19 ms·

The Criminalization of Everyday Life

482 points by mankypro 13y ago

mortyseinfeld 13y ago
This story reminded me of the Boston bombing and it's "lockdown" (read martial law). Didn't Boston have one of these APCs roaming the streets during its martial law. In that case it's really a show of force against the "civilian" population than to catch terrorists. Why the hell does Ohio State need an MRAP. Are they going to actually tell us that the terrorists might roll in with tanks or APCs. Or maybe the terrorists will be running around with APCs in full combat? No. Geez, is anybody even questioning these clowns about these acquisitions.
CalRobert 13y ago
Surprised this didn't get any comments. It's a good reason to leave (or not move to) the US, or increasingly, the UK.
- venomsnake 13y ago
  Do you think it is better anywhere?
  - mkaziz 13y ago
    Canada?
    - mhurron 13y ago
      Satan's Little Helper? The country that seems to simply enacts laws and legislation that just mirror the US so they look like good little friends? The country that assists the NSA as needed? That Canada?
      - mkaziz 13y ago
        There's less of a precedent of them abusing their own citizens so (which is my anecdotal opinion, admittedly). Add that to healthcare costs that won't cripple you forever, and it's a solid choice for an English-speaking country.
        mhurron 13y ago
        > less of a precedent of them abusing their own citizens http://pencanada.ca/blog/on-backdoor-information-access/ http://pencanada.ca/blog/on-backdoor-information-access/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement They let the Americans do that for them.
        MrZongle2 13y ago
        On the handful of times I've been in Canada, I've enjoyed the experience. The people were friendly and the scenery breathtaking. There's a lot to like about America's neighbor to the north. But some of their speech-restricting activities are disturbing: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/free-speech-eh-why-is-canada-prosecuting-mark-steyn-1.720445 http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/free-speech-eh-why-is-canada-pr...
      - afterburner 13y ago
        The general attitude, and the implications of everyone having health care, are far better. The police in general have a far friendlier disposition. It's not all about authority and the "listen to me I'm the coach/sergeant" sports-talk/military-talk mentality. There is also no real race issue the way African Americans experience in the US (a systematic, paranoid, aggressive marginalization of a large section of society). And there certainly isn't anything like the militarization of the police like there is in the US, which is the focus of this article.
        r-s 13y ago
        We have major race issues with Natives, nobody wants to talk about it though.
        deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
        afterburner 13y ago
        Please see my reply to mhurron above (I can't copy paste it because HN deletes it as spam)
        mhurron 13y ago
        I don't know where in Canada you've lived, but there is plenty of that in Toronto, and Calgary, especially dealing with the natives. I'll bet Montreal and Vancouver aren't must different. There was no culture shock moving from Canada to the US.
        afterburner 13y ago
        The situation with natives is a far cry from the systematic and pervasive problems with racism against African Americans in the US. Natives are such a small percentage of the population in Canada, and certainly in urban centres, that no especially abusive laws have been constantly set up over the years in order to keep them at what is considered the appropriate station in society. Think of the hundred years of Jim Crow laws in the US, and the even current attempt to disenfranchise them during every election through voter registration laws and voter list deletions. It is simply not comparable.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  - anonymousDan 13y ago
    Germany?
  - Zigurd 13y ago
    The US has poor and mediocre global rankings in many areas: Education, health care, economic disparity, crime, incarceration, number of times police use guns, etc. Some of our rankings, like incarceration, rank down there with totalitarian hell-holes. So, by most groupings of objective measures, you'll find a dozen or more places that have better living conditions than the US.
  - jotm 13y ago
    Well, I can tell you for sure that most of Europe (Spain, France, Germany, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland, Czech Republic, Italy, Austria, probably more) at least as it is now, is great for raising kids and living a normal life without a constant fear of the police in the back of your head.
- PavlovsCat 13y ago
  Once you leave (and give up citizenship) you loose a lot of options to influence it. And you leave behind those who are either too naive, too poor, too sick, or otherwise unable to follow; together with the elements who made you leave, and who now have free access to a completely empty stage..
  - CalRobert 13y ago
    Exit is what gives power to voice. If you're at a stagnant company where nothing changes even though it's clear that change is necessary, even the suits will sometimes notice when half their staff quit.
    - PavlovsCat 13y ago
      Do you know any examples where that made a dent?
      - CalRobert 13y ago
        Hah, well I like to imagine that just after walking out the door my previous boss realized the error of his ways and instituted sweeping new reforms. I don't know of anything that's not anecdotal. I also think that trying to fix things as an individual in a country of over 300 million, despite what people tell you, is generally a fool's errand for anyone who doesn't have enormous amounts of capital at their disposal. Best to find somewhere that suits you and enjoy life there.
- ufmace 13y ago
  What's funny to me about the suggestion to move is that the very people who have the greatest ability to actually move to another country - upper-middle class people with college degrees - are the ones least affected by these issues.
  - CalRobert 13y ago
    That's true, but I was profoundly disturbed by the direction the country was going and more directly at the thought that my taxes were supporting it (along with the military industrial complex, policies enabling substantial environmental destruction, etc.). My friends probably think my response is rather extreme but I prefer that my taxes go towards pensions, health, and education (and, yes, even the dole), instead of the military.
api 13y ago
This is a common way that a totalitarian state can be implemented on top of an apparent democratic republic: pass so many laws (and contradictory / complex laws) that anyone can be found guilty of something, then enforce the law selectively.
- rumcajz 13y ago
  Yep. We've had something like that in Eastern Europe during the communist era.
  - spiritplumber 13y ago
    "There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." (From Atlas Shrugged -- Damn, it's bad when I of all people am quoting Ayn Rand).
    - MrZongle2 13y ago
      If quoting Rand makes you uncomfortable, just remind yourself that even a broken clock is right twice a day. The quote itself is apt.
      - talmand 13y ago
        In military time it's only right once a day.
    - jotm 13y ago
      What's wrong with Ayn Rand?
      - mathgladiator 13y ago
        Generally, people don't like her for lacking 'heart'. However, most people don't actually understand her message, nor do they appreciate her definition of selfishness. It's very unfortunate because her writings were on the spot on about human behavior.
timbro 13y ago
> Sheriff Bud York suggested, according to the Post-Star, the local newspaper, that “in an era of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and mass killings in schools, police agencies need to be ready for whatever comes their way... And in reality, they're just preparing for social unrest that seem more likely by the day.
- steauengeglase 13y ago
  In reality the sheriff saw an opportunity for positive press and went for it. You don't turn down free PR.
MrZongle2 13y ago
When I read something like this, I always think back to when I would see some tinfoil-hat type ranting on Usenet 20 years ago about the growing surveillance/police state in America. It was generally eye-rolling or unintentionally hilarious stuff. What's depressing is that it's starting to look like they were right.
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  The real tinfoil types believe that the government cloud research facility in Alaska controls the weather globally and can cause earthquakes and tsunamis on command. We don't have any indication to believe that's true yet.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - MrZongle2 13y ago
    True; there are the tinfoil hat types that believe that there was a second gunman on the grassy knoll, and then there are those that believe Bigfoot killed Kennedy with the mind powers he learned from the Lizard People of Zeta Reticuli B. Edit: from the downvotes, I can only assume that I've offended the Bigfoot fans.
    - larrys 13y ago
      "from the downvotes, I can only assume" Separately, as a karma strategy, it makes sense to upvote something that you reply to (regardless of whether you agree or disagree) as it tends to make your reply higher up (because the parent comment is higher up) and get more visibility which in theory should result in more karma.
      - evacuationdrill 13y ago
        I do this, but I justify it by thinking that the thread was important enough to me to reply to, so I should vote. I don't care about karma, but I'm more likely to get replies, or so I hope.
CurtMonash 13y ago
"If you didn't do anything wrong, you have nothing to fear (at least from the cops)" is looking stupider every day.
- rjd 13y ago
  Not being from the states I've only seen this through documentaries and expose shows... but to me its just seems to be the police are starting to treat everybody the way minorities have said they have been treated for decades.
mortyseinfeld 13y ago
This is probably more of "If we scare people by throwing around the terrorist word then we get to spend money, have cool new toys, and look badass". It's pathetic, but it seems to work.
- tunap 13y ago
  Pathetic & self serving. There would be a cessation of federal/State/Muni funds if any agency's focal issue(s) were eradicated, hence the popularity of "War On..." ideologies with unattainable objectives. What starts as a legitimate(sic) cause all too often morphs into a personal job security issue. Imagine all the ICE, DHS, NSA, FBI, CIA, state, county and local LEOs that would have to look elsewhere for jobs if the "War on..."s didn't raise their budgets every fiscal quarter.
- crbnw00ts 13y ago
  And then of course once they acquire those toys and have them sitting around for a while, they start to get itchy for an excuse to "use" them.
JoeAltmaier 13y ago
The 'good old days' had drug dealers and violence, don't kid yourself. It got covered up and ignored. What is a police dept to do, when the crimes are escalating? Its simple to chide Warren County (or whoever); but who are you to say the next bombing or public rage will not occur there? The others were in similar places; no place is safe.
- spiritplumber 13y ago
  They are not. See stats.
  - JoeAltmaier 13y ago
    Didn't see stats in the article; just lots of strawmen and irresponsible summaries of crimes.
    - DanBC 13y ago
      Crime, especially violent crime, is dropping in most of US.
      - ctdonath 13y ago
        Violent gun-related crime dropped about 50% from 1993-2009. Thru the same period, gun ownership increased about 50%. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/ http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-...
      - djdj123 13y ago
        This generalization gets bandied about too much. Crime trends and patterns are highly local. I'm sure violent crime is dropping in many places, but in other places it's spiraling out of control, for example, South Chicago, East Oakland, Detroit. I think it's a mistake to throw those places in the same basket as a small city in Ohio (unless it really has similar crime stats).
coldcode 13y ago
What a depressing article(s). Our reality is only going to get worse since there is little we can (or have the will to) do. At least in the Ukraine people are really contemplating change. Here we watch our football and our shows and fawn over celebrities and nothing changes.
- thenmar 13y ago
  That Auburn game was really something though!
- RodericDay 13y ago
  Every time you say people are just fawning over celebrities you contribute to the problem by helping develop widespread facile cynicism. Say something new. Was OWS not your style? Do you think anti-capitalist critics that use technology are hypocrites? Are you waiting for someone to craft the perfect movement before you jump in? If any of these or those in their vein apply, it's time to change your MO, your way of looking at the problem.
- anon4 13y ago
  Yeah, but in Ukraine, they're digging themselves out of a much deeper hole. If they manage to get accepted in the EU, a lot of them would emigrate west. USA citizens don't have that option. There isn't a "west" for someone from the USA to emigrate to. USA is the west. You shouldn't compare your corruption with Ukraine's or other Soviet Bloc countries'. Those people have a place to run to, as hard as getting there is. You have nowhere to run.
  - afterburner 13y ago
    There's plenty of Western countries that are less screwed up than the US.
    - tokenadult 13y ago
      For example? What's involved for a citizen of the United States who would like to settle in one of those countries permanently?
crazygringo 13y ago
I can't say I'm exactly surprised. If you ran a police department, you're not about to turn down a free tank -- I mean, how cool is that, toys for the boys?!?! What's bothersome is that a police department is allowed to do this. That DoD rules don't prohibit selling/giving military equipment to police departments. That state legislatures don't prohibit it. A police department, like any organization, is always going to amass all the power/capability it can. Where are the people who are supposed to be limiting and regulating it?
- avmich 13y ago
  No, bothersome is the one above - that a police department chief is not about to turn down a free tank. If your police has such a mentality, you ought to be worried already.
  - csallen 13y ago
    Human nature is hard to change. Systems are (relatively) easy to change. Rather than worry about people being irresponsible, lazy, greedy, immoral, incompetent, etc, we should focus on building systems that work well and protect all involved despite all of that.
    - avmich 13y ago
      Agree. But it doesn't mean we shouldn't evaluate officials - especially elected ones - on their views. Now, what could be a workable approach...
      - walid 13y ago
        But I don't think this is a workable task in a political system. The views of the guy you voted for are going to be different from the one you didn't vote for. In a perfect system every person will be impartial in evaluating elected officials. In the real world, if you evaluate the guy you DID NOT elect you would be perceived as being biased. On the other hand, if you evaluate the person you DID elect you would be perceived as being biased as well. Both cases you would be perceived as being biased. So the only workable approach is to focus less on individuals and more on the system and its results.
0xdeadbeefbabe 13y ago
At least the 113th congress didn't create many new laws. No SOPA, PIPA, or COICA yet either.
- viggity 13y ago
  one of the few beauties of our government is that it is near impossible to pass laws with a divided congress. I'm a pretty passionate libertarian/conservative but having the dems control one house of congress isn't all that bad of a thing (from my viewpoint)
  - srl 13y ago
    Seconded. It's very popular these days to bash congress for not getting anything done, but it has its upsides. I'm pretty far left, and I wish the far-right wasn't quite so powerful, but I am glad the republican party is there, still powerful, waiting to pounce on any and every mistake made on the left. It helps keep us honest (c.f. obamacare - which I like, but the rollout, eh...). And when the roles are switched, say, 50 years, we'll do you the same "favor" :)
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
aestra 13y ago
WOW! The most shocking linked article is the kids who got arrested for waiting for the bus. They were excepted to plea bargain. That's right, the charges weren't dropped!!!!!! edit the DA dismissed the charges but the police chief thinks the arrest was justified. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/04/charges-against-ny-teens-will-be-dismissed/3868097/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/04/charges... Interview with the coach (he seems like a really nice guy): http://www.infowars.com/kids-arrested-waiting-for-school-bus/ http://www.infowars.com/kids-arrested-waiting-for-school-bus...
- bilbo0s 13y ago
  Ok... that one is crazy. Obey the cop and get suspended... or obey the teacher and go to jail. Just leaving these kids in no-win situations. SOMEONE has to be willing to listen and hear the kids out. Either the cop has to hear them out, and then say "OK, well I'll just keep an eye on you until your teacher comes." Or the teacher has to hear them out, and then say "Well, OK, it was my fault for telling you guys to stand there so I'm not going to suspend anyone this time." But you can't put kids in a situation like that and then say... "It's YOUR fault!" That's insanity. This wasn't ANY of these kids' fault.
  - aestra 13y ago
    Did you see the interview with the coach? He showed up, identified himself, said these kids were in the right place and they were going to a basketball game all while speaking very respecfully and the cops said if he didn't leave the coach was going to jail too! Apparently being out in public is illegal. They were going to a basketball game not school so they probably wouldn't get suspended but they were expected to be there. Plus they wanted to be there. It was according to the coach the normal place they caught the bus for games.
    - bilbo0s 13y ago
      Oh... I didn't know that the coach had tried to speak with the cop. Yeah... I guess that makes it a little worse for the cops. My only point was that this is a problem that should have been settled between the teacher(s) and the cop(s). They should have communicated better. Now if the teacher TRIED to communicate and the cop ignored him... yeah... that's a problem too. I mean, adults need to work together to solve problems where children are concerned... not get in pissing contests to see who's is bigger. This is an issue where, I would think, it's obvious that the schools and the police should be communicating about what's going to happen with respect to transportation. But you can't set up transportation. Communicate the arrangements to parents and students. Then show up and arrest all of the students for following your instructions. That's just a poorly run school district AND police department really. Actually... probably more a poorly run city. And to arrest the kids because of the bumbling ineptitude of all of the adults involved in the incident is unforgivable. People should be fired for that. Anyone who plays CYA by trying to pin his ineptitude on children should be out of a job. Incidentally... you do get suspended for some number of games for missing practice or a game. At least, those were the rules in my day. And that's how most teams are run at the school I work with. Basketball, Volleyball, Football or whatever.
iambateman 13y ago
If every police station in the country is equipped with military-grade weapons and vehicles, what happens in the event of despotic leadership? Suppose someone rises to power with little regard for legislative oversight and activates the sleeping military at home. It might start with a real (or faked) terror event coordinated across several major cities. It wouldn't take much at all, 5-10 cities, and suddenly: 1. Internet & cell communications are shut down 2. a national state of emergency is declared 3. A curfew is issued 4. Dissidents are squashed via a military police force with little recourse themselves. 5. Everyone is required to have location-aware implants "for safety." With a little fear, a government could take full, permanent control of their citizens via aggressive laws and more aggressive enforcers. Would it even take two weeks?
- redblacktree 13y ago
  To what end?
- uxp 13y ago
  Radley Balko’s book, which is cited in the article, "Rise of the Warrior Cop"[0] actually makes a very good argument that the 3rd Amendment which prohibits the quartering of soldiers during peacetime was referencing this exact situation, wherein a group of government controlled "peace officers", which are essentially military personnel, are in constant deployment inside the United States of America keeping tabs on it's citizens. He argues that it has nothing to do with literally being forced to give up your bed to a soldier, but entirely with the state housing soldiers within it's walls. With the gifting of Tanks, M16s and other paramilitary gear to ordinary police officers, we're essentially creating another branch of the armed forces. [0] http://www.amazon.com/dp/1610392116/ http://www.amazon.com/dp/1610392116/
- maxerickson 13y ago
  Why are the enforcers that are keeping the police in line so quick to go along with the despot? Or do you really think that the police in the U.S. are equivalent to a disciplined, no-questions-asked unit of the Federal government? (I don't think a majority of the military could be encouraged to act directly against the citizens of the U.S., never mind the police (preempting snide replies, against the people in a nationally organized manner))
ctdonath 13y ago
Used to be military surplus stores would acquire military surplus and sell them to an amused and subsequently harmless citizenry. All that old equipment has to go somewhere; now such civilian possession is prohibited (even used Humvees (basically just off-road cars) cannot, by law, be sold to the public), it ends up routed to the only group legally allowed to have it and wants it: police. In the meantime, stores that sold military surplus have adapted by selling military-like knockoff gear, and would-be buyers are pumping money into the fast-growing "tactical gear" market. Fact is, if all this military equipment were sold on open market, no harm would come of it. Used to be available and wasn't a problem then, and the rather large paramilitary equipment market isn't a problem now. Question is: why is the government so afraid of its own citizens possessing such gear?
- redblacktree 13y ago
  > Question is: why is the government so afraid of its own citizens possessing such gear? Is that the right question, considering that the tactical gear market is allowed to exist? I'm apparently too lazy to do it, but it would probably be instructive to look at the history of that ban on military-to-citizen sales.
  - ctdonath 13y ago
    Short version: In 1934, machineguns & "destructive devices" were hit with a $200 "transfer tax" and subject to tight paperwork regulations and severe penalties for violations. Given the products in question cost around $50, and the tax equaled some $3000 in today's US$, it was practically a ban. Inflation brought the tax down to affordable (cough) levels today. In 1986, possession/manufacture of new machineguns was banned outright. Old ones could still be owned & transferred, but between the severely limited supply and accumulated $200 taxes, prices have increased about 25x over what they would cost unrestricted, making them desirable for investment and undesirable for mundane use. When the US Army transitioned to "Humvees" replacing Jeeps, the contract included a clause prohibiting resale to civilians. Likewise other equipment cannot be resold, not so much by law but by contract. As it is, the tactical gear market is "allowed" to exist mainly because there isn't much way to legally prohibit it. Most such gear is objectively indistinguishable from other common products (clothing, camping equipment, radios, hunting gear); the differences are significant in specialized use but nowhere near enough to be codified in law. As demonstrated during the now-expired 10-year "assault weapons ban", the marketplace will come up with all kinds of creative solutions to bridge any gaps caused by prohibition (10 round limit? get subcompact pistols or .50-caliber semi-auto rifles. Weight limits? superlight plastic/carbon-fiber guns.)
DanielBMarkham 13y ago
One of the underpinnings of the U.S. Constitution is the Bill Of Rights, one of which states "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." People go bouncing off the wall around this issue as if it were one having solely to do with owning guns, but the real purpose is arranging the real power in the government. The people reserve and are ultimately responsible for the use of lethal force in the United States. They can delegate that power to the government for certain things, like a defense department or law enforcement, but at the end of the day, it's everybody carrying guns that are responsible for social order. At least that's the way it was set up. As we've drifted away from that principle, by assigning more and more powers to the defense department and police agencies, (gun control is part of this but not the only part), those folks have quite naturally started viewing themselves as the privileged few to hold the power to make things go boom. Then we got rid of the volunteer military, further separating the mass of the population from the things carrying lethal force. So nowadays, if you want to become a specialist in the application of power tools to destroy people and things, you pick one of a few different career paths and become one of the chosen few. This is a VERY recent development. Not 50 years ago it was commonplace to know people who could operate machine guns, explosives, and drive tanks around. To those folks, cops were just another working Joe like them except they wore a badge. On the other side, cops viewed the population as a trained asset to have and use in time of crisis. It was not unusual to consider gathering up as many armed men as necessary from an area to conduct police operations. But the professionals got involved, and having that kind of power was viewed as a terribly complicated responsibility that the average guy couldn't handle. This created a wall in society. On both sides now, it's us against them. We need MRAPS because, hell, anything can happen, and there's just a few of us cops in this county. We are no longer all in it together. It's not like if AQ comes knocking we can knock on doors and ask for help. This is a self-fulfilling feedback loop: as the police arm themselves more and more with special gear, the average person really can't operate it. So even more specialized training is required. Same goes for military gear, where this divide originated. I would suggest that what we need is some sort of ready reserve system where everybody is trained at reaching 18 on how to safely use most all common forms of police and military gear. I'd further suggest that local police departments be required to have a certain percentage of their patrols as civilian ride-alongs. There are a lot of things that can be done here, and we don't have to argue gun control to make progress. But I think we do need an understanding of how we got here in the first place. This is a trend that has been a long time coming. The War On Terror just exacerbated it.
300bps 13y ago
This is a continuation of the military industrial complex. There aren't enough wars, but companies that supply the military still need to make money. So they make so much equipment that the DoD needs to give their completely usable equipment away for free. This page should make any U.S. taxpayer sick and any non-U.S. citizen worried: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_e...
- tunap 13y ago
  The more things change the more they stay the same. https://archive.org/details/WarIsARacket https://archive.org/details/WarIsARacket
VonGuard 13y ago
Appropriate, seeing as how Kent State is in Ohio, too. Clearly, they learned their lessons in Ohio: shoot students first, ask questions later.
- microtherion 13y ago
  I was reminded of this, too, and took it as a reminder that the late 60s were not always as peaceful as the article’s author would have it.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
JonnieCache 13y ago
The fact that this is being instigated by the federal government makes me suspect that this is deliberate planning for the long-term consequences of american societal breakdown, for when the war on drugs isn't enough to control the ever-growing underclass anymore. Does this kind of thinking still place me firmly with the tinfoil contingent?
- redblacktree 13y ago
  Yes. It's comforting to think that it's all orchestrated from the top; that means that, even if it's not you, someone is in control of this chaotic world. The truth is much more frightening. No one quite knows what will happen or how to prepare for it, and we'll all likely get screwed when the unexpected happens.
  - JonnieCache 13y ago
    I used to religiously apply that view, nobody is in the driving seat, chaos reigns, conspiracy theorists are looking to replace their father, etc etc. These days I try to take more of a balanced perspective. There are many examples of covert malevolent acts in the halls of power throughout history, there was a list of confessed false flag operations on here just the other day. Look into any book about the history of military intelligence and you will find all sorts of nasty adventures. Then there's COINTELPRO, MKULTRA, the FBIs attempt to undermine the civil rights movement, it goes on and on. What would be truly irrational would be to believe that this stuff doesn't happen in the present. So now I try to evaluate each "conspiracy theory" on its own terms, lest I blind myself to the one that turns out to be real. (Note: I still don't actually believe in any specific tinfoilery. I just try to evaluate it honestly. Almost all of it, I still dismiss immediately. Most of the really juicy stuff is right there in the history books anyway.)
    - redblacktree 13y ago
      If you discover a conspiracy that you believe, in absence of proof, what can you do with that information? I stopped trying to "figure it all out" once I realized that there was very little I can do as an individual, even if I am right about some conspiracy.
ericthor 13y ago
>“in an era of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and mass killings in schools, police agencies need to be ready for whatever comes their way..." There has always been terrorism in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States As well as mass shootings. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-m... This current "era" isn't defined by the number or scale of these tragedies but by institutions' and the public's reaction to them. If we want to protect the lives and welfare of the average U.S. citizen our money and efforts would be better spent tackling some of the less newsworthy health issues. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_preventable_causes_of_death#Leading_causes_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_preventable_causes_of_d... Also the time frame of the Sandy Hook Shooting was extremely brief. The shooter was believed to enter the school around 9:30 the first 911 call was made at 9:35 and the last shot heard was at 9:40 and the police enter at 9:44. The MRAP and other military artillery obviously wouldn't have made a difference due to time frame of the tragedy.
dmix 13y ago
I wish people would move beyond 1984 and quote more Foucault's Discipline & Punishment [1]. There is a much deeper-rooted problem in society than mass surveillance or militarization of police. It's the question of why we all let this happen without any resistance. We accept and welcome our controllers. Foucault wrote about the effects of prisoner mindset in society in the 1960-70s. Our subjugation and tolerance to authoritarianism is very widespread and not limited to just police. We're not just afraid to be anti-authoritative, we're institutionalized since our birth in schools and the concept of control is in embedded in every aspect of life (such as in language found in politics, school work, or newspapers). Mass-surveillance is just a more direct implementation of "panopticon" [2] applied to everyday life, existing at all times. Having committed a crime is no longer the requirement to be imprisoned, whether physically or mentally. http://www.amazon.com/Discipline-Punish-Birth-Prison-Vintage-ebook/dp/B007OLYO7I/ http://www.amazon.com/Discipline-Punish-Birth-Prison-Vintage... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon
- thisiswrong 13y ago
  > It's the question of why we all let this happen without any resistance. Why, and how did we let this happen? Look no further : http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Hollywood.jpg http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Holl... 'War-nography', islamophobia, narco-phobia... and the script goes on. When the masses believe that they are in danger, they will stand behind those in power for protection. There's surprisingly little difference between Joseph Goebbels and Hollywood.
  - rhizome 13y ago
    'War-nography', islamophobia, narco-phobia... and the script goes on. Why is it that those movies attract capital?
    - evacuationdrill 13y ago
      Because they're fucking awesome. War movies, that is. Sure, I'm probably playing into some sort of social conditioning, but it doesn't change that I enjoyed watching John Wayne movies growing up.
snake_plissken 13y ago
I just find it so incredible that a hospital can bill you for a rectal cavity search ordered by police/judge. Honestly I think my mind is experiencing some sort of race condition as I try to pick a word that accurately describes my incredulity about this. Ughhhhhh
- userulluipeste 13y ago
  I share your sentiment, but trying to analyze objectively the entire scenario from different angles I find acceptable for the subject being searched to pay the bill if he is found guilty (which is hiding illegal stuff in his body). I don't agree with the shaky grounds used by the law enforcement to bring up the body search though.
afterburner 13y ago
I generally agree with the article, but I object to this section: "And the mood is spreading. Take the asset bubble collapse of 2008 and the rising cries of progressives for the criminal prosecution of Wall Street perpetrators, as if a fundamentally sound financial system had been abused by a small number of criminals who were running free after the debacle. Instead of pushing a debate about how to restructure our predatory financial system, liberals in their focus on individual prosecution are aping the punitive zeal of the authoritarians. A few high-profile prosecutions for insider trading (which had nothing to do with the last crash) have, of course, not changed Wall Street one bit." I think that the self-serving, damaging actions of those with a lot of power that affected the entire world's economy is worth looking into at least some prosecution, it's hardly in the same league as what happened to three innocent teenagers waiting for a bus. And if insider trading isn't related to the last crash, then of course prosecuting it isn't going to change anything.
- JackFr 13y ago
  The idea that there is a small cabal of powerful people who brought the economy to its knees while enriching themselves through their knowing and active malfeasance is a fairy tale. To ethically prosecute people you have to competently and in good faith believe they have broken specific laws. And you need to know the actions, and how specifically they violated the law. An unfortunate outcome is not sufficient.
  - afterburner 13y ago
    I made no claim that there is a small cabal of powerful people controlling everything brought down the system. There are, however, Goldman Sachs people that lied to their own customers in order to make money, for example. That is the kind of behaviour that can be persecuted, mostly along the conflict of interest or fraud lines. Those are specific laws. Oh, by the way, heard of the Libor scandal? Not specifically related to the crash, but interesting reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libor_scandal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libor_scandal
    - JackFr 13y ago
acuozzo 13y ago
This is AMAZING! We're getting closer and closer to a cyberpunk society (unfortunately, authoritarianism is necessary, but not sufficient for this). Soon it'll be like Escape From L.A. or Snow Crash or Neuromancer! I can't wait to stroll down the streets of Chiba like Case. I can't wait to hack around in the Metaverse like Hiro. I can't wait to explore the underbelly of prison-islands like Snake. We just need a bit more authoritarianism, some advanced cybernetic implants, and just enough unrest for a Modern Wild West to be born. Does anyone else plan on coming along for the ride? HACK THE GIBSON! HACK THE PLANET!
- ilaksh 13y ago
  LOL. I like Gibson, technology, and stuff too, but that's not a reason to be stoked about authoritarianism. Anyway you are probably kidding.
  - acuozzo 13y ago
    > Anyway you are probably kidding. Yep! Well, mostly. I'd say 95%.
memracom 13y ago
Americans really should learn more about the Soviet KGB and its predecessor, the NKVD, and how they ran a campaign of terror against citizens who did little more than have a different opinion of how the country should be run. Because now that America no longer compares itself to the Soviet Union, this is the kind of police state that is being constructed in the USA. Meanwhile, in Russia, the place where the Soviet system used to be, they have moved in the opposite direction and dismantled most of the police state. In Russia people have more personal freedoms with respect to the state than they do in the USA. Of course one unfortunate side effect of so much freedom is that there was a great increase in corruption and the growth of the oligarchs after the fall of the Soviet Union. But Russia is dealing with this step by step, reducing corruption and reigning in the oligarchs. Their ideal seems to be the USA of the 1960s or 70s, but not the USA of today.
- bananacurve 13y ago
  >In Russia people have more personal freedoms with respect to the state than they do in the USA. How it is possible for someone to reach such a stupendous level of confusion boggles the mind. Even if the Russian propaganda minister were to make such a declaration he surely isn't deluded enough to believe it to be true.
  - memracom 13y ago
    Well, I speak Russian fluently (and therefore can follow the Russian media/Internet) and I have visited the country 3 times. In addition I have visited another ex-Soviet country, Ukraine, over a dozen times. You really have to go to these places to understand them, and preferably have some level of competence in the language so that you can speak to a variety of people, not just some egotistic activist that gets his jollies out of manipulating foreign media.
    - bananacurve 13y ago
      I have spoken to Ukrainians and Russians, students and programmers, and they would be offended at your assessment of the situation. The most telling part of my conversations with them was when I suggested that things are getting at least a little better. They were adamant that things were not getting better. Anyway they were glad to be in the states.
whiddershins 13y ago
What's striking is the correlation between excessive police tactics and enforcement of victimless crimes. From a right libertarian point of view, it is the government's responsibility to protect your rights, not to protect you. From a left libertarian point of view, it is the government's responsibility to demonstrate that the good of enforcing a law outweighs the loss of individual freedom and other harm of enforcing it. Drugs, immigration, fail those tests. Many sex crimes fail those tests. Seatbelt laws probably fail. The police have to be so aggressive about these things because they never lent themselves to enforcement in the first place.
tedks 13y ago
This article is not about police tanks. (Even though it's horrifying that if the tanks were about to roll into America's equivalent of Tianeman Square, our American Tank Man would just be tasered, at best.) This article is about the prison/police system becoming the fundamental axis of civil society. Schools are run like prisons, and increasingly with police presence. Minority groups are, as always, increasingly targeted for harassment and neutralization. If you get on the radar of the police state, you and your family will be hounded forever. If you are imprisoned, it's more likely than not that you'll be held in solitary confinement. The article doesn't seem to answer the question I wish I knew the answer to -- how did we get here? What happened that made the United States this way? Was it always like this, behind the curtains, just a nest of HUAACs and J Edgar Hoovers? Well, now the J Edgar Hoover of 2013 knows everything about everyone, he can arrest anyone for any reason at any time, and he can't be opposed by any means I'm aware of. That iconic picture of a hippy putting a flower in the barrel of a riot cop's gun could never happen today -- as soon as the hippy reached for the gun I'm sure his head would be blown off.
foxhop 13y ago
My small town is gearing up as well ... http://waterford.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/waterford-police-department-humveeing-along http://waterford.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/waterfor...
- logn 13y ago
  My town of 2,000+ people now has a humvee... for a police department that has 3 officers.
mcantelon 13y ago
The post-911 federal gov has been directing resources towards building a domestic counter-insurgency apparatus and promoting a culture in law enforcement conducive to their inclusion in it. You don't spend over a decade building something without a reason. So what's the reason? Needless to say, if the founding fathers were around today they'd be pondering a strategy to resist it.
marincounty 13y ago
I have felt we have too many laws and over zealous cops for some time now. I guess I'm old--I was born in 1972, but I can assure you; things were not like it has been in the last twenty years. I started noticing a change in the late 80's and it's(a over regulated society, cops who abuse the system) just gotten worse. If Jesus Christ reappeared he would most likely be arrested for indecency. Ticketed for fishing without license. Arrested for loitering. Arrested for holding an event without a permit. Ticketed for sleeping in someone manger, without written consent. It's really not funny when you get an expensive ticket for no reason. I have thought about this and a solution; tie all fines to income, and require all Cruisers to be wired with 24/7 cams. This is a good website, but I sometimes wonder if I just blowing smoke, and racking up clicks for a already Rich Dude? Some of these topics are so important they deserve their own webpage?
- noonespecial 13y ago
  If Jesus Christ reappeared he would most likely be... All those crimes?! Jeeze, its sounds like they'd friggin' crucify him...
- TullamoreDude 13y ago
  If Jesus lived today? A religous extremist from the Middle East who talks alot about socialsm? America would send all the drones the got.
rglover 13y ago
Here's what I don't understand: what is the ultimate goal of this newfound desire to police everything? The obvious answer is control over people en mass, but say that happens...then what? Articles like this (which I'm glad are being written) point out the flaws and injustice in the system, but don't discuss the presumed results "those in control" are looking to achieve by manipulating it. From what I understand, the desired result is to minimize the autonomy of the general public and funnel the bulk of money, control, and power into the hands of a national elite. What happens next (an honest question, as I have some semi-paranoid theories but am curious to hear from someone who is a bit more educated on the topic)?
- richardjordan 13y ago
  We live in an era of delicate balance between global overpopulation and resource depletion. We have exceeded the carrying capacity of the planet, we are at peak supply rates for oil and other essential resources. We're rendering things less habitable and global climate change - coupled with water table depletion and topsoil burnout - threatens to crash food crops in some key regions. It's not a conspiracy. People who know things - and when you have wealth you have the ability to know things - tend to see that we have a period of incredibly instability coming involving a lot of dying and misery. In such a situation having a tight control of the masses and a control of resources in the hands of a tiny elite benefits that elite in ways that times of abundance make seem unnecessary.
  - rglover 13y ago
    Thanks for the response. Fairly inline with what I thought. Next question, how to prepare? Is it futile to make an effort to protect myself and those around me, or is such a thing feasible (I imagine this would require a huge edit to lifestyle)? I don't want to be "that guy" but I also don't want to be caught in the headlights if shit hits the fan (which it seems is inevitable). Anything to study to guide my thinking without going full-on bomb shelter?
    - richardjordan 13y ago
hobb0001 13y ago
The largest problem that I see with the militarization of the local police is that they will increasingly start to view themselves as soldiers. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment)
jsiarto 13y ago
l9.
vfclists 13y ago
The usual internet twaddle. How many commenters on this thread have bothered to look up incidents of this nature in their districts, neighbourhoods or whatever, and called their councilman or congressman? I guarantee none. Spend less time online and more complaining to your representatives. You will achieve a lot more in turning things around, ie if you really want to, cowards.
csours 13y ago
This can only stop when the epithet "Weak on Crime" no longer has power in politics.
squozzer 13y ago
I would say this is a symptom that could be explained by Turchin's structural-demographic theory -- that is, increasing competition for resources (including political power) produces measures that even in earlier, more violent periods might have been considered too drastic.
ilaksh 13y ago
Please see historical and global context related to 'police-state' and despotism in order to understand the significance of these issues. You will need to set aside your American exceptionalism. I do have an issue with the article though. My middle school did have quite a few young criminals in it, and a zero-tolerance policy would have been beneficial for everyone. Instead, quite a lot of physical violence and theft was dismissed as 'bullying' which resulted in escalation. I know for a fact that many of the students who misbehaved in less extreme criminal ways (and were allowed to get away with it) did enter into a life of crime before they were halfway through high school. So there is a difference between militarization and despotic control and disciplining students enough to prevent them from becoming criminals. I think that rather than worrying about harsh penalties for vandalism etc., take issue with the propaganda being fed to students and the lack of focus on problem solving outside of narrow domains.
analog31 13y ago
I'd love to study how long it takes the tanks to fall into disuse, to the point of being inoperable, simply because police departments will lose interest in them, neglect maintenance, forget where all of the pieces are, fail to find suppliers for spares, etc.
brooklynjam 13y ago
My family came on boat number 2 after the Mayflower. For the first time in my life, it may be time to checkout of the USA for awhile. Maybe it is time? Can always visit, but maybe this is it. This is just insane at this point.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
andy_ppp 13y ago
We are living in an extreme, high tech, highly theatrical version of The Wire; one in which you can't trust your government, the law, the police and you can guarantee they are watching you. Turns out that any laws that have loop holes will be abused and everyone is guilty. This is the definition of tyranny.
Digit-Al 13y ago
To me, as an English person looking at America through the prism of the news, and articles such as this, it looks more and more like the American state is a rogue element beset by paranoia, increasingly lacking trust not only in the world at large, but also in its own citizens. Do any of you American citizens out there have the same opinion of your government?
applecore 13y ago
The re-criminalization of everyday life—“privacy may be an anomaly”.

482 points by mankypro 13y ago

This story reminded me of the Boston bombing and it's "lockdown" (read martial law). Didn't Boston have one of these APCs roaming the streets during its martial law. In that case it's really a show of force against the "civilian" population than to catch terrorists. Why the hell does Ohio State need an MRAP. Are they going to actually tell us that the terrorists might roll in with tanks or APCs. Or maybe the terrorists will be running around with APCs in full combat? No. Geez, is anybody even questioning these clowns about these acquisitions.

CalRobert 13y ago

Surprised this didn't get any comments. It's a good reason to leave (or not move to) the US, or increasingly, the UK.

venomsnake 13y ago
Do you think it is better anywhere?
- mkaziz 13y ago
  Canada?
  - mhurron 13y ago
    Satan's Little Helper? The country that seems to simply enacts laws and legislation that just mirror the US so they look like good little friends? The country that assists the NSA as needed? That Canada?
    - mkaziz 13y ago
      There's less of a precedent of them abusing their own citizens so (which is my anecdotal opinion, admittedly). Add that to healthcare costs that won't cripple you forever, and it's a solid choice for an English-speaking country.
      - mhurron 13y ago
        > less of a precedent of them abusing their own citizens http://pencanada.ca/blog/on-backdoor-information-access/ http://pencanada.ca/blog/on-backdoor-information-access/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement They let the Americans do that for them.
      - MrZongle2 13y ago
        On the handful of times I've been in Canada, I've enjoyed the experience. The people were friendly and the scenery breathtaking. There's a lot to like about America's neighbor to the north. But some of their speech-restricting activities are disturbing: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/free-speech-eh-why-is-canada-prosecuting-mark-steyn-1.720445 http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/free-speech-eh-why-is-canada-pr...
    - afterburner 13y ago
      The general attitude, and the implications of everyone having health care, are far better. The police in general have a far friendlier disposition. It's not all about authority and the "listen to me I'm the coach/sergeant" sports-talk/military-talk mentality. There is also no real race issue the way African Americans experience in the US (a systematic, paranoid, aggressive marginalization of a large section of society). And there certainly isn't anything like the militarization of the police like there is in the US, which is the focus of this article.
      - r-s 13y ago
        We have major race issues with Natives, nobody wants to talk about it though.
        deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
        afterburner 13y ago
        Please see my reply to mhurron above (I can't copy paste it because HN deletes it as spam)
      - mhurron 13y ago
        I don't know where in Canada you've lived, but there is plenty of that in Toronto, and Calgary, especially dealing with the natives. I'll bet Montreal and Vancouver aren't must different. There was no culture shock moving from Canada to the US.
        afterburner 13y ago
        The situation with natives is a far cry from the systematic and pervasive problems with racism against African Americans in the US. Natives are such a small percentage of the population in Canada, and certainly in urban centres, that no especially abusive laws have been constantly set up over the years in order to keep them at what is considered the appropriate station in society. Think of the hundred years of Jim Crow laws in the US, and the even current attempt to disenfranchise them during every election through voter registration laws and voter list deletions. It is simply not comparable.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- anonymousDan 13y ago
  Germany?
- Zigurd 13y ago
  The US has poor and mediocre global rankings in many areas: Education, health care, economic disparity, crime, incarceration, number of times police use guns, etc. Some of our rankings, like incarceration, rank down there with totalitarian hell-holes. So, by most groupings of objective measures, you'll find a dozen or more places that have better living conditions than the US.
- jotm 13y ago
  Well, I can tell you for sure that most of Europe (Spain, France, Germany, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland, Czech Republic, Italy, Austria, probably more) at least as it is now, is great for raising kids and living a normal life without a constant fear of the police in the back of your head.
PavlovsCat 13y ago
Once you leave (and give up citizenship) you loose a lot of options to influence it. And you leave behind those who are either too naive, too poor, too sick, or otherwise unable to follow; together with the elements who made you leave, and who now have free access to a completely empty stage..
- CalRobert 13y ago
  Exit is what gives power to voice. If you're at a stagnant company where nothing changes even though it's clear that change is necessary, even the suits will sometimes notice when half their staff quit.
  - PavlovsCat 13y ago
    Do you know any examples where that made a dent?
    - CalRobert 13y ago
      Hah, well I like to imagine that just after walking out the door my previous boss realized the error of his ways and instituted sweeping new reforms. I don't know of anything that's not anecdotal. I also think that trying to fix things as an individual in a country of over 300 million, despite what people tell you, is generally a fool's errand for anyone who doesn't have enormous amounts of capital at their disposal. Best to find somewhere that suits you and enjoy life there.
ufmace 13y ago
What's funny to me about the suggestion to move is that the very people who have the greatest ability to actually move to another country - upper-middle class people with college degrees - are the ones least affected by these issues.
- CalRobert 13y ago
  That's true, but I was profoundly disturbed by the direction the country was going and more directly at the thought that my taxes were supporting it (along with the military industrial complex, policies enabling substantial environmental destruction, etc.). My friends probably think my response is rather extreme but I prefer that my taxes go towards pensions, health, and education (and, yes, even the dole), instead of the military.

api 13y ago

This is a common way that a totalitarian state can be implemented on top of an apparent democratic republic: pass so many laws (and contradictory / complex laws) that anyone can be found guilty of something, then enforce the law selectively.

rumcajz 13y ago
Yep. We've had something like that in Eastern Europe during the communist era.
- spiritplumber 13y ago
  "There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." (From Atlas Shrugged -- Damn, it's bad when I of all people am quoting Ayn Rand).
  - MrZongle2 13y ago
    If quoting Rand makes you uncomfortable, just remind yourself that even a broken clock is right twice a day. The quote itself is apt.
    - talmand 13y ago
      In military time it's only right once a day.
  - jotm 13y ago
    What's wrong with Ayn Rand?
    - mathgladiator 13y ago
      Generally, people don't like her for lacking 'heart'. However, most people don't actually understand her message, nor do they appreciate her definition of selfishness. It's very unfortunate because her writings were on the spot on about human behavior.

timbro 13y ago

> Sheriff Bud York suggested, according to the Post-Star, the local newspaper, that “in an era of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and mass killings in schools, police agencies need to be ready for whatever comes their way... And in reality, they're just preparing for social unrest that seem more likely by the day.

steauengeglase 13y ago
In reality the sheriff saw an opportunity for positive press and went for it. You don't turn down free PR.

MrZongle2 13y ago

When I read something like this, I always think back to when I would see some tinfoil-hat type ranting on Usenet 20 years ago about the growing surveillance/police state in America. It was generally eye-rolling or unintentionally hilarious stuff. What's depressing is that it's starting to look like they were right.

sliverstorm 13y ago
The real tinfoil types believe that the government cloud research facility in Alaska controls the weather globally and can cause earthquakes and tsunamis on command. We don't have any indication to believe that's true yet.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- MrZongle2 13y ago
  True; there are the tinfoil hat types that believe that there was a second gunman on the grassy knoll, and then there are those that believe Bigfoot killed Kennedy with the mind powers he learned from the Lizard People of Zeta Reticuli B. Edit: from the downvotes, I can only assume that I've offended the Bigfoot fans.
  - larrys 13y ago
    "from the downvotes, I can only assume" Separately, as a karma strategy, it makes sense to upvote something that you reply to (regardless of whether you agree or disagree) as it tends to make your reply higher up (because the parent comment is higher up) and get more visibility which in theory should result in more karma.
    - evacuationdrill 13y ago
      I do this, but I justify it by thinking that the thread was important enough to me to reply to, so I should vote. I don't care about karma, but I'm more likely to get replies, or so I hope.

CurtMonash 13y ago

"If you didn't do anything wrong, you have nothing to fear (at least from the cops)" is looking stupider every day.

rjd 13y ago
Not being from the states I've only seen this through documentaries and expose shows... but to me its just seems to be the police are starting to treat everybody the way minorities have said they have been treated for decades.

mortyseinfeld 13y ago

This is probably more of "If we scare people by throwing around the terrorist word then we get to spend money, have cool new toys, and look badass". It's pathetic, but it seems to work.

tunap 13y ago
Pathetic & self serving. There would be a cessation of federal/State/Muni funds if any agency's focal issue(s) were eradicated, hence the popularity of "War On..." ideologies with unattainable objectives. What starts as a legitimate(sic) cause all too often morphs into a personal job security issue. Imagine all the ICE, DHS, NSA, FBI, CIA, state, county and local LEOs that would have to look elsewhere for jobs if the "War on..."s didn't raise their budgets every fiscal quarter.
crbnw00ts 13y ago
And then of course once they acquire those toys and have them sitting around for a while, they start to get itchy for an excuse to "use" them.

JoeAltmaier 13y ago

The 'good old days' had drug dealers and violence, don't kid yourself. It got covered up and ignored. What is a police dept to do, when the crimes are escalating? Its simple to chide Warren County (or whoever); but who are you to say the next bombing or public rage will not occur there? The others were in similar places; no place is safe.

spiritplumber 13y ago
They are not. See stats.
- JoeAltmaier 13y ago
  Didn't see stats in the article; just lots of strawmen and irresponsible summaries of crimes.
  - DanBC 13y ago
    Crime, especially violent crime, is dropping in most of US.
    - ctdonath 13y ago
      Violent gun-related crime dropped about 50% from 1993-2009. Thru the same period, gun ownership increased about 50%. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/ http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-...
    - djdj123 13y ago
      This generalization gets bandied about too much. Crime trends and patterns are highly local. I'm sure violent crime is dropping in many places, but in other places it's spiraling out of control, for example, South Chicago, East Oakland, Detroit. I think it's a mistake to throw those places in the same basket as a small city in Ohio (unless it really has similar crime stats).

coldcode 13y ago

What a depressing article(s). Our reality is only going to get worse since there is little we can (or have the will to) do. At least in the Ukraine people are really contemplating change. Here we watch our football and our shows and fawn over celebrities and nothing changes.

thenmar 13y ago
That Auburn game was really something though!
RodericDay 13y ago
Every time you say people are just fawning over celebrities you contribute to the problem by helping develop widespread facile cynicism. Say something new. Was OWS not your style? Do you think anti-capitalist critics that use technology are hypocrites? Are you waiting for someone to craft the perfect movement before you jump in? If any of these or those in their vein apply, it's time to change your MO, your way of looking at the problem.
anon4 13y ago
Yeah, but in Ukraine, they're digging themselves out of a much deeper hole. If they manage to get accepted in the EU, a lot of them would emigrate west. USA citizens don't have that option. There isn't a "west" for someone from the USA to emigrate to. USA is the west. You shouldn't compare your corruption with Ukraine's or other Soviet Bloc countries'. Those people have a place to run to, as hard as getting there is. You have nowhere to run.
- afterburner 13y ago
  There's plenty of Western countries that are less screwed up than the US.
  - tokenadult 13y ago
    For example? What's involved for a citizen of the United States who would like to settle in one of those countries permanently?

crazygringo 13y ago

I can't say I'm exactly surprised. If you ran a police department, you're not about to turn down a free tank -- I mean, how cool is that, toys for the boys?!?! What's bothersome is that a police department is allowed to do this. That DoD rules don't prohibit selling/giving military equipment to police departments. That state legislatures don't prohibit it. A police department, like any organization, is always going to amass all the power/capability it can. Where are the people who are supposed to be limiting and regulating it?

avmich 13y ago
No, bothersome is the one above - that a police department chief is not about to turn down a free tank. If your police has such a mentality, you ought to be worried already.
- csallen 13y ago
  Human nature is hard to change. Systems are (relatively) easy to change. Rather than worry about people being irresponsible, lazy, greedy, immoral, incompetent, etc, we should focus on building systems that work well and protect all involved despite all of that.
  - avmich 13y ago
    Agree. But it doesn't mean we shouldn't evaluate officials - especially elected ones - on their views. Now, what could be a workable approach...
    - walid 13y ago
      But I don't think this is a workable task in a political system. The views of the guy you voted for are going to be different from the one you didn't vote for. In a perfect system every person will be impartial in evaluating elected officials. In the real world, if you evaluate the guy you DID NOT elect you would be perceived as being biased. On the other hand, if you evaluate the person you DID elect you would be perceived as being biased as well. Both cases you would be perceived as being biased. So the only workable approach is to focus less on individuals and more on the system and its results.

0xdeadbeefbabe 13y ago

At least the 113th congress didn't create many new laws. No SOPA, PIPA, or COICA yet either.

viggity 13y ago
one of the few beauties of our government is that it is near impossible to pass laws with a divided congress. I'm a pretty passionate libertarian/conservative but having the dems control one house of congress isn't all that bad of a thing (from my viewpoint)
- srl 13y ago
  Seconded. It's very popular these days to bash congress for not getting anything done, but it has its upsides. I'm pretty far left, and I wish the far-right wasn't quite so powerful, but I am glad the republican party is there, still powerful, waiting to pounce on any and every mistake made on the left. It helps keep us honest (c.f. obamacare - which I like, but the rollout, eh...). And when the roles are switched, say, 50 years, we'll do you the same "favor" :)
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

aestra 13y ago

WOW! The most shocking linked article is the kids who got arrested for waiting for the bus. They were excepted to plea bargain. That's right, the charges weren't dropped!!!!!! edit the DA dismissed the charges but the police chief thinks the arrest was justified. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/04/charges-against-ny-teens-will-be-dismissed/3868097/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/04/charges... Interview with the coach (he seems like a really nice guy): http://www.infowars.com/kids-arrested-waiting-for-school-bus/ http://www.infowars.com/kids-arrested-waiting-for-school-bus...

bilbo0s 13y ago
Ok... that one is crazy. Obey the cop and get suspended... or obey the teacher and go to jail. Just leaving these kids in no-win situations. SOMEONE has to be willing to listen and hear the kids out. Either the cop has to hear them out, and then say "OK, well I'll just keep an eye on you until your teacher comes." Or the teacher has to hear them out, and then say "Well, OK, it was my fault for telling you guys to stand there so I'm not going to suspend anyone this time." But you can't put kids in a situation like that and then say... "It's YOUR fault!" That's insanity. This wasn't ANY of these kids' fault.
- aestra 13y ago
  Did you see the interview with the coach? He showed up, identified himself, said these kids were in the right place and they were going to a basketball game all while speaking very respecfully and the cops said if he didn't leave the coach was going to jail too! Apparently being out in public is illegal. They were going to a basketball game not school so they probably wouldn't get suspended but they were expected to be there. Plus they wanted to be there. It was according to the coach the normal place they caught the bus for games.
  - bilbo0s 13y ago
    Oh... I didn't know that the coach had tried to speak with the cop. Yeah... I guess that makes it a little worse for the cops. My only point was that this is a problem that should have been settled between the teacher(s) and the cop(s). They should have communicated better. Now if the teacher TRIED to communicate and the cop ignored him... yeah... that's a problem too. I mean, adults need to work together to solve problems where children are concerned... not get in pissing contests to see who's is bigger. This is an issue where, I would think, it's obvious that the schools and the police should be communicating about what's going to happen with respect to transportation. But you can't set up transportation. Communicate the arrangements to parents and students. Then show up and arrest all of the students for following your instructions. That's just a poorly run school district AND police department really. Actually... probably more a poorly run city. And to arrest the kids because of the bumbling ineptitude of all of the adults involved in the incident is unforgivable. People should be fired for that. Anyone who plays CYA by trying to pin his ineptitude on children should be out of a job. Incidentally... you do get suspended for some number of games for missing practice or a game. At least, those were the rules in my day. And that's how most teams are run at the school I work with. Basketball, Volleyball, Football or whatever.

iambateman 13y ago

If every police station in the country is equipped with military-grade weapons and vehicles, what happens in the event of despotic leadership? Suppose someone rises to power with little regard for legislative oversight and activates the sleeping military at home. It might start with a real (or faked) terror event coordinated across several major cities. It wouldn't take much at all, 5-10 cities, and suddenly: 1. Internet & cell communications are shut down 2. a national state of emergency is declared 3. A curfew is issued 4. Dissidents are squashed via a military police force with little recourse themselves. 5. Everyone is required to have location-aware implants "for safety." With a little fear, a government could take full, permanent control of their citizens via aggressive laws and more aggressive enforcers. Would it even take two weeks?

redblacktree 13y ago
To what end?
uxp 13y ago
Radley Balko’s book, which is cited in the article, "Rise of the Warrior Cop"[0] actually makes a very good argument that the 3rd Amendment which prohibits the quartering of soldiers during peacetime was referencing this exact situation, wherein a group of government controlled "peace officers", which are essentially military personnel, are in constant deployment inside the United States of America keeping tabs on it's citizens. He argues that it has nothing to do with literally being forced to give up your bed to a soldier, but entirely with the state housing soldiers within it's walls. With the gifting of Tanks, M16s and other paramilitary gear to ordinary police officers, we're essentially creating another branch of the armed forces. [0] http://www.amazon.com/dp/1610392116/ http://www.amazon.com/dp/1610392116/
maxerickson 13y ago
Why are the enforcers that are keeping the police in line so quick to go along with the despot? Or do you really think that the police in the U.S. are equivalent to a disciplined, no-questions-asked unit of the Federal government? (I don't think a majority of the military could be encouraged to act directly against the citizens of the U.S., never mind the police (preempting snide replies, against the people in a nationally organized manner))

ctdonath 13y ago

Used to be military surplus stores would acquire military surplus and sell them to an amused and subsequently harmless citizenry. All that old equipment has to go somewhere; now such civilian possession is prohibited (even used Humvees (basically just off-road cars) cannot, by law, be sold to the public), it ends up routed to the only group legally allowed to have it and wants it: police. In the meantime, stores that sold military surplus have adapted by selling military-like knockoff gear, and would-be buyers are pumping money into the fast-growing "tactical gear" market. Fact is, if all this military equipment were sold on open market, no harm would come of it. Used to be available and wasn't a problem then, and the rather large paramilitary equipment market isn't a problem now. Question is: why is the government so afraid of its own citizens possessing such gear?

redblacktree 13y ago
> Question is: why is the government so afraid of its own citizens possessing such gear? Is that the right question, considering that the tactical gear market is allowed to exist? I'm apparently too lazy to do it, but it would probably be instructive to look at the history of that ban on military-to-citizen sales.
- ctdonath 13y ago
  Short version: In 1934, machineguns & "destructive devices" were hit with a $200 "transfer tax" and subject to tight paperwork regulations and severe penalties for violations. Given the products in question cost around $50, and the tax equaled some $3000 in today's US$, it was practically a ban. Inflation brought the tax down to affordable (cough) levels today. In 1986, possession/manufacture of new machineguns was banned outright. Old ones could still be owned & transferred, but between the severely limited supply and accumulated $200 taxes, prices have increased about 25x over what they would cost unrestricted, making them desirable for investment and undesirable for mundane use. When the US Army transitioned to "Humvees" replacing Jeeps, the contract included a clause prohibiting resale to civilians. Likewise other equipment cannot be resold, not so much by law but by contract. As it is, the tactical gear market is "allowed" to exist mainly because there isn't much way to legally prohibit it. Most such gear is objectively indistinguishable from other common products (clothing, camping equipment, radios, hunting gear); the differences are significant in specialized use but nowhere near enough to be codified in law. As demonstrated during the now-expired 10-year "assault weapons ban", the marketplace will come up with all kinds of creative solutions to bridge any gaps caused by prohibition (10 round limit? get subcompact pistols or .50-caliber semi-auto rifles. Weight limits? superlight plastic/carbon-fiber guns.)

DanielBMarkham 13y ago

One of the underpinnings of the U.S. Constitution is the Bill Of Rights, one of which states "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." People go bouncing off the wall around this issue as if it were one having solely to do with owning guns, but the real purpose is arranging the real power in the government. The people reserve and are ultimately responsible for the use of lethal force in the United States. They can delegate that power to the government for certain things, like a defense department or law enforcement, but at the end of the day, it's everybody carrying guns that are responsible for social order. At least that's the way it was set up. As we've drifted away from that principle, by assigning more and more powers to the defense department and police agencies, (gun control is part of this but not the only part), those folks have quite naturally started viewing themselves as the privileged few to hold the power to make things go boom. Then we got rid of the volunteer military, further separating the mass of the population from the things carrying lethal force. So nowadays, if you want to become a specialist in the application of power tools to destroy people and things, you pick one of a few different career paths and become one of the chosen few. This is a VERY recent development. Not 50 years ago it was commonplace to know people who could operate machine guns, explosives, and drive tanks around. To those folks, cops were just another working Joe like them except they wore a badge. On the other side, cops viewed the population as a trained asset to have and use in time of crisis. It was not unusual to consider gathering up as many armed men as necessary from an area to conduct police operations. But the professionals got involved, and having that kind of power was viewed as a terribly complicated responsibility that the average guy couldn't handle. This created a wall in society. On both sides now, it's us against them. We need MRAPS because, hell, anything can happen, and there's just a few of us cops in this county. We are no longer all in it together. It's not like if AQ comes knocking we can knock on doors and ask for help. This is a self-fulfilling feedback loop: as the police arm themselves more and more with special gear, the average person really can't operate it. So even more specialized training is required. Same goes for military gear, where this divide originated. I would suggest that what we need is some sort of ready reserve system where everybody is trained at reaching 18 on how to safely use most all common forms of police and military gear. I'd further suggest that local police departments be required to have a certain percentage of their patrols as civilian ride-alongs. There are a lot of things that can be done here, and we don't have to argue gun control to make progress. But I think we do need an understanding of how we got here in the first place. This is a trend that has been a long time coming. The War On Terror just exacerbated it.

300bps 13y ago

This is a continuation of the military industrial complex. There aren't enough wars, but companies that supply the military still need to make money. So they make so much equipment that the DoD needs to give their completely usable equipment away for free. This page should make any U.S. taxpayer sick and any non-U.S. citizen worried: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_e...

tunap 13y ago
The more things change the more they stay the same. https://archive.org/details/WarIsARacket https://archive.org/details/WarIsARacket

VonGuard 13y ago

Appropriate, seeing as how Kent State is in Ohio, too. Clearly, they learned their lessons in Ohio: shoot students first, ask questions later.

microtherion 13y ago
I was reminded of this, too, and took it as a reminder that the late 60s were not always as peaceful as the article’s author would have it.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

JonnieCache 13y ago

The fact that this is being instigated by the federal government makes me suspect that this is deliberate planning for the long-term consequences of american societal breakdown, for when the war on drugs isn't enough to control the ever-growing underclass anymore. Does this kind of thinking still place me firmly with the tinfoil contingent?

redblacktree 13y ago
Yes. It's comforting to think that it's all orchestrated from the top; that means that, even if it's not you, someone is in control of this chaotic world. The truth is much more frightening. No one quite knows what will happen or how to prepare for it, and we'll all likely get screwed when the unexpected happens.
- JonnieCache 13y ago
  I used to religiously apply that view, nobody is in the driving seat, chaos reigns, conspiracy theorists are looking to replace their father, etc etc. These days I try to take more of a balanced perspective. There are many examples of covert malevolent acts in the halls of power throughout history, there was a list of confessed false flag operations on here just the other day. Look into any book about the history of military intelligence and you will find all sorts of nasty adventures. Then there's COINTELPRO, MKULTRA, the FBIs attempt to undermine the civil rights movement, it goes on and on. What would be truly irrational would be to believe that this stuff doesn't happen in the present. So now I try to evaluate each "conspiracy theory" on its own terms, lest I blind myself to the one that turns out to be real. (Note: I still don't actually believe in any specific tinfoilery. I just try to evaluate it honestly. Almost all of it, I still dismiss immediately. Most of the really juicy stuff is right there in the history books anyway.)
  - redblacktree 13y ago
    If you discover a conspiracy that you believe, in absence of proof, what can you do with that information? I stopped trying to "figure it all out" once I realized that there was very little I can do as an individual, even if I am right about some conspiracy.

ericthor 13y ago

>“in an era of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and mass killings in schools, police agencies need to be ready for whatever comes their way..." There has always been terrorism in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States As well as mass shootings. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-m... This current "era" isn't defined by the number or scale of these tragedies but by institutions' and the public's reaction to them. If we want to protect the lives and welfare of the average U.S. citizen our money and efforts would be better spent tackling some of the less newsworthy health issues. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_preventable_causes_of_death#Leading_causes_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_preventable_causes_of_d... Also the time frame of the Sandy Hook Shooting was extremely brief. The shooter was believed to enter the school around 9:30 the first 911 call was made at 9:35 and the last shot heard was at 9:40 and the police enter at 9:44. The MRAP and other military artillery obviously wouldn't have made a difference due to time frame of the tragedy.

dmix 13y ago

I wish people would move beyond 1984 and quote more Foucault's Discipline & Punishment [1]. There is a much deeper-rooted problem in society than mass surveillance or militarization of police. It's the question of why we all let this happen without any resistance. We accept and welcome our controllers. Foucault wrote about the effects of prisoner mindset in society in the 1960-70s. Our subjugation and tolerance to authoritarianism is very widespread and not limited to just police. We're not just afraid to be anti-authoritative, we're institutionalized since our birth in schools and the concept of control is in embedded in every aspect of life (such as in language found in politics, school work, or newspapers). Mass-surveillance is just a more direct implementation of "panopticon" [2] applied to everyday life, existing at all times. Having committed a crime is no longer the requirement to be imprisoned, whether physically or mentally. http://www.amazon.com/Discipline-Punish-Birth-Prison-Vintage-ebook/dp/B007OLYO7I/ http://www.amazon.com/Discipline-Punish-Birth-Prison-Vintage... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon

thisiswrong 13y ago
> It's the question of why we all let this happen without any resistance. Why, and how did we let this happen? Look no further : http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Hollywood.jpg http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Holl... 'War-nography', islamophobia, narco-phobia... and the script goes on. When the masses believe that they are in danger, they will stand behind those in power for protection. There's surprisingly little difference between Joseph Goebbels and Hollywood.
- rhizome 13y ago
  'War-nography', islamophobia, narco-phobia... and the script goes on. Why is it that those movies attract capital?
  - evacuationdrill 13y ago
    Because they're fucking awesome. War movies, that is. Sure, I'm probably playing into some sort of social conditioning, but it doesn't change that I enjoyed watching John Wayne movies growing up.

snake_plissken 13y ago

I just find it so incredible that a hospital can bill you for a rectal cavity search ordered by police/judge. Honestly I think my mind is experiencing some sort of race condition as I try to pick a word that accurately describes my incredulity about this. Ughhhhhh

userulluipeste 13y ago
I share your sentiment, but trying to analyze objectively the entire scenario from different angles I find acceptable for the subject being searched to pay the bill if he is found guilty (which is hiding illegal stuff in his body). I don't agree with the shaky grounds used by the law enforcement to bring up the body search though.

afterburner 13y ago

I generally agree with the article, but I object to this section: "And the mood is spreading. Take the asset bubble collapse of 2008 and the rising cries of progressives for the criminal prosecution of Wall Street perpetrators, as if a fundamentally sound financial system had been abused by a small number of criminals who were running free after the debacle. Instead of pushing a debate about how to restructure our predatory financial system, liberals in their focus on individual prosecution are aping the punitive zeal of the authoritarians. A few high-profile prosecutions for insider trading (which had nothing to do with the last crash) have, of course, not changed Wall Street one bit." I think that the self-serving, damaging actions of those with a lot of power that affected the entire world's economy is worth looking into at least some prosecution, it's hardly in the same league as what happened to three innocent teenagers waiting for a bus. And if insider trading isn't related to the last crash, then of course prosecuting it isn't going to change anything.

JackFr 13y ago
The idea that there is a small cabal of powerful people who brought the economy to its knees while enriching themselves through their knowing and active malfeasance is a fairy tale. To ethically prosecute people you have to competently and in good faith believe they have broken specific laws. And you need to know the actions, and how specifically they violated the law. An unfortunate outcome is not sufficient.
- afterburner 13y ago
  I made no claim that there is a small cabal of powerful people controlling everything brought down the system. There are, however, Goldman Sachs people that lied to their own customers in order to make money, for example. That is the kind of behaviour that can be persecuted, mostly along the conflict of interest or fraud lines. Those are specific laws. Oh, by the way, heard of the Libor scandal? Not specifically related to the crash, but interesting reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libor_scandal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libor_scandal
  - JackFr 13y ago

acuozzo 13y ago

This is AMAZING! We're getting closer and closer to a cyberpunk society (unfortunately, authoritarianism is necessary, but not sufficient for this). Soon it'll be like Escape From L.A. or Snow Crash or Neuromancer! I can't wait to stroll down the streets of Chiba like Case. I can't wait to hack around in the Metaverse like Hiro. I can't wait to explore the underbelly of prison-islands like Snake. We just need a bit more authoritarianism, some advanced cybernetic implants, and just enough unrest for a Modern Wild West to be born. Does anyone else plan on coming along for the ride? HACK THE GIBSON! HACK THE PLANET!

ilaksh 13y ago
LOL. I like Gibson, technology, and stuff too, but that's not a reason to be stoked about authoritarianism. Anyway you are probably kidding.
- acuozzo 13y ago
  > Anyway you are probably kidding. Yep! Well, mostly. I'd say 95%.

memracom 13y ago

Americans really should learn more about the Soviet KGB and its predecessor, the NKVD, and how they ran a campaign of terror against citizens who did little more than have a different opinion of how the country should be run. Because now that America no longer compares itself to the Soviet Union, this is the kind of police state that is being constructed in the USA. Meanwhile, in Russia, the place where the Soviet system used to be, they have moved in the opposite direction and dismantled most of the police state. In Russia people have more personal freedoms with respect to the state than they do in the USA. Of course one unfortunate side effect of so much freedom is that there was a great increase in corruption and the growth of the oligarchs after the fall of the Soviet Union. But Russia is dealing with this step by step, reducing corruption and reigning in the oligarchs. Their ideal seems to be the USA of the 1960s or 70s, but not the USA of today.

bananacurve 13y ago
>In Russia people have more personal freedoms with respect to the state than they do in the USA. How it is possible for someone to reach such a stupendous level of confusion boggles the mind. Even if the Russian propaganda minister were to make such a declaration he surely isn't deluded enough to believe it to be true.
- memracom 13y ago
  Well, I speak Russian fluently (and therefore can follow the Russian media/Internet) and I have visited the country 3 times. In addition I have visited another ex-Soviet country, Ukraine, over a dozen times. You really have to go to these places to understand them, and preferably have some level of competence in the language so that you can speak to a variety of people, not just some egotistic activist that gets his jollies out of manipulating foreign media.
  - bananacurve 13y ago
    I have spoken to Ukrainians and Russians, students and programmers, and they would be offended at your assessment of the situation. The most telling part of my conversations with them was when I suggested that things are getting at least a little better. They were adamant that things were not getting better. Anyway they were glad to be in the states.

whiddershins 13y ago

What's striking is the correlation between excessive police tactics and enforcement of victimless crimes. From a right libertarian point of view, it is the government's responsibility to protect your rights, not to protect you. From a left libertarian point of view, it is the government's responsibility to demonstrate that the good of enforcing a law outweighs the loss of individual freedom and other harm of enforcing it. Drugs, immigration, fail those tests. Many sex crimes fail those tests. Seatbelt laws probably fail. The police have to be so aggressive about these things because they never lent themselves to enforcement in the first place.

tedks 13y ago

This article is not about police tanks. (Even though it's horrifying that if the tanks were about to roll into America's equivalent of Tianeman Square, our American Tank Man would just be tasered, at best.) This article is about the prison/police system becoming the fundamental axis of civil society. Schools are run like prisons, and increasingly with police presence. Minority groups are, as always, increasingly targeted for harassment and neutralization. If you get on the radar of the police state, you and your family will be hounded forever. If you are imprisoned, it's more likely than not that you'll be held in solitary confinement. The article doesn't seem to answer the question I wish I knew the answer to -- how did we get here? What happened that made the United States this way? Was it always like this, behind the curtains, just a nest of HUAACs and J Edgar Hoovers? Well, now the J Edgar Hoover of 2013 knows everything about everyone, he can arrest anyone for any reason at any time, and he can't be opposed by any means I'm aware of. That iconic picture of a hippy putting a flower in the barrel of a riot cop's gun could never happen today -- as soon as the hippy reached for the gun I'm sure his head would be blown off.

foxhop 13y ago

My small town is gearing up as well ... http://waterford.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/waterford-police-department-humveeing-along http://waterford.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/waterfor...

logn 13y ago
My town of 2,000+ people now has a humvee... for a police department that has 3 officers.

mcantelon 13y ago

The post-911 federal gov has been directing resources towards building a domestic counter-insurgency apparatus and promoting a culture in law enforcement conducive to their inclusion in it. You don't spend over a decade building something without a reason. So what's the reason? Needless to say, if the founding fathers were around today they'd be pondering a strategy to resist it.

marincounty 13y ago

I have felt we have too many laws and over zealous cops for some time now. I guess I'm old--I was born in 1972, but I can assure you; things were not like it has been in the last twenty years. I started noticing a change in the late 80's and it's(a over regulated society, cops who abuse the system) just gotten worse. If Jesus Christ reappeared he would most likely be arrested for indecency. Ticketed for fishing without license. Arrested for loitering. Arrested for holding an event without a permit. Ticketed for sleeping in someone manger, without written consent. It's really not funny when you get an expensive ticket for no reason. I have thought about this and a solution; tie all fines to income, and require all Cruisers to be wired with 24/7 cams. This is a good website, but I sometimes wonder if I just blowing smoke, and racking up clicks for a already Rich Dude? Some of these topics are so important they deserve their own webpage?

noonespecial 13y ago
If Jesus Christ reappeared he would most likely be... All those crimes?! Jeeze, its sounds like they'd friggin' crucify him...
TullamoreDude 13y ago
If Jesus lived today? A religous extremist from the Middle East who talks alot about socialsm? America would send all the drones the got.

rglover 13y ago

Here's what I don't understand: what is the ultimate goal of this newfound desire to police everything? The obvious answer is control over people en mass, but say that happens...then what? Articles like this (which I'm glad are being written) point out the flaws and injustice in the system, but don't discuss the presumed results "those in control" are looking to achieve by manipulating it. From what I understand, the desired result is to minimize the autonomy of the general public and funnel the bulk of money, control, and power into the hands of a national elite. What happens next (an honest question, as I have some semi-paranoid theories but am curious to hear from someone who is a bit more educated on the topic)?

richardjordan 13y ago
We live in an era of delicate balance between global overpopulation and resource depletion. We have exceeded the carrying capacity of the planet, we are at peak supply rates for oil and other essential resources. We're rendering things less habitable and global climate change - coupled with water table depletion and topsoil burnout - threatens to crash food crops in some key regions. It's not a conspiracy. People who know things - and when you have wealth you have the ability to know things - tend to see that we have a period of incredibly instability coming involving a lot of dying and misery. In such a situation having a tight control of the masses and a control of resources in the hands of a tiny elite benefits that elite in ways that times of abundance make seem unnecessary.
- rglover 13y ago
  Thanks for the response. Fairly inline with what I thought. Next question, how to prepare? Is it futile to make an effort to protect myself and those around me, or is such a thing feasible (I imagine this would require a huge edit to lifestyle)? I don't want to be "that guy" but I also don't want to be caught in the headlights if shit hits the fan (which it seems is inevitable). Anything to study to guide my thinking without going full-on bomb shelter?
  - richardjordan 13y ago

hobb0001 13y ago

The largest problem that I see with the militarization of the local police is that they will increasingly start to view themselves as soldiers. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment)

jsiarto 13y ago

l9.

vfclists 13y ago

The usual internet twaddle. How many commenters on this thread have bothered to look up incidents of this nature in their districts, neighbourhoods or whatever, and called their councilman or congressman? I guarantee none. Spend less time online and more complaining to your representatives. You will achieve a lot more in turning things around, ie if you really want to, cowards.

csours 13y ago

This can only stop when the epithet "Weak on Crime" no longer has power in politics.

squozzer 13y ago

I would say this is a symptom that could be explained by Turchin's structural-demographic theory -- that is, increasing competition for resources (including political power) produces measures that even in earlier, more violent periods might have been considered too drastic.

ilaksh 13y ago

Please see historical and global context related to 'police-state' and despotism in order to understand the significance of these issues. You will need to set aside your American exceptionalism. I do have an issue with the article though. My middle school did have quite a few young criminals in it, and a zero-tolerance policy would have been beneficial for everyone. Instead, quite a lot of physical violence and theft was dismissed as 'bullying' which resulted in escalation. I know for a fact that many of the students who misbehaved in less extreme criminal ways (and were allowed to get away with it) did enter into a life of crime before they were halfway through high school. So there is a difference between militarization and despotic control and disciplining students enough to prevent them from becoming criminals. I think that rather than worrying about harsh penalties for vandalism etc., take issue with the propaganda being fed to students and the lack of focus on problem solving outside of narrow domains.

analog31 13y ago

I'd love to study how long it takes the tanks to fall into disuse, to the point of being inoperable, simply because police departments will lose interest in them, neglect maintenance, forget where all of the pieces are, fail to find suppliers for spares, etc.

brooklynjam 13y ago

My family came on boat number 2 after the Mayflower. For the first time in my life, it may be time to checkout of the USA for awhile. Maybe it is time? Can always visit, but maybe this is it. This is just insane at this point.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

andy_ppp 13y ago

We are living in an extreme, high tech, highly theatrical version of The Wire; one in which you can't trust your government, the law, the police and you can guarantee they are watching you. Turns out that any laws that have loop holes will be abused and everyone is guilty. This is the definition of tyranny.

Digit-Al 13y ago

To me, as an English person looking at America through the prism of the news, and articles such as this, it looks more and more like the American state is a rogue element beset by paranoia, increasingly lacking trust not only in the world at large, but also in its own citizens. Do any of you American citizens out there have the same opinion of your government?

applecore 13y ago

The re-criminalization of everyday life—“privacy may be an anomaly”.