Is the United States becoming a police state?

G

GLV

Moderator
On the front page of the Indianapolis Star this morning, the first story I saw was the Supreme Court decision to broaden police powers in car searchs.

This new ruling removes all of the rights of the passenger as to search of person or belongings.

I am tired of the police being given powers far above and beyond what the Constitution and Bill Of Rights allows, all in the name of a so called " drug war ".

From this day forward, we will have to be very careful about who we ride with. Anyone in a hi visibility vehicle, anyone who drives in a manner that might cause a traffic stop, anyone that has a messy vehicle, with a few shells loose in the back seat, anyone that has NRA stickers, or any of the many pro gun bumper stickers, etc.

I realize the WAR ON DRUGS means tens of billions of dollars to the law enforcement community each and every year, but is this war worth the loss of all civil liberties? I am ready to surrender. GLV
 
I guess it depends on how you define a "police state"...damn, I sound like Clinton!

IF you think the police referring to us as "civilians" and thus, setting themselves apart from those they police, constitutes a police state...and

IF you think the police being trained in para-military assault tactics for the sake of the "war on grugs" or the less publicized war on guns (see Ruby Ridge or Waco) constitutes a police state...and

IF you think the issue of "police only" ammo and "police only" magazines and "police only" assault rifles and "police only" body armor and "police only" armored assault vehicles and aircraft constitutes a police state...and

IF you believe the police, on a tip from a criminal informant, coming to a private residence, breaking and entering with force, at 2 am, dressed in black, sometimes with masks, terminating with extreme prejudice anyone encountered with a gun, constitutes a police state...and

IF you think requiring every citizen to submit to fingerprinting and submitting private information into a central database just for the privalege of owning a firearm constitutes a police state...and

IF you believe having the freedom of speech and public assembly only by permit constitutes a police state...then

By that narrow definition we might just be real close to having one!
 
Rich,
I'm uneasy with the standard definition. Could we can expand it a bit?

--When incidents like Waco, Ruby Ridge, the Diallo shooting, etc. become routine, rather than horrible anomalies,
--When the government and LEOs no longer must answer to the citizens for any use of force or deadly force, and
--When citizens no longer have recourse through the LEO organizations and/or the courts,
--Then it would be irrelevant whether or not some civilians (i.e. non LEO) had firearms or not, and
--I think that would qualify as a police state.

I think my "gut" tells me we could have a police state even if some sheeple had guns but did nothing.

Suggestions?
 
How about another scenario?

If you are charged with having illegal drugs in your car, the law can take your car and sell it without you even coming to trial - ie your car is "guilty" and gone even if you're acquited.

What if the law finds one of your passengers has illegal drugs during one of these searches? Can the law still take your car?

I'm becoming just a little nervous about good intentions leading into uncharted territory.
 
Yep, it's the old, "Boil the frog slowly" method.

Just yesterday the LA Times ran an article about a one-horse town in Central California that had a PD with just 12-15 officers. Half of these guys were one their quasi-SWAT team called SET (special enforcement team?) that had all the requisite subguns, armor, etc. On a tip from an informant about a possible sawed off shotgun used in an earlier drive by (months earlier), they did the Hollywood, kick down the door with a MP-5 routine and put 15 rounds into the man of the household who was supposedly reaching for a FOLDING KNIFE. The wife said that she had never seen that knife before and theorized that the SET had planted it to CYA. No sawed off shotgun or anything else illegal was found after what I'm sure was a damned thorough search.

Well, the family sued after the DA cleared the SET members of any wrongdoing. The family was awarded about twice the annual budget for the whole town. The town is appealing the decision but has disbanded SET.

How's that for accountability?

I pretty much avoid drugs, both legal and otherwise, but I think the war against has taken far too much from our liberties. It seems like every week, the law enforcement agencies complain that in order to fight crime they need new tools to do so: tools that work around those pesky constitutional rights.
 
Destructo,
How's that for accountability?
Bluntly, it sucks. If I did this, I'd be facing the chair. These cops didn't even lose their JOBS, they just don't get to play with they're neat little Stormtrooper toys anymore! Accoutablility? I don't think so.


------------------
Your mind is your primary weapon.
 
I heard Gore this past weekend talking about Kosovo and he made the statement about the people there having black hooded police knocking on their doors. I thought so what's different from here?
 
When the NYCPD shoots at a man several feet away 41 times and only scores 19 hits either teach them to shoot or take their guns away!
 
I lived in Germany for a total of eleven years between 1960 and 1976. At that time, Germany was divided into East Germany (a police state) and West Germany (a "free" state).

In West Germany:
- an unmarried school teacher I knew had to pay over 50% income tax.
- the VAT (Value-Added Tax) of approximately 15% was added to every product at each stop from raw materials, production, transportation, wholesale, and retail, etc....
- The "tax man" could break into your residence, if necessary, to count your radios and televisions. Each one had to be accounted for because each one was taxed separately.
- The POST (post office) was the epitome of effectiveness and efficiency. A letter mailed anywhere in West Germany would be delivered within a day - accross the whole country! (a country about half the size of Texas.) Oh, yes, the Post had the right to open anybody's mail, read it, and was required to report to the Polizei anything which seemed "inappropriate".
- If you rented out a room in your house, you had to report this activity in full: Your name, address, occupant's name, mailing address, even the amount of rent, etc. had to be recorded at, and approved by, the Courthouse.

I believe most of us would consider all this a bit oppressive - but the Germans considered themselves "free". Relative to EAST Germans perhaps - but assuredly NOT to Americans (U.S. of A. Americans).

- It was "possible" to own guns if you passed all the horribly expensive investigations, paperwork, etc.
--- Usually the guns were "secured" at the Hunting House by the Hunting Club. Membership in the Hunting Club was mandatory for you, but optional for the Club. (See any problem there?)
--- It was possible for collectors to obtain permission to have a gun collection at home. The investigations and permits were difficult to fufill, incredibly expensive, difficult to "justify", took years to obtain, and were difficult to keep. Each and every gun had to be registered separately and as part of your collection. If a neighbor didn't like you and filed a "report" - your guns were confiscated. YOU had to pay for the investigation, prove yourself innocent, and pay your way through the difficult process of re-claiming your guns - which the Polizei may or may not return.

All this was done because "Ordnung muss sein"! (There MUST be order.)

This is why I believe you can have a police state even where the "civilians" may have firearms.

Whether you call it "boiling the frog" or "salami-slicing away your Rights", the effect is the same. You have Rights you may enjoy only at the convenience of the government. Most of us at TFL would call those "privileges" and would find such a life abhorrent.

We, in the U.S. of A, are the ONLY free people on Earth. Other countries and even many people in our government, are jealous of our freedoms and will try to reduce us to "reasonable controls typical of other free countries".

Don't fall for it. "We the People" must realize that "regulated Freedom" is NOT Freedom. It must not happen here.
 
Although I am strongly opposed to any drugs... I've always had one question on the war on drugs... If we had to pass an admendment to outlaw liquor.... then how are they getting away with outlawing drugs without an amendment? It's the same concept that they are trying to pull on guns... It's called social cost. The ends justifies the means.

As to a police state... it is when the revenue agents start packin' to insure collection of their taxes. CA July 1, 1997 now requires all FTB field agents to pack... at the same time they are in the process of disarming the public.... Yes we are already in a police state. The only thing holding them back is that there are to many citizens with guns.... They are trying to change that.

Richard
 
Yes, it's going to get worse and there is nothing you can do about it.

Oh ya, you could vote, write your representatives etc. and then hold your breath.

"The beatings will continue until morale improves"

"The bombings will continue until peace is achieved."

I apoligize in advance for the attitude, I could't help myself.
 
About that accountability: I was trying to exude sarcasm. Did it come through?

I'm sure the cities' financial loss isn't going to be missed by the cops involved, as they don't have to pay anything personally.

As I understand, this deal was a knock and go deal where they don't wait a reasonable amount of time for an occupant to answer the door. Therefore, our masked police, when they knock at all, do so as they break down the door.
 
As I recall the Supreme Court ruling, it allows search of the passenger's belongings, but NOT their person.

Frankly, this is probably not as much of a loss of rights as you would presume, as there are a variety of subtrifuges LEO's use to gain access to belongings in a car. One common one is to point to an obviously innocent item, and ask the driver if the LEO can examine it (in the car). Once this permission is given, permission is given to search the entire car.

Of course, this is just my view. In my experience, however, LEO's are NOT interested in searching my car.

At one time, through a case of (badly) mistaken identity, I was stopped, ordered out of my car at gunpoint, and handcuffed and told to sit on the hood of my car; the LEO's thought I was an armed rapist! I told them I had two pistols in my car, they were unloaded, and in hard pistol cases. Their response was, 'Let's just leave them there.' In 5 minutes, my identity was confirmed as an innocent person, and I was released, without the slightest interest in the contents of my car. I might add that it is somewhat disquieting to have several .45 ACP pistols pointed at you, but despite the heinous crime of which I was thought to have committed, I was treated VERY gently, and didn't even have bruises from the handcuffs. I was apologized to at great length. Walt
 
I have been told that if you should call 911 and request an ambulance, the police are required to accompany it. And at the moment permission is given for the paramedics to enter your home you have also given permission for the police to enter as well, effectively and passively granting them permission to search the home, much like the previous example of the car search.

Can anyone verify or vilify this claim?



------------------
John/az

"Just because something is popular, does not make it right."
 
In our area, there is NO blanket policy of Law Enforcement going before or with Fire or EMS personnel.

Police seldom go to Fire/EMS scenes unless there is a report of:
- violence (potential, threatened or actual).
- crime on/near the premises.
- DOS (Dead On Scene)(ANY kind of death)
- request for manpower (very seldom now that we have full-time EMS and Fire Dept personnel available)
- need for traffic or crowd control
- "bad neighborhood" or prior LE calls to that address or vicinity.

I think that's all (but no bets).
The only time I have seen LEOs search a scene, some crime was involved.
I never saw one of our LEOs roust someone unless they were drunk, on drugs, caught with drugs in plain view, or they threatened violence, or were violent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top