"They hate us for our freedom" - Epiphany

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

The problem with warrantless wiretapping (for those who actually buy into the "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" crap) is thus:

You let the government into your Constitutionally-protected private communications and first off, do you think you'll EVER get that freedom back, once it's been given up? Let's not kid ourselves. The #1 goal of government is maximizing control over the populace. I can think of not a single instance of government relinquishing control they gained.

Think of this scenario - you let the government wiretap your phones under the rationale of "we want to screen for possible terrorist communications", which you don't partake in. Think they just chuck the phone records then? Nope. When they get around to it, they'll revisit them in order to screen for violations of any/all other laws (including those which either may not exist yet, or may be so obscure you're not even aware you're violating them). There are so many laws on the books, can ANYONE honestly claim to know all of them? Are you 100% sure you're not breaking some law even by sitting here reading this? I'll bet you are. That's where we are.

Rule #1 - don't give 'em an easy one. Government and law enforcement have crossed a threshold in this country where they are no longer accountable to anyone and do not represent the public. They are NOT your friends, much as they might try and brainwash you into thinking so.

You want to give up the ONLY rights standing between us and totalitarianism? Be my guest. Just don't drag the rest of us down with you.

That's easy to believe at first glance, but it has not been the case with gun sales records and you would really think they'd start with that. When a gun store calls in your driver's license for the NICS check, the FBI cannot keep a record of the check and they cannot record the sale. The gun store, as part of his FFL licensing requirement must keep the records for 10 yrs., but feds can only request them if a gun turns up in a crime and that serial no. links back to that dealer. And it's not like wiretapping is anything close to as meticulous as gun paperwork. The NSA can search for certain key words in foreign languages, maybe dialects, wash it all through super complicated computer programs and come up with a few for further examination by human analysts. That's not exactly keeping typed transcripts of your phone conversations. Why the hell would they want to do that? The info is beyond useless. It sucks up all kinds of reseources for no benefit at all. The gov't. has a much greater interest in going after gun owners and they haven't even been able to do that.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by Moses

Interesting point, since DUI checkpoints are clearly forbidden in our Constitution, yet local jurisdictions have decided to let them continue "for the greater good".

I am afraid that the Constitution is no longer a guiding document...it seems to be interpreted to meet the narrow aims of specific interest groups with enough budget and lawyers to make their political slant stick.

FWIW, I often find it odd that many people seem to have no problem with the stunning amount of personal information that is mined everyday by corporations yet recoil in horror at "loss of personal rights" as defined by the Constitution.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

...You have a bunch of people getting stoned at a concert, pot is illegal, that's the risk you take....

It was not like what you are insinuating, in fact, nothing could have been further from the truth. Please tell me what "risk" I (and most others) were taking that justified having our rights violated by such survailence in our campgrounds? More importantly, what does "homeland security" have to do with a music festival, and why are my tax dollars being used in this fashion while REAL security issues (i.e. borders, shipping containers, etc.) are ignored?

ps: I've smelled more "smoke" at college football games than I did that particular weekend.

[Rick Lee]

The catch with DUI checkpoints is that you probably would have no standing to challenge them in court unless you were arrested at one, in which case you don't exactly make the most sympathetic plaintiff. The closest I came to getting nailed at one was when I had no idea what the huge traffic hold up was, but could see it went on for miles. So I did a U-turn over the median strip and took a detour home. I hadn't been drinking at all, but I've heard that kind of behavior tends to get the cops after you. They couldn't even see me though, since they were so far up the road. The other time I went through one in the 993 late at night. Cops had floodlights all over the side of the road with paramedics and nurses in their scrubs standing next to them. It was like a haunted house on Halloween. But they waved me through without saying anything. I really hate those things. Been through several of them in Europe too and they just stop you there to look at "your papers", not to even ask if you've been drinking.

[NICKG]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

I am afraid that the Constitution is no longer a guiding document...it seems to be interpreted to meet the narrow aims of specific interest groups with enough budget and lawyers to make their political slant stick.

FWIW, I often find it odd that many people seem to have no problem with the stunning amount of personal information that is mined everyday by corporations yet recoil in horror at "loss of personal rights" as defined by the Constitution.

you aren't kidding. My wife and I are taking out a small second mortgage to repair an old retaining wall and consolidate a small credit card debt, when I spoke with the loan officer, they did not need anything as far as account numbers..he said they have all of them. Flabbergasted, I asked if it wa the complete numbers or just the last 4...they were the complete numbers! I am still shocked that anyone pulling my credit report can get the complete numbers...
Having worked at a car dealership, I know firsthand how they just tossed papers out when/if the deal fell thru. Scary that they have that much info

[widebody911]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

FWIW, I often find it odd that many people seem to have no problem with the stunning amount of personal information that is mined everyday by corporations yet recoil in horror at "loss of personal rights" as defined by the Constitution.

I have a problem with that, as well. The thing is, if I tell CitiBank to f*ck off, I don't go to jail.

[NICKG]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

That's easy to believe at first glance, but it has not been the case with gun sales records and you would really think they'd start with that. When a gun store calls in your driver's license for the NICS check, the FBI cannot keep a record of the check and they cannot record the sale. The gun store, as part of his FFL licensing requirement must keep the records for 10 yrs., but feds can only request them if a gun turns up in a crime and that serial no. links back to that dealer. And it's not like wiretapping is anything close to as meticulous as gun paperwork. The NSA can search for certain key words in foreign languages, maybe dialects, wash it all through super complicated computer programs and come up with a few for further examination by human analysts. That's not exactly keeping typed transcripts of your phone conversations. Why the hell would they want to do that? The info is beyond useless. It sucks up all kinds of reseources for no benefit at all. The gov't. has a much greater interest in going after gun owners and they haven't even been able to do that.

the gun records are able to be tracked now , right now they are tracking every gun that is taken by police in nj thru the FBI/atf database(which does record EVERY new gun purchase) and hope to have 100% traceability on guns in nj by the next few months. They want to find out where the guns are coming from. I find it really ironic, because in Nj it is impossible to legally buy a handgun(you need to show why you NEED it and then the police cheif says yes or no)

[Tim Hancock]

Some here seem to think that laws on the books do not apply to them (illegal drug use). The real infringement on your freedom is the law itself, not the fact that you got caught. If a law enforcer uses binoculars, radar gun, videotape or other electronic means to catch you in the act, what is the difference?

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by widebody911

I have a problem with that, as well. The thing is, if I tell CitiBank to f*ck off, I don't go to jail.

I agree, but you can tell Citibank whatever you want and they will still report your activity to the government. I hate all intrusions into my personal life.

Maryland has a website where anyone can view what you paid for your house, taxes you pay on the property and a detailed description of the property. I tried to get my farm off the website and was told there is no method to do that.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by Tim Hancock

Some here seem to think that laws on the books do not apply to them (illegal drug use). The real infringement on your freedom is the law itself, not the fact that you got caught. If a law enforcer uses binoculars, radar gun, videotape or other electronic means to catch you in the act, what is the difference?

No, no, no...I'm afraid you're missing the point. My girlfriend (at the time) and I, plus the vast majority of people camping at this festival had nothing to be worried about. This thread asked about "freedoms" that we've lost, and I listed one. I'm sorry, but I don't like being "spied upon" with night vision goggles and cameras while I'm camping, particularly under the guise of "homeland security"....would you? What REALLY scares me is that folks like you (whom I don't really know, but have developed a great deal of respect for) seem to have no problem with this invasion upon our private lives.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Originally Posted by KC911

It was not like what you are insinuating, in fact, nothing could have been further from the truth. Please tell me what "risk" I (and most others) were taking that justified having our rights violated by such survailence in our campgrounds? More importantly, what does "homeland security" have to do with a music festival, and why are my tax dollars being used in this fashion while REAL security issues (i.e. borders, shipping containers, etc.) are ignored?

ps: I've smelled more "smoke" at college football games than I did that particular weekend.

I'm not saying that the response was justified, but anyone that uses illegal drugs risks arrest. Period. Further, I fail to see how watching the concert for those using drugs is a violation of your rights. It's not as if they were hiding in your closet, watching you and your wife smoke a fattie.

I don't know who was playing this music festival, but I've been to my share of concerts. I can't count how many times I've been offered a joint by a complete stranger. Never happened to me at any football games.........

[on-ramp]

they hate us because "we" are killing the world. Iraq is an excellent example.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

.... It's not as if they were hiding in your closet, watching you and your wife smoke a fattie.....

Yes it was...having video cameras and LEOs with night vision goggles set up to monitor campsites is close enough to cause me discomfort. You guys are missing the point...EVERYONE was spied on, and you say "but if you're not doing anything illegal, then you shouldn't have a problem". Well, we weren't doing anything illegal, but I DO have a big problem being spied upon while camping.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

Maryland has a website where anyone can view what you paid for your house, taxes you pay on the property and a detailed description of the property. I tried to get my farm off the website and was told there is no method to do that.

Before the Internet, anyone could do this just by going to the courthouse. If you buy a house, the deed gets recorded there and tax assessments are a matter of public record. I think it's always been this way. The Internet just takes some of the legwork out of it. I had to go look up a property at the courthouse once for a small claims suit and the defendant would never have given me the info voluntarily. But it wouldn't have made any sense for me to sue the guy I THOUGHT owned the place, when it turns out he wasn't the actual owner.

And NJ is a complete police state when it comes to guns. The feds may have helped them get there. But that does not (yet) exist here in VA. Private face-face sales between state residents are 100% legal. I've bought a gun in a Home Depot parking lot, two wks. ago sold one in a K-Mart parking lot and have done plenty of wheeling and dealing at gun shows right in front of state police and probably undercover ATF agents. In fact I sold a rifle to a DC cop at a gun show in VA. Doesn't bother me at all since I know it was 100% legal. With stuff like that going on LEGALLY, I doubt VA sees much point in helping the feds out with what little information they can gather on gun sales through dealers. I do not believe the FBI can record gun sales, as I am pretty sure my FFL keeps every piece of paper I fill out. None of it is carbon copy. He just calls in my drivers license to the VA state police and uses my CCW as backup id. I've sat there with him countless times. He doesn't tell what I'm buying, just that it's me and they always approve it within one minute. In fact, I once bought a gun in PA from dealer, though I was a VA resident then. But he let me do it because I still had a PA CCW. I felt the deal was a little fishy because I got it so cheap and with no paperwork. So I called VA state police and asked them about it. They said not to worry about and enjoy my new gun.

[Moneyguy1]

There is an older Dean Koontz book that I recommend to those who want to see how freedoms can be lost. There are a lot of "recommended" real world references at the end. Sure, it is fiction, but it does give one pause......."Night Chills".

[onewhippedpuppy]

Obviously the police response might have been a bit extreme. But when you put yourself in that situation, that's the risk you take. Had you been at a peaceful campground with your family and found police watching from the trees, then you would have a reason to complain.

When I was single, I lived with several guys in a house. One of them was a good guy, but had drug troubles in the past. He promised that those issues were behind him. All was peaceful for months, until the other roommate (moron) got into financial difficulties, and had to move back in with his parents. After I lost the majority, things quickly changed, and the activities the ex-druggie roommate had hidden from us quickly moved into our home. I was not doing drugs, but I was in a position where I was around those that were. I fully expected our house to be raided by the police. Thus, I made a point to never be there, and was able to end the lease early.

[Mule]

Originally Posted by on-ramp

they hate us because "we" are killing the world. Iraq is an excellent example.

Once more we get proof that ignorance & stupidity have no bounds. How can you continue to be part of such a murderous rogue nation on ramp? Have you considered moving to iran?

Nick, thanks for the props on the origin of allah. Good to see someone paying attention.

Cool Chick, still waiting for some proof (in addition to your infallible word).

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

Obviously the police response might have been a bit extreme. But when you put yourself in that situation, that's the risk you take...

Please tell me what my girlfriend and I did to put ourselves in "that situation" (as you refer to it). I'll tell you what we did...not a damn thing other than attend a music festival that was invaded by a "gestapo like" group of LEOs with a bunch of "homeland security $$$" to play with. This was NOT an isolated incident (it happened two years in a row), and imo is an almost direct result of the "Patriot Act" and "Homeland Security funded LE budgets" gone awry.

[Superman]

Wow.

First, if handguns are nearly impossible to get in NJ, and only by special permission of the local constabulary, then this is one "liberal" who was a massive problem with that. If NJ residents want to arm their homes with handguns, it would be my fervent position that they have every right to do so.

I share Seahawk's concern about the colossal pile of personal information being trafficked by corporations. I don't trust my government with this information and I SURE don't trust corporations with it.

And I continue to be surprised at the confidence Rick has in his gubmit. He seems confident that government will not abuse his personal information. Rick, if I'm not getting that right, then please clarify.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Oh for the love of God. You went to a concert where a bunch of guys were busted for smoking pot. Get over it. I've been to parties and concerts where people have been arrested for a variety of things, that's what happens when people break the law. Had you or I been at church, such things would not have happened, would they? If you'd been camping somewhere in the forest by yourselves, it would not have happened, would it?

Other then getting your panties in a bunch, how were your rights infringed upon? Because cops were watching you from the forest? Get over it. If you don't want it to happen again, don't go back. The reaction might have been a bit over the top, but they were enforcing the law. Don't like it? Tell your fellow concert-goers to quit smoking pot, etc.

As for you continuously throwing out "Homeland Security", in case you have not noticed, they are pretty much the umbrella over all domestic law enforcement. That means most federal money, whether it is for watching terrorists or crossing guards, flows through them. B!tching about them is irrelevant, it's what the various departments choose to do with the funds that is worth inspection.