Patrick Elliott <kag### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> That being said, to use a better anology.. the US has become about as 
> much of a police state, given the revelations of the NSA, and a lot of 
> other crap going on, as.. say.. An Oreo is a kind of "soft cookie". Its 
> both, at once, depressingly inaccurate, and a tad too close to 
> plausible, given the right.. environmental conditions.

Before Jim got his tantrum, he kind of missed my point.

It's not the individual actions, or their frequency, that give a vibe
of a police-state-like system, it's the fact that they mostly can do
it with impunity. Most of the abuses go unpunished, either because
the authorities are unwilling to investigate or, in the worst case,
because nothing illegal was actually done.

For example, as far as I understand (and please correct me if I'm wrong),
but at least in some states it's actually completely legal for police
officers to lie to suspects, and this is regularly abused eg. by traffic
cops to try to make drivers incriminate themselves (often of traffic
violations or other crimes they haven't actually committed.)

Time and again you can read stories about a cop abusing or injuring
someone, or otherwise going well beyond the limits of what the situation
had required, and get no penalty for it. Often it's not even investigated
at all. In the most publicized cases it might get investigated, but even
then no punishment is enacted, or the punishment is really light.

It's not the acts themselves per se, it's the reaction of the government
to them.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 02/01/2014 11:06 AM, Warp wrote:
> It's not the individual actions, or their frequency, that give a vibe
> of a police-state-like system, it's the fact that they mostly can do
> it with impunity. Most of the abuses go unpunished, either because
> the authorities are unwilling to investigate or, in the worst case,
> because nothing illegal was actually done.

I think that you go a bit too far saying that America is a Police State.
You say that it has a high level of abuse and corruption. But that 
doesn't make it a Police State.
Lots of 4 am knocks on doors, makes for a Police State.
As for surveillance, Britain probably has the most in Europe and I don't 
hear us being called one, often.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 02/01/2014 11:06 AM, Warp wrote:
> > It's not the individual actions, or their frequency, that give a vibe
> > of a police-state-like system, it's the fact that they mostly can do
> > it with impunity. Most of the abuses go unpunished, either because
> > the authorities are unwilling to investigate or, in the worst case,
> > because nothing illegal was actually done.

> I think that you go a bit too far saying that America is a Police State.
> You say that it has a high level of abuse and corruption. But that 
> doesn't make it a Police State.

"It's not the individual actions, or their frequency, that give a vibe
of a police-state-like system."

Please read what I wrote. I said that the US feels *like* a police state,
and the reason was not the *frequency* of the abuse, but the *reaction*
of the government and officials to it.

> Lots of 4 am knocks on doors, makes for a Police State.

How about people, especially if they are not white, getting regularly
stopped by police simply for walking on the street?

> As for surveillance, Britain probably has the most in Europe and I don't 
> hear us being called one, often.

"Other countries do it too" doesn't diminish the severity or meaning.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 02/01/2014 11:51, Stephen wrote:
> On 02/01/2014 11:06 AM, Warp wrote:
>> It's not the individual actions, or their frequency, that give a vibe
>> of a police-state-like system, it's the fact that they mostly can do
>> it with impunity. Most of the abuses go unpunished, either because
>> the authorities are unwilling to investigate or, in the worst case,
>> because nothing illegal was actually done.
>
> I think that you go a bit too far saying that America is a Police State.
> You say that it has a high level of abuse and corruption. But that
> doesn't make it a Police State.
> Lots of 4 am knocks on doors, makes for a Police State.
> As for surveillance, Britain probably has the most in Europe and I don't
> hear us being called one, often.
>

This thread is beginning to bring Pink Floyd's 'Gunner's Dream' to mind:

... where you can speak out loud about your doubts and fears
and, what's more, no-one ever disappears, you never hear their standard 
issue kicking in your door. You can relax on both sides of the tracks 
and maniacs don't blow holes in bandsmen by remote control and everyone 
has recourse to the law and no-one kills the children anymore.

John

Post a reply to this message

On 01/02/2014 07:29 AM, Doctor John wrote:
> On 02/01/2014 11:51, Stephen wrote:
>> On 02/01/2014 11:06 AM, Warp wrote:
>>> It's not the individual actions, or their frequency, that give a vibe
>>> of a police-state-like system, it's the fact that they mostly can do
>>> it with impunity. Most of the abuses go unpunished, either because
>>> the authorities are unwilling to investigate or, in the worst case,
>>> because nothing illegal was actually done.
>>
>> I think that you go a bit too far saying that America is a Police State.
>> You say that it has a high level of abuse and corruption. But that
>> doesn't make it a Police State.
>> Lots of 4 am knocks on doors, makes for a Police State.
>> As for surveillance, Britain probably has the most in Europe and I don't
>> hear us being called one, often.
>>
>
> This thread is beginning to bring Pink Floyd's 'Gunner's Dream' to mind:
>
> ... where you can speak out loud about your doubts and fears
> and, what's more, no-one ever disappears, you never hear their standard
> issue kicking in your door. You can relax on both sides of the tracks
> and maniacs don't blow holes in bandsmen by remote control and everyone
> has recourse to the law and no-one kills the children anymore.
>
> John

OK ... good one, I quit /really/ reading this thread awhile ago (except 
nuggets like these) ... It really ceased being about the original topic 
a long time ago and more like a pissing contest about differing opinions 
... lol yeah I said that!

Post a reply to this message

On 02/01/2014 12:11 PM, Warp wrote:
> "It's not the individual actions, or their frequency, that give a vibe
> of a police-state-like system."
>
> Please read what I wrote.

I did read what you wrote. I was replying to the subtext.

> I said that the US feels*like*  a police state,
> and the reason was not the*frequency*  of the abuse, but the*reaction*
> of the government and officials to it.
>
>> >Lots of 4 am knocks on doors, makes for a Police State.
> How about people, especially if they are not white, getting regularly
> stopped by police simply for walking on the street?
>

That is racism, Police State-ism (;-) )applies to the majority of the 
state. Not just a few ethnic groups.

>> >As for surveillance, Britain probably has the most in Europe and I don't
>> >hear us being called one, often.
> "Other countries do it too" doesn't diminish the severity or meaning.

A sentence can be more than the sum of the words.

Your point is not the point that I was making. Not in the slightest degree.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 05:51:59 -0500, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> Bingo.  It's for my blood pressure.  Historically, the things that Warp
>> writes in threads like this do nothing but wind me up, because I think
>> is arguments are ultimately stupid and pointless.  I've tried a number
>> of times to have the debates, and the end result is the same:  My blood
>> pressure goes up, I get angry, and nothing is achieved.
> 
>> Since it happens on a number of topics, there's no point in reading
>> anything he writes, because historically what he's written has made me
>> angry more often than not because he comes across as completely
>> ignorant and unwilling to listen to reason.
> 
> You talk like this would be a common thing, yet I can't even remember
> the last time you, or anybody else, had such a tantrum.

Yes, please, do keep using inflammatory language.  It's so *you*.

> Then, when someone asks about it, you engage in personal attacks and
> belittling comments, and you make it clear that you won't be reading any
> possible responses.

You call it a "personal attack".  I call it stating my perception of 
facts.  You won't listen to reason, and instead start comparing the TSA 
to the Stasi, and when I say that's not reasonable, you double down on 
the ignorance and being unreasonable.

> Yes, quite a mature thing to do, especially since I have in no way
> attacked or insulted you personally.

Oh, yes, just winding people up is *so* mature, Warp.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 06:06:06 -0500, Warp wrote:

> Patrick Elliott <kag### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> That being said, to use a better anology.. the US has become about as
>> much of a police state, given the revelations of the NSA, and a lot of
>> other crap going on, as.. say.. An Oreo is a kind of "soft cookie". Its
>> both, at once, depressingly inaccurate, and a tad too close to
>> plausible, given the right.. environmental conditions.
> 
> Before Jim got his tantrum, he kind of missed my point.

Meh, you think that was a tantrum - it was just me saying "you're 
unreasonable and I'm not going to engage with you any more in this 
discussion because you piss me off because you refuse to listen to what 
I'm saying and resort to hyperbole and being unreasonable, and I don't 
have time for this."

But let's try this again and see if you can understand what I'm saying 
and respond to it in a reasonable manner rather than Godwining the 
discussion.

> It's not the individual actions, or their frequency, that give a vibe of
> a police-state-like system, it's the fact that they mostly can do it
> with impunity. Most of the abuses go unpunished, either because the
> authorities are unwilling to investigate or, in the worst case, because
> nothing illegal was actually done.

Give us some statistics that *prove* that most of the abuses go 
unpunished, Warp.  Because I live here, and I hear about abuses like 
this, but they *do* get punished.  But that's not newsworthy, so it's not 
reported in the media on a wide scale.

For example, here in Salt Lake City, we had a cop who was responsible for 
killing the guy who started shooting up a mall about a mile from where I 
live a few years ago.  Our neighbor was actually there when it happened.

This guy was regarded as a hero, because he stopped this murderer from 
killing more innocent people.

A couple months later, he was arrested for abusing his position as a 
police officer.  He is no longer on the force, and as I recall, he may 
even have ended up serving time for his offense.

> For example, as far as I understand (and please correct me if I'm
> wrong),
> but at least in some states it's actually completely legal for police
> officers to lie to suspects, and this is regularly abused eg. by traffic
> cops to try to make drivers incriminate themselves (often of traffic
> violations or other crimes they haven't actually committed.)

It is legal, but it's not as common as you seem to think.  I've actually 
asked cops (and have cops in my family) about this, and they have told me 
that while they are allowed to mislead a suspect, they rarely have to do 
it.

It's funny that you use traffic stops as an example, because for most 
cops, traffic stops are a nuisance - they have to do paperwork for each 
stop, regardless of whether a ticket is issued or not.  So unless there's 
another reason - or a clear violation of traffic laws - they'd rather not 
stop someone.  For example, on a stretch of I-80 in Nebraska, there's a 
*lot* of drug trafficking that goes on.  After dark, the highway patrol 
pulls people with out of state license plates over for incredibly minor 
infractions (I've been stopped two or three times on that stretch myself 
for things like failing to signal for 150 feet before changing lanes, or 
drifting out of my lane for a moment on a fairly winding section of 
freeway).

The purpose of the stops isn't to cite for the failure to signal long 
enough, but for the cop to get a chance to see if the car smells like 
pot.  Apparently these drug runners are kinda stupid, and are often 
high.  Pulling the motorist over lets them smell the inside of the car 
(when the window opens), and if it smells like weed, then they have 
probable cause for a search.

That's not *lying* per se, it's using the law to its full potential to 
crack down on drug trafficking.  It's apparently very effective.

> Time and again you can read stories about a cop abusing or injuring
> someone, or otherwise going well beyond the limits of what the situation
> had required, and get no penalty for it. Often it's not even
> investigated at all. In the most publicized cases it might get
> investigated, but even then no punishment is enacted, or the punishment
> is really light.
> 
> It's not the acts themselves per se, it's the reaction of the government
> to them.

You seem to think this is a daily or frequent occurrence here.  I'm 
trying to tell you that it's not - it does happen, sure, and it needs to 
be dealt with, but you make it sound like every other cop is doing this, 
and that simply isn't true.  It's a rare occurrence, and it ends up in 
the news *because* it's rare.

Do you now understand?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Am 02.01.2014 13:11, schrieb Warp:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:

>> I think that you go a bit too far saying that America is a Police State.
>> You say that it has a high level of abuse and corruption. But that
>> doesn't make it a Police State.
>
> "It's not the individual actions, or their frequency, that give a vibe
> of a police-state-like system."
>
> Please read what I wrote. I said that the US feels *like* a police state,
> and the reason was not the *frequency* of the abuse, but the *reaction*
> of the government and officials to it.

Maybe there's a disagreement here about the definition of the term 
"police state"?

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 07:11:40 -0500, Warp wrote:

> Please read what I wrote. I said that the US feels *like* a police
> state,

You said:

> Or how about doing what every other western country is doing, *and not
> being such a police state?*

Emphasis added.

Try reading what *you* wrote, and maybe you'll understand why you piss 
people off so much.

Jim

Post a reply to this message