The Police State comes to Arkansas

Discussion in 'Politics and News' started by techs, Dec 18, 2012.

  1. ichy

    ichy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    6,939
    Likes Received:
    0
    This must be a joke. Any police force that tried this would be sued to oblivion.

    What kind of buffoon would say something like that? This is America, people have the right not to say anything to the police.
     
  2. Fern

    Fern Elite Member <br> Super Moderator
    Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    26,087
    Likes Received:
    2
    Yeah. Was going to post this.

    Whole thing seems so weird I googled to find out WTH was going on.

    Doesn't seem like a big deal once you realize it's focused on high crime areas. From what I've seen, the people who actually live in those areas often like this type of thing.

    Fern
     
  3. TastesLikeChicken

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    16,375
    Likes Received:
    2
    I'd bet just about everyone in those areas likes it except for the criminals. :D

    I fail to see what the big deal is. First of all, this isn't happening to "Arkansas," it's happening to a small town in Arkansas. Nor is there anything resembling a Police State. The hyperbole needle is being pegged to maximum.

    One more bit of irony in threads like this is that the anti-authoritarian types in here love to drone on about how fear is being use to control the public. And they make that point by spreading fear about authority. My shirts get perfectly pressed every time I read this kind of thread.
     
  4. ichy

    ichy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    6,939
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm generally pro-law enforcement but stopping people at random, arresting them for not showing ID and forcing them to tell you where they're going is unconstitutional. The cops can ask, but it's also people's right to refuse to answer and walk away.

    Law & order means that the cops have to obey the law as well.
     
  5. Hayabusa Rider

    Hayabusa Rider Elite Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2000
    Messages:
    39,330
    Likes Received:
    3
    So tell us, does the NSA illegally access Constitutionally protected private information? How do you know either way? If not, why not?
     
  6. Jhhnn

    Jhhnn Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 1999
    Messages:
    31,042
    Likes Received:
    152
    And now, obfuscation.

    If the NSA is doing such things, it's because of the Patriot act & the overblown Terrarist Threat! fearmongering of the Bush years that made it seem acceptable to the average citizen.

    If it is occurring then it's always tough to quit, isn't it? particularly when congressional Repubs put the Patriot act into an all or nothing proposition, despite Dems' efforts to soften it.

    If such powers are used, then the Executive gets a lot of sniping about it, and if abandoned & followed by a major terrorist attack, then the Right Wing authoritarian raving about not protecting America would be epic.

    The Executive branch is stuck following the dictates of Congress in such matters, whether they want to be or not.

    That's tough for a conspiracy theorist to accept, I'm sure.
     
  7. Hayabusa Rider

    Hayabusa Rider Elite Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2000
    Messages:
    39,330
    Likes Received:
    3
    Nope. Completely wrong. I knew you'd "but but BOOSH". This is completely a decision made by this administration. Was it started by Obama? No, but it's lovingly embraced by him. You don't even know what the issue is, as demonstrated by your blind guesses. This has nothing to do with the Patriot Act. You're playing apologist.
     
  8. Jhhnn

    Jhhnn Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 1999
    Messages:
    31,042
    Likes Received:
    152
    And you're playing the usual "I know a secret!" routine so loved by conspiracy theorists. What is it that you think you know about the NSA, anyway? What can you offer to back it up?
     
  9. Hayabusa Rider

    Hayabusa Rider Elite Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2000
    Messages:
    39,330
    Likes Received:
    3
    One thing I can do is read

    apologize away
     
  10. bradley

    bradley Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2000
    Messages:
    3,664
    Likes Received:
    1
    In the last fifteen years, we've broken so free from the US Constitution in a concerted Progressive effort, it's almost too late to stop these type scenarios.
     
  11. mizzou

    mizzou Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,432
    Likes Received:
    3
    "We're going to do it to everybody," he said

    No...No you are not...
     
  12. Screech

    Screech Golden Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,189
    Likes Received:
    0
  13. Jhhnn

    Jhhnn Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 1999
    Messages:
    31,042
    Likes Received:
    152
    That doesn't contradict anything I've said in the slightest. The Executive branch will, by it's very nature, attempt to maintain whatever "national security" powers congress has granted it, regardless of which party is in power, for the reasons I offered above.

    That doesn't mean I support some sort of massive domestic dragnet you theorize- there is no evidence to show that it is happening, but rather that you think it could be, which are entirely different things.

    I support the EFF's efforts & the idea that the judge should receive evidence in camera, for starters. I also support Congress letting all of the Terrarist Threat! legislation lapse quietly into oblivion, where it belongs.

    I doubt that your fellow conservatives will see it that way, at all, given their history.
     
  14. sm625

    sm625 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2011
    Messages:
    7,767
    Likes Received:
    23
    The police state has been in arkansas for a long time now. How do you think clinton got to be president?
     
  15. Hayabusa Rider

    Hayabusa Rider Elite Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2000
    Messages:
    39,330
    Likes Received:
    3
    Bad apology my neocon friend. This isn't congress, this is the executive branch, so that shoots that down. The "you don't know" is precisely the point you intentionally miss. The justice department says the eff and others need to demonstrate illegal activities and at the same time cannot get that without a successful legal challenge, a perfect catch 22.

    Still you squirm by pointing to other things I never approved of. Yes, dems like you can be and are neocons. As for me I disapprove of a small community doing whats being done in Arkansas, but theres a far larger issue that you stand for. Party over all is your motto.
     
  16. cubby1223

    cubby1223 Lifer

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    13,328
    Likes Received:
    7
    I leave the forum for a good while, and when I come back the quality of threads in P&N is even lower than before????

    Let's actually see this plan form, let's see them actually pursue this, before jumping to the conclusion that America is bat-shit crazy?

    Both the conservative and the liberal "media junkies" go off about all these events that never come to pass. There never will be a follow-up story on this, within a week it'll be completely forgotten. And the media will have pushed you onto to a new potential threat to be pissed off about.
     
  17. Jhhnn

    Jhhnn Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 1999
    Messages:
    31,042
    Likes Received:
    152
    From your own link-

    So it's not just about the Executive branch, but Congress first & foremost. As I've offered & you choose to ignore, the Executive will use & try to keep any national security powers Congress grants. Period, no matter who's in the big chair.

    4th amendment issues wrt electronic communication are in the process of being sorted out, with both Congress & the Executive coming down on what we both see as the wrong side of the issue.

    It doesn't matter what the Executive wants if Congress allows the applicable statutes to expire- the Executive would have no legal grounds to continue, Constitutional issues aside. Only action by the Judiciary can alter that, action specifically disallowing what Congress intended when they gave questionable powers to the Executive.

    I've agreed with the EFF when they offer that the judge should first view pertinent documentation in camera to determine if the govt's state secrets & national security claims are legit, and to determine if the plaintiff actually has standing, if they were, in fact, actually under surveillance.If the judge rules in favor of the EFF, then the govt will undoubtedly appeal, and legal wrangling will continue.

    I do not support such surveillance, despite your claims that I do. I've pointed out that Congress can put an end to it by doing nothing, letting the supporting legislation expire. That seems unlikely, even though it's the right thing to do, for the reasons I've already laid out. Therefore, the legal battle will continue.

    Which really has nearly nothing to do with the usual small southern town authorities getting all in the face of "undesirables" in "high crime areas"... like someplace a fine upstanding conservative citizen caught a whiff of marijuana smoke... where people who don't have air conditioning drink beer in public on the front porch, fer crissakes... where a person having more than one old car that won't run calls themselves a "collector"...
     
  18. Hayabusa Rider

    Hayabusa Rider Elite Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2000
    Messages:
    39,330
    Likes Received:
    3
    Where in the law does it require Obama to block legal challenges? Not defend against them, but step into the legal process to block even asking? "National security", the neocon ace card.

    As far as the point, it has to do with small timers in arkansas as much as Mussolini condemning crying about some village locking up drunks. You'll miss that too.

    You'll continue to defend the greater crime and others will too. I deplore both. You make excuses, and bad ones at that. Note no one is stepping up for you.

    It's about the abuse of power.
     
  19. Zodiark1593

    Zodiark1593 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,220
    Likes Received:
    0
    Considering I always leave all forms of my ID home when I'm not the driver, glad I'm not in Arkansas.
     
  20. SandEagle

    SandEagle Lifer

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2007
    Messages:
    16,817
    Likes Received:
    1
    do you leave your brain at home as well? if this can happen in Arkansas, it can happen in any of the other states. it is the catalyst to test the waters somewhere first to see what the public reaction would be.
     
  21. Zodiark1593

    Zodiark1593 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,220
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's purposeful. Police ask for ID, they can take a hike for all I care as I'd be doing nothing that would require me to carry it.
     
  22. SandEagle

    SandEagle Lifer

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2007
    Messages:
    16,817
    Likes Received:
    1
    i understand that. i was commenting on the 'glad I'm not in Arkansas' part :rolleyes:
     
  23. Zodiark1593

    Zodiark1593 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,220
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ah, ok, misunderstanding then. :whiste:
     
  24. Vic Vega

    Vic Vega Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    4,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Didn't Fresno do this a while ago?

    Anyone living in Atlanta in the 80s remembers when they used to CLOSE DOWN the down town area after dark and put up chain link fences around down town and setup checkpoints.

    I guess a fair question is (and I am not saying this is a good or bad thing) but how bad is bad enough when something like this is required and who gets to decide?
     
  25. SAWYER

    SAWYER Lifer

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2000
    Messages:
    16,441
    Likes Received:
    7
    #75 SAWYER, Dec 24, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2012