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.

 

The American Police State is the 'New Normal'

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Article

I found this article on Yahoo News of all places, and its currently at the top of their "most e-mailed" list. This article talks about many of the issues we have talked about here on ATS, and I think the author really hits the nail on the head. It's a short read, but it says so much. He also references a quote by Martin Niemöller, which has always stuck with me since I first heard it:



First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out -- Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out -- Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out -- Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak for me.


I pan on emailing this article to everyone I know to prove that I'm not just "paranoid".




posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ProjectBlue
 


The title is a bit misleading (I know its from the article) when the issues raised are placed into proper context.

Tasering nonviolent people to death - A Taser is not a non lethal device. Like its rubber bullet and beanbag counterparts, its considered less than leathal. While I dont neccisarily agree with tasering a 75 year old lady, there are some other factors to take into account. Tasering grandma might actually be safer than having one or 2 officers go physical to subdue grandma. In this case if she was tased for yelling at the cop and that was it, then the cop should be fired if not charged. I base that off the article info, and subject to change if I can find more details.

Stealing your cellphone (and its data) - This is present in only 3 states, with California's law being the first to go to the courts. The State courts upheld the ability of law enforcement to essentially raid cell phones ONLY as a search incident to arrest. Michigan is the other state who does this, although I have not seen any laws / challenges there yet. I am drawing a blank on the 3 state. I will wager it will make its way to SCOTUS who will rule against the practice.

Lots of digital cases are heading through the system now dealing with searches, seizures, etc etc etc


Arresting nonviolent activists - This is also bit misleading. If a group of people are protesting, that in and of itself is not illegal and guaranteed by our Constitution. However, if that group of people are blocking a public right of way, or preventing people from entering private property, then they can be arrested. If you look into the cases you will see the reason for arrest is not protesting.

As for the Jefferson Memorial incident, there is a longer version of the video floating around somewhere here on ATS. The "dancers" were givenmultiple warnings by the Police but failed to listen. Also, the yahoo article uses the term dancing, while the people on the video argued they were protesting.

I think they were doing one of those stupid flash mob dances.

Regardless of personal feelings on that one, a persons rights end when they interfere with anothers.

As far as the FBI goes, they were essentially granted the same level of authoirty as Local police, so while it sounds like a power grab, in reality its nothing more than the FBI going back to what they have pretty much always been allowed to do.

If you take your trash out and place it by the curb, no search warrant is needed to snag the trash, or go through it to retrive any personal information (check your local law, some will vary. For those who are thinking about private property or 4th amendment violations, neither are applicable.

As far as the trash goes - it will fall under curtilage -

The curtilage is an important legal term to define the land immediately surrounding a house or dwelling, including any closely associated buildings and structures, but excluding any associated 'open fields beyond'. It defines the boundary within which a home owner can have a reasonable expectation of privacy and where 'intimate home activities' take place. It is an important legal concept in some jurisdictions for the understanding of burglary, trespass, and in relation to planning controls.

In urban properties the location of the curtilage may be evident from the position of fences, wall and similar; within larger properties it may be a matter of some legal debate as to where the private area ends and the 'open fields' start.[1]


The best deterent to those who think things are going down hill - Get invovled and vote. Hold your reps accountible and have communication with law enforcement.

Absent any of that, nothing is really going to change until the courts get it. But hey, why wait for the courts when you as citizens can apply pressure on your reps to make changes, not support, vote against what have you.

Anyways.. nothing wrong with due diligence.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
This about sums it up as to how far they are willing to go in order to shut us up if we protest against the new Police State actions:

trueslant.com...

Americans have already accepted forms of police brutality (macing, sound cannons, tasering) as the inevitable punishments for exercising their First Amendment rights. They have already submitted to the bureaucratic requirements of permits (permits to gather, permits to use a bullhorn,) and the ridiculous spectacle of caged protests where activists are literally penned behind gates and cannot move from their designated locations as they “exercise” their “freedom of speech.”

When the protest spills past the acceptable parameters of activism, the police state shocks the citizenry back into submission. They taser, and mace, and deafen people until they stop fighting.

And the truly sad part is that people are accepting this as the new norm! Supporting it, laughing when people are subjected to it and applauding these new measures as necessary to "keep us safe!"

Remember that little saying by Mr. Franklin? The actual quote has a couple varients, including:

"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." It has never sounded so true.

There hasn’t been too much fuss about this kind of oppression. Some guy got tasered when he asked John Kerry a question, but his fellow citizens mostly laughed about that. Jay Leno had a lot of fun with the “Don’t taze me, bro” stuff. Good times had by all.



edit on 26-6-2011 by jude11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by ProjectBlue
 


Thank you for showing this article. It reminds me of the current trend of putting CCTV cameras everywhere. I spoke to someone about this a little while ago, and he said, "well, if I´m not breaking the law, then I´ve got nothing to worry about!" A key point in this discussion was that me and my boyfriend at the time were sitting in a park by the river sharing a bottle of wine and some dinner. We´d been there for, maybe half an hour or so, when police rocked up. Rather than wait to find out what would happen, we slipped away into the dark pretty quick, but while we were hiding, we could see 2 police cars, 3 motorbikes and a few security or police officers on foot roaming frantically around the park, starting from exactly the place we were sitting. Now, according to the aforementioned person I was talking about this with, he went on tell me that we were breaking the law, and deserved to be fined and locked up!

OP, your quote rings true time and time again. And it is normal. When it gets to the point where all people are left without rights of basic humanity, who will defend their own sensibilities? How can they, when to them, this abomination of social order will be nothing more to them but normal? People in freedom can read a novel such as 1984 perhaps, and wonder why there is no revolution.... but why would people revolt against what... to them... is nothing but the way things have always been, always should be, and so rightly so?

Sometimes I go out with friends here in this city, and say, I light up a cigarette. So often I´ll be told... "You cant do that, you have to be at least ten metres away from a building!" They insist I´ll get fined if I do not move, so I move.... a metre away. The law is crushing the soul of the people through fear. So many people are afraid of their own shadows, too afraid to dare to protest. We are humans no longer, for how can we be human when the essence of humanity is in our animality? We have become drones, too beaten down and scared to live, to be alive as we once were. We are pacified by small ...very small.... allowances of enjoyment, which once could have been considered draconian in their administration, but now are luxuries greeted with veritable ecstasy.

I don´t claim to know why this is happening. I don´t know why they´re doing this to us, or for what end. I speak against it, and am called crazy, a lunatic, a radical insurgent against peace and order - or at least the facades of such falsehoods. All I can say is spread the philosophy of freedom as far and wide as you can. Time for a revolution of thought.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by jude11
Remember that little saying by Mr. Franklin? The actual quote has a couple varients, including:
"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." It has never sounded so true.


People actually need to understand how the law as well as their rights work before invoking Mr. Franklin. If you want to get technical then We the People are to blame, since we want to vote for American Idol instead of voting for our elected officals.

Constantly screaming Police brutality while taking no active approach to remedy the issue as you see it helps just as much as drinking vodka in the middle of the desert.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   
It's not right that law abiding citizens have to fear cops just as much they fear criminals. I dont see it changing thought.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by jude11
Remember that little saying by Mr. Franklin? The actual quote has a couple varients, including:
"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." It has never sounded so true.


People actually need to understand how the law as well as their rights work before invoking Mr. Franklin. If you want to get technical then We the People are to blame, since we want to vote for American Idol instead of voting for our elected officals.

Constantly screaming Police brutality while taking no active approach to remedy the issue as you see it helps just as much as drinking vodka in the middle of the desert.



Good Point.

I believe that is what it actually means tho. People just wanting to sit back and vote for Idol and leaving it up to Govt. to keep us secure instead of voting for the security is what makes the "deserve neither" ring true.

IMO



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by jude11
Remember that little saying by Mr. Franklin? The actual quote has a couple varients, including:
"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." It has never sounded so true.


People actually need to understand how the law as well as their rights work before invoking Mr. Franklin. If you want to get technical then We the People are to blame, since we want to vote for American Idol instead of voting for our elected officals.

Constantly screaming Police brutality while taking no active approach to remedy the issue as you see it helps just as much as drinking vodka in the middle of the desert.


You're very right. People say that "voting does't work." but if you give into that idea than you have no one the blame but yourself. We The People are the only thing keeping the government in check. When We The People stop caring, that's when the problem starts. Government runs like a business, they care about money. They don't give a frack about the peoples rights. And you know what they say about rights, "use them or lose them."



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by DeepThoughtCriminal
 


You are correct about people being apathetic to what occurs around them. As for many of our rights being taken away (here in the US anyways), such as smoking or enjoying a glass of wine in the park, it comes about because some busy body has decided that they are offended. They contact their legislator and it moves on from there.

Quite often the law is passed before any one even knew that there was a bill out there. At this moment, I am a fan of CCTV. The Police have them, so why shouldn’t the people? Keeps both parties honest. And helps solve crimes that may have gone unsolved.

As Xcathdra says, we only have to participate in the process to correct this.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

People actually need to understand how the law as well as their rights work before invoking Mr. Franklin. If you want to get technical then We the People are to blame, since we want to vote for American Idol instead of voting for our elected officals.

Constantly screaming Police brutality while taking no active approach to remedy the issue as you see it helps just as much as drinking vodka in the middle of the desert.



I can agree - but I think people are also frustrated in that this is one area where their vote or voice just doesn't seem to matter.

For example, Bush and Obama are at pretty opposite ends of the political spectrum. But, really - how much has anything to do with this topic changed at the national level?

Several congress members and governors have came and went. Likewise enough various state and local officials have been voted out and in to fill a prison with their promises. Has anything changed with regard to this issue?

I think people are frustrated because no matter who or how they vote - this kind of thing just keeps not only happening, but getting more common.



Meet the new boss, same as the old boss - The Who



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
It's not right that law abiding citizens have to fear cops just as much they fear criminals. I dont see it changing thought.


Let me ask you this then...

If we know its not right for law abiding citizens to fear the police, and we know corruption exists in our government, and we dont like it, whats the point in complaining about it if your end viewpoint is you dont see anything changing.

Couldnt it be said then the reason we have these issues is because of that specific argument you just made above? If we resign ourselves to the concept that we know the probelms exist, but wont do anything to correct then, then why bring up the transgressions in the first place?

Also, I just wanted to say im not attacking you or trying to come across as a prig. Its a genuine question.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by jude11
Good Point.

I believe that is what it actually means tho. People just wanting to sit back and vote for Idol and leaving it up to Govt. to keep us secure instead of voting for the security is what makes the "deserve neither" ring true.

IMO


While I understand your argument and the quotes, I think we should look a little farther back to bring home the fact we are in the predicament we are in because people dont care.

Outside Independence Hall when the Constitutional Convention of 1787 ended, Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?"

With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded,"A republic, if you can keep it."

Goes hand in hand with what you are talking about, but the fact remains we knew what we were getting into when our coutnry was founded, and as we can see with all the quotes, the intent of our founding fathers was to endure a government of, by and for the people. They purposely intended the citizens to be the final say and controllers of their own destinies.

As you pointed out, people need to stop relying on the Government to do whats best. We also must remeber that we dont live in a Democracy, but a Representative Republic. Its not enough to just vote and then rubberstamp incumbents.

We need to quit being apathetic about voting, as well as being apathetic towards our elected officals. We are 14 trillion in debt, and all I see is each side of the aisle blaming each other, people in these forums blaming Bush or Obama. We the people made this mess, and we the people are now going to pay for it.

To bring it back around to somewhat being on topic, I dont think we are a police state. The op article is a gernalization that tries to extend those incidents to the whole of the US, which they are not. It doesnt mean it will never happen, but I am hopeful we can head it off while reclaiming our country.

Its going to take more than just pointing out the problems and talking about them though. In this case actions really will speak louder than words.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex
You are correct about people being apathetic to what occurs around them. As for many of our rights being taken away (here in the US anyways), such as smoking or enjoying a glass of wine in the park, it comes about because some busy body has decided that they are offended. They contact their legislator and it moves on from there.

Question for you, and im playing devils advocate. Where exactly does it say smoking is a right?



Originally posted by TDawgRex
Quite often the law is passed before any one even knew that there was a bill out there. At this moment, I am a fan of CCTV. The Police have them, so why shouldn’t the people? Keeps both parties honest. And helps solve crimes that may have gone unsolved.


This goes back to my argument about the people needing to take an active approach to our Government. I agree that we have laws that are passed in backrooms. However people seem to ignore that is how our Government works. We have a REpresentative Republic, and by extension the lawmakers who are drafting those laws are doing so on the behalf of the people they represent.

Simply voting a person into office is not enough. We must keep tabs on the children less they run up the parents credit card. In this instance, we have failed to live up to our requirement as citizens, and have temporarily transfered Government legitimacy from the consent of the people to our elected officals.



Originally posted by TDawgRex
As Xcathdra says, we only have to participate in the process to correct this.


One of the old Police Departments I used to work for had a permanent ban on the sale and shooting off of fireworks within city limits. When I worked 4th of July, it was non stop calls from people complaining neighbors were shooting off fireworks. When I arrived I would always make contact and give my shpeel - City Ordinance says you are not allowed to shoot fireworks off in the city. With that I would end my encounter with - I have calls pending so I am going to let you guys take your time cleaning up the fireworks. I should be back around in this area around midnight.

I had people complain about how unfair the ordinace was. We always took flack, and I always reminded the people that the Police are not the ones who pass the laws, we just enforce them (and in this case enforced is used losely). I explained to the people that they could attend city council meetings and make their thoughts known to city council.

To those who say votes dont count, the law was changed and fireworks are now allowed in city limits on the 4th (much ot the irritation of the fire department).

Its not to late for us. Look at it this way - 100 Senators, 435 Representatives, 9 Supreme Court Justices, and A Military and Law Enforcement community who took an oath to defend the Constitution. If our Government decides to make "changes" I think we the people could take em.

After all, its already happened once in our History, and because of that we no longer sing God Save the Queen. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
1984* watch the movie, and relate it too police brutality by todays standards/ eerily similar



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frogs
I can agree - but I think people are also frustrated in that this is one area where their vote or voice just doesn't seem to matter.

For example, Bush and Obama are at pretty opposite ends of the political spectrum. But, really - how much has anything to do with this topic changed at the national level?

Several congress members and governors have came and went. Likewise enough various state and local officials have been voted out and in to fill a prison with their promises. Has anything changed with regard to this issue?

I think people are frustrated because no matter who or how they vote - this kind of thing just keeps not only happening, but getting more common.



Meet the new boss, same as the old boss - The Who


The President has absolutely nothing to do with the day to day running of the United States - that job is reserved for Congress.

I am glad we have voted congressmen in and out - that tells me right there our voices do count. Its what we do with that voice once we get it elected that we screw up. How many times have you written your representative, called, signed a petititon etc?

If we take people back to Government 101 we the people can meet with our representative in order to draft a bill. Citizens cant introduce to the House, but our Reps can, and that ption is present for any and all who want to take advantage of it.

If we dont like a bill, then why not have the people come up with one?

I truely believe that if the citizens decided to come together in the spirit of fair debate and compromise, we can easily fix this mess. We need to ingore the talking heads on tv who push their agenda and distort facts. If the people come together in such a manner their voice is clear, changes can and will happen.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ziggy1706
1984* watch the movie, and relate it too police brutality by todays standards/ eerily similar

Read the book, the movie was horrible.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Smoking is not a "right." I always ask those around me if it is ok to light up. If they don't like the smell of cigarettes, I take it elsewhere or don't smoke. It depends upon the situation I'm in.

I have been told by a couple of buds that I am strange because I attend the town hall meetings and speak up when I have a question. I look at the towns website weekly to see if money is being spent in what I think is an illogical manner. Also to see what ordinances are up for vote.

Back in the day, we used to have family reunions in the towns park, virtual keggers. The only reason the police showed up was to say Hi to friends and maybe have a Brat or two. Nowadays, the town won’t allow that.

Like you said, you have to participate.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I was just expressing my skepticism. If I can do anything I will do it.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by jude11
Remember that little saying by Mr. Franklin? The actual quote has a couple varients, including:
"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." It has never sounded so true.


People actually need to understand how the law as well as their rights work before invoking Mr. Franklin. If you want to get technical then We the People are to blame, since we want to vote for American Idol instead of voting for our elected officals.

Constantly screaming Police brutality while taking no active approach to remedy the issue as you see it helps just as much as drinking vodka in the middle of the desert.



STAR FOR YOU!!!!!!

Absolutely. Vote the BUMS out,and Change the Laws. We are to blame.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


This is not meant to be argumentative, but the day to day running of the government is truly up to the career bureaucrats and their substantial organizations. Chief policymakers, cabinet officers are generally transients appointed by the various administrations that come and go. But there stands a corps of career bureaucrats that maintain and nurture the wheels of government, no matter what stamp of idiot is at the reigns of power at any given point in time. In large part, these executives act as "tools" of the ruling administrations to accomplish political objectives - but they serve their own bureaucratic interests which span many "generations" of administration change. While the Executive branch appoints policy makers, the Congress makes laws and the Supreme Court ajudicates - it's the career bureaucrats that have to turn these lawmakers fantasies into real regulation in the day-to-day operation of their respective agencies "where the rubber meets the road" comes to mind. Above all other concerns the career bureaucrat promotes continuation of the bureaucratic endeavor (and of course those "soft" rewards that come with the recognition of a good job done - lol).

ganjoa
edit on 26-6-2011 by ganjoa because: correxia dyslexia




top topics



 
4

log in

join