7 ms·

What does it mean for us Europeans, who still have, for the moment, more lenient police? Should we expect that America uprises against their own police? Draw a

by tajen 11y ago

What does it mean for us Europeans, who still have, for the moment, more lenient police? Should we expect that America uprises against their own police? Draw a Fergusson every 3 months? Becomes either less economically stable or more economically agressive? Should we expect that US' political influence requires us to step up our police, the same way France escalated an NSA-style law six months ago? It worries me that a friend country's police goes more totalitarian, but are there actual consequences on us? It's an open question. For the last 6 years I've refused to set foot in US (and even declined free tickets to a very important tech conference in my field) because of your unpredictable trigger-friendly police [1] and your guantanamo-friendly interviews at border control [2]. I wonder it your unstability could reach me in Europe. [1] Being a foreigner, I'm not protected by your constitution and the officers haven't sworn to protect and serve me. [2] I do believe an intent to go to a conference could randomly be recategorized as seeking work, which is illegal, and using a false Facebook name could be recategorized as identity theft. I do believe it's therefore possible to be retained at your border for an undefined amount of time, with no record and no rights to a lawyer. I do believe I'd be upset in this situation and I could end up sentenced for life in your prisons.

maxerickson 11y ago
Your reaction is extreme. Working professionals from rich countries that come to the US on short term Visas are not subjected to intense scrutiny. No one is prosecuted for the name on their Facebook account.
- Elrac 11y ago
  You need to be a bit more careful with sweeping generalizations like "no one." Here are two cases just off the top of my head that almost perfectly contradict what you wrote. http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/04/23/Feldmar/ http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/04/23/Feldmar/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/think-before-you-tweet-why-two-teenagers-were-refused-entry-to-the-u-s/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/think-before-you-tweet-why-two-...
  - rory096 11y ago
    While those incidents are obviously outrageous, refusal at the border isn't the same as prosecution and certainly nobody was sentenced to life imprisonment.
    - Elrac 11y ago
      I grant part of that. But now _you_ have to tell me: How do you claim to know that no one was arrested and suffered life imprisonment? The point you seem to be missing is that you have no way of knowing! This is the "wonderful" thing about the Patriot Act: Even as an American citizen, you could be disappeared and shipped to a foreign country for torturing... and there's a good chance no one would find out, for years, maybe forever. I don't think you have an idea of how significant this is. America does not operate under the rule of law.
      - rory096 11y ago
        >The border guard then escorted him to his car and made sure he did a U-turn and went back to Canada. >To their surprise, however, when they arrived at L.A. International, they were not only detained and questioned at length by U.S. authorities, but were swiftly -- after a night in the cells, naturally -- plonked back on a plane back to England, and barred from entering the United States again. I'm not sure what you mean. They were each returned to their respective countries.
        fian 11y ago
        The fact that these people were returned to their respective countries allows for them to speak of their experiences. People who were not returned (ie disappeared) are not able to speak of their experiences, so you would never know it happened. Note that both Canada and England are allies of the USA. What happens to questionable people who are not from allied nations?
  - maxerickson 11y ago
    I actually thought about being more careful with that but decided that replies complaining about it would probably strengthen the point.
Elrac 11y ago
For what it's worth, I feel the same way as you do about the US, and I'm a US citizen. I've told friends that I may return to the US "when the US becomes a democracy again." Unchecked police brutality is just one of a complex of problems I see in the news: The private for-profit prison industry that lobbies for more and longer incarcerations, the bail-and-debt system, civil forfeitures, plea bargaining, the unabashed wiretapping and widespread weakening of 4th Amendment rights... if you describe the US system of "justice" to a neutral party, he will guess you're talking about Russia or maybe North Korea. To answer your question, whether that state reaches Europe depends on whether the US' war of the rich on the poor spreads to Europe. The statesmen of the US are cheaply purchased pawns of various rich industries, and law & order are replaced by high-tech feudalism. If Europe finds itself ruled by corrupt evil clowns like the US is, then we'll see similar conditions here. That said, I have no idea how it will go. I have no knack at all for predicting politics. I'm betting on kicking the bucket before shit hits the fan.
smhg 11y ago
> For the last 6 years I've refused to set foot in US I have never been to the US, and although a trip to California would be an obvious to-do in my profession, the main reason I don't consider it is the death penalty. It sounds so unattractive to visit countries stuck with such laws. Despite all the nice things they have to offer. It might be easier to understand from a European perspective. [1] [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Europe https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Europe
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- wtbob 11y ago
  > I have never been to the US, and although a trip to California would be an obvious to-do in my profession, the main reason I don't consider it is the death penalty. Don't kill anyone and you'll be good. Or perhaps you're actually concerned about false conviction, which is a different problem and no less bad when someone spend the rest of his life in prison
powertower 11y ago
> Draw a Fergusson every 3 months? The majority of what you have been told by your media are "narrative" stories that are removed of all actual facts and details (to fit the narrative). Its pure politics. For example, in the Ferguson case, you where told that the police officer (Darren Wilson) saw Michael Brown, and for whatever reason, just murdered him on the spot, by shooting him through the back of his head - all while Michael Brown was doing nothing wrong, and holding his hands up. Except none of that is true. Here is the basic outline of what happened instead - http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ferguson-shooting-13-facts/2014/11/25/id/609483/ http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ferguson-shooting-13-facts/... Or here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown And that's still leaving allot out. In the case of Trayvon Martin, the spin was even worse. This is a racist "white" man - http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2013/02/06/zimmerman-brother-voted-obama/ http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2013/02/06/zimmerman... And a watermelon soda is an ice tea - http://www.examiner.com/article/trayvon-s-skittles-arizona-tea-and-something-called-purple-drank http://www.examiner.com/article/trayvon-s-skittles-arizona-t... I'm assuming the later was "modified" in the produced story by all the left-leaning news outlets because it was too stereotypical / and the narrative must be protected. If you don't believe it, check the crime seen photos and the court records - I did. And that's about 5% of the falsehood story. I could go on and on. > Should we expect that America uprises against their own police? Cops kill a reported 500 or so people every year. Maybe twice that much in real numbers. The majority of those people are violent criminals - some of which are firing at cops, using knifes to stab cops, garbing at cops' guns, using vehicles to run cops over, etc. Why would anyone that is not delusional with the political media spin revolt against cops?
- evan_ 11y ago
  Sorry but you're going to need to explain why having watermelon soda is a shoot-on-sight offense, and why it matters that it's soda and not ice tea.
  - powertower 11y ago
    > , and why it matters that it's soda and not ice tea. It matters that it was a manufactured lie. The "ice tea and skittles" was also mentioned every time the name Trayvon Martin was mentioned. Every. Single. Time. So it must have also had a great importance to everything and everyone. And the point was to show how these stories are manufactured by removing facts, and replacing them with the narrative... A young 12 year old kid just getting some ice tea and skittles on a bright sunny day - murdered by a white racist who had no injuries, was not arrested, was not handcuffed and taken-in, etc (all points proven false). > Sorry but you're going to need to explain why having watermelon soda is a shoot-on-sight offense Why would I have to explain it? What you just said is completely made up, and you are the one saying it. Trayvon was shot because he was beating Zimmerman's head into the pavement. They both made mistakes, it escalated. And everything that was reported was spun to the narrative.
adventured 11y ago
The next US response will be gradual de-escalation of its police aggressiveness. The beginning of the end of the war on drugs, body cameras, attention being cast on asset seizures and minimum mandatory sentencing - it has become obvious to most of the population that over the last 30 years the policing system has gotten out of control. You know it's understood to be bad when the president is openly discussing how much worse imprisonment is in the US than other countries, and becomes the first sitting president to visit a federal prison.
- mcherm 11y ago
  Except that it is possible this will become politicized. If one party becomes identified as the party supporting prison and law enforcement reform then the other party will then by default have to be the party opposing that. Then when THEY get into office they will oppose reforms. I hope this politicization does not happen but I am worried it may.
nickff 11y ago
I am not a US citizen, a supporter of the militarization of the police, or their unchecked use of power, but your third (numbered) point: "[1] Being a foreigner, I'm not protected by your constitution and the officers haven't sworn to protect and serve me." is incorrect. All persons on US soil are protected by the US constitution, whether citizens or not. Your (confusingly) similarly enumerated point earlier "[1] and your guantanamo-friendly interviews at border control" is also flawed, as there is no possible way (of which I am aware) for US Customs and Immigration to send you to Guantanamo Bay without the assent of the country you are leaving. US C&I can turn you back, or temporarily detain you, and have a great deal of latitude with respect to questioning and searches, but you are always protected by the US constitution and possibly the laws of the country you are attempting to leave depending on where you are being questioned. The reason that people were allowed to be transported to Guantanamo Bay is that they were captured as unaffiliated combatants (who are allotted few rights in the Geneva Convention,) within the borders of a country whose sovereign granted the USA custody, and allowed deportation for detention without conditions.
- taejo 11y ago
  > All persons on US soil are protected by the US constitution, whether citizens or not. That's my reading, too, but it's not clear that it's government's reading.
ahomescu1 11y ago
> It's an open question. For the last 6 years I've refused to set foot in US (and even declined free tickets to a very important tech conference in my field) because of your unpredictable trigger-friendly police [1] and your guantanamo-friendly interviews at border control [2]. I wonder it your unstability could reach me in Europe. This seems excessive to me, you're not going to run into the cops going to a tech conference. I've lived in the US for the past 5 years, and never had any issues with police or border control. In fact, I'd go as far as saying that the part of California I live in (Orange County) is safer than my home country in Europe.
Shivetya 11y ago
In Europe you are more likely to have lightly if unarmed cops because its more acceptable to have troops with fully automatic weapons deployed. I still remember quite a few pictures of such at airports if not on the streets so six of one, half dozen of another.

by tajen 11y ago

maxerickson 11y ago

Your reaction is extreme. Working professionals from rich countries that come to the US on short term Visas are not subjected to intense scrutiny. No one is prosecuted for the name on their Facebook account.

Elrac 11y ago
You need to be a bit more careful with sweeping generalizations like "no one." Here are two cases just off the top of my head that almost perfectly contradict what you wrote. http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/04/23/Feldmar/ http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/04/23/Feldmar/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/think-before-you-tweet-why-two-teenagers-were-refused-entry-to-the-u-s/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/think-before-you-tweet-why-two-...
- rory096 11y ago
  While those incidents are obviously outrageous, refusal at the border isn't the same as prosecution and certainly nobody was sentenced to life imprisonment.
  - Elrac 11y ago
    I grant part of that. But now _you_ have to tell me: How do you claim to know that no one was arrested and suffered life imprisonment? The point you seem to be missing is that you have no way of knowing! This is the "wonderful" thing about the Patriot Act: Even as an American citizen, you could be disappeared and shipped to a foreign country for torturing... and there's a good chance no one would find out, for years, maybe forever. I don't think you have an idea of how significant this is. America does not operate under the rule of law.
    - rory096 11y ago
      >The border guard then escorted him to his car and made sure he did a U-turn and went back to Canada. >To their surprise, however, when they arrived at L.A. International, they were not only detained and questioned at length by U.S. authorities, but were swiftly -- after a night in the cells, naturally -- plonked back on a plane back to England, and barred from entering the United States again. I'm not sure what you mean. They were each returned to their respective countries.
      - fian 11y ago
        The fact that these people were returned to their respective countries allows for them to speak of their experiences. People who were not returned (ie disappeared) are not able to speak of their experiences, so you would never know it happened. Note that both Canada and England are allies of the USA. What happens to questionable people who are not from allied nations?
- maxerickson 11y ago
  I actually thought about being more careful with that but decided that replies complaining about it would probably strengthen the point.

Elrac 11y ago

For what it's worth, I feel the same way as you do about the US, and I'm a US citizen. I've told friends that I may return to the US "when the US becomes a democracy again." Unchecked police brutality is just one of a complex of problems I see in the news: The private for-profit prison industry that lobbies for more and longer incarcerations, the bail-and-debt system, civil forfeitures, plea bargaining, the unabashed wiretapping and widespread weakening of 4th Amendment rights... if you describe the US system of "justice" to a neutral party, he will guess you're talking about Russia or maybe North Korea. To answer your question, whether that state reaches Europe depends on whether the US' war of the rich on the poor spreads to Europe. The statesmen of the US are cheaply purchased pawns of various rich industries, and law & order are replaced by high-tech feudalism. If Europe finds itself ruled by corrupt evil clowns like the US is, then we'll see similar conditions here. That said, I have no idea how it will go. I have no knack at all for predicting politics. I'm betting on kicking the bucket before shit hits the fan.

smhg 11y ago

> For the last 6 years I've refused to set foot in US I have never been to the US, and although a trip to California would be an obvious to-do in my profession, the main reason I don't consider it is the death penalty. It sounds so unattractive to visit countries stuck with such laws. Despite all the nice things they have to offer. It might be easier to understand from a European perspective. [1] [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Europe https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Europe

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
wtbob 11y ago
> I have never been to the US, and although a trip to California would be an obvious to-do in my profession, the main reason I don't consider it is the death penalty. Don't kill anyone and you'll be good. Or perhaps you're actually concerned about false conviction, which is a different problem and no less bad when someone spend the rest of his life in prison

powertower 11y ago

> Draw a Fergusson every 3 months? The majority of what you have been told by your media are "narrative" stories that are removed of all actual facts and details (to fit the narrative). Its pure politics. For example, in the Ferguson case, you where told that the police officer (Darren Wilson) saw Michael Brown, and for whatever reason, just murdered him on the spot, by shooting him through the back of his head - all while Michael Brown was doing nothing wrong, and holding his hands up. Except none of that is true. Here is the basic outline of what happened instead - http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ferguson-shooting-13-facts/2014/11/25/id/609483/ http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ferguson-shooting-13-facts/... Or here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown And that's still leaving allot out. In the case of Trayvon Martin, the spin was even worse. This is a racist "white" man - http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2013/02/06/zimmerman-brother-voted-obama/ http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2013/02/06/zimmerman... And a watermelon soda is an ice tea - http://www.examiner.com/article/trayvon-s-skittles-arizona-tea-and-something-called-purple-drank http://www.examiner.com/article/trayvon-s-skittles-arizona-t... I'm assuming the later was "modified" in the produced story by all the left-leaning news outlets because it was too stereotypical / and the narrative must be protected. If you don't believe it, check the crime seen photos and the court records - I did. And that's about 5% of the falsehood story. I could go on and on. > Should we expect that America uprises against their own police? Cops kill a reported 500 or so people every year. Maybe twice that much in real numbers. The majority of those people are violent criminals - some of which are firing at cops, using knifes to stab cops, garbing at cops' guns, using vehicles to run cops over, etc. Why would anyone that is not delusional with the political media spin revolt against cops?

evan_ 11y ago
Sorry but you're going to need to explain why having watermelon soda is a shoot-on-sight offense, and why it matters that it's soda and not ice tea.
- powertower 11y ago
  > , and why it matters that it's soda and not ice tea. It matters that it was a manufactured lie. The "ice tea and skittles" was also mentioned every time the name Trayvon Martin was mentioned. Every. Single. Time. So it must have also had a great importance to everything and everyone. And the point was to show how these stories are manufactured by removing facts, and replacing them with the narrative... A young 12 year old kid just getting some ice tea and skittles on a bright sunny day - murdered by a white racist who had no injuries, was not arrested, was not handcuffed and taken-in, etc (all points proven false). > Sorry but you're going to need to explain why having watermelon soda is a shoot-on-sight offense Why would I have to explain it? What you just said is completely made up, and you are the one saying it. Trayvon was shot because he was beating Zimmerman's head into the pavement. They both made mistakes, it escalated. And everything that was reported was spun to the narrative.

adventured 11y ago

The next US response will be gradual de-escalation of its police aggressiveness. The beginning of the end of the war on drugs, body cameras, attention being cast on asset seizures and minimum mandatory sentencing - it has become obvious to most of the population that over the last 30 years the policing system has gotten out of control. You know it's understood to be bad when the president is openly discussing how much worse imprisonment is in the US than other countries, and becomes the first sitting president to visit a federal prison.

mcherm 11y ago
Except that it is possible this will become politicized. If one party becomes identified as the party supporting prison and law enforcement reform then the other party will then by default have to be the party opposing that. Then when THEY get into office they will oppose reforms. I hope this politicization does not happen but I am worried it may.

nickff 11y ago

I am not a US citizen, a supporter of the militarization of the police, or their unchecked use of power, but your third (numbered) point: "[1] Being a foreigner, I'm not protected by your constitution and the officers haven't sworn to protect and serve me." is incorrect. All persons on US soil are protected by the US constitution, whether citizens or not. Your (confusingly) similarly enumerated point earlier "[1] and your guantanamo-friendly interviews at border control" is also flawed, as there is no possible way (of which I am aware) for US Customs and Immigration to send you to Guantanamo Bay without the assent of the country you are leaving. US C&I can turn you back, or temporarily detain you, and have a great deal of latitude with respect to questioning and searches, but you are always protected by the US constitution and possibly the laws of the country you are attempting to leave depending on where you are being questioned. The reason that people were allowed to be transported to Guantanamo Bay is that they were captured as unaffiliated combatants (who are allotted few rights in the Geneva Convention,) within the borders of a country whose sovereign granted the USA custody, and allowed deportation for detention without conditions.

taejo 11y ago
> All persons on US soil are protected by the US constitution, whether citizens or not. That's my reading, too, but it's not clear that it's government's reading.

ahomescu1 11y ago

> It's an open question. For the last 6 years I've refused to set foot in US (and even declined free tickets to a very important tech conference in my field) because of your unpredictable trigger-friendly police [1] and your guantanamo-friendly interviews at border control [2]. I wonder it your unstability could reach me in Europe. This seems excessive to me, you're not going to run into the cops going to a tech conference. I've lived in the US for the past 5 years, and never had any issues with police or border control. In fact, I'd go as far as saying that the part of California I live in (Orange County) is safer than my home country in Europe.

Shivetya 11y ago

In Europe you are more likely to have lightly if unarmed cops because its more acceptable to have troops with fully automatic weapons deployed. I still remember quite a few pictures of such at airports if not on the streets so six of one, half dozen of another.