Drones clarification?

[Sola_Fide]

When the brothers walked out of the convenience store they had just robbed and killed the MIT cop, Rand is saying it would have been appropriate to use a drone in that instance as they were at large and threatening people with violence.

Rand is wrong.

 

[dskalkowski]

From a bunch of people who kept denouncing the media's portrayal of Ron Paul during the election, a lot of you sure are falling for the media's tricks..

 

[klamath]

Imminent threat is exactly what Rand meant. I stand with Rand. If somebody is driving down a street randomly shooting people and the cops are chasing them yes I believe it is an imminent threat and they need to to be taken out by what ever means necessary.
Rands wording was poor but anybody that really is a Rand supporter knows what he means.

 

[klamath]

Rand is wrong.

sola fide is wrong

 

[Rudeman]

I really didn't think this would become a big issue, pretty obvious Rand has the same position he had during the filibuster. It seems that some are looking for reasons to not support Rand or to bring him down.

 

[dskalkowski]

Imminent threat is exactly what Rand meant. I stand with Rand. If somebody is driving down a street randomly shooting people and the cops are chasing them yes I believe it is an imminent threat and they need to to be taken out by what ever means necessary.
Rands wording was poor but anybody that really is a Rand supporter knows what he means.

You're exactly correct. People on this forum are taking his statement out of context, thinking he compromised on his principles. All of the Rand-haters on here would end up getting pissed if Rand's favorite lunch turned out to be bologna instead of salami. It's just ridiculous, everyone here knows (especially now with that statement) that he misspoke and didn't clarify what he meant. I'm getting a bit sick of seeing some of the stupidity on this forum.

 

[rocket]

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Sen. Rand Paul released the following statement this evening following erroneous reports of a change in his position on the use of domestic drones.

"My comments last night left the mistaken impression that my position on drones had changed.

"Let me be clear: it has not. Armed drones should not be used in normal crime situations. They only may only be considered in extraordinary, lethal situations where there is an ongoing, imminent threat. I described that scenario previously during my Senate filibuster.

"Additionally, surveillance drones should only be used with warrants and specific targets.

"Fighting terrorism and capturing terrorists must be done while preserving our constitutional protections. This was demonstrated last week in Boston. As we all seek to prevent future tragedies, we must continue to bear this in mind."

 

[BSU kid]

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Sen. Rand Paul released the following statement this evening following erroneous reports of a change in his position on the use of domestic drones.

"My comments last night left the mistaken impression that my position on drones had changed.

"Let me be clear: it has not. Armed drones should not be used in normal crime situations. They only may only be considered in extraordinary, lethal situations where there is an ongoing, imminent threat. I described that scenario previously during my Senate filibuster.

"Additionally, surveillance drones should only be used with warrants and specific targets.

"Fighting terrorism and capturing terrorists must be done while preserving our constitutional protections. This was demonstrated last week in Boston. As we all seek to prevent future tragedies, we must continue to bear this in mind."

Eww...all I can say is eww. Sounds like Marco Rubio.

 

[Rudeman]

Eww...all I can say is eww. Sounds like Marco Rubio.

Marco Rubio sounds nothing like that. It sounds like you guys want to dislike Rand.

 

[klamath]

Marco Rubio sounds nothing like that. It sounds like you guys want to dislike Rand.

You think...

 

[tennman]

I agree. What Rand said wasn't a big deal and is the media trying to attack his chances in 2016. If someone is shooting at you and your house and you can't get to your guns or are out of bullets, you expect the police to take him out, right? That's what Rand was talking about. He was saying that should be the only use of Drones. He stated AGAIN that he's completely against them for spying on us or taking out people just because they're political enemies. But hey, if there's a serial killer taking out people while walking down the street, a Drone might could be used to take him out. It's like self defense for crying out loud! You'd do the same thing with your own gun if that were the case and would expect a police officer to do it.

I swear, some of you apparently just love losing and want to chop the head off of anyone in our movement who has a chance. I swear, I've never seen someone's motives questioned 24-7 like this.

I agree with the statements below.

Imminent threat is exactly what Rand meant. I stand with Rand. If somebody is driving down a street randomly shooting people and the cops are chasing them yes I believe it is an imminent threat and they need to to be taken out by what ever means necessary.
Rands wording was poor but anybody that really is a Rand supporter knows what he means.

It is strange wording and definitely needs clarification asap.

I hope Rand doesn't get into the habit of talking just to talk. That's where stuff like this liquor store comment comes from. It wasn't necessary to add to the interview and just creates opportunities for gotcha pieces by the media. Stick to the message!

When the brothers walked out of the convenience store they had just robbed and killed the MIT cop, Rand is saying it would have been appropriate to use a drone in that instance as they were at large and threatening people with violence.

 

[hillertexas]

Definitely no media manipulation going on...

• Ron Paul fans furious over Rand Paul's drone flip-flop - By John Hudson (April 23, 2013)
• Ron Paul Supporters Are Fuming Mad at Rand Paul (over Romney Endorsement) - By John Hudson (May 12, 2012)

Well now... ain't that a coinkydink... But wait! there's more...

• Ron Paul Supporters Are Really Pissed That Rand Paul Endorsed Mitt Romney - BusinessInsider
• Ron Paul supporters denounce Rand Paul for Hagel vote - DailyCaller
• Breaking: Hagel filibustered — barely; Update: Rand Paul getting hammered by Ron fans for voting no - HotAir
• Rand Paul Peeves Fans of Ron Paul's Foreign Policy: "Any Attack on Israel will be Treated as an Attack on the United States" - Reason
• Paultards Traumatized By Rand Paul’s Romney Endorsement - Wonkette
• etc

#PaintDivide&ConquerByNumbers

..