6 ms·
What this means is that any element of surprise which may have occasionally caught out criminals will be lost. Instead, it will simply violate the privacy of no
by iliketosleep 7y ago
What this means is that any element of surprise which may have occasionally caught out criminals will be lost. Instead, it will simply violate the privacy of normal citizens on a grand scale.
If they were smart, they would use such powers sparingly and on those who appear to be a genuine threat. In fact, I really cannot understand their strategy. It makes no sense unless mass data collection from normal citizens is the goal.
- pjc50 7y agoMass intimidation is the goal. Fascism 101: the point of the boot is not to actually achieve order, but to ensure that those below know it is on their neck and that those above know they wear the boot. Remember there are people out there who think that increased border searches, walls, etc, are a good thing. This is for them.
- raxxorrax 7y agoPeople "against walls" supported and implemented this too.
- burgerboy 7y agoBorder walls exist already, as do searches, and they are very effective you fascist swine
- theflyinghorse 7y agoI think you mean to say authoritarianism not fascism. Fascism tends to be authoritarian but dose not have to be. Here's a great explanation on the topic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQbFgszFaZg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQbFgszFaZg
- toper-centage 7y agoActually, my theory about why we need to take our belts out, shoes off, and give away water bottles, at the airport security, is all about humiliation, intimidation and control.
- ShorsHammer 7y agoSo business as usual for the security theatre troupe?
- fredgrott 7y agoor more sinister ssl and other privacy key/certs for other shaddy actions..ie instead of their powers assigned under US Congress law expansion into NSa things
- blunte 7y agoI'm just guessing, but based on experiences with my family and the people they know in Texas, the people who most support this kind of behavior are also the people who see little reason to travel outside the US. Thus, they never personally experience the pain or inconvenience of their policies. Furthermore, since outsiders (_immigrants_) are considered to be bad or dangerous, any policy that dissuades them from even coming the the US is supported. Some may think my observations are ridiculous, but come spend some time in rural or southern US. Sit with the locals while they watch Fox news and echo what they hear.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago>Some may think my observations are ridiculous, but come spend some time in rural or southern US. Sit with the locals while they watch Fox news and echo what they hear. Your observations are ridiculous. I've been there and done that. It's not any worse than having your ears bleed when overhearing the equally "well informed" urban equivalents talk politics to each other on the subway. People who support Orwellian government are unfortunately abundant pretty much everywhere and on both sides of the isle. The only significant difference is which groups of people they conveniently craft their policy positions to not oppress and which laws they want enforced with an iron fist.
- 0xdeadb00f 7y ago> People ... who support Orwellian government are unfortunately abundant pretty much everywhere and on both sides of the isle. That may be true but these are his personal observations. He hadn't observed the other side with his own eyes - he can't comment on that, he's commenting on what he has observed.
- dsfyu404ed 7y agoAnd I'm calling his observation ridiculous (as suggested) and expanding upon his observations with my own. Why is that not ok? Are we not allowed to tell people they only have incomplete information anymore?
- dangerface 7y ago> If they were smart They aren't dumb they aren't trying to catch criminals.