You say Police State, I say potato. Either way let's discuss surveillance and government overreach.

So I'm sure most readers of this thread have seen this ridiculous story by now. Reason notes a bit why it's important.

Minarchist wrote:

So I'm sure most readers of this thread have seen this ridiculous story by now. Reason notes a bit why it's important.

So police are allowed to raid your house because a suspected criminal is suspected to be in the general vicinity? You're essentially being asked to prove you're not guilty of a harboring a fugitive/criminal. With the added incentive of a high velocity rifle pointed at your face.

jibboom wrote:
Minarchist wrote:

So I'm sure most readers of this thread have seen this ridiculous story by now. Reason notes a bit why it's important.

So police are allowed to raid your house because a suspected criminal is suspected to be in the general vicinity? You're essentially being asked to prove you're not guilty of a harboring a fugitive/criminal. With the added incentive of a high velocity rifle pointed at your face.

After being partially blinded by a bright light so you can't determine if it's police or not.

Mixolyde wrote:

After being partially blinded by a bright light so you can't determine if it's police or not.

And then his responding to your requests for ID by screaming and cursing you out.

Even though no one was harmed in this specific instance, I still consider it the most terrifying one of the last 54 pages.

Thanks for, umm. Thanks for shaking my view of comfort, I guess.

Minarchist wrote:
Mixolyde wrote:

After being partially blinded by a bright light so you can't determine if it's police or not.

And then his responding to your requests for ID by screaming and cursing you out.

In all fairness they are protecting us. *

* Always look on the bright side of police actions.

Yeah, I keep re-reading this passage and I don't even know how to respond:

The tip was never about Goldsberry's apartment, specifically, Wiggins acknowledged. It was about the complex.

But when the people in Goldsberry's apartment didn't open up, that told Wiggins he had probably found the right door. No one at other units had reacted that way, he said.

Maybe none of them had a gun pointed at them through the kitchen window, I suggested. But Wiggins didn't think that was much excuse for the woman's behavior. He said he acted with restraint and didn't like having that gun aimed at him.

“I went above and beyond,” Wiggins said. “I have to go home at night.”

Goldsberry was at home, I said. She had a gun pointed at her, too, and she wasn't wearing body armor and behind a shield. She had no reason to expect police or think police would ever aim into her kitchen and cuss at her through her door to get in. It seemed crazy. She was panicked.

“We were clearly the police,” Wiggins insisted. “She can't say she didn't know.”

She does say so, actually.

So...you pointing a gun at someone's head from outside their window to gain entry to an anonymous tip that covered an entire complex is cool? And someone's exercising of their 4th amendment right from a frankly ridiculous warrantless search is suspicious because all the other apartment residents acted like good little sheep? He didn't like having that gun aimed at him? HOW DO YOU THINK SHE FELT HAVING ONE POINTED AT HER IN HER OWN HOME, YOU TWATMONGLERSAAAAARAHGAHG
IMAGE(http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20081110024604/fark/images/7/7c/Wharrgarbl.jpg)

Are the Militarized police constitutional?

Something not dealt with is the continued constitutional punt, that local law enforcement, and state police are controlled through the democratic process or that the majority of police regulation is squarely for the states according to the 10th amendment. And no election, I can ever think of ever dared to run on a platform of less police and less police protection. But those are the 2 main reasons the high federal courts afford so much power to local police.

Thanks for the article, KG. Really interesting read.

Tell your lawmakers today if you want them to support an amendment to defund the NSA's blanket surveillance of Americans: https://act.demandprogress.org/lette...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...

"This blunt approach is not the product of an informed, open or deliberative process," said the statement emailed from the White House late on Tuesday in anticipation of a House debate on the Amash measure scheduled for Wednesday.

Ironic statement is ironic.

Here is the fact sheet for the Amash amendment.

http://amash.house.gov/speech/amash-...

In asset forfeiture news, a Federal judge has just ordered the Nebraska State Troopers to return $1 million (plus interest) to Tara Mishra. The money was seized by police after Mishra and her traveling companions, who were driving cross country, were pulled over for speeding last fall.

Mishra earned the money during her 15 year career as a stripper and was going to use it to purchase a nightclub in New Jersey.

By the transitive theory, this is the single greatest threat to American lives at the hands of Drones.

KingGorilla wrote:

By the transitive theory, this is the single greatest threat to American lives at the hands of Drones.

There was a company in San Francisco not too long ago that wanted to deliver Mexican food via drones. The FAA pretty quickly put a stop to it.

It's interesting how the opposition and attempt are both relatively bipartisan.

Booooooooooooo

Bloo Driver wrote:

It's interesting how the opposition and attempt are both relatively bipartisan.

That is interesting, you're right. Good catch.

ruhk wrote:
KingGorilla wrote:

By the transitive theory, this is the single greatest threat to American lives at the hands of Drones.

There was a company in San Francisco not too long ago that wanted to deliver Mexican food via drones. The FAA pretty quickly put a stop to it.

The TacoCopter! Turned out it was a hoax, though. But I did hear about two college engineers that got the idea for a Burrito Bomber from the TacoCopter deal.

Minarchist wrote:

Password hunting time?

Criminy. There is literally nothing they can't get away with right now. Time to setup that offshore email account and start killing US accounts.

DSGamer wrote:
Minarchist wrote:

Password hunting time?

Criminy. There is literally nothing they can't get away with right now. Time to setup that offshore email account and start killing US accounts.

I missed the part where this went from Cnet's normal FUD to the NSA actually just getting handed any password that they please as opposed to from the grand jury or a judge.

KingGorilla wrote:

I missed the part where this went from Cnet's normal FUD to the NSA actually just getting handed any password that they please.

Did you miss the part where the government is asking for passwords that it has no business having?

DSGamer wrote:
Minarchist wrote:

Password hunting time?

Criminy. There is literally nothing they can't get away with right now. Time to setup that offshore email account and start killing US accounts.

Unless you encrypt your email with PGP, that's not going to do anything.

Edwin wrote:
DSGamer wrote:
Minarchist wrote:

Password hunting time?

Criminy. There is literally nothing they can't get away with right now. Time to setup that offshore email account and start killing US accounts.

Unless you encrypt your email with PGP, that's not going to do anything.

Of course. And even at that there's a copy of any email in the wild. I'm speaking more about voting with dollars, feet, etc.

MyBrainHz wrote:
KingGorilla wrote:

I missed the part where this went from Cnet's normal FUD to the NSA actually just getting handed any password that they please.

Did you miss the part where the government is asking for passwords that it has no business having?

Investigators and law enforcement ask for many things. What makes you think they cannot ask? There exists a big gap between asking and compelling or forcing to turn over. They ask to enter houses all the time, even yell it-the place with the absolute greatest degree of security and constitutional protection. It is amazing what officials get by asking nicely. NSA asks encryption company for passwords, supposedly the company denies that request. In 2 criminal cases, judges reach conflicting rulings on whether a person has to turn over their own password. That is bad and congressional or Supreme Court intervention is needed.

Minarchist wrote:

So I'm sure most readers of this thread have seen this ridiculous story by now. Reason notes a bit why it's important.

Yeah, this is the kind of sh*t that lends weight to the argument that we are legitimately moving in the direction of a police state.

My turn for a link dump!

The ACLU is suing the US for declaring a 100-mile zone inside the US border for warrantless stops-and-searches regarding citizenship.

Police use Occupy protestors as experimental guinea pigs.

White House "welcomes a debate" about NSA civil liberties violations while actively suppressing said debate.

St. Louis police chief asks FAA for drones "To help keep officers safe, to help keep the community safe"

One more evidence planting, just for fun:

KingGorilla wrote:

Investigators and law enforcement ask for many things. What makes you think they cannot ask? There exists a big gap between asking and compelling or forcing to turn over.

I acknowledge that the government can ask for literally anything it wants. At issue is whether the government should be asking in the first place.

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/Wiwx76g.jpg)

Cos Edwin