America Becoming A Police State?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
That is not quite the issue, the issue is whether the police has to slam entirely peaceful protesters into the ground.

[/quote]

Hmmmm. As I recall, it was ONE officer slamming ONE protester who was ignoring his instructions and heading for the door.

But your version is definitely more dramatic. [/quote]

Yeah, I know, he is the rare exception.

[/quote]

To what?

I thought we were discussing this incident.

Do you have proof that more than what I said happened, happened?
[/quote]

Well then lets stay with this ONE cop and this ONE incident.

Since police officers are the ones actually trying to enforce the laws, their whole job basically consists of either threathening violence or the use of it.

I would except someone like that to actually have a nuanced approach to encounters with citizens and not a) smile and wish him a good day or b) HULK SMASH! , because, after all, it is teh core component of his job.

In related news I would also expect surgeons to have a nuanced approach when it comes to cutting people open, construction workers to operate heavy machinery without flattening surrounding buildings and truck drivers to know that their truck has a speed between standing still and 100 mph.

This officer lacks the sophistication necessary to carry a badge and a gun.

43

If I were a cop I would be ashamed of enforcing such immoral laws and probably go home and take it out on my family…because, you know, I have been trained to handle most problems with violence.

44

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
the leader of the free world has more people in prison than any other nation[/quote]

Funny, I thought incarcerating criminals was the responsibility of the judiciary as opposed to the President. Sounds more like a ‘police state’ if you say the President locks them up though right?[/quote]

I am not sure if you are equating this to Obama locking up people , I would think even if you were a very pro civil liberties person , you would still have to crack heads of your underlings to make sure they represented your policies.

We have never had a President , that ran on a platform of civil liberties. I personally think it is high time :)[/quote]

I know it must be tough over there. I mean you can’t even dance inside the Jefferson memorial. It must be like living in Nazi Germany only with liberals, minorities and elections and stuff.[/quote]

I assume ,you are being sarcastic , it is hard to tell, there are so many people incapable of rational thought .

Going on the assumption that you are , I would agree , it is no real loss of major liberty, but what was the point. of arresting those people , as I recall we have the right to PEACEFUL
assembly. I am not sure , but I guess these people are trying to inform you and I that we have cops at this memorial that do not grasp the concept of public service , there is a fine line to good police service and being and being LORD POLICE[/quote]

The law’s the law. Not only did they break it but they broke it with the intention of being arrested then resisted arrest so they could make the cops look bad and whinge about alleged infringements of their liberties. The right to peaceful assembly is not a ticket to be an arsehole. You can’t hold a peaceful assembly inside a fire station, in an ER room, inside a nuclear facility or any other number of places that have restrictions on public access. This is not a breach of peoples’ rights it’s common sense.

Someone made the decision that those who enter the Jefferson memorial have to maintain a reverential atmosphere. Whether you agree with this decision or not is neither here nor there. It’s law, it’s not a breach of anything and cops will rightly arrest you if you break that law.[/quote]

If you watched the video , that was I believe the main point. What law ? The is a BIG difference between the LAW and some arbitrary RULE. IMO the police should not being enforcing RULES, just my opinion:)

45

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I guess the key to understanding what a police state might look like is how the police treat nonviolent protesters.
[/quote]

Seems to me this ended exactly as the “protesters” wanted it to.

What’s the problem?[/quote]

From that perspective you might be right.

The problem, however, is that we are not mindless grass-eaters waiting line for the killing floor. Why can’t we dance in “the freest country on earth”?[/quote]

I don’t know.

Why can’t we have sex in a crowded movie theater?[/quote]

I think the majority of people would consider that lewd and indecent , that is a poor example

46

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
That is not quite the issue, the issue is whether the police has to slam entirely peaceful protesters into the ground.

[/quote]

Hmmmm. As I recall, it was ONE officer slamming ONE protester who was ignoring his instructions and heading for the door.

But your version is definitely more dramatic. [/quote]

Yeah, I know, he is the rare exception.

[/quote]

To what?

I thought we were discussing this incident.

Do you have proof that more than what I said happened, happened?
[/quote]

Well then lets stay with this ONE cop and this ONE incident.

Since police officers are the ones actually trying to enforce the laws, their whole job basically consists of either threathening violence or the use of it.

I would except someone like that to actually have a nuanced approach to encounters with citizens and not a) smile and wish him a good day or b) HULK SMASH! , because, after all, it is teh core component of his job.

In related news I would also expect surgeons to have a nuanced approach when it comes to cutting people open, construction workers to operate heavy machinery without flattening surrounding buildings and truck drivers to know that their truck has a speed between standing still and 100 mph.

This officer lacks the sophistication necessary to carry a badge and a gun.

[/quote]

I totally agree

47

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I think the majority of people would consider that lewd and indecent , that is a poor example
[/quote]

It’s a good example why we don’t need laws to protect us from indecency (or dancers). Most people already know this is not acceptable behavior and would not do it in the first place. If someone were to do it why couldn’t it just be prohibited voluntarily? For example, people who are offended can refuse to associate or to do business with these kind of people. That is a harsh punishment which can quickly correct bad behavior.

And with the use of social media there is no hiding from your sins.

48

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I think the majority of people would consider that lewd and indecent , that is a poor example
[/quote]

It’s a good example why we don’t need laws to protect us from indecency (or dancers). Most people already know this is not acceptable behavior and would not do it in the first place. If someone were to do it why couldn’t it just be prohibited voluntarily? For example, people who are offended can refuse to associate or to do business with these kind of people. That is a harsh punishment which can quickly correct bad behavior.

And with the use of social media there is no hiding from your sins.[/quote]

Because that way those in charge can’t exercise their power.

49

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
That is not quite the issue, the issue is whether the police has to slam entirely peaceful protesters into the ground.

[/quote]

Hmmmm. As I recall, it was ONE officer slamming ONE protester who was ignoring his instructions and heading for the door.

But your version is definitely more dramatic. [/quote]

Yeah, I know, he is the rare exception.

[/quote]

To what?

I thought we were discussing this incident.

Do you have proof that more than what I said happened, happened?
[/quote]

Well then lets stay with this ONE cop and this ONE incident.

Since police officers are the ones actually trying to enforce the laws, their whole job basically consists of either threathening violence or the use of it.

I would except someone like that to actually have a nuanced approach to encounters with citizens and not a) smile and wish him a good day or b) HULK SMASH! , because, after all, it is teh core component of his job.

In related news I would also expect surgeons to have a nuanced approach when it comes to cutting people open, construction workers to operate heavy machinery without flattening surrounding buildings and truck drivers to know that their truck has a speed between standing still and 100 mph.

This officer lacks the sophistication necessary to carry a badge and a gun.

[/quote]

Ah, so then your criticism is limited to that one (of several) officers?

That may be a legitimate criticism.

See, when you stop painting entire countries with the broad stroke of your absurd generalizations, reasonable discussion can be had.

BTW, that guy was heading for the door. Would you have advocatted just letting him walk away after his earlier actions? If not, what would you have done were you the cop?

Finally, do the police get ANY room from you for being humans who sometimes loose their cool? Because if not, we sure as hell need to raise taxes to pay for the stellar individuals needed to do the job.

[/quote]

What would I have done if someone silently danced on the spot?

Nothing whatsoever.

What would I have done if he walked away?

Let him go.

No, they dont.

I dont care if they go home and kick their dog, but as long as they are on the job they dont get to be human beings.

If they cant handle that, maybe they should find another job.

50

In related news, apparently does not only have the Fish and Wildlife service SWAT teams, teh Department of Education can send them as well if you do not pay your student loans?

I do not know on what planet this is considered to be normal, but if that is how its handled in the land of the free perhaps everyone else is doing it wrong?

51

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
That is not quite the issue, the issue is whether the police has to slam entirely peaceful protesters into the ground.

[/quote]

Hmmmm. As I recall, it was ONE officer slamming ONE protester who was ignoring his instructions and heading for the door.

But your version is definitely more dramatic. [/quote]

Yeah, I know, he is the rare exception.

[/quote]

To what?

I thought we were discussing this incident.

Do you have proof that more than what I said happened, happened?
[/quote]

Well then lets stay with this ONE cop and this ONE incident.

Since police officers are the ones actually trying to enforce the laws, their whole job basically consists of either threathening violence or the use of it.

I would except someone like that to actually have a nuanced approach to encounters with citizens and not a) smile and wish him a good day or b) HULK SMASH! , because, after all, it is teh core component of his job.

In related news I would also expect surgeons to have a nuanced approach when it comes to cutting people open, construction workers to operate heavy machinery without flattening surrounding buildings and truck drivers to know that their truck has a speed between standing still and 100 mph.

This officer lacks the sophistication necessary to carry a badge and a gun.

[/quote]

Ah, so then your criticism is limited to that one (of several) officers?

That may be a legitimate criticism.

See, when you stop painting entire countries with the broad stroke of your absurd generalizations, reasonable discussion can be had.

BTW, that guy was heading for the door. Would you have advocatted just letting him walk away after his earlier actions? If not, what would you have done were you the cop?

Finally, do the police get ANY room from you for being humans who sometimes loose their cool? Because if not, we sure as hell need to raise taxes to pay for the stellar individuals needed to do the job.

[/quote]

What laws were broken ? Is there a law that says you can not dance in a public place ? Or were the enforcing some rule ?

52

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I think the majority of people would consider that lewd and indecent , that is a poor example
[/quote]

It’s a good example why we don’t need laws to protect us from indecency (or dancers). Most people already know this is not acceptable behavior and would not do it in the first place. If someone were to do it why couldn’t it just be prohibited voluntarily? For example, people who are offended can refuse to associate or to do business with these kind of people. That is a harsh punishment which can quickly correct bad behavior.

And with the use of social media there is no hiding from your sins.[/quote]

Lifty , I am speachless, I personally believe in having laws designed to keep people from offending any one , I will play the devils advocate , what would you do if a grown man showed your 3 year old Mr Happy ? Would you say , “I will never do business with you”?

56

Eh, some folks tried to make a scene, they made one. I used to live in DC, I’m glad they don’t allow protests in some areas.

Yes, the cops should have handled it better.

57

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I guess the key to understanding what a police state might look like is how the police treat nonviolent protesters.
[/quote]

Seems to me this ended exactly as the “protesters” wanted it to.

What’s the problem?[/quote]

From that perspective you might be right.

The problem, however, is that we are not mindless grass-eaters waiting line for the killing floor. Why can’t we dance in “the freest country on earth”?[/quote]

I don’t know.

Why can’t we have sex in a crowded movie theater?[/quote]

I think the majority of people would consider that lewd and indecent , that is a poor example
[/quote]

Really?

I know several people (most of them much older than you / somewhat older than me) who thought that what those people did was quite “indecent.”

Everybody has their own standards, which is why we need rules and laws.

If so many people disagree with the rule against the behavior shown in the video, it ought to be easy to get the rule changed by less offensive and provocative ways, no?

Did these people even TRY to talk to their representives, or to protest OUTSIDE the building first? Of course not, since they couldn’t care less about the rule.

They just wanted to make the police look bad.

It’s all about “fighting the man!”[/quote]

Most people do not find dancing offensive , or giving some one a kiss

A common defense on these forums is to take something to an absurd extreme and say than anything else lesser than this is the same , it is not , to give some one a kiss is not the same as buggering them , to dance is not the same as masterbating

These absurd arguments is how they get away with the stupidity of some of these cops

As far as making the Cops look bad , they did it and it was way too easy

58

I think the Cops and legal system are out of control.
Kokesh did a good job showing absurd it has become.
I think, intentionally agitating was bs in the Kokesh video.
He did it to make a point, and he made his point. Especially with the woman and the man dancing and kissing.
It is a bullshit law, there is a difference between appreciation in your own way and trolling.
By this merit, can loud retards, boisterous fat black women (you know the kind I speak of) and people with MS not be allowed to enter? When is it disruptive and when is it tolerable? I suppose MS and Parkinson’s people would be shaking and moving around not unlike the others, so where do we draw a line…do we make another ‘rule’?

The Cops were right to break up Kokesh’s protest because that is what it was, how would you like it, if you went to Abe Lincoln or Jeff Monument, and some Hare Krishna’s were doing wierd chants and shyt?

Obviously, this is disruptive. Kokesh’s demosntration was necessary but also disruptive, it did a good job showing a stupid law, and how out of control the police have become, but also show, why the demonstrating law should probably be in place in the first place.

Imagine how the other people their felt by that scene, and the fact TV cameras were taking them into their footage…maybe they didn’t want to be on TV, what about their rights?

In order to be arrested, one needs to be informed of the crime they are committing, this is one thing to get from this video.