It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Police Illegally Seizing DNA from Drivers

page: 11
17
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by benign.psychosis
Hah. Spare me with the creation of the United States. It involved so much argument, propaganda, and the concession of rights and liberty


so what is it? you are either for rights and liberty, or not. is privacy not a right? contradictions liquidation sale?



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by verylowfrequency
Spare me with the creation of the United States.


Awe, now we see where your coming from. You do not love the US as we do, & thus you wish to destroy the ideals of those who created it and those of us who cherish it. Now were getting a better picture.


I suppose not. You see, I love the entire world and everyone in it. Not some particular country and people above all the rest - nor do I love some outdated ideology. You can hold on to the past as long as you want, but you're just omeone who refuses to drive a car on the basis that he still owns a horse. With the future comes change. It's a fact. Social and political structures will change, as they always have. You are merely attempting to ignore the evolution of society and civilization by grasping on an ideaology that is comforting to you because you fear change.

It's understandable. You just have to have some courage. I suppose that's why many refer to it as a "Brave New World." There are some personal sacrifices that have to be made, and we will have to shift from selfish impulses to selfless desires to better humanity.

We understand that it strikes fear into the ego, for it thrives off of selfish impulses. I can only suggest that you destroy your ego, and assimilate into the collective conscious. You will be unable to see the true vision of the future until you do.




Or maybe we would decide to kill those ones our society doesn't need or deemed flawed humans before they are even born.


Paranoid dystopian delusions, man. That's all they are. There is no reason to be scared of technology and advancement. Crappy examples anyway, I'm not even going to get into it as you haven't thought about it enough yourself without injecting some type or irrational fear. You are concentrating on nothing but the potential negatives. It's very absurd.

As far as babies being destroyed, It's already being done. Children are being killed because of birth defects or even because they were unplanned/unwanted. We are working to stop it, not continue it. With gene advancement technology, and advancement in robotics, there will be no need for those lower level jobs. There will be no need for a lower level caste. Everyone will have the ability to become advanced human beings, each with the potential to work to better humanity. It will be a period of exponential growth, not one of oppresion.




On second thought Nope - I don't want your perfect world - The flaws in our imperfect world are what makes it interesting & worth living for. It is the fight of living we live for & not the perfection of death at the end.


You can tell that to everyone who has a child kidnapped, a child molested, their families killed, there sons killed in war, there daughters sold as sex slaves, etc... You think that's okay, but let me break it down for you: The majority of the world does not. The people in power never do.

You see, the problem is that clinging to selfish desires makes you push away the advancement of our species. You would rather have your own desires met, rather than have your decendents experence a better life. To describe it in terms of money, you would rather use credit and your own money to satisfy your own materialistic desires, rather than invest for your offspring, your family, and your decendents - so that they would not have to live in a world such as you do.

So that they would not be at the bottom of the system. So that they would not have to complain.

Face it. If you started it now, your decendents would have the ability to change this world, to make it better. Just as those who have the resources are attempting to do now - yet, they receive resitance from those such as you who do not have the influence.

Do you know why? It is simply the chains of causality. Your ancestors where selfish, and did not provide for the future.

Compare it to the most influencial figures in the world today. There ancenstors provided for them, made a plan, so that they would not suffer in the depths of lower and middle class, living a life where they complain about the powers on top of them. complaining about oppression and how unfair life is. How much everyone is trying to control them.

If you want a change, it doesn not happen now. It takes generations. It's up to you if you want to start that process now, share your ideas, and have your offspring carry on with the goal of shaping the world in such a way that you and your family see fit.

Until then, you sound like a child to a parent.

[edit on 12-2-2008 by verylowfrequency]



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by scientist

Originally posted by benign.psychosis
Hah. Spare me with the creation of the United States. It involved so much argument, propaganda, and the concession of rights and liberty


so what is it? you are either for rights and liberty, or not. is privacy not a right? contradictions liquidation sale?


You can't talk about privacy as if it is an ideal. Reality does not have ideals.

Is privacy a right to a serial killer who has the dead body of your wife in his home - and you know it?

If you knew that he had your wife in his home, what would you do? What if you didn't have ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL, except for your word?

What if your nextdoor neighbor came over right now, shot your child, and went back into his house. Does he have the right to privacy when the police show up and ask to search his house?

I can tell you one thing, while you were there crying your eyes out, I bet the cops would say # it and storm the guys house - that is, if you actually lived by your privacy ideology that you preach, and called the cops.

If you saw him drag your dead wife in his home, and he locked his door behind him before you got there, does that killer have a right to privacy?

It's happened to someone, somewhere. If that situation is not good enough for you, I'm sure you are smart enough to think of some others.

What is more important to you?

Justice (be it lawful, or personal), or privacy?

Perhaps the question should be: Reality vs. privacy.



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 10:57 PM
link   

benign.psychosis
You see, I love the entire world and everyone in it.

That is about best thing you've written since we started. So, we both love mankind - I guess we do have some common ground.

My viewpoint is "The United States" because that is where I live & that's where the topic arose from. Without freedom here first I would not have the opportunity to assist others elsewhere.

Kind of like the oxygen mask in the aircraft scenario that the flight attendants spew in the emergency briefings , if you don't put on your mask first you may not be conscious to assist others later.

benign
nor do I love some outdated ideology

I don't see our ideology as outdated, I'm sorry you hate our privacy. I see those who think like you fit the definition of selfish egocentric behavior, not us as you claim. You believe we should sacrifice the rights of the many in favor of the selfish few who feel somehow infringed. God gave us choice & no man or state can take that away.

psychosis
There is no reason to be scared of technology and advancement.

Technology is my living and strengthens me and my words it does. Only weak people am I afraid of, who abuse technology and use it as a tool to sneak their subversive agenda past the masses that may be unaware of the techniques and or implications of such abuse. As one who implements technology in the real world, it's my responsibility to make layman aware of its caveats and help stop potential abuses.

We have school principles getting caught putting hidden cameras in girls bathrooms, telling us it's for their own good because some bad girls are smoking and catching them is more important. So, the bigger crime of potential perverts invading the privacy of our children is ignored , because the state sees it's argument trump our little girls privacy rights.

Kind of like the rapists who upon leaving the victims home, tells their victim that they're locking the door on the way out so other rapists can't get in. Another words "this is my territory and I'm the only one who can rape here". Here instead of the state we have the rapist trying to convince the victim he's her protector and she's thinking "you already took my innocence & dignity - what have I got left to protect."

Evil cares not who calls it.

That's why we need to make rules on how technology can be used, otherwise the potential crimes committed by the state are far greater then the crimes they are preventing by its citizens..

benign
You can tell that to everyone who has a child kidnapped, a child molested, their families killed, there sons killed in war, there daughters sold as sex slaves, etc...

There will always be sacrifices either way, shall we all sacrifice the freedoms of the many for the selfishness of a few who have crimes committed against them? So according to you, by sanctioning the state to commit crimes upon all of us, is somehow better then a few crimes committed against less of us by other citizens?


You talk as if you embrace moving forward yet, you wish to go back in time where it was ok for the gestapo to ask for your ID when going about your business or the king's men would kick in your front door any time they see fit. Using technology to go backwards is not the answer we must use it carefully & responsibly without infringing on the rights of those you've taken an oath to protect.

psychosis
Your ancestors were selfish, and did not provide for the future.

Nope, my ancestors sacrificed themselves in order that we can even have this conversation. At one time reading & writing was a technology only for the elite - I think we've come quite a ways and here in America we have the first amendment to remind us/them.


benign subversion
What is more important to you?

Justice (be it lawful, or personal), or privacy?


Privacy then Justice. If neither is upheld, we have the 2nd amendment

[edit on 13-2-2008 by verylowfrequency]



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by benign.psychosis

Originally posted by verylowfrequency
On second thought Nope - I don't want your perfect world - The flaws in our imperfect world are what makes it interesting & worth living for. It is the fight of living we live for & not the perfection of death at the end.

You can tell that to everyone who has a child kidnapped, a child molested, their families killed, there sons killed in war, there daughters sold as sex slaves, etc... You think that's okay, but let me break it down for you: The majority of the world does not. The people in power never do.


"The people in power never do."

That's among the most ludicrous and patently false statements you've attempted to foist off on this board.

All through human history examples abound of the "people in power" abusing that power.

Who sends the children of the disenfranchised to die in the wars that profit the elite?

Who orders the "disappearance' of whistle blowers whose actions threaten the power of the shadow government's deceptions?

Who, in fact, employs deception to encourage citizens to unwittingly give up their Constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure?

And who repeatedly obfuscates their arguments with twisted logic, ad hominem attacks and hyperbole in an attempt to sway the weak-minded to their presumptive and frankly arrogant positions on whatever the subject is at hand?

Balderdash!



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by benign.psychosis
 



You are unbelieveable. How in God's name can you have the nerve to compare two totally different things and appply them equally? It is nuts.


First, you have these scenarios where an eyewitness to a horrid crime, who would get immediate attention from the cop's, who after seeing bloody drags marks to the perps doort and hearing you eyewitness testimony, would break the door down right then; no warrant is needed in an EMERGENCY situation.

However, you then have another one: NO evidence except your word. If you cannot come up with anything more than: " Hey, Officer, I am really sure that a killer has my wifes dead body in his house, although IO cannot really give you any rational reason to believe me, just take my word and we will see if I am right. It does NOT work that way friend, thank God.

You cannot escape logic, and you cannot convince by comparing apples and concrete blocks. If you have some EVIDENCE that some killer was there with a body, then you would be listened to and if found reliable and checked out, the appropriate actions would be taken. But what YOU want is for the GUESS or aASSUMPTION or HUNCH of a person having the same weight as real and articulable evidence, and that is jut madness...ridiculous.

If all the proof you have is your ' word ' then of course that is nopt enough. Let's say that some insane person or schizophrenic in delusion believe that he just saw some men drag a body into a house. Are you really saying that based only on the ravings of a deranged mind the cop's should break down the ' suspects ' door to see if the madman was right?

It takes EVIDENCE to protect us from the ravages of a police state and loss of privacy. My privacy is more valuable to me than anyones wife or kid. If some cop came to my door and asked me to let them look and see if there was some body in my house because some guy said so with no evidence other than his imaginings, I would laugh and tell them to go to hell, and on the way back stop at the courthouse and get a warrant next time. Of course they could not, and so all this is crazy.

Do you rteally believe that the killer would allow a cop in without a warrant? NO way!! Only the weak and innocent are inclined to prove their innocence rather than demanding that the state prove your guilt. Reversing the way justice operates is not the way to insure due process, now is it?

Your argument always fails because you rely on some theory that we all should always give up our rights when the police announce some new threat; every threat means another series of intrusive gestures and tests and homes searched...and still the killer gets away. An eyewitness to a crime may provide a reason to have the cop's approach a home and knock and ask questions...for sure. But without SUBSTANTIATING EVIDENCE, the word of one man is no more valuable than another, and that means that " no warrant shall issue without PROBABLE CAUSE ".

If our privacy can be invaded every time someone gets killed and the cop's have no evidence and want to make us prove ourselves innocent to them, we are living in a total police state and have no privacy at all. The humilation of being considered a suspect..the inconvenience of having armed men view your most intimate and personal possessions in your home...the awful feeling that would horrify you if the cop's make a mistake..or intentionally alter or plant evidence...all this makes this too much to bear.

Voluntary or nothing. The day that a cop can storm a home based only on the word one of person with zero evidence, that is the day to lock and load and resist them forcefully. By that point why not?



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by goosdawg

"The people in power never do."

That's among the most ludicrous and patently false statements you've attempted to foist off on this board.

All through human history examples abound of the "people in power" abusing that power.

Who sends the children of the disenfranchised to die in the wars that profit the elite?

Who orders the "disappearance' of whistle blowers whose actions threaten the power of the shadow government's deceptions?

Who, in fact, employs deception to encourage citizens to unwittingly give up their Constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure?

And who repeatedly obfuscates their arguments with twisted logic, ad hominem attacks and hyperbole in an attempt to sway the weak-minded to their presumptive and frankly arrogant positions on whatever the subject is at hand?

Balderdash!



Of course, that would be "the people in power" who work to make the world a safer place. I suppose you would have realized that if you could deamalgamate those who posses great influence.

Unfortunately, in your "Us vs. Them" world, "They" are all evil.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 04:34 PM
link   
well said, eyewitness.



posted on May, 11 2008 @ 08:24 AM
link   
I,ve already made up my mind 5y's + ago since these swabbing tests have been experimental here in Australia-Victoria first-Sydney.
Our own Aussie coppers are getting Lazy as well !
Stuff'em, their(coppers) getting Fat again here!
Never let Anyone take you blood or saliva full stop.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 11:52 PM
link   
we need to keep them off streets




top topics



 
17
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join