Law and Order is going to have a heyday if it happens.
-------------------- "And slowly, you come to realize, it's all as it should be, you can only do so much. If you're game enough, you could place your trust in me. For the love of life, there's a tradeoff, we could lose it all but we'll go down fighting...." - David Sylvian FreeSpace 2, the greatest space sim of all time, now remastered!
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
You know, I was concerned when the big terrorist attacks first started that there would be some kind of restriction of civil rights. I got worried when they started talking about "Homeland Security" and "Citizen Awareness Groups."
This downright scares me.
Will Oxnard v. Martinez end up being a watershed case for the future (or lack thereof) of criminal justice? Let's hope that the Supreme Court has the sense to realize that there are some lines that simply should not be crossed. Especially if the War On Terror� is supposed to be for the preservation of the American Way�.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
It is getting scary down there. Little by little the US is turning into a police state. I'm starting to buy stock in companies which make brown shirts.
-------------------- "and none of your usual boobery." M. Burns
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
Saltah'na
Chinese Canadian, or 75% Commie Bastard.
Member # 33
posted
Orange Jumpsuits here.
-------------------- "And slowly, you come to realize, it's all as it should be, you can only do so much. If you're game enough, you could place your trust in me. For the love of life, there's a tradeoff, we could lose it all but we'll go down fighting...." - David Sylvian FreeSpace 2, the greatest space sim of all time, now remastered!
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I think Grokca was referring to Nazi Germany...
EDIT: I just went and dug up a quote I posted here a few months back:
"...It would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism -- free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power: that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go..." -- Thomas Jefferson, The Kentucky Resolutions, October 1798
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
1. Oxnard is going to lose. 2. I love how they say that the Bush Administration "supports this" but don't back that statement up with ANYTHING. 3. Deliniating limits on the conditions in which a Miranda warning is necessary is about two galaxies to the left of dismantling it altogether. That slope's so slippery you could do a triple axel without ice skates.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
What I don't understand is how you can shoot someone in the eyes w/o totally fucking them up. I'm surprised the man is anything more than, at best, a complete vegetable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I think when 2 arch-conservatives join the ACLU in its efforts to support privacy rights, we should be very worried.
In 2000, Governor Bush declared his wish to be a dictator. Though dismissed by many as a joke, I didn't think then or now he was joking. He was the first man for this office I now of who spoke of being a dictator. How can a man who openly shows his liking for the powers of a dictator be a friend of democracy?
By the way, there was an amendment to the Constitution. I consider this amendment very important and critical in our world today as freedoms are limited and our fears are fed by propanganda and hatred. I speak of the Ninth Amendment which states, I paraphrase here, that there are rights not listed in the Constitution which the people have rights to. We never speak of this amendment or its importance. Why?
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:"It's tragic," said Alan E. Wisotsky, the lawyer for the city of Oxnard, "but you can't look at it from a philanthropic standpoint. He tried to kill police officers or they thought he was trying to kill them .... Does the tape (of the interrogation) sound bad? Yes, the guy is in agony. But the questioning was to get at the truth."
That makes it all right then. Senator Joe is alive and well. . .
posted
'The truth'? A policeman's job and duty is to get the facts and leave the interpretation to the crime scene investigators and, finally, the court system. They are not hired to seek the truth, or innocent men and women may be hurt in the process.
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by newark: In 2000, Governor Bush declared his wish to be a dictator. Though dismissed by many as a joke, I didn't think then or now he was joking. He was the first man for this office I now of who spoke of being a dictator. How can a man who openly shows his liking for the powers of a dictator be a friend of democracy?
Heh. There's a difference between appreciating efficiency and wanting to BE a Borg.
It's widely known, newark, that despite its many great benefits, democracy is a TERRIBLY inefficient way to run a country. This is actually most obvious in times of crisis.
Most of the time, however, this efficiency is a great benefit. It keeps things from changing too much too fast, thus preventing instability. It generates debate, which, under ideal conditions, generates thought and reason. But it is traditionally SLOW to act, and HARD to direct towards a goal, because everybody has different ideas about what that goal should be.
For efficiency, you can't beat ONE voice. However, the potential drawbacks of dictatorship are so many that it usually becomes unthinkable. We're used to expecting Dictators to be vicious kleptocrats, people like Hitler and Hussein and Amin and such. And they usually are.
But what if Dictatorship rested in the hands of a truly benevolent person who really DID have his people's best interests at heart? What then? I don't know. It's probably too risky to ever find out. Despite my 'grassroots campaign,' I wouldn't say I'm best suited for the job, either.
Remember that Socrates believed that troubles would continue "Until kings become philosophers and philosophers become kings." There may yet be some truth to that.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
In the Roman Republic, they had the post of Dictator: a person who would be chosen for the office when the shit had truly hit the fan. He would take over, be given extraordinary powers for the duration (I think it was one year, but I'm not sure - my Ancient History degree is 10 years in the past), and, crucially, would not be held accountable afterwards.
It wasn't used very often, and in fact mainly in times of internal strife. Because the Republic wasn't a democracy, it was about making sure everyone had their turn. The ruling class worked their way up through the Senate and, if they were really lucky, got to be one of the two Consuls for a year. That's why Julius Caesar got killed, really - not because they had some great aversion to kings in general, it's just that if he claimed kingship of Rome then all those other people wouldn't get their crack at the whip they'd been born and bred for.
Historical analogy is a dangerous thing. But I'm sure there aren't any parallels here, after all the US is a true democracy and there's no ruling class, right? 8)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
