Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

scarletwoman

(31,893 posts)
2. "On the other hand..."?!?!? I hope you're not serious!
Tue Feb 27, 2018, 09:44 PM
Feb 2018

In case you were actually serious, I must strenuously object.

These capabilities in the hands of the State will pretty much always be used to suppress legitimate dissent, and will rarely - if ever - be used to "fight terrorism, mass shootings, and riots."

Terrorism strengthens the State - the only reason to appear to "fight terrorism" is to impose increasing limits on the freedom of its citizens.

Mass Shootings - the only way to "fight" mass shootings is to limit the kinds and numbers of weapons in circulation. The State cannot surveill its way into the inner thoughts of gun owners. The number of gun owners needs to be severely limited, as well as the kinds of guns they are allowed to own.

Riots - Several elements to consider:

(1)This really depends on what you consider a "riot". Are you talking about surveilling sports fans to prevent them from getting drunk and running wild in the streets? Good luck with that.

(2)If you're talking about the idiot "Black Bloc" so-called anarchists who show up to break windows and shit during legitimate demonstrations, first determine how many of them are actually law enforcement undercover plants.

(3)And please bear in mind that authoritarian governments LOVE to characterize peaceful demonstrations as "riots" - I hope you know that.


There is no good to be had for ordinary people from governments having this kind of surveillance power. None.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»China using 'predictive p...»Reply #2