PDA

View Full Version : The Police State is Personal



sunshine05
27th May 2011, 06:59 AM
The Police State Is Personal

Mises Daily: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 by Wendy McElroy

Does America now qualify as a police state? And, if so, where do you — or will you — personally draw a hard line and say, "No! That is a law or a police order I refuse to obey"?

As an anarchist, I view all states as police states, because every law is ultimately backed by police force against the body or property of a scofflaw, however peaceful he may be. I see only a difference of degree, not of kind. But even small differences in the degree of repression can be matters of life or death, and so they should not be trivialized.

A police state is more commonly described as a totalitarian government that exerts extreme social, political, and economic control. It maintains this control by a pervasive surveillance of its own citizenry, by draconian law enforcement, and by granting or withholding "privileges" such the ability to travel. Typically, there is a special police force, such as a Stasi, that operates with no transparency and few restraints. Unlike traditional policemen, who respond to crime, the purpose of such state police is to monitor and control society.

Let me restate my opening question: does America now embody this common description of a police state?

Clearly it does. The American government exerts extreme control over society, down to dictating which foods you may eat. Its economic control borders on the absolute. It politicizes and presides over even the traditional bastion of privacy — the family. Camera and other surveillance of daily life has soared, with the Supreme Court recently expanding the "right" of police to perform warrantless searches. Enforcement is so draconian that the United States has more prisoners per capita than any other nation; and over the last few years, the police have been self-consciously militarizing their procedures and attitudes. Travel, formerly a right, is now a privilege granted by government agents at their whim. Several huge and tyrannical law-enforcement agencies monitor peaceful behavior rather than respond to crime. These agencies operate largely outside the restrictions of the Constitution; for example, the TSA conducts arbitrary searches in violation of Fourth Amendment guarantees.

The Internet would run out of electrons before I could complete a list of the specifics that constitute an emerging Police America. The extent to which you are personally oppressed by the state, however, can be estimated by answering several more abstract questions:

How many peaceful activities would make you a criminal if you chose to do them?

How much of your life is spent working to pay taxes and other government fees?

How freely can you relocate your assets and person outside state jurisdiction?

How freely can you use your assets and person within state jurisdiction?

Few people aside from the state apparatchiks can answer in a way that makes them feel anything but economically enslaved and physically trapped.

No one should have to chose between family and the state, nor their wealth and the law. When confronted by such choices, there is no easy or correct answer. An increasing number of Americans are becoming expatriates for their own safety and that of their families. But the great majority of people are rooted in place by extended family, friends, work, inertia, emotional attachments, or other compelling reasons.

Those who recognize the emergence of Police America and yet feel a need to stay should ask themselves a question: where is the limit at which you withdraw your cooperation and say "no!" to a state law or a state agent's order? Would you inform on a neighbor, as the authorities already urge you to do? Would you assist a friend or family member even if it made you criminally an accessory; if so, whom? Would you steal from or harm an innocent person on command? If ordered, would you assist a police officer to do so, or would you interfere and, so, become vulnerable to a charge of "obstructing justice"?

There are several reasons for asking yourself such questions now. They include:

The consequences of your act may depend not merely on where you draw a line but also on how you do so. Planning can help you draw your line in a prudent way.

You may be reluctant to draw the lines you wish because you fear endangering your loved ones, your wealth, or something else valuable to you. If possible, secure these in advance. Prepare.
Mises Academy: Daniel D'Amico teaches The American Prison State

If you don't know where the lines are, then you are far more likely to act against your own principles or interests when suddenly confronted by a distressing, demanding situation like an officer barking commands.

Knowing where your limits are makes it more possible to avoid situations that trigger them.

Harry Browne advised people to pay a price as soon as possible because it costs less overall; this applies to psychological prices as well as to financial ones. It will never be easier for you to consider this question than right now, in privacy and comfort.

There are no correct answers. The purpose of the exercise is merely to become more aware of how you, personally, could live under a police state while retaining your safety and your self-respect.

http://mises.org/daily/5317/The-Police-State-Is-Personal

gunDriller
27th May 2011, 07:51 AM
obviously the US Police State goes back many decades, to at least 1937 when Harry "Reefer Madness" Anslinger led the charge to make the 3 most widely proscribed medicaitons in the US illegal - tinctures of opium, cocaine, and marijuana.

but i found this new instance, as part of my quest to divorce the local phone company by setting up a wireless connection to local free wireless hotspots -

"A/ My friend uses wifi directional antenna mounted high on a HAM radio tower. He is outside of town in a more isolated area surrounded by trees, with no other form of internet access. He has a amature radio license.

B/ A ham license doesn't cover all bands, just the Amateur Radio bands. It's still a violation. It's still up to $10K fine for a first offense (however unlikely).

I'm an Extra class, trust me"

from
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2166561

i don't even have a ham radio license, but i want to mount a wireless antenna on a tree.

it sounds like that might make me a criminal in the FCC's perspective !

maybe their purpose is to prevent people from doing an end run around the local phone company monopoly that 99% of the time is run by Talmud-worshippers ?


side note - if you tell the FCC to go fcc themselves, what happens ? ;D

Dogman
27th May 2011, 09:15 AM
obviously the US Police State goes back many decades, to at least 1937 when Harry "Reefer Madness" Anslinger led the charge to make the 3 most widely proscribed medicaitons in the US illegal - tinctures of opium, cocaine, and marijuana.

but i found this new instance, as part of my quest to divorce the local phone company by setting up a wireless connection to local free wireless hotspots -

"A/ My friend uses wifi directional antenna mounted high on a HAM radio tower. He is outside of town in a more isolated area surrounded by trees, with no other form of internet access. He has a amature radio license.

B/ A ham license doesn't cover all bands, just the Amateur Radio bands. It's still a violation. It's still up to $10K fine for a first offense (however unlikely).

I'm an Extra class, trust me"

from
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2166561

i don't even have a ham radio license, but i want to mount a wireless antenna on a tree.

it sounds like that might make me a criminal in the FCC's perspective !

maybe their purpose is to prevent people from doing an end run around the local phone company monopoly that 99% of the time is run by Talmud-worshippers ?


side note - if you tell the FCC to go fcc themselves, what happens ? ;D


If it is a true free access point, any one can use it with out buying a product like coffee , I think all wi-fi products are covered by fcc part 15 which is mostly a limitation of the max power that can be used to transmit. If you use a wi-fi hi gain router acting as a repeater or several to connect to the provider from your home, I think that would be legal, as long as the hot spot is totally open to all users. On a plus ? side you also would be opening up access to others to use the link along its path, not sure if it is possible for a wifi router to receive open signals and then retransmit encrypted signals, so you can lock out anyone else.

And in answer to the fcc screwing them selfs , it depends , very few have fought them and have won, in the end they win.

Ponce
27th May 2011, 09:35 AM
You are a "criminal" only if you are caught.........I know that if everyone here had been arrested for all the laws that they have broken then the entire population of the US would be in FEMA camps........always have a plan behind the plan and a back door that you can use.......but of course I am not called Saint Ponce for nothing because I have never broken any laws :oo-->

First post of the day...................good morning to one and all.

undgrd
27th May 2011, 10:32 AM
I like reading articles like this to the point where they talk about expat. As is moving to a different flavor of Tyranny is a better option. You show me a country that will leave me alone to be, and I'll show you a country that everyone else calls the Moon.

ShortJohnSilver
27th May 2011, 04:38 PM
but i found this new instance, as part of my quest to divorce the local phone company by setting up a wireless connection to local free wireless hotspots -

I'm an Extra class, trust me"

from
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2166561

i don't even have a ham radio license, but i want to mount a wireless antenna on a tree.

it sounds like that might make me a criminal in the FCC's perspective !

maybe their purpose is to prevent people from doing an end run around the local phone company monopoly that 99% of the time is run by Talmud-worshippers ?


side note - if you tell the FCC to go fcc themselves, what happens ? ;D


You need to read up on "Part 15" rules. They explicitly allow you to emit a certain measured amount of radiation (power, called EIRP) without having to obtain a license. Many hams are morons when it comes to Wifi, better to read up on the Wireless ISP boards.

sunshine05
27th May 2011, 08:09 PM
I like reading articles like this to the point where they talk about expat. As is moving to a different flavor of Tyranny is a better option. You show me a country that will leave me alone to be, and I'll show you a country that everyone else calls the Moon.



True. But I have a feeling this is going to be the worst place to be and already is in many ways. I don't see other countries doing the radiation scanners and pat-downs. And when the dollar collapses it's going to be a nightmare since 40 million Americans are on food stamps. I do believe riots in the streets are in our future. I want to leave. I'm just not sure where to go.

undgrd
28th May 2011, 07:50 AM
I look at other countries' populations like dogs trained by an electric fence. After realizing there's no way past a certain point, you can disable the fence because the dog will never test it again.