We do NOT live in a police state! Please move on.

reply to post by projectbane

PIGS? you referring to the POLICE? I will have to assume you are. Well done for for your lack of professionalism. Its brings me to my next point - with that attitude no wonder you were the "alleged" victim (or in your biased eyes you were, possibly committed a crime seeing as you say "your circle" ) I would have to say, hmmmmm I wonder what the other version of your so called events are? Two sides and all that.

Yeah, two sides. Derogatory terms are used on both sides of the bench. Delinquents used to be a popular term for the judge who sentenced kids for kickbacks, even though they didn't commit crimes. A friendly cop (not pig) bought some young boy some McDonalds, and was then gunned down. Was it a delinquent? Or maybe he wasn't really a nice guy, since police cause more incidents than terrorists.

Derogatory terms are bred out of various things, in some case it's programmed hate. Sometimes its manufactured hate for personal gain. Sometimes it's simply fear (people from certain neighbourhoods are afraid of being respectful to law enforcement). Or sometimes it's because they experienced injustice.

The point being is that the issue you are discussing is at the political policy level and the effects on the ground, or the effects with interaction of LEOs and community, are all being governed by their mandate. And while one can poke and jab at "criminals" or "pigs", it's all for naught because you are not addressing the political climate, but rather the symptoms of that climate.

Here is some food for thought:

You might be hard pressed to find anyone who hasn't ignorantly committed some crime in one form or the other:

You commit three felonies a day  JUN 10 2013
In a book called Three Felonies A Day, Boston civil rights lawyer Harvey Silverglate says that everyone in the US commits felonies everyday and if the government takes a dislike to you for any reason, they'll dig in and find a felony you're guilty of.

The average professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she has likely committed several federal crimes that day. Why? The answer lies in the very nature of modern federal criminal laws, which have exploded in number but also become impossibly broad and vague

kottke.org...

In the OP, you were speaking about North Korea and China and how oppressive they are. But, if there are so many laws on the books that the government can come down on nearly anyone, at any given time, so long as they have a reason, I find that eerily similar to some made up authoritarian rule.

Maybe it's a sign of how future societies are going to progress. I kind of doubt it, because there are plenty of nations around the world that are not so arbitrary in their justice system.

Again though, I don't know if it fits the definition of a police state, the contemporary version, sure. I do think if the US was to bottom out into a depression era/with war- type situation you may very well see a traditional police state form during this time.

As it stands there are probably better terms to describe it which are more accurate to the classic definition. However, the "electronic police state" cited earlier from the Police Sciences Textbook, current climate seems to be indicative of such a definition.

reply to post by projectbane


I strongly agree with your main idea. I think that we enjoy an exceptional level of freedom, despite the never ending need to update our layers of security.

Like you, I have never been personally subjected to any form of maltreatment at the hands of law enforcement or government. I also have not been charged with any crimes or arrested. I admit to being a habitual speeder, but I often find that I'm not stopped over for it. I have always found myself graced with leniency. There have been many times that I should have been given harsher treatment than I actually received. I've had my share of unnecessary inconviences from law enforcement. In the U.S., I'm often pulled over, whenever I drive outside of my area of residence. I also find that whenever I get a new car, I am stopped by the police within a week or two. I'd scream that I am being profiled, but I understand the problem. If I saw myself driving any of my cars, I'd also likely believe that I must have stolen it.

In recent years, I have started to develop a negative opinion of law enforcement. I'll admit that I likely do not have the full story for the countless events that have shaped my current opinion. I do not extend my negative view to all law enforcement, but I do feel that lower quality candidates are finding it too easy to earn a badge. Unarmed or non-threatening individuals are being shot. Non-threatening dogs are being shot. Warrants are being served on the wrong addresses. That's just the top of the list, I could add how women are being raped by law enforcement, individuals are getting stomped for legitimately asking what crime they are suspected of, mentally ill are often inappropriately handled, and many newer police officers appear to be control freaks. My grandfather and an uncle were career leo's, and they had a high level of integrity. They also had a high level of skill or maybe it was proper training. They were able to handle many situations, including against armed suspects, without always drawing their own weapon.

I personally see three possible problems with our current law enforcement. First, I do not believe that applicants are screened well enough to weed out the mentally challenged. Some of their ranks are filled with the truly unfit. Next, I do not believe that law enforcement are adequately held accountable for their wrong actions. Someone should always be accountable for any accidental or intentional overkill officers inflict upon the publc. If a person finds they will get away with improper behavior, they will usually continue, and likely increase their misconduct. Finally, I would call the third problem a pussification of law enforcement. I understand how they put their life on the line every time they show up for duty. However, law enforcement has always been a dangerous job. There is no excuse for not greeting the public with integrity and honor. There is no excuse for shooting an unarmed person, or shooting a friendly pet dog. I could add that law enforcement do not need military grade equipment. On occasion, it may be necessary, but for the most part I believe that it adds to the fear of law enforcement.

No one should not be fearful of law enforcement, if they are not engaged in any criminal activity. If a law enforcement officer is unable to make law abiding citizens feel safe in their presence, then they are in the wrong business. If a law enforcement officer is not mentally equipped to meet any situation with a cool head, then they are in the wrong business. If a law enforcement officer is found to be corrupt or guilty of breaking the law, then they should at least get a life behind bars. Yes, than can be viewed as overkill in many cases, but they should be held to the highest standard. If they want respect from the public, then they have to earn it back.

I agree that we are not living in a police state, and that my issues with law enforcement do not constitute a police state. However, I cannot be convinced that we do not live in a state of increasingly heavy surveillance. I used to be bothered by it, but I have developed a strong indifference to it. I'd say that I am not doing anything wrong, but that is very subjective. I can say with certainty that I am not breaking any laws, nor am I planning to. I also do not try to hurt other people or plan to do so. I can handle all the government watching. I know other people complain that they do not like surveillance, and that they are not criminals. Apologies to those in that category. I do not easily believe you are not interested in concealing criminal activity.

Soon I will have a lot less to watch, because I find the internet has become less useful over the years. I'm planning to unplug in the near future, but it has nothing to do with government surveillance. My reasoning has more to do with an increasing loss of value, and a perceived marketing overload. I cancelled cable television, many years ago, because I didn't want to understand why I had to pay so much for cable and still have so many advertisements. It's not so much the number of advertisments that I receive from the internet, it is the data mining that I am subjected to. It's not that I care who knows what I do on the internet. For more than 25 years, I've used the internet, and never once have I assumed that there was any level of anonymity present. My problem is that the advertisements are mostly irrelevant. More than likely, if I search for a product or service, I will buy it right after my search. I do not need to see advertisements for cars, insurance, vacations, watches, or women for months after making my decision.

I think many people have the wrong idea of what is happening. I used to think that it was the governments pushing us into a totalitarian nanny state. I've since developed the opinion that it is business, especially big corporations, which are behind the push to eliminate privacy. They want to have a window, into every facet of our life, so that they are better able to seperate us from our money. Even the healthcare crap appears to be the industry gaining a greater control and a bigger slice of the American pie.

All of this is my opinion, and I do not claim it to be the truth. It doesn't matter to me if you even share my thoughts or opinions. I don't even care if I'm liked or disliked. I just want to suggest that you consider the benefits of tuning out, turning off, and dropping back into life outside of the internet.

As far as the bad seeds in law enforcement. Get involved with changing the laws and/or creating ones that are more sensible. We have too many laws, and some that are unbalanced, which is another way to say unjust. Be active in voicing your dissatisfaction for any law enforcement officer unfit for duty. Become aware of how your local and state law enforcement officials are selected, and actively seek to change an unsatisfactory selection processes. Become aware of the review processes for current law enforcement officials, and seek to change any unsatisfactory review processes. Anytime a law enforcement officer is guilty of overstepping their authority, or of abusing their authority, launch your complaints at the level of government that they fall over. My favorite tactic is to simply vote no for police funding. .

JanAmosComenius
OP, you did not respond to this post. So again: How is it possible that US have largest prison population not only per capita but also absolutely? It est larger then totalitarian China with 4 times+ larger population? Are Americans natural born criminals or are US criminals so lame?

Apologies for not replying!! trying to read all the responses and decipher some of the irrelevant and nonsensical aspects of peoples posts is not only time consuming but is pause enough for the proverbial shaking of the head.

Your first two points could be linked together (the per capita and the jailing for profit) im not saying they are or are not but yes these two things are a cause for concern. However, again quite possibly America having the largest population of prisoners etc could boil down to simple criminal behavior due to many different reasons or lots of reasons combined. For example, could it be possible that certain types of Amercians are criminally minded? OR could it be that the POLICE force in certain areas of America are that much BETTER at their jobs and catching more criminals? These are two very plausible reasons????

I will have to say that it could be a mix of private prisons (therefore corrupt companies not government or police) trying to make a profit from jailing more people!! And a mix of police being more efficient in their work and use of the large budget allocated to the service yearly.

Whenever private companies are involved it seems to me that regardless of market and product they will find a way to bend the rules and corrupt the system. This is not down to a police State or government corruption but a possible lack of oversight and trusting these companies too much!

boncho
reply to post by Rosha

 

The thread is about a police state or absence of. But you specifically misquoted a speech by JFK and ignored the transcript when it was presented. I never argued the main theme of the thread with you, I simply pointed out your error.

I did nothing of the sort. I do see it as a case that Kennedy knew more than he let on and was speaking of a far wider conspiracy than just communism. I do not think he was dumb enough to fall for the distraction the Pentagon was feeding to him. Look at the results...while the true perps were distracting US in the bs drama show of communism, the same way they are doing today with the Arab Spring..the actual perps, quietly and incrementally, while everyone slept and in collusion with many branches of US gov, took control of everything...they are STILL doing it!

That portion of the speech JFK gave, speaks to me of just that....the pressing for diligence, vigilance..all of it..just wasted on deaf ears it seems.


Ro.
...trying to work.

SnF OP

I get this all the time "dont you know we live in a police state"

it annoys the hell out of me because we quite clearly do not, many try to depict the Orwellian nightmare as our new reality again its totally nosecone

I really dont have much more to add other than to say that i agree with you.

We're not in a Police State?
That's such a relief.

www.washingtonsblog.com...

-Peace-

Eryiedes
We're not in a Police State?
That's such a relief.

www.washingtonsblog.com...

-Peace-

I read that article about 2 hours before i wrote the thread. That NSA ex has his opinion. And what he says would and possibly could carry a small amount of weight IF he wasn't a "whisleblower"!!

My reason is this.....for a man who signed a confidentially agreement his word means NOTHING, therefore his creditability to ME is suspect. Because, most "whisleblowers" have or had some grievance public or not. He left the NSA shortly after 9/11 in fact a month and a half after!

In September 2002, he, along with J. Kirke Wiebe and Edward Loomis, asked the U.S. Defense Department to investigate the NSA for allegedly wasting "millions and millions of dollars" on Trailblazer, a system intended to analyze data carried on communications networks such as the Internet. Binney had been one of the inventors of an alternative system, ThinThread, which was shelved when Trailblazer was chosen instead. Binney has also been publicly critical of the NSA for spying on U.S. citizens, saying of its expanded surveillance after the September 11, 2001 attacks that "it's better than anything that the KGB, the Stasi, or the Gestapo and SS ever had"[9] as well as noting Trailblazer's ineffectiveness and unjustified high cost compared to the far less intrusive ThinThread.[10] He was furious that the NSA hadn't uncovered the 9/11 plot and stated that intercepts it had collected but not analyzed likely would have garnered timely attention with his leaner more focused system

The last sentence says a lot!! firstly he was unhappy that the NSA didn't use his recommended system but instead used one he thought was more costly and timely.....second for someone (and yes he was very high in the NSA) so high in the NSA he had no idea 9/11 was an "inside" job!!

This says a lot about 9/11 truthers. This whole system that collects so much data on US citizens didnt pick up that a conspiracy was going on??? Hmmmmm....HE was furious that the NSA hadnt uncovered the 9/11 plot!!!

Binney repeated estimates that the NSA (particularly its Stellar Wind project[16]) had intercepted 20 trillion communications "transactions" of Americans such as phone calls, emails, and other forms of data

Overall, as a credible person for the Police State comment.....he had issues with his former employers for not using a system he wanted to use....sounds like sour grapes to me!!

reply to post by projectbane


Can you respond to my post please?

What do you make of the NDAA act, America being declared a battlefield (Law of War is applicable to american soil) and the Constitution-free zone..

Do you not think these seem like a dismantling of our rights? That the ability to be incarcerated, even assassinated without a trial, legally, is the sign of a violently controlled nation? A nation controlled unlawfully.. by law?

If you are not 100% on these concepts, go back to my post, I explain them there.

reply to post by projectbane


Nothing to see here folks. Just a cop trying to rationalize what has been done to citizens for years as 'law and order'.

IMO, he is the real life, breathing incarnation of Eric Cartman from South Park.

Respect my authoritah!

iRoyalty
reply to post by projectbane

 

Can you respond to my post please?

What do you make of the NDAA act, America being declared a battlefield (Law of War is applicable to american soil) and the Constitution-free zone..

Do you not think these seem like a dismantling of our rights? That the ability to be incarcerated, even assassinated without a trial, legally, is the sign of a violently controlled nation? A nation controlled unlawfully.. by law?

If you are not 100% on these concepts, go back to my post, I explain them there.

edit on 18-1-2014 by iRoyalty because: (no reason given)

I remember when Eisenhower coined the phrase Military Industrial Complex......he thought this would be a phrase to place more control on that complex and stiffen responsible government response to armed conflict. In fact he accidentally did the opposite..he should of left it the way it was called....WAR PROFITEERING!!

What do I think of the NDAA? Well its a budget act for the DoD...at its purest form....can you be more specific?

I DO NOT think we live in a police state....however I said there are some things that are wrong. Guantanamo bay and combatants of war being held without due process and without certain human rights like charges or access to due process.
I fully believe in the constitution of the USA. I am a patriot at his most prideful. But there are things that I feel ashamed about. Unlawful detention, indefinite detention. I am a firm believer that EVERYONE should have the right to a fair trial in a court on USA soil. You see, for me (I love the military with furious passion) but the 9/11 event was a criminal act NOT a act of war. But the Industrial Military Complex raised its head. (The Soldiers can' t be blamed!! They have a job to do!!) So the detainee if charged should be charged in a US criminal court. Obama was going to do that but then changed his mind. That was not his best decision ever but he buckled to pressure form the usual suspects and said the public were not to crazy about the idea.

I never said the USA is perfect and I never will, but we live in a democratic nation that houses the greatest military might in the world to protect the average person from being separated from their daily does of Desperate Housewives or some dumb as a tree NBA idiot and his girlfriends adventures. If people were willing to do as much to help the country as they are too moan about it then wouldn't we all be better off.

But 99 percent of the wasters I hear on various message boards, out on the street and at work or wherever, talk about things but DO NOTHING!! they flap their gums....but hey, its their right to moan and do jack!

Not being perfect is not a crime....what it is, is a conglomerate of people making poor decisions that ultimately have a downside. BUT we are still FREE as of today...so again I ask "What Police State"

No one knocked on my door last night!!!!!!! Did they knock on yours?

WHY NOT ACT - after all we are still free to do so!!

reply to post by projectbane


You characterize what can possibly be considered treasonous behavior from an ex-security agency head as just "sour grapes" do you?
Enjoy your NDAA, NSA, CIA, FBI, BATFE, TSA, IMF, Trans-Pacific Treaty, ACA, Patriot Act, Drone Strikes, Not-so-Secret Kill Lists, Prisoner Acclimation Training, Eroding Constitution, Gun Confiscations, Micro-Chipping, Executive Orders, Puppetshow Politics, Military & Prison Industrial Complexe, 100 mile "Constitution-Free" Zones, Illegal Checkpoints, Terahertz Scanners, Roadside Fistings and "The Thin Blue Line".
Funny...that sounds like the exact recipe of a police state to me.
Maybe you feel those things are actually for our benefit?

-Peace-

reply to post by projectbane


The NDAA act allows indefinite incarceration and assissination of US citizens, without due process based on intel that they might be a terrorist or holds opinions opposing US interest. This is almost the definition of a police state alone.

US has been declared a battlefield (why? I don't know) but this means the rules of war apply to American soil, perhaps this is to bring some validity to the NDAA act.

Also you say you love the constitution but do you live in the Constitution free zone? The map is on my post. This means that 2/3 US citizens no longer have constitutional rights.

Perhaps we are not at a full police state yet, however we are damned close. This is the same course that other totalitarian leaders have taken, the US has just done it slower and sneakier.

The groundwork is laid out, deny it on a technicality if you want, but it's coming and the only people standing in the way are the libertarian hippies you have expressed so much distaste for.

butcherguy
reply to post by projectbane

 

Nothing to see here folks. Just a cop trying to rationalize what has been done to citizens for years as 'law and order'.

IMO, he is the real life, breathing incarnation of Eric Cartman from South Park.

Respect my authoritah!

No basis for anything you have said here. Law and Order is what is need for societal needs. Having a libertarian view on life is all well and good for you...but in reality it doesnt work. WHY? Because its basically individualism..."i want to do what I want to do and don't tell me otherwise" kind of selfish really....

Society need governing and governing requires laws for the sake of the population. People with your view of "Nothing to see here" are merely not informed enough or lack grown up perspective of what it takes to run a huge country with differing opinions, religions, political views etc.

Libertarianism is all about lets have smaller government, less police, more control in the peoples hands.....but the message is lost when the phrase "NOW VOTE FOR ME" comes into play.

I don't watch south park....im not a child!!

reply to post by projectbane

I don't watch south park....im not a child!!

You should watch one episode.... then you would know that there is a warning at the beginning.... it is meant for mature audiences!

Most cops are like children emotionally.

Our country was founded on libertarian principles, it has been downhill from there.

projectbane
I don't watch south park....im not a child!!

South Park is the most adult comedy on mainstream tv lol if you were a child I would be worried you were watching it.

Sorry, had to clarify, I'm a big fan!

reply to post by projectbane


Yes, we live in a police state. They have simply chosen, at this point in time, not to exercise the laws that they have already passed to deny us any movement and/or freedoms.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


" I really dont have much more to add other than to say that i agree with you.

Considering the Degree of Technology available Today to the U.S. Goverment and some of the Mentally Challenged People who are part of the " System " , the Temptation to use such Technology in Totalitarianistic ways in order to have a Sense of Complete Control over others is Unbounded in a Unmoralistic sense to me , and many other Free Thinking People who reside in this Alledgely Democratic Republic called the United States Of America . It is happening as we Speak , the Erosion of Personal Freedoms we ONCE took for Granted . If Americans don't Respond to such Alarming degrees of Control soon , then yes , a Fascist Police State will come to fruition in our not to Distant Future .

reply to post by projectbane


I expect you've gotten a ton of resistance by now over your thread. Let me add my two cents worth.

It's been many years since, but I've been stopped twice for no reason other than I was driving through a part of the poorer part of east Austin. Basically, the suspect, me, was a white male in an old vehicle in a black community. Bingo! A dude, me, out buying something surely illegal.

You would probably respond by asking what was the big deal?
My response would be that that was the more less the start of the decline in how law was imposed on citizens. I was deemed a suspect for no good reason except what was in the officer's mind. And I'm sure he was confident that he was performing a public service by pulling me over and checking my ID. But I thought it was harassment because of the physical reasons I've given and as a direct warning to keep clear of the neighborhood even if I was not guilty.

That about time the time of the big bank shoot out in California and the subsequent development of the black uniformed SWAT teams, and then their armored cars replaced their standard vans and then the tazers appeared, and then training that seemed to have mandated faceplants if the customer was argumentative, and more recently five or six or 20 bullets directed at the torso if the cops weren't satisfied with enough compliance. Naw, its not a police state. --Excuse me, I failed to mention along the way of that progression the introduction of police dogs at some early point.

I shouldn't have forgotten that bit of info having lived on a few miles from an outfit that imported those trained dogs from Germany. Yeah! Really, direct from Germany. Probably old Stasi dogs, you think?

None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody had decided not to see. Ayn Rand

The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Ayn Rand

I must agree with you OP. We do not live in a police state, as most would describe it. We live under a system of vast and expansive control that has been incrementally set in place over a long period of time. One very few are able to see, and some refuse to see. The system uses a modicum of oppression to breed rampant repression among the masses. Repression is always more powerful than oppression, as a means of control. We are a deceived and deluded civilization. We have chosen not to see that our lives are no different from the domesticated(enslaved) animals we put on long chains, in fenced backyards, and live with in our homes every day. Their domestication is a reflection of our own condition.

Civilization is the progress toward a society of privacy. The savage's whole existence is public, ruled by the laws of his tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men. Ayn Rand

Narrow-minded. I was trying to find a way to describe what I read in the OP, and that is what I came up with.

The OP has determined that since no kind of injustice has touched his/her life or those of anyone that they know, then an emerging police state doesn't exist.

The United States (as well as much of the rest of the world) is moving (at an ever-increasing speed) towards a full-blown police state; to suggest otherwise with the plethora of information available is ignorant at best.

Every liberty that We the public enjoy is being reduced or removed by the government that is supposed to be in place to protect those very liberties.

Laws have been, and are being, passed to curtail any protection the public enjoys from tyranny, and if the OP cannot see that for themselves, then I expect that nothing short of being rounded up at gunpoint will open their eyes.

A culture of fear is being force-fed to the public intravenously through every means of communication and entertainment that we currently enjoy, and it is being done so to catastrophic effect, in order to expedite the process of bringing the masses under the full and complete control of the Government. If you don't recognize this, you are in a near-pure state of denial.

The "wake up" call for the OP is going to be a particularly harsh one, in my opinion.