Are we becoming a police state?

[chickened]

You hit a cyclist in Portland it is automatically your fault.

 

[kstaven]

Quote:
Good point. But a whole range of diseases are spread daily through normal day-to-day human interaction. People going out to the mall who are sick, sending sick kids to school (Is this the next thing to become a crime?).

Then there is always the one my doctor used to say;"If you want to get sick, visit the hospital"

We are being micro-managed into subservience.

 

[WyandotteTX]

No I dont think we are.

I do think our country is rife with people who think they deserve something for nothing though, a false sense of entitlement perhaps. I have seen the video of the Grandma who got tasered by the cop, SHE DESERVED IT. She was beligerant and offensive in every way to that officer who was being very respectful to her. He was just doing his job, she was screaming and shouting at him not complying with very simple instructions up to the point where she was becoming a danger to herself and the officer. How so? She was close to the highway and if she kept on losing control of herself she was going to walk out into traffic. I also want to say this happened well over two years ago also?....not sure, but it seems like a while ago.
I have not read or heard about the other instance of the older man at the grocery store, a terrible occurance nonetheless.

 

[kstaven]

Four police officers in an office with one man who can't speak english. He picks up a stapler. They tasered him to death ( used multiple times AFTER he was down).

 

[punk-a-doodle]

I think there are two discussions going on here. Parts seem to be about 'police state' issues, as in, "does the government exert rigid control over the populace?" The other topic seems to be about police brutality. Both are very important topics, but also separate issues that can have overlap, but also may be independent of one another. So basically, cases of possible police brutality may not be an indication of widespread government control, nor may even widespread corruption within a police force.

What's always ironic and somewhat alarming to me is that many people, in the state I am currently in especially, rant about "nanny states" and so forth...but at the same time call for complete bans on whatever *they* happen to not like. I think that very skewed version of freedom, ie. "freedom is me getting my way, and working to remove anything I don't agree with", is much more prevalent than it should be. I would definitely be down with seeing less of it and similar attitudes.

 

[kstaven]

My personal opinion is less regulation more common sense and taking personal responsibility for ones own actions would go a long ways toward fixing the issues. Rather than talk we react.

When it comes to tasers up here, it was government that dictated the wide range of situations it was allowable to be used in. So they are intertwined.

 

[dainerra]

I agree that taking responsibility for our own actions would go a long way? but common sense? Ever heard the saying "common sense isn't" (common that is)

For 99.9% of the population, tasers will be non-lethal. Do some officers take that too far? OF COURSE! After all, the police are only human. The article with the adult diaper?? I didn't read it as "remove her diaper, we gotta see Grannie's goodies" It was a DIRTY diaper, perhaps they didn't want to mess around with Granny while she was covered in poo??? And totally agree with another poster, my first thought was "why didn't you have a spare?" Sure, it was possible that Granny had been extra ill that day and went through them faster than expected. NOT the TSAs fault though, is it?

The police aren't able to ask "excuse me, do you have a heart condition before I taser you?" I will see if I can find the link later (gotta get to work eventually) but there have been lawsuits over police dogs as well. Guy was screaming "cruel and unusual punishment" because he was afraid of dogs. HMMM maybe do what the cops tell you and the big doggie stays in the car??

Are there laws I don't agree with? Sure and a lot of them are the "for the good of the children (elderly, cute fuzzy puppies)" laws. They don't actually DO anything except put up hurdles for those of us who already follow the laws. The criminals? well, they ARE criminals so they don't care that the government enacted the 17th law that does the exact same thing, just different words. They're already breaking a dozen different laws, so what's one more??

Don't get me started on the nanny state thing. Those can be some of the most hypocritical. They want programs they don't use cut, but expansions in what they like. If something they like is on the chopping block, there is panic and the government trying to control their lives.

 

[Dunkopf]

Quote:
You know, they asked her to remove it because it was soiled. Urine, feces, or a combo of the two. If it hadn't been removed, that woman would have been sitting in that for HOURS. Can anyone say "pressure ulcer" and "tissue breakdown"? She may not have had a spare, but being clean and dry is so much healthier, even if she is incontinent. I think that is elder abuse for that woman to let her mother sit in a soiled diaper for an entire plane ride. They didn't plan ahead and bring extras in the carry on?

That was my opinion too. On top of that they did allow her daughter to take her in the bathroom to remove the diaper. Everyone is subject to search. It's unpleasant and this old woman must have been mortified. Truthfully though if she was willing to go through the trip with just one pair of depends she was obviously not fully capable of comprehension. I've never known someone that has to use depends that wants to sit around in soiled ones. Particularly not on a flight sitting in close proximity to strangers. That would be extremely humiliating.

Sounds like the children just wanted to make an issue of it in the press. If it was me I would've been embarrassed that I only brought one diaper for my mother.

I think that's the case with a lot of the PB complaints. I know there's a lot of real ones too. We don't really get to hear the details from the police perspective. Sometimes it's just blatant and it's hard to think of a valid reasoning behind it. Other times it's a needed to be there kind of thing.

The laws in this country since 911 are certainly a lot more enabling of a police state though. Bin Laden went to his grave knowing that he accomplished exactly what he was after. Financial and societal breakdown of western culture specifically the US and her allies.

 

[Dunkopf]

Quote:
I like you.

 

[bakerjw]

I am an avid supporter of the 2nd amendment and as such I frequent many firearm related forums. I will agree that we are well into a police state.

Take the incident of Jose Guerena. He did nothing wrong and didn't fire a shot. Then was not allowed medical treatment for over an hour.
http://newsone.com/nation/casey-gane-mccalla/arizona-swat-team-kills-marine-in-botched-raid/

Then there was the Indiana supreme court ruling that citizens have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. If a swat team has the wrong address and performs a no knock raid on your house then you have no legal right to resist.

The TSA not only performs searches in airports. They are now also performing them in train and bus stations as well as public events. They have portable back scatter imaging vans for mobile use. Any government agency having the ability to search my person without my consent, even just walking down the street, is violating my 4th amendment rights.

Good ole Ben said it best. "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."