Police State?


PDA






dev_null
July 18, 2004, 08:16 PM
In your judgment, does the U.S. fit the definition of a police state?

If you enjoyed reading about "Police State?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Mulder
July 18, 2004, 08:30 PM
I think it is more of a quasi-police state, but we approaching a total one.

What are the characteristics of a police state?

-- One set of rules for the elites and the enforcers, and another for the rest of us

-- So many laws that anyone can be arrested for almost anything

-- Shift from constitutional law to administrative law

-- Eradication of jury system

-- Elimination of rights against illegal searches and seizure

-- Gov't able to detain people with filing charges

-- No accountability for gov't action

-- The state has the authority to demand your 'papers' for no reason


We're closer than alot of people think

Coronach
July 18, 2004, 09:36 PM
I don't think we are in one, nor do I think we are close to one, but I cannot pick the option that says that it will not happen in my lifetime. Such things can always happen.

So long as elections are actually meaningful, a police state is not really possible. The dangerous thing is that once you get close, turning back is rather difficult. Doubly so if you have lost RKBA.

Mike

Treylis
July 18, 2004, 09:58 PM
"The only difference between a welfare state and a police state is time."
--Ayn Rand

We're already halfway there, helped along eagerly by the Republicans and Democrats alike.

R.H. Lee
July 18, 2004, 10:01 PM
No. Not even close. And it won't happen as long as the American people are as well armed as we are today.

Edward429451
July 18, 2004, 10:32 PM
We have no redress for grievances.

No accountability in government.

No way to be recognized as law abiding.

No amount of cooperation or obsequiousness will let us go our own way in peace unless the gestapo is in a good mood that day.

Yes, I'd say that that qualifies as a police state.

Most are in denial.

TallPine
July 18, 2004, 11:21 PM
So long as elections are actually meaningful, a police state is not really possible.
Well, with the no-win choice between Bush and Kerry, I would say the presidential election this year is no longer meaningful.

Coronach
July 18, 2004, 11:53 PM
The terrible thing about living in a society with other people is that not everything that happens meets with the individual's approval.

FWIW, I have felt the same way about every election since Reagan/Carter/Anderson (the first I can remember), and I bet if you could poll the populace back through history, they would say the same about each one since Washington/uh...whomever ran against him.

And remember the Whiskey Rebellion. Washington was a pinko statist fascist jack booted thug. ;)

WonderNine
July 18, 2004, 11:56 PM
Well, with the no-win choice between Bush and Kerry, I would say the presidential election this year is no longer meaningful.

Vote Independent. :)

JPL
July 19, 2004, 02:02 AM
Judging by a lot of what I've read over the years, we've been "rapidly" approaching a police state since about 1607.

Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?

If you kids don't shut up, I'm going to pull this country off to the side of the road and lay a baton upside your heads!

WonderNine
July 19, 2004, 02:06 AM
Ahhh!!

Police brutality!
Police brutality!
Police brutality!
Police brutality!

:neener:

Treylis
July 19, 2004, 08:19 AM
And remember the Whiskey Rebellion. Washington was a pinko statist fascist jack booted thug.

Ah, somebody's been reading their L. Neil Smith. ;-)

Art Eatman
July 19, 2004, 08:37 AM
We have the "arrest the money" laws; we're no longer free to wander about with whatever amount of cash that suits us. We have the application of the RICO act to other than organized crime activities. We can't have a foreign bank account without informing IRS.

There's little or no accountability for governmental misdeeds, as evidenced by the Ruby Ridge and the Waco hearings before Congress.

We have the use of eminent domain for the benefit of private enterprises.

Where's the accountability for any maltreatment of people in airports, by the TSA employees?

Martha Stewart, while not under oath, lied to the government about something which was legal: The sale of stock. She's sentenced to jail.

People have lost property to governmental sequestration because of the actions of third parties, in the so-called War on Drugs.

We have the dead bodies of innocent people as a result of the militarization of the attitudes of some police forces and from the methodology of entering homes to search for drugs.

We have many laws, decried here, which seek to prevent crime by restraining only those who do not perpetrate crimes: Gun control laws.

No, we're not yet in any sort of full-fledged police state. Yes, we're in deep doo-doo as regards liberties which were once taken for granted...

Art

cuchulainn
July 19, 2004, 08:41 AM
Hmm. This question opens a minefield of misperception. On one hand, we've gone far beyond what our grandparents (much less the Founders) would have considered outrageous. On the other hand, we're nowhere near what people in Nazi Germany or the USSR had to deal with.

The trick is to open our eyes without being Chicken Little.

rick_reno
July 19, 2004, 10:16 AM
Don't worry - the police state is being put in place for the children.

nero45acp
July 19, 2004, 10:32 AM
A country that imprisons a higher percentage of it's population than any other country in the world, and can confiscate your property (asset forfeiture) without due process meets my criteria for the title "Police State".:scrutiny:



nero

Selfdfenz
July 19, 2004, 10:35 AM
Pretty depressing. 78% of us thing we are there or on our way.

S-

liliysdad
July 19, 2004, 10:40 AM
I dont, nor do I think we are even on our way...but then again, I m aone of the jack booted thugs......if this were a police state, the ACLU wouldnt be alive..unfortunately, it is.

Bartholomew Roberts
July 19, 2004, 10:56 AM
Art sums up my thoughts pretty well. There is a great deal to be concerned about; but at the same time I've travelled some and the U.S. is a long way from the low standards of some of our democratic allies, let alone the autocratic stylings of a real police state.

Edward429451
July 19, 2004, 11:39 AM
While it may be true that we're not living in a full fledged police state, that's just because the haven't taken off the velvet glove and showed their teeth yet. Make no mistake, the technology is in place, the jackboots have been delivered. They just haven't been issued with stomping orders yet.

Checkman
July 19, 2004, 12:06 PM
Let's see there was the Whiskey Rebellion and Hay's Rebellion in the first few years of our nations history. Both collapsed without to much effort being expended by the goverment. Apparently we had already slipped into tyranny.

The Civil War needs no explanation. Of course there was the Bonus Army in the early 1930's and bad feelings about the railroads taking folks land without little to no compensation in the 1800's. The feelings got pretty strong because some of the lands belonged to white people. Oh and lets see there was the predicted revolution in the late sixties and the voices got really loud after Kent State - at least for a few weeks. Boy we could go on and on. Wounded Knee in 73 and the taking over of Alcatraz by "activists" around the same time. Riots, labor unrest, et. etc. The Cassandras have been yelling about the United States being a tyranny since the country came into exsistence.

I've lived in Western Europe and we are much more open then those democracies. Fron what I've lerned in my study of American history this country is more open then it was just a century ago. A centry ago the KKK ran rant large parts of the south. Lynch mobs rountinely broke into jails and murdered suspects - without a trial. So much for due process. One could go to jail for mailing "obscene material". You know material addressing such things as sex education and so forth. I believe it was called the Sullivan Act, but I'm not certain.

Women couldn't vote, "literacy tests" were given at voting locations to deny blacks their vote, companies - especially coal companies - kept their workers in legal servitude ( company stores, company housing, bad working conditions) and the extreme wealthy lived so far above the averag citizen they might as well have been gods.

I just wish that all of the folks who talk about the police state and fighting for their freedoms would admit that they want another civil war. Heck they relish the idea of another civil war. Perhaps they also relish the idea of being in charge. Lord knows that's the impression I get from the folks who post their various cop bashing threads.

Well just remember this. While these posters see themselves on the side of the angels others don't. As a member of the oppresive police state (Army veteran, active duty police army, NRA member) I also have firearms and I will shoot back if you shoot at me. I'll definitely shoot back if you threaten my family. I'm not a jackbooted thug, I'm not a Nazi. I'm a police officer and an American who serves this country and you - whether you like it or not. I'm also not going to be a fantasy target for the heros. Bullets in the real world go both ways guys. I'm not making a threat just an observation.

R.H. Lee
July 19, 2004, 12:18 PM
While it may be true that we're not living in a full fledged police state, that's just because the haven't taken off the velvet glove and showed their teeth yet. Make no mistake, the technology is in place, the jackboots have been delivered. They just haven't been issued with stomping orders yet

I understand what you're saying, but just don't see how "they" could do that on any wholesale basis, against armed opponents. Think about it. Nobody knows each of our individual AO's like us. We know every road, trail, rock, tree, hill and valley. We know all the structures and what they contain. A few good men with accurate rifles, moving from place to place, would at the very least slow them down to a crawl. Unless they were willing to wage full scale war against a civilian population (which would stop the economy and the collection of taxes dead in its tracks), there is no way they could selectively eliminate/apprehend enough "insurgents" to quell an ongoing rebellion.

Art's points are well taken, especially regarding Waco and Ruby Ridge, which were clearly police state tactics and nothing short of legalized murder. The powers afforded to government in the form of the Patriot Acts are also "troubling". I don't know whether RICO is rife with abuses of innocents or not.

To me, "Police State" means no knock entries, disappearance of people, suspension of due process, appropriation of private property, detention without reasonable cause, etc., on a wholesale large scale basis. I just don't think that will happen while we are armed. I think "they" (the wannabe tyrants) are afraid of an armed population, which is why this gun control incrementalism is so pervasive. Just don't turn over your firearms, NO MATTER WHAT crappy laws they pass. That's my philosophy.

Edward429451
July 19, 2004, 01:07 PM
I understand what you're saying, but just don't see how "they" could do that on any wholesale basis, against armed opponents.

That's the crux of it, huh? Prolly why we're as free as we are still! If they went wholesale large scale, they'd be doing good just to protect their bases. So they wont, probably.



there is no way they could selectively eliminate/apprehend enough "insurgents" to quell an ongoing rebellion.

What about biologicals? I think the're coming. Invisible & silent plausable deniability. Martial law to protect us. Thats their style.

Checkman, I hear your apprehension and respect your thought process. It shows you've been paying attention to the writing on the wall. I for one don't want to shoot at you and would not unless a threat to me & mine were perceived, still only in a defensive mode. I don't dislike cops. I dislike the administration that unfairly pits them against their friends & neighbors. I suspect we have lots of cops on our side discretely. But wholesale mayhem is not present yet and cops want to keep living & feeding their families in the mean time. Can't fault that. Everything is not black & white in this new kind of war that is upon us. White picket fences are a thing of the past having been replaced with concertina wire & electric. There is no demilitarized zone. Let's just keep on keeping on and continue to pay attention to the cards that are played...

JPL
July 19, 2004, 01:17 PM
The technology for a police state has been in place with every generation over the past 400 years.

The only "true" police state ever to hold sway may likely have been the suspension of habeus corpus and other elements of the Constitution during the Civil War.

When I was in my late tees and 20s, and part of the anti-Vietnam movement, I and many of my compatriots were firmly convinced that we were living in a fascist police state.

The actions of police suppressing blacks AND whites seeking civil rights and equal equality and in suppressing anti-war demonstrations was all the proof that we needed.

The generations before me saw McCarthyism, Mitchell Palmer, the suppression of the labor movements through use of the militia and at times the regular army, the list goes on and on.

R.H. Lee
July 19, 2004, 01:46 PM
What about biologicals? I think the're coming. Invisible & silent plausable deniability. Martial law to protect us. Thats their style

Now THAT is some scary crap. You've heard of the "chemtrails" controversy?

Coronach
July 19, 2004, 01:53 PM
The fact remains that as long as elections are held, "they" are "us."

Mike

tcdrennen
July 19, 2004, 02:30 PM
See my sig for my opinion.

If the populace is completely dependent on the police powers of the state to protect it against predators and criminals, then it is a police state. Thus NYC, Chicago, D.C.. L.A. are or approach the status of police states.

And since those areas at least THINK they set the standards for The Rest Of Us, and are doing everything they can, By Whatever Means Necessary, to impose those standards on the nation, the movement toward a total Police State (and/or Tyranny) is well underway.

And, yes, it did start with Washington's suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion (L.Neil Smith for President! :evil: ) or maybe even the stealth creation of the Constitution by a convention whose only legal authority was to reform/revise the Articles of Confederation.

But I like the Constitution For The United States Of America, as originally written. Yes, they blew it big time with their failure to address slavery, leading eventually to the Appeal To Heaven sometimes called the Civil War - and States' Rights were NOT the issue, BTW; in fact the slave states had vigorously OPPOSED "States Rights" just 10 years earlier when the abolitionists claimed it as justification for ignoring the Fugitive Slave Act and the slave owners insisted on the supremacy of the Federal power in seizing escaped slaves.

Jeebus, I can digress. :scrutiny: :D

Anyway, I support (and defend) the Constitution these days. Imperfect as it may be, it's the best humans have ever written down, and its principles are sound.

We do need to reawaken the average citizen's understanding and committment to it. The arguements of the statists would fall on deaf ears if the people truly honored the principles of the Declaration and the Constitution; the statists have had there way with defining the debate for 'way too long.

And they desperately want and NEED a Police State to ensure their domination: after all, It's For The Children.

The fact that The Children will in all likelyhood d@mn them for their presumption is of no importance - by then THEY'LL all be dead, as John Maynard Keynes noted when confronted with the certain consequences of HIS statist prescriptions. :fire: :cuss: :banghead:

Sam Adams
July 19, 2004, 03:16 PM
Rapidly approaching. The myriad of (unconstitutional) laws that have been passed in the name of the War on (Some) Drugs and the War on Terror are literally incomprehensible, but they collectively (an interesting word, no?) give the Fed.gov INCREDIBLE powers once either the President or the AG certify that there's an "emergency" or that you belong to a "terrorist group" or that you possess various "illegal" items, etc. I'm not too worried about what Bush & Co. will do with that kind of power, but I am petrified about what a President *****lery and AG Schemer will be able to do. A police state is only as far away as a Reichstag Fire (i.e. a fake event) involving guns under such an administration.

Our only hope is that they will be equally or more petrified to act against 85 million people armed with a quarter of a BILLION guns (and isn't that exactly why the 2nd Amendment was proposed and ratified?).

4t5
July 19, 2004, 03:37 PM
My oversimplified definition of a police state: Where the police are the only ones with guns. So, no we are not living in one yet, but our children could be.

Edward429451
July 19, 2004, 03:58 PM
Now THAT is some scary crap. You've heard of the "chemtrails" controversy?

Sure have. Very scary. Only one possible scenario. Even scarier yet.

Mike, WADR, I think you may be oversimplifieing the situation. Just because the signs still in the window doesn't mean its in stock in the store. No one ever stayed alive by underestimating their opponent. It could be that no one has put it all together yet on the nature of the fraud...

Out of stock? Can I get a raincheck on my Liberty please? LOL.

The thing that the conspiracy theorists have going for them is that they are not underestimating their opponent, even if their wrong about certain specifics.

Moparmike
July 20, 2004, 04:14 AM
I agree with "rapidly approaching." It may very well be in my lifetime, but I will probably be too old to do anything about it.

Art summed it up well. :)

MP5
July 20, 2004, 08:28 AM
I'm not too worried about what Bush & Co. will do with that kind of power

I am:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04181/339070.stm
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/06/28/scotus.enemy.combatants.ap/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62516-2004Jun22.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44849-2004Jun15.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5223932/
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/12/iraq/main628789.shtml
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,63702,00.html
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/07/21/justice.civil.liberties/
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=110-06282004

(to pick just a few of the thousands of relevant articles at random)

A reckless disregard for basic human rights and the right of law, not to mention a total disrespect for the truth and the American people (and its brave soldiers who've been sent off to die) are part and parcel of the Bush adminstration. They'll bend you over and screw you without thinking twice. Don't believe that because Republicans have traditionally been more in favor of the RKBA than Demos that they're any better otherwise.

Lobotomy Boy
July 20, 2004, 09:11 AM
I'll make a prediction: If the Bush administration declares a state of emergency and suspends the elections next fall, as it is reportedly preparing for according to last week's Newsweek, it will at least explore the possibility of confiscating privately owned firearms in the name of national security.

Many of us would say, "There's no way I'd let that happen," but the sad fact is that if push came to shove, most people would obey authority and turn in their firearms, just as they turned in certain types of firearms in England and Australia. The press would crucify the few who resisted and were killed or arrested, and the remaining sheeple would turn in their firearms, complaining loudly all the way. We'd have a new cabinet position of "Gun Czar," and the New World Order would include at best a token bill of rights.

At that point it would be game over. Bush and the neocons would be our new royalty.

DRZinn
July 20, 2004, 11:27 AM
The trick is to open our eyes without being Chicken Little.

Almost. The real trick is to open other people's eyes without being seen as Chicken Little.

JohnBT
July 20, 2004, 03:17 PM
"police state: Where the police are the only ones with guns."

I like that.

John

R.H. Lee
July 20, 2004, 03:21 PM
Edward:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now THAT is some scary crap. You've heard of the "chemtrails" controversy?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Sure have. Very scary. Only one possible scenario. Even scarier yet.


Don't stop there. Expound. Please.

RevDisk
July 20, 2004, 03:42 PM
We are always one step away from a police state. Politicians have always wanted as much power as possible. Keeping them in check is an ongoing process, and it always will be.

Keep voting, keep writing to your congresscritters, support the best politicians possible, educate your children. These are the ways to maintain freedom.

biere
July 20, 2004, 09:56 PM
Personally, I feel the supreme court has made this a police state. I get too upset rolling through their choices but many are not for the normal citizen in my personal opinion.

A phrase along the lines of when a recession is when others are poor and a depression is when you are poor would go like this: A police state would be when you are nailed by stupid laws and a verge on a police state would be when others are nailed by stupid laws.

The national seatbelt law, I think it went national since ohio finally has it now. Its a seatbelt folks, get over it.

Some of the national dui laws that get into alcohol limits and road funds, I have heard road funds would be with held if states would not lower their limits to .08 or so.

The awb has shown everyone that police and military are worthy while law abiding citizens are not worthy. Heck I can dump all laws in here from full auto to shorty shotguns.

Oh and lets play with some of the state regs on registering guns, or transferring them through a dealer and whatever else.

The simple amount I pay in tax for legal income, legal gas purchase, and legal sales tax and whatever else legal I forgot. Oh, the cell phone tax sucks personally.

While some of my statements do not mean there is a police state, there are enough things on the books that I figure we are to the point that anyone can be brought up on charges if they upset the wrong person. I personally feel I can be pulled over for no reason and locked up for no reason simply becuase of how some of the ohio and fed laws for car stuff go.

We are not into checkpoints yet.

But don't ask me how free I feel since I personally feel like I have to decide for myself if I wish to follow the letter of the law, or be able to fend for myself.

And what about hunting license stuff and game wardens. Those seem out of hand as well.

I am done. I don't have to get to a checkpoint to leave my county but when the police can legally set up a seatbelt or dui checkpoint and check everyone, I sure don't feel free.

DRZinn
July 20, 2004, 10:29 PM
I have heard road funds would be with held if states would not lower their limits to .08 or so.

Another way to circumvent another Amendment, this time the Tenth. The federal government takes more money than it needs, then makes the return of the money to the states conditional (with the accompanying loss of x percentage as the money passes through the federal bureaucracy), thus having the effect of the federal government controlling things that should the responsibility only of the states.

Edward429451
July 23, 2004, 09:48 AM
Don't stop there. Expound. Please.

Here's a little on it:

http://www.pbn.4mg.com/kitchenmilitia.htm

Here's another site with a lot of info on similar & related type stuff, but it seems to have been hacked. Maybe in a day or two it'll be back up.


http://tetrahedron.org/

.gov has a lot of really nasty stuff on the shelf. I'm not even talking about Aids & Ebola, that they created them is common knowledge now but from what I've heard, they've got stuff now that makes Aids look like a common cold.

Been real busy at work so I dont have time to go into greater detail at this point...

liliysdad
July 23, 2004, 10:59 AM
This reminds me to buy stock in Reynolds Wrap.

Zedicus
July 23, 2004, 11:10 AM
Baised on Mulder's List here's how the UK rates.


-------------------------------------------------
What are the characteristics of a police state?

-- One set of rules for the elites and the enforcers, and another for the rest of us check (for the last 300+ years)

-- So many laws that anyone can be arrested for almost anything check

-- Shift from constitutional law to administrative law check

-- Eradication of jury system not yet but creeping in

-- Elimination of rights against illegal searches and seizure check (they just call them Lawfull Searches/Seasures now.)

-- Gov't able to detain people with filing charges check (look no further than govt making eg's of people who defend themsellves)

-- No accountability for gov't action check (look no further than the scandal over the iraq war)

-- The state has the authority to demand your 'papers' for no reason check
-------------------------------------------------

:barf:

R.H. Lee
July 23, 2004, 11:20 AM
Thanks for the links, Edward.:)

CZ52GUY
July 23, 2004, 11:25 AM
Hmm. This question opens a minefield of misperception. On one hand, we've gone far beyond what our grandparents (much less the Founders) would have considered outrageous. On the other hand, we're nowhere near what people in Nazi Germany or the USSR had to deal with.

The trick is to open our eyes without being Chicken Little.

...when Americans start getting in boats bound for Cuba, we'll know we're in trouble.

There are dangers, absolutely, but reckless hyperbole does not a compelling case make. We see the anti's use this tactic to scare people into calling for the surrender of arms. With truth on our side, I see no reason to resort to this tactic to rally folks to defend our arms.

Iraq under Saddam, North Korea, the Soviet Union and the client states, China, going back in time think Nazi Germany, Italy...there are numerous examples of actual Police States that bear little resemblence to the United States of America in 2004.

I lawfully own multiple rifles which accept full capacity and large capacity magazines. I lawfully own both standard capacity and large capacity magazines.

I lawfully own multiple pistols which accept full capactiy magazines. I lawfully own full capacity pistol magazines.

I vote my conscience in a secret ballot without fear or intimidation.

I express my views to elected leaders, without fear of retribution.

I express my views on this forum, without fear of retribution.

I lawfully carry a concealed firearm.

These are all activities that are not consistent with living in a "Police State".

Certainly there is cause for concern. Vigilence is absolutely necessary. But a mischaracterization of our present situation is not useful.

Our liberties are under a threat, but they have been since July 4, 1776. They will always be under a threat. But we haven't lost them yet, and I intend to do all I can to ensure they are not lost.

Stay safe, and rational ;),

CZ52'

R.H. Lee
July 23, 2004, 11:42 AM
This reminds me to buy stock in Reynolds Wrap.


This government has a long history of carrying out secret experiments on its own military personnel. Is it too outrageous to suspect they may do likewise on civilians?

MP5
July 23, 2004, 12:40 PM
Our liberties are under a threat, but they have been since July 4, 1776. They will always be under a threat. But we haven't lost them yet, and I intend to do all I can to ensure they are not lost.

Well said!

braindead0
July 23, 2004, 01:35 PM
I express my views to elected leaders, without fear of retribution. But only certain socially acceptable views, the others will find you on the receiving end of some form of retribution or another.

Edward429451
July 23, 2004, 02:22 PM
Yeah, jus cause you have no fear of retribution doesn't mean it wont eventually come. Just that you have no fear of it!:D

There still working up the Psy-Pro's on us, you know how slow the wheels turn.;)

If you enjoyed reading about "Police State?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!