Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by willrocks, Oct 11, 2019.
I already know about #1 & #2.
But what's this about Hummers and BMWs?
Scales of Justice from the early 80's comes to mind.
BECOMING a police state?!?? I had a chuckle when i read the heading of this thread! Are u kidding me?? That ship has sailed a long time ago already! We make the USA look like Ron Paul is president and has already had his way over there by comparison...
A good few years ago already i read a reputable article stating that the chances of an ordinary citizen being spied upon by some government agency (without a warrant) in Australia was more than TEN times higher than was the case in the USA!! And the US has certainly already traveled a considerable distance down the road to becoming a police state since 9/11...
When I wrote to my Member of Parliament about this article and told him I was really worried about this state of affairs and believed that the government had crossed the line - he went on to confirm the truth of the article and actually sounded proud of these startling facts raised in the article about the overreach of government surveillance in Australia. He said it was good and right and it was nescessary for 'our safety' ... I was shocked by his admission and self righteous attitude regarding the matter!
I know better nowadays to not let this kind of thing shock me. Only ignorant people (i.e. the majority in Australia) would be shocked or would doubt the validity of such shocking statistics.
59 successful out of 11,533 searches.
0.005% success rate.
Actually not "success rate". This sort of waste of time and money is more a "failure rate".
The cops have to strip everytime they pull someone over? Sounds weird but very freeing.
The US is less of a "police state" than many here seem to believe. More and more states are allowing concealed carry (some now allow constitutional carry which means no carry permit required), despite what you see in the MSM. In a traditional police state the citizens are forbidden to own guns since that is really the only way a citizenry can "protest" their Gov if things really get bad (like the US founders mentioned).
The Patriot Act is often mentioned to show the police state here, but there are not many, if any I've ever heard of, "regular folks" who have been apprehended under the Patriot Act. Look at all the "mass shooters" who left tons of evidence before they did their dirty deed, by posting online, making threats, etc. But nobody in law enforcement finds out until after everyone gets shot. In a real police state, these posts would be caught if everything is really run through the NSA as conspiracy folks like to say.
I believe the Patriot Act was created to help the Deep State keep tabs on and if necessary, have the means to destroy anyone who challenges their "way of life".
What was done to Trump by the Deep State (using FISA warrants to spy on him and his campaign under now clearly false pretenses), was possible thanks to the Patriot Act.
As far as policing on the "local level", since the event in the US known as "Ferguson", police departments in many metropolitan "urban areas" across the US have drastically reduced their enforcement. This is knows as the "Ferguson Effect". The police won't admit to this because it makes them look bad for relaxing their enforcement, but the arrest numbers are down up to 50% in many big cities for certain offenses.
These are mostly offenses that require the police to be proactive, such as stopping cars because the occupants appear "suspicious", minor traffic offenses, and other situations where they are investigating random situations they encounter during their shift. Many of those stops yielded guns, drugs, drunk drivers, guys on the way to do a carjacking or drive by, etc.
Many cops would rather not take a chance on getting into a situation where they will be videotaped or caught possibly doing something wrong, or said to have done something wrong when they didn't.
This is why bodycams MUST be made mandatory. Any cop who is against body cams is probably corrupt in my opinion. What do they have to hide? Kind of like when cops interrogate a suspect at the station house, but don't do it in the fully audio wired, camera recorded interrogation room, but instead do it in a manner that is completely unrecorded. Why would they ever do that?
Body cams will show in most instances if the cop acted properly or not. Without such footage, it is the cop's word vs. the dead perp.
Of course trigger happy cops are an issue is some places and they need to be prosecuted if they shoot someone without proper cause and not be protected by their fellow "boys in blue".
The ATO has really stepped up their efforts in creating a Police State. They now have a tip-off web page where you can dob in someone with complete impunity, and based on pure speculation (or revenge), while remaining completely anonymous. You can even identify your target using their social media account.
ha ha. ring that number and say "i just did a cashie" and hang up. if they show up at your door then it's not quite anonymous.
I've just moved to Boise, Idaho and must say it's nice to drive through lights without wincing for a camera flash. Can't even do that in Tassie now.
Sounds like NSW is over-policed and due for a culling of the ranks
The Cash Ban law passed. Yet another example of politicians pushing a globalist 1984 style agenda with total disregard for what the community wants.
I just watched the video of this. It looked like one tired and aggressive copper dealing with a stupid driver who likely got her licence in a box of Cornflakes. The event looked more frustration and annoyance than racial abuse. What's shown looks like a very low bar for racial prejudice charges.
On the side of the police, I don't know how they cope with their job considering the sort of dropkicks they deal with constantly. And still on their side, with the politics these days that they have to deal with.
This is not to excuse the meathead special types who've been raised on TV cop show violence and hunger for aggravation and a chance to behave like Swat wannabes.
I think the coppers in this road incident have been stitched up because of internal political motivations.
There's more than one way to get a police state operating.
Islam is not a race. The Commissariat says "on balance" it is satisfied. What that implies is that the standard of proof is one of the balance of probabilities. However the offence is "serious misconduct". One would think the standard of proof, given the gravity of the charge, should be beyond reasonable doubt.
Given the nature of the police statements, which are unlikely to have occurred in a vacuum, there is deeper subtext to this interaction. (Without watching the video) the response does not seem to make sense unless there is more to it. Australian police just don't reel off at the tongue this way imo. It takes more. This is western Sydney, where the majority are the crucible of the social experiment that has been developed over the last few decades, yet the backbone of the public infrastructure remains quite traditional.
Should introduce you to some of our local boys in blue, they could make a job site of tradies blush on a hot day the way they interact with the public.
Still seems disproportionate (again, without having watched the video, taken within the snippets of ABC media, notoriously distorted).
That said, was the disproportionate verbiage of a racially discriminatory nature? That looks more of a stretch. It looks more like cuffs were applied following words uttered by the women that the older one was on a temp visa. This in of itself is not prima facie racial in nature nor does it infer racial prejudice unless it is to be taken that temp visa holders are a race. They are not.
Again the subtextual factor looks likely. One officer enquired about religion (which should be clear enough without asking). Religion is not a race.
It does look like the officers involved thought the driving was so bad that it would warrant charges. Did their vehicle have a camera on it? Nowadays that is quite standard. What did it show? Was the driving reckless?
Separate names with a comma.