In 1999 I was locked out of my car and a police officer offered to take me to the police station to make a phone call to have a friend pick me up.
When I got to the police station I needed to use the restroom before I made the phone call so the officer told me to use the one in the holding cell because the front of the station was locked up for the night and when I was finished to knock on the door and he'd let me out.
To make a long story short when I knocked he didn't let me out instead a very big officer opened the door and beat the crap out of me then other officers came in and they cut off my heels and took off my pantyhose and threw me in the drunk tank.
Then the big officer came back in and held me by my hair and sprayed mace into my eyes.
In the morning I was arrested for public intoxication,battery on a peace officer and for being under the influence of a controlled substance.
I immediately went to the hospital and had all of my extensive injuries documented and had an alcohol and drug test taken both of which came back negative.
The videos came up missing of what took place in both cells and the public pretender tried to get me to plea no contest which is an admission of guilt but they won't tell you that.
I filed a complaint with Internal Affairs and they agreed to investigate my case.
The officers claimed that my injuries were sustained in a bar fight and Internal Affairs found that to be inaccurate.
They also claimed I was intoxicated and under the influence of meth and Internal Affairs found that to be inaccurate as well.
Also Internal Affairs found both police reports the one that was written about me being locked out of my car and taken to the station to call for a ride home and the one that said I was in a bar fight and a danger to myself and others drunk and on drugs.
I pushed for a jury trial knowing that the city would not want that because it would cost them money.
So on the day of jury selection Internal Affairs spoke to the public pretender who spoke to the District Attorney who then spoke to the judge and my case was suspended.
This whole process took about a year to wrap up and it all began with me being locked out of my car.
So you think the police state is just beginning?
My friend it began a long time ago.
2007-10-15 19:57:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by Adelaide B 5
·
3⤊
2⤋
What is a police state?
Basically I would argue it is one where police have judicial powers. That is, they can decide if you are guilty or innocent. From that point of view the US is not a police state because the decisions are being made by the executive and legislature, not by the police. Though some anti terrorism laws do in fact give police powers that start to head to a police state.
The other definition of a police state is where the police intervene in many aspects of life. It isn't the police on the street that are doing this, it is the ID checks, the use of social security numbers and so on.
It is the, if you are doing nothing wrong so you should have nothing to fear mentality.
PS: the fully armored military might be on a training exercise that might save your butt one day, say during the next major terrorist attack, rather than acting as a police force.
Anyway, there is a balance between having an active police force and a police state. If people break out of a nearby jail and police set up road blocks to catch them....are you complaining?
So the moral of this story is not about the police presence, but who controls them. When there is a large police force with extraodinary powers, the possibility of abuse becomes greater.
However the answer lies in a matter of balance. How powerful a police force do you want vs how much freedom do you want?
2007-10-15 19:49:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by flingebunt 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I worry more about things like the Patriot Act, and these renegade government agencies that seem to think that the fact there is a war on terrorism gives them a carte blanche to throw the Bill of Rights out the window. What you are describing, however, is hardly the degeneration of liberties you are describing.
1) The police do have random checkpoints for very good (and legal) reasons. They've been doing this for the better a part of a century ... its nothing new, and certainly nothing the 'evil Bush administration' has any direct control over. As you stated in your own rhetorical question -- they create checkpoints to check for violations. Do you think people with suspended licenses, no insurance, drunk, etc ... should be allowed to drive on the street? If the police didn't do anything, and one of these persons then got in an accident and killed someone you cared about I bet you would be the first one blaming the police for not doing something to stop them. Its complete hypocrisy ...
2) There are boundaries on the freedom of speech ... you can't walk into a movie theater and yell "fire," or go to a KKK meeting and say "Lets go kill us some minorities ..." Those things are illegal. You have the right to exercise your freedom of speech, but only insofar as you follow the law. If you want to have a rally you have to file for a permit -- we can't just have people staging rallies anywhere they want, anytime they want. What if a group decided to have a rally that blocked every major freeway in the town you lived in ... do you think that would have good or bad consequences? That is why you need permission beforehand, and you cannot rally/protest violently -- it endangers the rights of other citizens. Being free, and being able to do to whatever the hell you want are not the same thing.
3) Military policing the neighborhood at night ... really? What made up place in the United States do you live in? This is just pure BS ...
So I guess what I'm saying is ... its okay to question your government, and to think critically of what is going on around you, but there is a point where critical thinking devolves into schizophrenic paranoia ... and too many people seem to be going there. They create the very false dichotomy they are describing ...
2007-10-15 20:04:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by blursd2 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
Gee, I don't know what city you live in, but it's probably already one of their welfare states.
No need to worry until after Jan. 2009 and the "fairness" doctrine eliminates freedom of speech from the airwaves. Your ability to defend yourself comes next (hand over your guns and kitchen knives), and your property (free health care costs money, you know).
By then, all those Christians everybody worries about will be banished to their basements to pray.
And Kerry suggests that I'll thrive once I get out of re-education camp! (I always look on the bright side...)
2007-10-15 19:50:45
·
answer #4
·
answered by Boomer Wisdom 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
the only element i've got got here across form of a chuckle approximately each of those that whinge approximately how unfavorable it rather is to stay in this u . s . a . is they do no longer seem in any great hurry to prefer to go away. you already know what I propose? you will think of that the whiners would prefer to flow somebody else the place their lives would be lots extra suitable. in spite of everything, it rather is getting lots worse and all. you will think of besides... "occurring around the globe" Wow.... i think we in basic terms provide up because of the fact there is not any longer something we are in a position to do. in spite of everything, that's what all great people of the previous did while they confronted adversity. provide up and roll over..... I hear ya!
2016-12-29 12:35:09
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I see Emperor of all the World coming, Pax Americana, and 1500 years of dark ages, if the dark ages end at all.
We are consistently making choices that lead in that direction and tend to squash freedom. But, I am not sure, as my crystal ball broke back in 1987 when Greenspan and Volker managed to stop the world economy from collapsing. Go figure. It'll be another 70 years before enough data is available to recalibrate my economic model and try predicting the future accurately again.
Life is too important to take seriously, so, when death smiles at you, smile back.
2007-10-16 02:10:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by balloon buster 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
EXCELLENT QUESTION....please do not stop being the insightful, wonderful inquisitive being that you are...Don't forget that surveillance cameras are frequently becoming the norm, too. I think that the police state is already here, and the screws are being slowly tightened. The government hopes that we will become dispirited and give up, thus giving them what they are already taking, absolute power...we must not let them have absolute power, not without a fight. We must start reclaiming our country for its citizenry, block by block. Read your history books on the rise of National Socialism in Europe in the 20th Century, not only Germany, but in Italy, Spain etc. The parallels are breathtaking!
2007-10-15 19:48:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by Jeff B 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
where have you been? since 1955 our so called comrade lawmakers have made almost a million new laws making it impossible for anyone not to break them, shy do you think we have more people in prison than China or North Korea, more than any nation on earth, we are already a police state, many people don't realize it yet, look at our constitution, it has been ragged out so much our forefathers would flip in their graves if they knew how lazy, and cowardly their progeny had become,
2007-10-15 19:47:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
God, here we go. No, the supreme court adds more and more restrictions on what we can do every year.
Checkpoints are for DUI and Information. They are completely lawful, and constitutional, as decided by United States Supreme Court Case Law.
You have the right to assemble PEACEABLY, start brawls in the street, no, you can't protest anymore.
We have SWAT teams for high-risk warrants, barracaded situations, etc. It's to keep us safe, live with it.
Curfews and prisoners? You're an idiot.
2007-10-15 19:50:36
·
answer #9
·
answered by trueblue3167 4
·
0⤊
4⤋
theres already curfews for people under 18. i dont think the militarys doing anything unless you live near one of their bases. Cops on the other hand are racist and evil and they suck and everyone hates them and they know it thats why theyre jerks.
2007-10-15 19:44:23
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋