 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 10:37:45 -0500, Warp wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospam com> wrote:
>> But again, to call the US a "police state" is really like calling us a
>> "socialist state" because we now have affordable health care. It's
>> hyperbole at the best.
>
> The TSA all in itself doesn't make the US police-state-like, but it adds
> up to everything else.
Sure, but at the same time, I actually live in the US; you don't. During
the lead-up to the 2002 Winter Olympics, Salt Lake City felt like a
police state - we had armed personnel on high structures around the
Olympic venues. We don't have that now.
I'm not saying that there aren't problems, but I'm saying we're far from
being a police state - and reports that that is the case are pretty
skewed and show the worst of the worst rather than the status quo.
I will, however, grant that as a white male in the US, I am not subject
to "stop and frisk," being asked to provide documentation of citizenship,
etc. My view certainly isn't the only one here, and I'm sure if you
asked a black 19-year-old in New York City if it was a police state, they
might have a different view.
> It seems to be that, at least at some places, there's a strong "us vs
> them"
> mentality among the police force, and they act as if they were a
> military force within a foreign and potentially hostile land.
Again, reports of the worst of the worst - not the norm. Boston after
the Boston bombing, for example - way over the top, but not the state of
affairs in any city on a daily basis.
> They are extremely trigger-happy and will pull out guns and tasers at
> the slightest of provocation, or even without, but just if they feel
> like it. They can legally lie to people, and trick people into
> implicating themselves. They regularly abuse people with impunity.
*Again,* this is the exception that you see in the news. Cops behaving
themselves aren't newsworthy. Cops tasing a grandmother are, so that's
what you hear about on the news.
> Time and again we get news about new cases of police brutality. While
> that alone doesn't yet make it a police state, what does is that they
> usually get scot-free. Their buddies will support them and lie for them,
> even under oath, and their superiors are not eager to start internal
> investigations. Such investigations are generally started only if the
> event gets wide publicity, and even then the punishments are often
> extremely lenient or even non-existent.
*Again* - the exception and not the rule. I'm not saying there aren't
bad actors, but most cops (like most citizens) do their job admirably. A
few bad apples give all cops a bad name.
> The cases that get publicity are probably just the tip of the iceberg.
> There just *happened* to be a camera pointing that way, or someone with
> a camera who didn't have it immediately confiscated afterward. How many
> such cases are happening where there are no cameras and no credible
> witnesses? In these cases it's usually the word of the victim vs. the
> word of a half-dozen police officers (all of who, naturally, agree that
> no abuse happened, of course.)
>
> If the government just watches by while all this is happening, rather
> than taking stern actions to eradicate these abuses, what else is that
> other than being police-state-like?
Your view is skewed because it's based entirely on news media reports and
not actually being here.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> I will, however, grant that as a white male in the US, I am not subject
> to "stop and frisk," being asked to provide documentation of citizenship,
> etc.
OTOH, you *are* subject to the countrywide surveillance by the NSA
of a scale that even the former Stasi would have been jealous of...
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 14:58:08 -0500, Warp wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> I will, however, grant that as a white male in the US, I am not subject
>> to "stop and frisk," being asked to provide documentation of
>> citizenship,
>> etc.
>
> OTOH, you *are* subject to the countrywide surveillance by the NSA of a
> scale that even the former Stasi would have been jealous of...
Well, allegedly, I am - but the amount of data in that database is
staggering, and mining databases of that size isn't a trivial task, even
with the kind of computing power available to the NSA. But yes, that
certainly *is* a valid point.
My larger concern (though certainly the surveillance is problematic) is
that by casting such a wide net, these agencies will actually learn about
threats too late. Allegedly just like 9/11 - the reports say that the
attack was known about and predicted, and there was advance knowledge for
it, but the analysis wasn't complete until after the event was done.
You can only scale up computing power so much to mine that amount of data
- and processing power isn't the limitation, bus speed and storage device
speed are. By being less discerning, these agencies (IMHO) make us less
safe rather than more safe - but they're really good at telling us about
stuff that's already happened.
But that's really a different topic than the supposed "police state" we
live in because of abuses by a minority of TSA personnel and cops. Like
I said, I live here, you don't. My experiences are more relevant than
the tidbits you pick up in the news, which only call out the worst
exceptions to the rule. It's not like every cop in the US is walking
around looking for someone to tase or shoot, which is what it seems your
impression of life in the US is like.
Most cops are decent, hard-working people just trying to make their part
of the country a little safer - while not having to take on doing too
much paperwork. The same is true for most TSA personnel.
But ho-hum experiences with the vast majority of cops and TSA personnel
aren't newsworthy, so nobody hears about them.
It's like going to a support forum and then saying "this product sucks"
based solely on reading about people who have problems, and not taking a
sample of those who never have a problem at all.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 30.12.2013 20:58, schrieb Warp:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> I will, however, grant that as a white male in the US, I am not subject
>> to "stop and frisk," being asked to provide documentation of citizenship,
>> etc.
>
> OTOH, you *are* subject to the countrywide surveillance by the NSA
> of a scale that even the former Stasi would have been jealous of...
No, certainly not. They'd be jealous of the technology, but as for scale
the Stasi surveillance is probably still unsurpassed. After all, they
had a significant percentage of the entire population as information
sources.
Oh, and from what I've heard the NSA is far more active outside the USA
than inside.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 23:12:05 +0100, clipka wrote:
> Am 30.12.2013 20:58, schrieb Warp:
>> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>> I will, however, grant that as a white male in the US, I am not
>>> subject to "stop and frisk," being asked to provide documentation of
>>> citizenship,
>>> etc.
>>
>> OTOH, you *are* subject to the countrywide surveillance by the NSA of a
>> scale that even the former Stasi would have been jealous of...
>
> No, certainly not. They'd be jealous of the technology, but as for scale
> the Stasi surveillance is probably still unsurpassed. After all, they
> had a significant percentage of the entire population as information
> sources.
>
> Oh, and from what I've heard the NSA is far more active outside the USA
> than inside.
What's more, the Stasi actually were locking people up for what they say
and think. We're not at that point in the US. Yet. I am something of
an idealist in this regard as well, and think that should the abuses
actually lead to jailing political opponents, the populace would react
quite strongly.
So right now, we're at the point of comparing the NSA to the Stasi, and
that's kinda like saying Christians are actually persecuted in the US.
No Christian in the US (that I've heard of) has actually experienced
*real* persecution within the borders of this country.
The Stasi - now there's an organisation that was involved in systematic
persecution of religious (and other) minorities.
That's the sort of hyperbole I expect from members of the fringes of the
Tea Party. Not someone who lives in a country that actually experienced
the effects of persecution firsthand. Then again, Finnish Jews were
reportedly not persecuted, since Finland fought with Germany against the
USSR, as I understand it.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> What's more, the Stasi actually were locking people up for what they say
> and think. We're not at that point in the US. Yet.
Yeah. So far you have to do something really heinous like make a joke in
order to get in jail.
http://www.change.org/petitions/release-my-son-justin-carter-being-prosecuted-for-a-facebook-comment
If that were just a single, isolated incident...
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 19:23:42 -0500, Warp wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> What's more, the Stasi actually were locking people up for what they
>> say and think. We're not at that point in the US. Yet.
>
> Yeah. So far you have to do something really heinous like make a joke in
> order to get in jail.
Again, the exception, not the rule. You don't seem to understand that
one case in 100,000 does not a trend make.
> http://www.change.org/petitions/release-my-son-justin-carter-being-
prosecuted-for-a-facebook-comment
>
> If that were just a single, isolated incident...
Hmmm, so you know of more? You see a trend somewhere beyond a few
isolated incidents? Do tell.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 19:45:13 -0500, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 19:23:42 -0500, Warp wrote:
>
>> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>> What's more, the Stasi actually were locking people up for what they
>>> say and think. We're not at that point in the US. Yet.
>>
>> Yeah. So far you have to do something really heinous like make a joke
>> in order to get in jail.
>
> Again, the exception, not the rule. You don't seem to understand that
> one case in 100,000 does not a trend make.
>
>> http://www.change.org/petitions/release-my-son-justin-carter-being-
> prosecuted-for-a-facebook-comment
>>
>> If that were just a single, isolated incident...
>
> Hmmm, so you know of more? You see a trend somewhere beyond a few
> isolated incidents? Do tell.
Because yeah, I can see the parallels between a few isolated incidences
like this and, oh, genocide. Yeah, they're *so* alike, of course they
should be compared.
You might just need to get this thing called a "sense of proportion".
Back in the twit filter you go.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Human stupidity never ceases to amaze me; as Einstein said: "2 things
are infinite, The Universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about
the former...".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> Back in the twit filter you go.
Now this is something that has always puzzled me. What possible advantage
could you possibly achieve by self-censoring someone's posts? I just don't
get it. It just feels like putting your fingers in your ears and shouting
"lalalala I can't hear you!" And as a side-effect you stop seeing
*everything* I write, even if completely unrelated.
One would think that if you are done with a conversation, then the
rational thing to do is that you simply stop participating in that
particular conversation. Censoring everything I write just seems
senseless and childish.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
