Boston Bombing gives a look at how we really have become a police state in the US

[Oldgamer]

Late-night HBO host Bill Maher described his uneasiness during last week’s manhunt for the remaining Boston Marathon bombing suspect, declaring that the United States is turning into a “police state.”
“This country is becoming a police state, and it is very troubling to me,” the “Real Time” host said while showing pictures of police officers patrolling the city and searching for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. “I want to talk about the police. I want to talk about the police, who I am a supporter of, and of course, obviously, we all are. We would be in big trouble without the police.”

Actress-playwright Anna Deavere Smith agreed that the country is becoming a police state but argued heavily that it’s becoming more of a “military state.”
Political adviser Robert Traynham disagreed, saying the heavy response was not something that happens every day on Main Street.
“What we saw was a federal response after a horrific bombing,” he said.
ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel jumped in, adding that he agrees the country is becoming more policed.
“I think we are in a police state,” he said. “We have cameras and our phones are being tracked and our cars are being tracked. … We must want this; this must be something we want.”
Mr. Maher criticized the Boston police as “unprofessional” for shooting at the boat where Mr. Tsarnaev was hiding, even though it turned out he was unarmed.


Video showing hundreds of bullets being fired into and at the boat

Quote from poster on the article: "he US is a paramilitary state where the citizens have been deluded into thinking they have to tolerate gross invasions of privacy and 24/7 surveillance from the air and ground in order to be "safe"
If the government was truly concerned about our "safety" wouldn't they have done something about the pathetic immigration "policy" that has allowed god knows what to stream into our country for the last 20 years.
Satan could get into the US on a student visa, and Stalin could get in on an H1B. People really need to look at history to understand what is happening; and why. At the very least, if they know the factual reality of what is going on the have a chance to survive.
Prosperity is reserved to those who drink the kool aid, and adhere to the global agenda that is literally destroying people all over the world. And that is just the beginning."

Quote: "The over militarization of the police is troubling."

Link to the Washington Times article here

 

[Capt Caveman]

Completely disagree and I was around it.

 

[2timer]

Were there any gross invasions of privacy in the manhunt, or is this just more rabble rousing and mob hysterics?

 

[CPA]

My biggest issue was the "quarantine" to homes. If I want to go out on my lawn, I don't give a crap what's going on, I will.

 

[woolfe9998]

I haven't seen strong evidence of a pattern of busting down doors and conducting warrantless searches. I thought the police response was an overreach, but how often do we see something like this? Not very.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: people who think we live in a police state haven't the first clue of what a real police state is like. It's insulting to people who actually have to live through it. Forget the Nazis and Stalinist Russia for the moment. Take modern day North Korea with its 200,000 people held as political prisoners in detention camps, the North Korean Gulag. There isn't anything even remotely similar here, nor is it imminent, unless you believe everything you read over at Infowars.

 

[Capt Caveman]

My biggest issue was the "quarantine" to homes. If I want to go out on my lawn, I don't give a crap what's going on, I will.

Unless you lived in the search area in Watertown, you could.

 

[Jaskalas]

Quote: "The over militarization of the police is troubling."

Over? How about overt. The militarization is not being hidden and there is little outcry / nothing truly being done against it. If anything, Americans continue to demand more of it.

That is when you know you need secession to carve out a few states for like minded individuals who oppose tyranny.

 

[sixone]

That ship sailed YEARS ago. Income taxes, social security, Medicare, ad nauseum. The government has its filthy little paws in every facet of your life, one way or another.

This is not new. It only seems that way if your illusions have been stripped away.

 

[woolfe9998]

That ship sailed YEARS ago. Income taxes, social security, Medicare, ad nauseum. The government has its filthy little paws in every facet of your life, one way or another.

This is not new. It only seems that way if your illusions have been stripped away.

Equating social security and medicare with a police state? This is a new low of rhetorical idiocy.

 

[Jaskalas]

Ron Paul:

They reminded of a “military coup in a far off banana republic,” he said, Politico reported. “Force lockdown of a city. Militarized police riding tanks in the streets. Door-to-door armed searches without warrant. Families thrown out of their homes at gunpoint to be searched without probable cause. Businesses forced to close. Transport shut down.”

 

[gevorg]

This is just the beginning. The sheep proved to be very obedient.

 

[sixone]

Equating social security and medicare with a police state? This is a new low of rhetorical idiocy.

It's all part of the big picture. You have no right to privacy, and probably haven't ever had it in your lifetime.

 

[Oldgamer]

Equating social security and medicare with a police state? This is a new low of rhetorical idiocy.

LOL

 

[sixone]

LOL

What's funny about that?

Does that mean you're willing to give up your privacy, until men with guns appear on your street?

 

[monovillage]

I haven't seen strong evidence of a pattern of busting down doors and conducting warrantless searches. I thought the police response was an overreach, but how often do we see something like this? Not very.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: people who think we live in a police state haven't the first clue of what a real police state is like. It's insulting to people who actually have to live through it. Forget the Nazis and Stalinist Russia for the moment. Take modern day North Korea with its 200,000 people held as political prisoners in detention camps, the North Korean Gulag. There isn't anything even remotely similar here, nor is it imminent, unless you believe everything you read over at Infowars.

Sorry wolfie, just because we're not as bad and extreme as some of the police states it doesn't mean it's not on the path we're traveling.

Reductions in 1st Amendment (permits/insurance/security to protest), 2nd Amendment (waiting periods, expensive training requirements), 4th Amendment (electronic tracking/Patriot Act), rights are so routine that people are getting used to the constitution being violated by their government.

 

[woolfe9998]

Sorry wolfie, just because we're not as bad and extreme as some of the police states it doesn't mean it's not on the path we're traveling.

Reductions in 1st Amendment (permits/insurance/security to protest), 2nd Amendment (waiting periods, expensive training requirements), 4th Amendment (electronic tracking/Patriot Act), rights are so routine that people are getting used to the constitution being violated by their government.

The trouble is I don't think we're even trending toward it, not if you take a long view of our history. Sure, there's been a slight move toward it since 9/11, the distance covered between us and a true police state being roughly equal to how much closer a monkey gets to the moon when it climbs a tree. But this sort of thing ebbs and flows.

We have much more in the way of civil liberties than we had 100, 200 years ago. In 1798 Congress passed the Alien & Sedition Acts, which, among other things, made it a crime to publicly criticize the POTUS (John Adams at the time.) That law was passed not 7 years after we enacted the Bill of Rights. Today, such a law would be thrown out by the SCOTUS in the wink of an eye. We don't even argue today about whether someone has the right to criticize the government. That concept is now sacrosanct. Today, the argument is over whether the First Amendment allows some loony to show up at a funeral with "God hates fags" signs. And guess what, we still find they have the right.

Most of our 4th, 5th and 6th amendment protections for those accused of crimes had very little teeth prior to the Warren Court era in the 1960's. The police didn't even have to advise people of their rights until the 1966 Miranda decision. Today we complain about a narrow exception used to avoid Mirandizing one defendant for a short time. There was no such recognized right at all for the first 175 years of our Constitution.

We are freer today than we have been throughout most of our history.

And be it farther enacted, That if any person shall write, print, utter or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written, printed, uttered or published, or shall knowingly and willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government, or either house of the said Congress, or the said President, or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States, or to stir up sedition within the United States, or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States, done in pursuance of any such law, or of the powers in him vested by the constitution of the United States, or to resist, oppose, or defeat any such law or act, or to aid, encourage or abet any hostile designs of any foreign nation against United States, their people or government, then such person, being thereof convicted before any court of the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars, and by imprisonment not exceeding two years.

 

[woolfe9998]

What's funny about that?

Does that mean you're willing to give up your privacy, until men with guns appear on your street?

It's funny because social security/medicare->"men with guns" is a ludicrous application of the slippery slope fallacy.

 

[sixone]

It's funny because social security/medicare->"men with guns" is a ludicrous application of the slippery slope fallacy.

Did I mention men with guns in my post about having no privacy?

 

[woolfe9998]

Did I mention men with guns in my post about having no privacy?

Maybe you need to clarify your position then. Since you posted this:

That ship sailed YEARS ago. Income taxes, social security, Medicare, ad nauseum. The government has its filthy little paws in every facet of your life, one way or another.

This is not new. It only seems that way if your illusions have been stripped away.

....in a thread that is about whether we are or are becoming a police state, it sounds an awful lot like you're arguing that SS/Medicare (among other unspecified things) are either the actions of a "police state" or are steps leading toward a police state.

 

[sixone]

Maybe you need to clarify your position then. Since you posted this:

....in a thread that is about whether we are or are becoming a police state, it sounds an awful lot like you're arguing that SS/Medicare (among other unspecified things) are either the actions of a "police state" or are steps leading toward a police state.

They are steps that we as a nation have taken towards having the government involved in every aspect of our lives, via legislation.

Try earning a paycheck without paying taxes, including SS or Medicare. You might not have men with guns on your doorstep, but you WILL be policed.

 

[monovillage]

The trouble is I don't think we're even trending toward it, not if you take a long view of our history. Sure, there's been a slight move toward it since 9/11, the distance covered between us and a true police state being roughly equal to how much closer a monkey gets to the moon when it climbs a tree. But this sort of thing ebbs and flows.

We have much more in the way of civil liberties than we had 100, 200 years ago. In 1798 Congress passed the Alien & Sedition Acts, which, among other things, made it a crime to publicly criticize the POTUS (John Adams at the time.) That law was passed not 7 years after we enacted the Bill of Rights. Today, such a law would be thrown out by the SCOTUS in the wink of an eye. We don't even argue today about whether someone has the right to criticize the government. That concept is now sacrosanct. Today, the argument is over whether the First Amendment allows some loony to show up at a funeral with "God hates fags" signs. And guess what, we still find they have the right.

Most of our 4th, 5th and 6th amendment protections for those accused of crimes had very little teeth prior to the Warren Court era in the 1960's. The police didn't even have to advise people of their rights until the 1966 Miranda decision. Today we complain about a narrow exception used to avoid Mirandizing one defendant for a short time. There was no such recognized right at all for the first 175 years of our Constitution.

We are freer today than we have been throughout most of our history.

And I would have been screaming and complaining about the Alien and Sedition Act just like i'm complaining about the Patriot Act, the TSA and air travel, restrictions in the right to protest, sobriety checkpoints, government cameras monitoring citizens etc.

The time to scream is on the way down, once you hit the bottom it's too late.

 

[xBiffx]

Orwell would be proud.

 

[woolfe9998]

And I would have been screaming and complaining about the Alien and Sedition Act just like i'm complaining about the Patriot Act, the TSA and air travel, restrictions in the right to protest, sobriety checkpoints, government cameras monitoring citizens etc.

The time to scream is on the way down, once you hit the bottom it's too late.

I agree that we should be complaining about all of these things. We should always be vigilant. I just don't think the hyperbolizing is productive.

Americans have been fat, happy and relatively free for a long time now and we've become a nation of whiners. At our worst recent economic times (2009), our standard of living was 10x what people throughout most of the world experience. And we complain about living in a so-called police state when we're nowhere close. People in other countries or times past complain that their family is "disappeared" - tortured and detained as political prisoners, and we complain that we're searched at the airport and that there were too many cops out in Boston.

I just think we need to keep things in perspective.

- wolf

 

[woolfe9998]

They are steps that we as a nation have taken towards having the government involved in every aspect of our lives, via legislation.

Try earning a paycheck without paying taxes, including SS or Medicare. You might not have men with guns on your doorstep, but you WILL be policed.

If paying taxes = police state, then there is no state that isn't a police state. Sorry, I don't see the slippery slope there at all.

 

[sixone]

If paying taxes = police state, then there is no state that isn't a police state. Sorry, I don't see the slippery slope there at all.

The IRS isn't going to show up, then leave when they get a check. They're going to go through every bit of financial information that they can find, to determine how big that check should be.

That is a complete invasion of privacy, and it's a direct consequence of enacting an income tax, as opposed to a sales tax or a flat tax.