30,000 Drones Over America! Obama's Weaponized Police State! 2012

[rareboy]

I don't know why Americans would be so paranoid about drones....

It isn't as though the USA doesn't have spy satellites capable of seeing you making a 'O' face while wanking in front of your Puter screen....or that if they wanted to, a rogue Obama government could get Air Force One to fly right over your house and drop a bunker buster.

Just think of drones as smaller, less expensive ways to put out those high frequency waves that make the proles vote for a black Kenyan Communist Islamist.

[bankside]

Two problems with this approach to freedom:

1) the idea that "people should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people."

Bullshit. For a country that invented the idea of government of the people, by the people, and for the people, it's awfully slow to realise that they're saying "people should not be afraid of their governments people, governments people should be afraid of their people. Quit arguing that people should be afraid of themselves, and afraid of each other.


2) the idea that people should wait until government gets bad enough that things are desperate, then shoot them in an armed insurrection.

Dumb. Given that you have freedom of press, freedom of assembly, and an election every two years for everything from congress to dog-catcher, use it to select people who will not tyrannise the country. The personal weapon is the least effective guarantor of an open society when compared to the editorial column, the peaceful protest, the twitter pic from the citizen's POV, and the ballot box. You have them. Fucking use them.

But some asshole sitting in a bunker in the middle of Montana doing nothing for his country but waiting for the day he can go and shoot his way to freedom, fuck him.

[White Eagle]

I don't know why Americans would be so paranoid about drones....

It isn't as though the USA doesn't have spy satellites capable of seeing you making a 'O' face while wanking in front of your Puter screen....or that if they wanted to, a rogue Obama government could get Air Force One to fly right over your house and drop a bunker buster.

Just think of drones as smaller, less expensive ways to put out those high frequency waves that make the proles vote for a black Kenyan Communist Islamist.

Try Google Maps. Here is a pic of my apt. You can even see the hanging baskets on my balcony. Even the no smoking sign in the window. Yeah they don't see anything.

[Rolyo85]

Two problems with this approach to freedom:

1) the idea that "people should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people."

Bullshit. For a country that invented the idea of government of the people, by the people, and for the people, it's awfully slow to realise that they're saying "people should not be afraid of their governments people, governments people should be afraid of their people. Quit arguing that people should be afraid of themselves, and afraid of each other.

2) the idea that people should wait until government gets bad enough that things are desperate, then shoot them in an armed insurrection.

Dumb. Given that you have freedom of press, freedom of assembly, and an election every two years for everything from congress to dog-catcher, use it to select people who will not tyrannise the country. The personal weapon is the least effective guarantor of an open society when compared to the editorial column, the peaceful protest, the twitter pic from the citizen's POV, and the ballot box. You have them. Fucking use them.

But some asshole sitting in a bunker in the middle of Montana doing nothing for his country but waiting for the day he can go and shoot his way to freedom, fuck him.

So much this! So many people talk about government as if it's this alien organism that is parasitically attached to us and is only waiting for a chance to drain us of life. When in fact it's a group of people stemming from the population, having the same mindset and same goals as you. And yes, power corrupts. Which is why nobody is allowed to stay in government indefinitely.

[TX-Beau]

Silly rabbit, if you have no impending fascism, you have no reason to buy a Chinese assault rifle.

Then you have to admit your penis is only 2" long.

[xbuzzerx]

I don't know why Americans would be so paranoid about drones....

It isn't as though the USA doesn't have spy satellites capable of seeing you making a 'O' face while wanking in front of your Puter screen....or that if they wanted to, a rogue Obama government could get Air Force One to fly right over your house and drop a bunker buster.

Just think of drones as smaller, less expensive ways to put out those high frequency waves that make the proles vote for a black Kenyan Communist Islamist.

My thought exactly... I don't know why people would worry about this now when this level of "potential intrusiveness" has been a fact of life since google maps/google earth. Yes those programs don't let you spy on someone real time. But anyone who didn't imagine that intelligence agencies couldn't be using the satellites in the same way WITHOUT the software restrictions on what you can look at and when was lacking a bit in the imagination department.

I don't know how much of it is true vs. how much of it is urban legend but didn't they say even during the Cold War that military intelligence could view so keenly through satellites they could read the newspaper in a USSR citizen's hand?

Two problems with this approach to freedom:

1) the idea that "people should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people."

Bullshit. For a country that invented the idea of government of the people, by the people, and for the people, it's awfully slow to realise that they're saying "people should not be afraid of their governments people, governments people should be afraid of their people. Quit arguing that people should be afraid of themselves, and afraid of each other.


2) the idea that people should wait until government gets bad enough that things are desperate, then shoot them in an armed insurrection.

Dumb. Given that you have freedom of press, freedom of assembly, and an election every two years for everything from congress to dog-catcher, use it to select people who will not tyrannise the country. The personal weapon is the least effective guarantor of an open society when compared to the editorial column, the peaceful protest, the twitter pic from the citizen's POV, and the ballot box. You have them. Fucking use them.

But some asshole sitting in a bunker in the middle of Montana doing nothing for his country but waiting for the day he can go and shoot his way to freedom, fuck him.

Agreed. If it even gets to the point where your main option is to grab your firearms and go fight the government you've failed as a responsible citizen for years and years and years (in a democracy). That's the way I've always viewed it.

[JayHawk]

I don't know how much of it is true vs. how much of it is urban legend but didn't they say even during the Cold War that military intelligence could view so keenly through satellites they could read the newspaper in a USSR citizen's hand?

The only difference between the collection efforts before the Patriot Act and after is more law enforcement agencies are being told about the results so they had to seek congressional cover to share that illegally gained info...

[Kulindahr]

The ipso-facto on "one city, crime rate" is still a dumb argument and it doesn't advance you guys' position at all. It is precisely like I said in the other thread, passing air pollution laws in a municipality within mainland China and then measuring the pollution and going "see, pollution laws don't work." It's a soiled sample to gauge anything within a greater surrounding area where the pollution is still ongoing.

It demonstrates at the very least that gun bans/restrictions don't do anything about crime.

[xbuzzerx]

It demonstrates at the very least that gun bans/restrictions don't do anything about crime.

Only within the greater context of "someone can walk outside the city limit and get a gun."

Seriously, it doesn't pass any kind of objective logical snuff to look at piecemeal restrictions in highly localized areas and leap to the conclusion you wish to draw.

If this logic held we should have the lowest crime rate in the first world.

[Kulindahr]

I won't be coy.. I do think a lot of the arguments you guys use don't stand up to logical scrutiny, whether it's "fight the government with handguns" or "city x banned guns crime went up y %." That doesn't however mean that everything I say should be taken as I'm trying to get Obama and Oprah to come into your house and steal all your firearms.

However I think what flew in a frontier society or a colonial society, or even in a rural Arkansas society, doesn't work in a massively populated metropolitan society. Rural Arkansas doesn't have a quarter million people on anti-psychotic medications or half a million people going through horribly nasty divorce proceedings on a year in year out basis, it doesn't have road rage inspired from constant, never ending 10-lane gridlock where it takes you 2 hours to go 30 miles, etc. So I do think we need sensible gun restriction particularly in the department of checks/waiting periods. Training/certification required would be even better imho.

And not to take a jab at Kul but I just don't buy that the gang bangers with prison records as long as your arm can make guns at home. I just don't give them that much credit. When they get them illegally I think 9 times out of 10 what they're doing is getting them at gun shows where I have no idea how the law works regarding gun shows or how they are selling things that are 'ordinarily' illegal in the given state or county, but that's what I hear all the time. "Oh you can't get that here, you gotta go to a gun show for that." With more regulation that wouldn't be such an obvious/easy avenue for criminals.

It would help your credibility if you didn't make things up -- which you did with the items in bold.

As for felons with prison records, I know of two who do in fact make guns, in the same shops where they repair automobile engines. They do bolt-action rifles and revolvers, because those are simpler to machine.
What concerns me about them is that both are members of the Klan, so I wonder who they're arming... though since they only make one or two a year I'm not terribly worried.

Concerning gun shows: the laws for selling firearms or anything else there are the same as anywhere else. As for felons trying to buy at gun shows, that's not an exceptionally smart move for a felon -- the last few gun shows I've been to except one have had pictures of all the people within an hour's drive who aren't legally able to buy firearms posted at the doors. At one of those gun shows, someone caught one... and he was very glad to see the sheriff's deputies when they arrived. People at a gun show don't just tell a felon he can't buy a gun; they grab him, restrain him, and wait for the authorities.

[Kulindahr]

Two problems with this approach to freedom:

1) the idea that "people should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people."

Bullshit. For a country that invented the idea of government of the people, by the people, and for the people, it's awfully slow to realise that they're saying "people should not be afraid of their governments people, governments people should be afraid of their people. Quit arguing that people should be afraid of themselves, and afraid of each other.


2) the idea that people should wait until government gets bad enough that things are desperate, then shoot them in an armed insurrection.

Dumb. Given that you have freedom of press, freedom of assembly, and an election every two years for everything from congress to dog-catcher, use it to select people who will not tyrannise the country. The personal weapon is the least effective guarantor of an open society when compared to the editorial column, the peaceful protest, the twitter pic from the citizen's POV, and the ballot box. You have them. Fucking use them.

But some asshole sitting in a bunker in the middle of Montana doing nothing for his country but waiting for the day he can go and shoot his way to freedom, fuck him.

The moment there are career bureaucrats, the proposition that government is the same as the people is suspect.

Media can be controlled.

Voters can only select candidates the money men have already approved.

[Kulindahr]

So much this! So many people talk about government as if it's this alien organism that is parasitically attached to us and is only waiting for a chance to drain us of life. When in fact it's a group of people stemming from the population, having the same mindset and same goals as you. And yes, power corrupts. Which is why nobody is allowed to stay in government indefinitely.

People tend to say that because the government spends a great deal of time draining us of life and wasting money.

Here's an example, prompted by something I ran into today:

A storm causes a small mud slide to come down and partly block a road. As things stand, it's illegal for citizens to volunteer their own time, resources, and effort to clean it up -- they are subject to arrest for doing so. Instead, the road remains blocked until whenever the bureaucrats schedule a cleanup, and that cleanup costs eight thousand dollars. The citizens would happily have done it at no cost to anyone else, but the law says they have to sit on their asses and do nothing.

With situations like this -- and they happen with regularity -- it's inevitable that citizens will regard the government as some bizarre, alien entity that treats them as incompetent little children, but more often doesn't care about them at all.


The real government is the bureaucrats, who have no term limits and aren't elected, and do stay in office indefinitely, working steadily to make government bigger and less effective. "Work expands to fill the time available for its completion, and that a sufficiently large bureaucracy will generate enough internal work to keep itself 'busy' and so justify its continued existence without commensurate output." And while doing so, will aid every member to rise to his or her level of incompetency.

- - - Updated - - -

Silly rabbit, if you have no impending fascism, you have no reason to buy a Chinese assault rifle.

Then you have to admit your penis is only 2" long.

If you wait that long, you won't be allowed to buy any rifle.

Which is why so many Americans see the Democratic party as fascist.

[Kulindahr]

The only difference between the collection efforts before the Patriot Act and after is more law enforcement agencies are being told about the results so they had to seek congressional cover to share that illegally gained info...

Hardly. A lot of authority was handed out to law enforcement agencies to arrest people on mere declaration of suspicion of possible association with terrorists activities. In essence, that means they can arrest anyone they decide to.

- - - Updated - - -

Only within the greater context of "someone can walk outside the city limit and get a gun."

Seriously, it doesn't pass any kind of objective logical snuff to look at piecemeal restrictions in highly localized areas and leap to the conclusion you wish to draw.

If this logic held we should have the lowest crime rate in the first world.

No logical connection here.

[TX-Beau]

...If you wait that long, you won't be allowed to buy any rifle.

Which is why so many Americans see the Democratic party as fascist.

Oh give me a fucking break. Find me ONE instance where the Democratic party ACTUALLY TRIED to take everyone's guns away.

YOU CAN'T so you're going to try to quibble, regulations are not bans and never have been, and I've never seen either party try to ban all guns everywhere, and neither have you.

[xbuzzerx]

Hardly. A lot of authority was handed out to law enforcement agencies to arrest people on mere declaration of suspicion of possible association with terrorists activities. In essence, that means they can arrest anyone they decide to.

- - - Updated - - -



No logical connection here.

So Kul... do pollution laws not work because China is really polluted?

Yes, your point that these shimsham transient experimental gun restrictions in a limited area within a greater continental U.S. where people are not feudally locked to the village they're born in and can drive out of town to get anything not sold in town proves anything is ridiculous. Trying to present these as your QED that gun restrictions have no effect on crime is bunk, it's pseudoscience.

As I've said before, to accept your premise we have to explain two very major things. Why the U.S. doesn't have a FANTASTICALLY LOW crime rate, and why countries with strict gun control make our murder rate look absolutely astronomical by comparison.

Your only answer to that is waving your hand and saying "oh, culture did it."

[bankside]

People tend to say that because the government spends a great deal of time draining us of life and wasting money.

Here's an example, prompted by something I ran into today:

A storm causes a small mud slide to come down and partly block a road. As things stand, it's illegal for citizens to volunteer their own time, resources, and effort to clean it up -- they are subject to arrest for doing so. Instead, the road remains blocked until whenever the bureaucrats schedule a cleanup, and that cleanup costs eight thousand dollars. The citizens would happily have done it at no cost to anyone else, but the law says they have to sit on their asses and do nothing.

I see. So the solution is for citizens to arm themselves to face down the tyranny of government-imposed mud slide delays….







(Or maybe vote for more efficient road clearing….)
(Or maybe vote for new laws of liability so the municipal government doesn't feel obliged to prohibit voluntary road clearing because just before they banned it, someone got hurt clearing the mud and it turned into a lawsuit that cost the taxpayers 12 million dollars)

[TX-Beau]

I loved that tag you used to have that went something like

".. the bill of rights a PIECE OF PAPER protecting gun ownership for over 200 years..."

Which pretty much underscores that our liberties will not be threatened unless we elect people who will try to take them away - and even then, enough people will still agree to that theft that they got elected in the first place.

Can you say PATRIOT ACT!!!!!!!!!

Another quote I like is the one that goes:

"...Democracy is the form of government that ensures people get exactly the government they deserve..."

[TX-Beau]

I agree that all this Gov bad, me good rhetoric is nothing more than abdication of our civic responsibilities.

[bankside]

I loved that tag you used to have that went something like

".. the bill of rights a PIECE OF PAPER protecting gun ownership for over 200 years..."

Which pretty much underscores that our liberties will not be threatened unless we elect people who will try to take them away - and even then, enough people will still agree to that theft that they got elected in the first place.

Can you say PATRIOT ACT!!!!!!!!!

Another quote I like is the one that goes:

"...Democracy is the form of government that ensures people get exactly the government they deserve..."

Hah! I had forgotten that. Well, I think it's true.

[JayHawk]

Hardly. A lot of authority was handed out to law enforcement agencies to arrest people on mere declaration of suspicion of possible association with terrorists activities. In essence, that means they can arrest anyone they decide to.

- - - Updated - - -



No logical connection here.

If you read my post it says COLLECTION efforts. You are correct the patriot act made the attainment of a warrant essentially an in-house evolution or unnecessary. However the collection was occurring previously then the agencies found other ways to hunt down these folks. 9/11 for instance was a case where we had the intel but we didnt share it with appropriate authority so then it occurred. The patriot act made it so the agencies who were already collecting information could then share it with law enforcement and NOT be violating the law as they were collecting it previously.