[Screwston]

Quoting Kenny Powers. Do people not mind being harassed because of how they look or a cops suspicion? Im sure most wouldnt complain if cops started randomly searching homes to check for anything illegal.

(09-29-2013 06:40 PM)kenny_powers Wrote:  

One of the worst and most popular schools of thought in the U.S.A. now is "hey, I've got nothing to hide, go ahead and search me if it helps keep us safe"

[Avarence]

That's essentially the Department of Homeland Security compacted into a sentence.

[Dr. Howard]

I had this discussion the other day where the other person was "nothing to hide, I'm not breaking any laws, why be worried" and I said "you're making the assumption you know all of the laws". It of course did not sink in.

[Kingsley Davis]

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin

[hoops330]

the founding fathers would be turning over in their graves in regards to what the fourth amendment is today

[WanderingSoul]

(09-29-2013 09:03 PM)wiscanada Wrote:  

I had this discussion the other day where the other person was "nothing to hide, I'm not breaking any laws, why be worried" and I said "you're making the assumption you know all of the laws". It of course did not sink in.

A huge problem is even many cops don't know the laws. Or even if they do, still impede on your rights because they know either you don't know them, or don't have the money to fight the charges anyways.

Are cops held accountable at all for charging people with crimes if they are not guilty? A cop can charge you with pretty much anything he wants, then it falls on you to prove him wrong. It really is not innocent until proven guilty in this country.

My best friend was charged with trumped up assault with a deadly weapon charge, and quite a few other charges, that the cops knew were bullshit. However, he was feuding with the son of a councilmen, who was also a very prominent businessman in this small mountain town. Long story short my friend and him fought, then a dozen or so of the kids friends run out from the apartment and beat the crap out of my two friends, kicking them on the ground, broke one of their orbital bones, etc.

Said kid then punches in my friends car window, and when the cops show up charged my friend for assault with a deadly weapon because the kid said he ran him over. Obvious bullshit since only the kids knuckles bleeding. Not to mention in the police report it even said a girl was driving, not my friend.

Arrest my buddies, charge no one else for stomping two guys into the street and breaking one of their orbital bones. Kicking them in the head while they are already down.

Friend goes to court several times with a few felonies held over his head. He already had a felony for selling dimebags when he was 18. They tell him if he fights and loses, he's going to prison for a long time with a drug and a violent felony on his record. However, if he accepts a public fighting and illegal lane change charge (police report says he wasn't even driving) they will drop the other charges. Of course he accepts the deal, how could he not? 20 year old kid looking and a long prison stretch if he loses.

Just before this happened the same kid threw a brick through my buddies window and covered our friends three year old daughter in glass. Cops come, find the kid, detain him after he swings on them, and then release him to his friends with no charges.

[UrbanNerd]

Answer: Because there is a time to challenge things and there is a time not to.

Just because a cops mistakenly "suspects" you does not mean you have to escalate the situation. SO what it may have violated rights (of course I am talking a minor infraction). What is the use of causing a scene?...it's not like you will be able to win a $10 billion settlement for those few seconds of unjust suspicion.

[WanderingSoul]

(09-29-2013 11:02 PM)UrbanNerd Wrote:  

Answer: Because there is a time to challenge things and there is a time not to.

Just because a cops mistakenly "suspects" you does not mean you have to escalate the situation. SO what it may have violated rights (of course I am talking a minor infraction). What is the use of causing a scene?...it's not like you will be able to win a $10 billion settlement for those few seconds of unjust suspicion.

What's the point of standing up for yourself if someone calls you a faggot? What if they spit on you, or slap you? When do you draw the line? Give someone an inch and they will take a mile. More people need to stand up to the police or they will continue to abuse their power, myself included. The problem is the system is so skewed in their favor that it can be dangerous to question them.

Look at all of the YouTube videos of police forcing people to stop recording them, even though it is well within their rights. Eventually it could be illegal to film police at all and then they will have even more power and freedom to abuse their authority because it will be our word against theirs, and with no video evidence, we know how that plays out in court.

The more they are allowed to get away with, the further they will go. Maybe today it is petty stop and searches with no probable cause, but what about tomorrow when they decide they can search your house whenever they want?

[2Wycked]

People are seeking a god.

What I always find amusing is atheists who think overthrowing religion will result in a free society or whatever. They fail to realize the psychological affect ideology X, Y or Z has on somebody.

I have found people on both sides of the aisle who have this narcissistic approach to the government. Either government is the shining beacon of justice/purity/whatever or so fucking corrupt that...you get the picture.

Truth is, people don't say shit till THEY have an issue. While you will always get some ambulance chaser types that will always take umbrage with authority-based intervention, the naked truth is most people only give a shit about THEIR rights, not OUR rights.

People will deify the government until it fucks them, then suddenly they hate the government, but will always look for a new savior to worship. The Supreme Court, the media putting their story on blast and having public backlash, whatever.

The inherent problem is people needing a god in the first place. First off, if you want a god, go to church and find God. It is utterly foolish and dangerous to seek such levels of omnipotence in real life. Most importantly, social nihilism (the Marivaudian man) combined with personal delusions of immunity (would never happen to me!) and blind worship of authorities (come on, they have to be the good guys!) results in this bizarre world of flashes of hatred and rebellion that are mostly impotent and do nothing to stem the ripping tide of authoritarianism in America.

[Ocelot]

For a long time when I was a child, all my parents' mail was arriving opened, their phone was tapped and they being harassed continually. Banks wouldn't give them petty loans, even though they had an income and a perfect credit rating, and their cards kept being stopped. Their business was broken into and the police refused to even look at the crime scene, despite sending 3 squad cars to the shop next door when a quarter the amount of stock was stolen some months later. There was a whole lot more, but I'm sure you get the idea: they were temporarily ruined, and my dad had to clean fucking toilets for tesco for some time, having been an engineer and a skilled tradesman all his life.

Now, they weren't suspected of any crime. They just made enemies with the wrong people, who had friends with the right powers (to this day, they still only have a vague idea of who). As you can imagine, it makes me want to pull my hair out whenever I hear people tacitly endorsing totalitarianism because they have "nothing to hide". Of course you don't. Who needs human rights anyway? What are you, a criminal or something? Bear in mind, since 9/11 (and to a lesser extent in the UK, the 7/7 bombings), the state's power to spy on its citizens, arrest and imprison them indefinitely without charge, or otherwise invade what used to be their human rights has expanded limitlessly. Seven or so years ago it was revealed that the British government taps around 250,000 people's phone lines a year. That figure is probably drastically higher today and with the continuing advance of technology, we all know what the endgame is: everything anyone ever does will be known at all times. The data itself will of course be too vast to ever effectively use for the prevention of crime, but rest assured if you so much as utter the faintest whisper of dissent, your life will be forfeit. I guess, to quote Trotsky, "The old principle: who does not work shall not eat, has been replaced by a new one: who does not obey shall not eat."

Sorry for the rant, I guess this is just something that gets under my skin haha

[It_is_my_time]

2Wycked is right. Women and beta males need someone to look up to. God is being removed. Men who display masculine life style are looked down upon. The govt. is the next step.

Women are the majority of voters. Most women would vote for security over freedom. It is one of many reasons the founding fathers didn't intend on women voting. They run out and vote for the party that makes up a "war on women" that they will fight and win for them.

The result is the NSA tracking all our moves online, but still unable to stop terrorist attacks and mass shootings.

[It_is_my_time]

(09-30-2013 05:05 AM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

2Wycked is right. Women and beta males need someone to look up to. God is being removed. Men who display masculine life style are looked down upon. The govt. is the next step to look up to.

Women are the majority of voters. Most women would vote for security over freedom. It is one of many reasons the founding fathers didn't intend on women voting. They run out and vote for the party that makes up a "war on women" that they will fight and win for them.

The result is the NSA tracking all our moves online, but still unable to stop terrorist attacks and mass shootings.

[Bad Hussar]

(09-29-2013 09:03 PM)wiscanada Wrote:  

I had this discussion the other day where the other person was "nothing to hide, I'm not breaking any laws, why be worried" and I said "you're making the assumption you know all of the laws". It of course did not sink in.

HaHa. Definitely true. You're probably breaking several laws just by getting out of bed in the morning.

On a somewhat related topic: The selective application of laws freaks me out. e.g. Drug laws in, say, Canada and many European countries like The Netherlands.

Now, I'm all for the legalisation of soft, and medium, drugs, but having laws against them on the books, while the police routinely ignore them as a matter of policy makes me very nervous. It essentially gives the police, in fact the whole "State", too much power. If so many people routinely break the law (and not just a traffic law, but one that could have serious consequences) it gives police massive leeway in targeting people they don't "like", or for some other extra-legal reason. It makes "stop and frisk" look like childs play, since there are no really serious legal consequences for someone stooped and frisked. But imagine someone who thought it was OK to smoke a joint in public, because he's done it a million times before, and the police have a "hands off" policy on personal drug use. If he runs afoul of the police for some other reason, and they can't book him for this reason, they can target him for the drug infraction since the aw is still on the books. It gives individual officers too much power.

[The Beast1]

When people say that, ask them if they would be comfortable with you following them around from a distance taking pictures, bugging their apartment, and all around just getting mad snoopy on their lives.

They'll say no. Then say to them, "Then why are you comfortable with some nitwit in the NSA doing the same to you?"

[Sombro]

(09-29-2013 06:40 PM)kenny_powers Wrote:  

One of the worst and most popular schools of thought in the U.S.A. now is "hey, I've got nothing to hide, go ahead and search me if it helps keep us safe"

Didn't the CEO of Google make the same BS claim about internet privacy?

Every time this "What do you have to hide" shit comes up I shoot them down with this:

Discretion Does Not Imply Guilt.

[Cyr]

More importantly, how is it ok for the US to spy on other countries on such a massive scale? If you live in America or Brazil, you shouldn't be spied on by America. You didn't vote Obama (or Bush) into office.

[emuelle1]

I wrote a post on my blog a while back after a talk with a coworker who got that South Park closed eye look when he said "I have nothing to hide" during a discussion on privacy. I said we should have two systems. One for people who believe in the 4th amendment, and one for people who "have nothing to hide."

Situation 1 "Nothing to hide"
Police: Excuse me, sir, we have no probable cause or reason, but would you mind if we came into your house and searched around for no good reason?
Nothing to hide: Sure. Come on in. I have NOTHING to hide. I love my government. Thank you for keeping me safe.

Situation 2 "4th Amendment"
Police: Excuse me, sir, we have no probable cause or reason, but would you mind if we came into your house and searched around for no good reason?
4th Amendment: Yes, I mind. If you have a warrant, I'll be happy to oblige. Otherwise I'll have to ask you to leave. The dumbass who lives next door says he has nothing to hide. Maybe he'll let you search his place.

[MrXY]

Only a complete drone has nothing to hide

[Aliblahba]

(09-30-2013 08:22 PM)MrXY Wrote:  

Only a complete drone has nothing to hide

How bout that? The last 3 times I remember getting stopped, 2 were serious arrest-able offenses. The other a potential speeding ticket. Those two major stops worked in my favor cause I let them do what the fuck they wanted. Being a dick and spewing some shit about my rights would've cost me freedom. I walked away due to coopering. Is that beta?

And yeah, all 3 letter agencies talk to one another. Piss off one where you are "clean" and the others will come sniffing.

[UrbanNerd]

(09-30-2013 08:41 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  

How bout that? The last 3 times I remember getting stopped, 2 were serious arrest-able offenses. The other a potential speeding ticket. Those two major stops worked in my favor cause I let them do what the fuck they wanted. Being a dick and spewing some shit about my rights would've cost me freedom. I walked away due to coopering. Is that beta?

And yeah, all 3 letter agencies talk to one another. Piss off one where you are "clean" and the others will come sniffing.

Yes, all 3 letter agencies talk to one another. I work for one (as a contractor) and can verify that.

[soup]

They don't realize what it will be like as this their privacy is slowly eroded like chinese water torture until America looks like the Soviet Union, and the thought police will be very real weeding out dissent.