How do we end the police state?

[ClairvoyantCat]

and who doesn't try to fuck with our Second Amendment RIGHTS.

Because you never know when the king of England is gonna get all up in your face.

[rumborak]

BTW, just a general comment : Calling the US a police state does a lot of injustice to people who really live in one. In the 10 years I have lived here I have not had anything more than a few fleeting interactions with police officers. A police state is something very different. I've been to Egypt, and that one felt like a police state. Israel a little bit too, with the ubiquitous soldiers there.

rumborak

[El Barto]

BTW, just a general comment : Calling the US a police state does a lot of injustice to people who really live in one. In the 10 years I have lived here I have not had anything more than a few fleeting interactions with police officers. A police state is something very different. I've been to Egypt, and that one felt like a police state. Israel a little bit too, with the ubiquitous soldiers there.

rumborak

I don't think anybody's trying to compare us to the DPRK (just yet).   Compared to our proudly free former selves, though, I think it's a apt characterization.  We've really taken huge steps in the wrong direction. 

[Super Dude]

I hate to turn this into an Israel thing, but Israel is not a police state.

[Scheavo]

BTW, just a general comment : Calling the US a police state does a lot of injustice to people who really live in one. In the 10 years I have lived here I have not had anything more than a few fleeting interactions with police officers. A police state is something very different. I've been to Egypt, and that one felt like a police state. Israel a little bit too, with the ubiquitous soldiers there.

rumborak

Well, we incarcerate more people than anyone in the entire world. We have laws on the book that say that police can pretty much ignore our constitutional rights, habeus corpus is yours only if the state doesn't deem you a threat, and police officers are allowed to harass you with little to no justification. Taking photographs of the wrong building? Be prepared to be fucked with, and possibly be apprehended (just to make sure). With the police, you are guilty until proven innocent.

[rumborak]

I hate to turn this into an Israel thing, but Israel is not a police state.

Definitely not saying it is. But the ubiquitous presence of soldiers definitely takes you aback when you arrive. I remember sitting in the bus from Tel Aviv to Haifa, having a soldier with a huge Uzi fall asleep on my shoulder

rumborak

[rumborak]

BTW, just a general comment : Calling the US a police state does a lot of injustice to people who really live in one. In the 10 years I have lived here I have not had anything more than a few fleeting interactions with police officers. A police state is something very different. I've been to Egypt, and that one felt like a police state. Israel a little bit too, with the ubiquitous soldiers there.

rumborak

Well, we incarcerate more people than anyone in the entire world. We have laws on the book that say that police can pretty much ignore our constitutional rights, habeus corpus is yours only if the state doesn't deem you a threat, and police officers are allowed to harass you with little to no justification. Taking photographs of the wrong building? Be prepared to be fucked with, and possibly be apprehended (just to make sure). With the police, you are guilty until proven innocent.

But it's a far cry from Egypt where you can't drive for more than 10km without having to show your passports to a soldier in front of a street barrier.
I am not disagreeing with the general notion of the thread that the US is not "coherent" enough with its application of its own laws (they do seem indeed fly out of the window when it's convenient to do so), but the US is not a police state.

rumborak

[sonatafanica]

The way I see it, the way the police situation is now is just a big indicator of the difference between the people and the government. (you know, when they're shouldn't be a difference at all)

I never had a bad attitude with cops my whole life until I started driving. Then I noticed all the people being pulled over for the slightest offenses. The thing that very much changed my view was when I got pulled over for having an expired tag. Oh yeah, and the tag had expired three days before. The only reason I hadn't renewed it is because of my intense work and college schedule at the time and not being able to get to the DMV or whatever to get a new one. The point is, it was June and that's what the sticker said. The cop went out of his way while driving to make goddamned sure that I was breaking the law, pulled me over, took away my license, wrote me every citation he could for it (totaling around $500), threatened me several times to have a K9 unit come and search my car for drugs, then made me walk home. It was my first ticket ever. No criminal record, not so much as tossed a paper plane in school. Deans list student. But I'm an awful, awful criminal in the eyes of the government I am so privileged and blessed to live under.

On that walk all I could think was how I just got my paycheck from my job that day and saw the chunk of it that the government takes for taxes. To pay for police for "the people". Is that really what the people want? to be treated that way? Is that what we're paying for, to be treated like low-life criminals?

And it goes even beyond that. Whenever I see a police car it puts me on edge. It doesn't make me feel safe as it should what with me not being a criminal, and there's something wrong there.

[El Barto]

Getting back to the militarization of the police, a couple of interesting stories.  Dallas County sentenced a guy to life in prison today for shooting a cop that was breaking down his front door.  Johnny was serving an arrest warrant for somebody thought to be inside.  The defendant and one of his accomplices said that there was no indication they were cops, and instead that the dead officer had provided a fake name at the door before trying to force it open.  After firing through the door,  the shooter immediately called 911 to report shooing a burglar.  Prosecutors charged him with capital murder and sought the death penalty.*  I wasn't there so I have no idea how it actually went down, but I have a problem with the assumption automatically being that he just wanted to kill a cop.  No-knock warrants have become the norm, and now they're having to insure that people who might try to defend themselves against such things will be vilified and prosecuted.  Home invasion robberies happen all the time, and the bad guys never yell "WE'RE ROBBING YOU!".  They yell "PO-LICE,  SEARCH WARRANT!"  It would appear that, in Dallas anyway, protecting yourself is done at your own peril. 

https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2011/06/07/accused-dallas-cop-killer-says-officer-never-identified-himself/

Reading up on this story, I found a the story of this guy, who rather than being prosecuted for shooting at a cop, was shot 21 times (70+ rounds fired at him).  Like the first story, I don't know everything that happened here, but it's also another case where Johnny created a situation that was of greater risk to both parties than need be, and in both cases the blame falls onto people who might have been only trying to defend themselves.  This country really isn't going in the right direction.



*And a fine example of why I can't stand prosecutors, they played recordings of the guy's gangster rap as evidence of how he hated cops and acted out of malice.  That's almost as bad as convicting somebody on the basis of an Iron Maiden poster and a Zeppelin tattoo. 

[Nigerius Rex]

Wow what the fuck, the amount of unsubstantiated suggestion and bullshit that goes into legitimately trying to convict him by playing his choice of music to the jury when he clearly acted in self defense and fear offends and saddens me.

The sad thing is, because he was smoking weed and representing himself he is probably going to jail for life.

[El Barto]

It was his music.  He was an aspiring rapper.  (not that it should matter)

[Nigerius Rex]

Obviously the line of reasoning makes sense because all rappers frequently participate in the the violent and illegal activities they detail in their music....oh wait.

[Super Dude]

We should blame Obama.

[El Barto]

This is pretty interesting:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/06/rick-perrys-populist-attack-on-tsa-frisks/240798/

A few months ago, Republicans in the Texas legislature introduced  a bill that would've made it illegal for TSA agents to perform enhanced pat-downs on air travelers without probable cause. The anti-groping measure had enough support that the feds feared it might become law. So they sent a letter to the Lone Star State threatening to ground all flights at its airports if it passed.

The intimidation tactic succeeded: The bill's sponsor withdrew the legislation. As Texas Gov. Rick Perry ponders a presidential run, however, he's decided to revive it. The Houston Chronicle reports:

Rick Perry is a jackass (and might actually be less intelligent than his predecessor if you can believe that), and more importantly this bill will go absolutely nowhere.  However, it's certainly interesting that pushing back against the police state is becoming a populist issue.  Five years ago if you complained about airport security, you hated America and supported terrorists.  Now that it's the evil, socialist Obama that's grabbing us by the nuts, it's suddenly OK to complain about it.  We had Rand Paul actually rail against the USAPATRIOT Act, and now a presidential contender trying to curtail TSA.  I suppose it's entirely possible that these sorts of things might actually become campaign issues.  Sadly, they're not going away since both sides actually want The Man dictating how we live our lives,  but it's nice that the Republicans are now taking up the cause (even if it's all for show). 

[Scheavo]

https://www.boingboing.net/2011/06/22/woman-who-filmed-cop.html

I'm sure people have heard about this by now, not sure why I decided to post this particular link to the video.

Very interesting quote to me: "I'm going to arrest someone for not following police orders." I'm sorry, but since when did police have authority over someone when they aren't suspected of commiting a crime? I hope this case gets thrown out, but it's a great example of how dickish and authoritative police are allowed to be in our society. Charges dropped or not, this woman was still arrested and harassed for doing something which should be fully legal.

That cop should be fired.

[El Barto]

The weird thing is that plenty of cops actually love being filmed.  As much as I dislike the guys, I can't argue with the fact that they're probably abusive much less than they're falsely accused of being abusive.  Cameras exonerate them more than they indite them.  In this case, they just didn't like the reason they were being filmed, and yeah, they were way out of line in this case. 

[Scheavo]

I think that ignores the larger issue though, and this is hardly an isolated case.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/TheLaw/videotaping-cops-arrest/story?id=11179076


The police us bullshit "wiretapping" laws to say they can't be filmed without consent.

[Nigerius Rex]

If you needed more proof of the po blatantly abusing their power:

https://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20110625/NEWS01/106250348/Emily-Good-supporters-claim-city-police-targeted-them?odyssey

Supporters of Emily Good, the woman arrested while videotaping police during a traffic stop, maintain that city police targeted a meeting of theirs with selective ticketing.

[Scheavo]

https://newsblaze.com/story/20090221100148tsop.nb/topstory.html

You are 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist

[Nigerius Rex]

https://newsblaze.com/story/20090221100148tsop.nb/topstory.html

You are 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist

Don't question it, citizen!

[sonatafanica]

you don't notice that you're on a leash if you just stay by the peg all day


i guess it takes stuff like that to make us aware of it.

[El Barto]

I figure there comes a point, where terrorists put forth enough effort to blow up 'Merikans that you just have to let them have a few.  Using incontinent 95 year old women as bombers probably reaches that point.

Fuck, people!

[Scheavo]

I guess they figure that a 95 year old women really doesn't have much to lose... ?

I think those numbers prove more than anything the ridiculousness of our entire "war on terror," or whatever it is we call it now... but I would think the stat that you're more likely to die from a police officer should open peoples eyes up a little, and want us to scale down police powers. I mean, we spend billions of dollars, have invaded two countries, bomb at least three more, all to "protect" ourselves from something which is a very small to nonexistence threat.

[MetalMike06]

I figure there comes a point, where terrorists put forth enough effort to blow up 'Merikans that you just have to let them have a few.  Using incontinent 95 year old women as bombers probably reaches that point.

Fuck, people!

Just read about that. Absolutely ridiculous.

[El Barto]

Supreme Court to Decide Constitutionality of Warrantless GPS Monitoring

I'm really not sure how they're going to come down on this.  The cynical part of me figures they'll rubber-stamp this thing without too much fuss.  This court doesn't really care too much for privacy rights.  At the same time,  this runs afoul of the premise that they used to decide Kyllo.  I figure, like Kyllo, Scalia will be the determiner, and sadly there's just little telling which Justice he'll choose to be on any given day.

Something that troubles me is that if SCOTUS decides for Obama, then what would prevent Uncle Sammy from demanding access to all of On-Star's network to have everybody's locale in realtime?

[Scheavo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXpMzT5yGp8

[El Barto]

That's quite the clusterfuck they've got going on there.  I can't really form an opinion one way or the other about the use of deadly force, but it doesn't trouble me too much.  I'd certainly be concerned that their cops don't know better than to avoid shooting each other in crossfires.  And naturally I'm plenty concerned that their mindset is to destroy evidence afterward.  If somebody gets video of you lawfully using deadly force, destroy the guys phone shouldn't be your first inclination.  Kind of provides some insight into how Johnny viewed their actions that night. 

I guess I can't complain that the guy the killed appears to be a genuine maniac, but this isn't going to do much to call attention to a very real problem. 

[Super Dude]

Considering I have no knowledge of the surrounding circumstances, I will refrain from judging the incident one way or another.  But I'm sure the police didn't just randomly start shooting people for no reason.

[bss4life15]

I have had many run-ins with douchebag cops before.  One time a state trooper backed into me when i was driving.  We both stopped and she got out of the car ad started screaming at me about how i hit her.  She called for back-up and there were four police cars there.  Then she started yelling at other people trying to tell them to say that it was me that hit her.  I was really lucky because i was leaving work and my friend who worked there told her she backed into me.  I was able to go after that, i was scared she was going to arrest me.  Cops always seem to be on a power-trip whenever i see them. 

[Scheavo]

Considering I have no knowledge of the surrounding circumstances, I will refrain from judging the incident one way or another.  But I'm sure the police didn't just randomly start shooting people for no reason.

Their shooting seems excessive. I disagree with that, but it's not the problem with the video. They actively sought down and destroyed any evidence which showed their malpractice. It was coordinated, and not just some rogue action by a cop.

[El Barto]

100 shots might sound excessive, but under the circumstances, it's pretty understandable.  My concern would be the legitimacy of the first shot.  The subsequent 99 don't matter.  As for attempting to destroy the evidence, of course I'm in complete agreement with you, but it might not be as clear cut as the guy says.  Johnny has released a picture of the guy's cellphone, and it's pretty well intact.  Aside from a crack on one corner of the LCD, it's fine.  And for the same reasons that we're outraged that they tried to destroy the evidence, they were required to confiscate it.  We have no idea what their intentions were, since trying to destroy the evidence and trying to secure it might look very similar. 

[Scheavo]

Meaning you have to chase after anyone who was in the vicinity, who filmed it? We have the Miranda rights because there's a point when acquiring evidence goes too far, that cops are their to protect our liberty, and not take them away; if this is what is required to "secure evidence," (they quickly hunted down the eye-witness, going as far as to point guns at them), then it seems to me to go too far.

[El Barto]

From what I can tell,  when he saw that they noticed him filming, he bolted for his car.  It seems understandable that in light of recent events, they might want to cover a guy who bolted for his car.  Now,  for the record,  I think Hibel was a horrible decision, but since we're stuck with it, they were within their rights to secure him.  Now, arresting him certainly seems to be bullshit, and I'd be curious to know how they justified that.  Seems like intimidation to me.

Speaking of which, as an answer to how we end the police state, I'd say appoint judges that actually give a shit about substantive due process.  The ones we have now certainly don't. 

[Scheavo]

Speaking of which, as an answer to how we end the police state, I'd say appoint judges that actually give a shit about substantive due process.  The ones we have now certainly don't. 

Ya, our entire judicial system needs redoing... especially the Supreme Court.

I was just wondering last night, how much a factor the war on drugs is having. Americans are consuming more illegal drugs, and with prohibition in place, this just leads to more money for criminals, which makes crime more of a problem.

[El Barto]

After watching the recent goings on in Fullerton (homeless guy beat and tazed to death),  it occurs to me that cameras are the best way to end the police state.  They recently suspended the 6 cops involved in the incident (pending a through investigation, of course  ),  but only because a video of horrified bystanders made it to youtube.  This sort of thing has happened for 100 years, and nobody ever paid any attention to it unless they were forced to.  Now that there are 20 cellphone videos of every police encounter, people are being forced to.  While this sort of thing will continue to happen, at least some of the perpetrators will be held accountable, and that might actually discourage some of it.  Unfortunately,  I think SCOTUS will ignore it for as long as possible, before eventually ruling that we have no right to film an officer doing "his job".  Until then,  the more people who film cops, the better.

Frankly,  instead of acting like irrational children,  all the gun rights fanatics should be rallying about cameras.  That should be the new 2nd amendment.  None of these gun-nuts are ever going to shoot a cop, or overthrow the government, or fight off the King of England.  The right to bare arms does us absolutely no good when it comes to protecting us from the very thing that it was [ostensibly] put there for.  Cameras will.