key word in that amendment is “unreasonable.” It’s completely reasonable for the INS & US Marshall’s Service to retrieve a kidnapped child from kidnappers who have already shown the world they have the child at that very address. Get over it.
Yo Monty! I agree, the key word is unreasonable. Given the circumstances as described in the OP, would you think this was “reasonable” if this happened at your house?
Pointing automatic weapons at children is “reasonable”?
You get over it.
What about the smile as he meets his baby brother, or the smile on being with his father and step-mom?
You know, I wold be afraid of a gun, too. That doensn’t mean that the Miami kidnappers had a right to keep the kid.
P.S. Aren’t we supposed to avoid personal attacks in “Great Debates,” even if the attack is on someone in politics? If not, how would this be “great” thinking?
Bucky
I think you need to find out what that photographer was doing before assuming any free press violations. Did you see what he was doing before being arrested, or did you just see the arrest.
A few days ago a reporter was arrested for stabbing a cameraman with a ball point pen after he had pushed his way in front of her. There are some cut throat journalists there and not all are going to follow the law.
So, milroyj, what procedure do you think that the authorities should have employed?
And another thing: if you, want to say that the INS’s actions with regard to Elian were unreasonable, that’s one thing. But the title of this thread is “Gonzalez Family’s 4th Amendment Rights”. Claimg that the family’s rights were violated is silly.
The Ryan,
I’m not a big fan of “the authorities”, but, they should have continued the negotiations which were apparently continuing throughout last night. It’s not as if the child was in any kind of danger in his family’s home. The Gestapo tactics were unnecessary.
Forgive me, but it looked to me that the gun was pointed at the person holding the child, not at the child - and the officer’s left hand was reaching out to pry the child away from that person.
(Yes, that picture, with Elian’s terrified expression, is a PR nightmare, and I’m sure it will be on the cover of the next editions of Newsweek and Time.)
I’m happily surprised that the raid played out as incident-free as it did, with nobody getting hurt. I was convinced that there was going to be plenty of bloodshed when the inevitable raid happened.
Okay. They’ve been working on negotiations for two weeks, ever since the father got here. The family has been backsliding, saying one thing and then doing another, and overall stalling since then. The father agreed to go to Miami to meet with the family, but the family said no because of the fact that the father would still get custody (realize that the father’s personal safety might have been at risk in Miami as well, but he was willing to go). The family has gone so far as to insinuate that the father was a child abuser. They were supposed to hand him over quite a while ago, but the government kept pushing back the deadlines in order to try to reach some compromise that would be palatable to all involved. The family in Miami would not allow it. The negotiations stalled.
At this point, what would you do? You have to go in and get the kid. Would you go in during broad daylight, when the throngs of people surrounding the house could see it coming? Would you go in unarmed, and risk the lives of federal agents because some crackpot was carrying a weapon and decided to play target practice with immigration officials? They pretty much did what they had to do, given what the Miami family was doing to them. I blame the family for what happened to this kid, not the government. Had they just given him to his father two weeks ago, this never would have been happened. They whine and complain now about how the government scarred this kid, but they really gave them no other choice.
I have always felt that the boy should be with his father. (Hell, they should have sent him back the first week.)
I believe that to an extent the Miami relatives (and a lot of the protesters, especially the younger troublemakers who probably don’t know what the Bay of Pigs fiasco even was) were unwitting pawns of prominent Cuban exiles trying to further their own agenda.
The relatives aren’t saints either.
However, I believe Reichsfuhrer Reno went too far with the “raid”.
I am sure the gov knew exactly who was in that house every minute from the word go, and to think they would be met with a firefight from the lawyers, media types, and the relatives in the house is ludicrous.
I can see taking some measures to keep the crowd back.
I can see armed marshalls outside and even inside.
I can’t see breaking down the door and blasting in sticking MP5’s in peoples faces like they were raiding a meth lab.
Regardless of what you think, that was a damn powerful photo of the marshall pointing the gun at Elian and his fisherman rescuer.
Unlike Bill, Janet Reno doesn’t need to find a legacy…
Originally posted by milroyj:
Negotiations? What’s there to negotiate?
Not an immediate danger, but… how would feel if someone kidnapped your child, and defended not giving him back by saying “Well, it’s not as if he’s in any danger”?
Perhaps, but the family could have easily avoided them.
Were criminal sanctions against the family ever seriously considered?
It’s somewhat strange for a person who considers himself to be mostly a Libertarian to say this, but yes, I do think it was reasonable. The relatives were holding a boy away from his father. Kidnapping is a fairly accurate term for what was going on. The refused to turn the boy over to his father to make a political point. Just a guess, but I’ll bet they are more upset that they lost their bargaining chip than that the boy is going to be with his father. I can’t wait to see how loud they whine and moan looking for sympathy. Screw 'em. If it was up to me, they’d be facing kidnapping charges and looking at hard time or deportation. The federal agents entered the house, secured the safety of Elian, and reunited him with his father. The did this without anyone being hurt, too. I say, well done.
Cecil said it. I believe it. That settles it.
Relax, I’m not as Dave as I look!- A Wallified sig!
MILROYJ says:
For what? They’ve been “negotiating” with the family for weeks, with nothing to show for it. Presented with a valid, legal directive to turn the child over, Lazaro Gonzales and family defied it. There is absolutely no reason to believe that continued negotiations would be fruitful.
Conceivably, he was in danger of significant emotional trauma every minute that he was in that fishbowl of a house, used by his relatives as a political tool, given toys, made to wave at the camera, cajoled into telling his father he wants to stay on videotape, and being separated from the only parent he has left. The fact that he was not in physical danger does not impress me. If my child was stolen by my relatives, who refused to give him back, I would not consider the fact that they would refrain from physically harming him to be justification for keeping him.
I don’t see how else they might have handled it. There was no reason to belive the Gonzaleses would return the boy voluntarily, ever. They have said as much themselves, and have defied a legal directive to return him. Therefore, he had to be taken by force. If the government announces in advance when they are coming, complete with a caravan of trucks moving through Miami, there is little doubt that they would have been met with by a large, extremely hostile crowd. Were the agents armed? Heck, yes. There were rumors that some of the people around the house were armed, and the agents would be fools to go into such a hostile situation unarmed.
It looks heavy-handed (and it is), but the best way to conduct such an operation is by surprise and with a sufficient show of force to intimidate your opponents immediately and completely. It seems to me that the only way to acheive the boy’s removal without the injury or death of any of the participants, be they citizens or agents, was to act precisely as the government did. They went in, they took him out, and no one was physically hurt. If the Gonzaleses wanted the situation to end in a less dramatic way, they should not have defied the law and insisted on keeping Elian away from his father. I don’t see that the government had any choice, and I think the situation would have gotten worse and worse as time went by.
To those of you who are deploring the government’s actions, I ask this: In light of the Gonzaleses history of noncooperation, and the obviously hostile attitude of those holding and supporting Elian, how do you think it should have been handled? Wait until the courts decide custody? Why? There’s no question, the issue of asylum aside, that the father is entitled to custody. And there’s no reason to believe the Gonzaleses would give the boy back if ordered to by a court. I mean, I knew this situation was going to end “ugly” weeks ago; to me, it was only a question of when.
Jodi
Fiat Justitia
It should not surprise anyone. These are the same federal criminals who got away with the murder of innocent children at Waco. New information indicates that they used an Apache helicopter armed with a Hellfire missle to incinerate American citizens.
These are the same killers who shot Randy Weaver’s wife through the neck as she was standing on her porch holding her baby.
Now they want your firearms, under the guise of ‘saving the children.’
::
What does this have to do with anything that happened in Miami today? Gun control is not the issue. Not even remotely connected. It’s not even a fringe issue here.
I’m sure the INS would have loved to have just knocked on the door, asked for Elian, and had him handed over peacefully, without argument. But the Miami relatives proved time and time again that that was not going to be the case. There was no other choice. It’s a shame that it came down to this, but the relatives brought this one on themselves.
Cristi, Slayer of Peeps
I made my husband join a bridge club. He jumps next Tuesday.
(title & sig courtesy of UncleBeer and WallyM7!)