General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The REAL Police State = Russia [View all]Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Or he wasn't as informed on the subject as he thought.
Let's see. Police State. Individuals have limited rights, and can have those rights eliminated by the decision of a few people without judicial review. NSL's from the Federal Agencies seems to fall into that category. If it doesn't, then checkpoints (like the one I went through last night on my way home) where identification must be produced, even if you call it a "safety check" would seem to qualify.
Restrictions on travel. If you go to the airport, you have to be screened by TSA agents before you can board the aircraft. That screening can include physical searches. Well, just ignore the airports and take ground transport. The TSA has set up along highways too for rolling checkpoints to fight the shadowy forces of terror. Perhaps the train, or bus. Well, they've done similar searches at bus stations and train stations. So you can't avoid the searches if you take your own car, or ride another form of transport. Oh, and if the Police believe you are smuggling anything, forget it your car will likely be disassembled before you get it back.
Ability to deprive people of their property. Civil Forfeiture. Need I explain? RICO statutes make it necessary to prove that you are innocent if Civil Forfeitures are an unknown menace to you.
Citizens are subjected to arbitrary violence from agents of the state. That means police. Do I have to give examples of that one?
Citizens are subject to surveillance by the Authorities. Really? You want me to get started on that one?
By any metric you choose, we are living in a police state. By any standard you want, we are, not will be, not could be, are.
This is probably an evil thought, but I wonder if Democrats would as a party rise up to resist it if a Republican got elected in 2016? Not that it would matter, because any Democratic candidate would also continue the practices and excuses. Merica!