Big Brother - Page 2

Big Brother

This is a discussion on Big Brother within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Totally crazy....

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 100

Thread: Big Brother

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array Supertac45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Michigan's U.P.
    Posts
    3,657
    Totally crazy.
    Les Baer 45
    Sig Man
    N.R.A. Patron Life Member
    M.C.R.G.O.


  2. #17
    Senior Member Array bobcat35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    664
    problem with "radio proof" wallets. they're just foldable faydan jars(please correct spelling) and if my memory of highschool physics class is right an out of band carrier wave would easily defeat such measures although it would have to be directional IIRC.
    "Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result."
    -Winston Churchill
    Every well-bred petty crook knows: the small concealable weapons always go to the far left of the place setting.
    -Inara, firefly

  3. #18
    Senior Member Array dunndw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    1,123
    Wonder what would happen if you put the "RealID" chipped item in the microwave...or hit is with a electromagnet
    "If I was an extremist, our founding fathers would all be extremists," he said. "Without them, we wouldn't have our independence. We'd be a disarmed British system of feudal subjectivity."

  4. #19
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    This is one of the repeating topics here. Everytime it appears I ask the question as to exactly what rights are violated and why people are frightened of being identified. So far, the answers have not satisfactorily addressed the issues, only emotional arguments revolving around the mythical right to privacy.

    Personally, I welcome any technology that alleviates my carrying a wallet full of credit cards, debit cards, licenses, permits, membership cards, insurance cards, discount cards and access cards. Not to mention a passport that [until the new passports arrive, which by the way, were attacked by some here] doesn't even fit in my wallet! If I can get a single card, microchip or other technological advancement that solves these problems I will be first in line. I am certainly not afraid of the government. And no one has provided any evidence as to why I should be fearful of government.

    Anything that makes my life easier and helps others do their jobs is a good thing. Placing obstacles in the way of law enforcement or Federal authorities only makes their tasks more arduous, more frustrating and more expsensive for the taxpayers.

  5. #20
    VIP Member Array HKinNY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nassau, NY(Long Island)
    Posts
    2,855
    Quote Originally Posted by goldshellback View Post
    I'll just mold a part of my aluminum hat and secure my new "real ID" in it.

    Jus tmake sure that the shinny side is facing outwards or else the hat will not block the mind altering beam.

  6. #21
    Distinguished Member Array Pro2A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,933

  7. #22
    Distinguished Member Array Pro2A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,933
    Quote Originally Posted by Ram Rod View Post
    What's going to happen to you when you get pulled over and law enforcement is unable to identify you? That's just the way things are headed. Bad.

    Restoration of liberty, privacy and total bliss

  8. #23
    Senior Member Array rdoggsilva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    591
    There is one thing that will make a RFID work better, It is called a hammer.
    John Steinbeck: Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he's too old to fight, he'll just kill you.

  9. #24
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,876
    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    Everytime it appears I ask the question as to exactly what rights are violated and why people are frightened of being identified. So far, the answers have not satisfactorily addressed the issues, only emotional arguments revolving around the mythical right to privacy.
    As a U.S. citizen, there is an explicit, protected right to be secure in one's person, home, papers and effects. The purpose is to be safe from a prying, heavy-handed government.

    I'm no constitutional attorney or historian, but the reality is that the U.S. Constitution was written in fairly plain language for the average educated adult of the time. It wasn't written in legalese, to be interpretable only by a learned court or counsel.

    As such, the general spirit and meaning of the first Amendments can be read and understood by everyone, with little Clintonesque mincing of words about the limitations intended to be placed on the governing few over the citizens.

    It is my opinion that the 4A of the Constitution is expressly about the citzens' right to privacy, pure and simple. The whole purpose of the 4A is to keep the government's prying eyes and hands off the citizens, except in cases justifiable by sworn warrant "particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." It is, obviously, intended to disallow casual, general searches of citizens. The 4A is about keeping the government's hands off, except where expressly warranted, literally.

    But that's what we've got with roadblocks, checkpoints, metal/substance detectors, the demand for "papers" (please!) nearly everywhere you go, taps of one's internet, telephone or email use. The list goes on. In short, the spirit and (IMO) the plain language of the 4A is violated in each and every one of these cases. Each of these is absolutely a search and no such general requirement to be lightly searched in these unwarranted ways is supportable, given the 4A.

    And yet, here we are, with the same legal waffling and mincing of words as is being applied to the 2A in the DC v Heller case. In Heller, it's with respect to the clear meaning of "shall not be infringed" being interpreted as all imaginable limitations being legal and acceptable so long as the court sides with the government about reasonableness. The practical result is that the 2A right shall not be infringed except where the government says it shall. That is NOT how the framers intended it. That's how a right is turned into an abuse. The abuse is evident across more than a dozen of the Amendments. It's no accident. It's a simple exercise in power and a stark reminder about who has it.

    Call it creeping incrementalism or whatever you prefer but, over time, it's how a governing body with an "interest" in doing so turns a Constitution of guiding principles and limitations into something more useful as a roll of paper better suited to mopping up the mess.

    What's going to happen to you when you get pulled over and law enforcement is unable to identify you?
    Given the modern intertwining of taxation and governmental documentation into nearly every transaction we do (from prescription medicines to contracting with the gas/electric company for service), everyone is sadly requiured to identify themselves in order to get anything done. The reality, if one cannot be identified by the governing powers whenever it asks? You're well and truly screwed, so long as you have no identity. (Shadow jails, abduction and lack of access to Habeus Corpus come to mind.) But it has now become so much more than that. As RamRod notes, much of the world's economy revolves around identity. The wording of the U.S. guiding principles (via the Constitution) was hardly able to constrain those ill effects.

    Ah, well. It all was simply words and paper, anyway, right? No biggie.

    As paraphrased from the film The Majestic and, IMO, the way the Constitution was originally intended:
    Even though the Constitution and the Bill of Rights ... are just pieces of paper with signatures on them ... they're the only contracts that we have that are defintely not subject ... to renegotiation.
    - Peter Appleton (character), berating Congress about its malfeasance.
    Last edited by ccw9mm; April 5th, 2008 at 10:48 AM. Reason: spelling
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  10. #25
    Senior Member Array Fast Cloud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Gulfstream
    Posts
    603
    Agreed...there's nothing "mythical" about my right to privacy. Whether I actually get to enjoy it or not is another matter.
    "Any rationally thinking person is armed" ---Hinds Co. constable John Lewis

    NRA member

  11. #26
    Ex Member Array DOGOFWAR01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    WYOMING
    Posts
    562
    These various government outfits need to be jerked hard and reined by Congress.

    Congress a long time ago, gave up some of their Congressional Powers to these various government outfits. Congress needs to take this powers back and completely away from many various government outfits. If it is not a law passed by Congress then these so called government outfit regulations should not mean squat and any level bureaucrat that tries to use these regulations should immediately go to jail for many years.

    Congress is to listen to the People not government outfits on about what laws and regulations there should or should not be.

    Again, this chip squat, worthless and will cost billions of dollars - send these government hired hands of the taxpayers to the Border at Border Patrol Agents.

    The U.S. Border Patrol is definitely one federal level Peace Officer organization that needs to be expanded many fold in people, equipment, etc. then left alone to do their job as mandated by Congress and no one else.

  12. #27
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    As a U.S. citizen, there is an explicit, protected right to be secure in one's person, home, papers and effects. The purpose is to be safe from a prying, heavy-handed government.
    I have to disagree. The purpose of the specific words of the Fourth was to protect US citizens from the Federal Government breaking into homes without warrant as was common in England. It was certainly not crafted to allow a person to not identify themselves.


    I'm no constitutional attorney or historian, but the reality is that the U.S. Constitution was written in fairly plain language for the average educated adult of the time. It wasn't written in legalese, to be interpretable only by a learned court or counsel.

    As such, the general spirit and meaning of the first Amendments can be read and understood by everyone, with little Clintonesque mincing of words about the limitations intended to be placed on the governing few over the citizens.
    I have to agree with all of the above if you limit the Constitution, as it was intended, to put limits on the Federal government. I find it a bit disingenuous for people (five men in robes) to invent enamations of penumbras to opine that there is a right to privacy when in the plain language of the Constitution none exists.

    It is my opinion that the 4A of the Constitution is expressly about the citzens' right to privacy, pure and simple. The whole purpose of the 4A is to keep the government's prying eyes and hands off the citizens, except in cases justifiable by sworn warrant "particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." It is, obviously, intended to disallow casual, general searches of citizens. The 4A is about keeping the government's hands off, except where expressly warranted, literally.
    There is a significant difference between privacy and the Federal government performing a search.

    But that's what we've got with roadblocks, checkpoints, metal/substance detectors, the demand for "papers" (please!) nearly everywhere you go, taps of one's internet, telephone or email use. The list goes on. In short, the spirit and (IMO) the plain language of the 4A is violated in each and every one of these cases. Each of these is absolutely a search and no such general requirement to be lightly searched in these unwarranted ways is supportable, given the 4A.
    Again, I disagree. At this point I will not argue the Constitutional protection, since that is limited to the Federal government, but the rights of every man as enumerated by the Founders. Out of your list, the nly search is the DUI checkpoints, where, without cause, your person is searched. Asking to be identified is not a search. Metal detectors are never mandatory thus that is not a search and electronic communications that is not in your possession is certainly not a search.

    And yet, here we are, with the same legal waffling and mincing of words as is being applied to the 2A in the DC v Heller case. In Heller, it's with respect to the clear meaning of "shall not be infringed" being interpreted as all imaginable limitations being legal and acceptable so long as the court sides with the government about reasonableness. The practical result is that the 2A right shall not be infringed except where the government says it shall. That is NOT how the framers intended it.
    Heller is limited to the District. It has no bearing on the states. Any arms infringement in DC is unconstitutional. States can do what the people decide. While the rights of man are clear and inalienable, unless there is a prohibition in the state law or state constitution, banning guns or any other restriction is the decision left to the states.

    That's how a right is turned into an abuse. The abuse is evident across more than a dozen of the Amendments. It's no accident. It's a simple exercise in power and a stark reminder about who has it.
    The people have the power, no? We elect our Representatives, our Senators, our President. We elect governors, state legislators and in some cases, judges. We are the government.

    Call it creeping incrementalism or whatever you prefer but, over time, it's how a governing body with an "interest" in doing so turns a Constitution of guiding principles and limitations into something more useful as a roll of paper better suited to mopping up the mess.
    Nothing incremental about it. Each law passed is studied, considered, and voted upon. I absolutely agree that the Constitution is a brilliant document and many of the same people invoved with the US Constitution also wrote their state constitutions. They are principles, which for the most part, remain intact and unviolated. Certainly there is nothing in RealID, passports and the like that in any way is a breach of the prinicples embodied in the Fourth Amendment.

    [QUOTE]Given the modern intertwining of taxation and governmental documentation into nearly every transaction we do (from prescription medicines to contracting with the gas/electric company for service), everyone is sadly requiured to identify themselves in order to get anything done. The reality, if one cannot be identified by the governing powers whenever it asks? You're well and truly screwed, so long as you have no identity. (Shadow jails, abduction and lack of access to Habeus Corpus come to mind.) But it has now become so much more than that. As RamRod notes, much of the world's economy revolves around identity. The wording of the U.S. guiding principles (via the Constitution) was hardly able to constrain those ill effects./QUOTE]

    Why do you think it is an ill effect to identify yourself? This has me puzzled more than any other concept. Most people are proud of their name, their standing, their accomplishments, their history. It is necessary for any society to be able to identify its members, especially so when we are all connected electronically and remotely.

    The only possible reason for wanting to withhold your identity from authorities (just doing their jobs) is because you have something to hide.

    Ah, well. It all was simply words and paper, anyway, right? No biggie.

    As paraphrased from the film The Majestic and, IMO, the way the Constitution was originally intended:
    Even though the Constitution and the Bill of Rights ... are just pieces of paper with signatures on them ... they're the only contracts that we have that are defintely not subject ... to renegotiation.
    - Peter Appleton (character), berating Congress about its malfeasance.
    Our nation is great because of the Constitution and the principles understood by the Founders. In my opinion, the Bill of Rights has no place in the Constitution. The rights of man are as obvious now as they were then. Paraphrasing John Adams, the Constitution will only succeed for a moral people. When the people adbdicate their responsibility to a government then they get what they deserve.

    The anti-Federalists, as many are on this forum, afraid of governmental overreach. But by specifically enumerating some rights that are prohibited from infringement by the Federal government that actually opens the door for infringment.

    But a right to privacy? That doesn't even have the slightest bit of credibility. There is no right to be anonymous anywhere in the Constitution, English law, or from any other society.

  13. #28
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by DOGOFWAR01 View Post
    Congress is to listen to the People not government outfits on about what laws and regulations there should or should not be.
    No, the Congress is elected by the people to use their own judgement. Congress was never supposed to be swayed by public opinion but rather to act as they see fit under the oath they swore.

    Again, this chip squat, worthless and will cost billions of dollars - send these government hired hands of the taxpayers to the Border at Border Patrol Agents.
    Actually, the RealID is not worthless and solves a specific problem that would have prevented 9/11 if it was in force at that time.

    The U.S. Border Patrol is definitely one federal level Peace Officer organization that needs to be expanded many fold in people, equipment, etc. then left alone to do their job as mandated by Congress and no one else.
    Yes, the Border Patrol shoud be supported to a much greater extent than they are currently.

    Build The Fence.

  14. #29
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    15,055
    Self Defense..
    I've got a better idea.

    Lets just cut though the preliminary BS and just get a chip implanted in the forehead or the right hand.

    That way, law enforcement wont be impeded, you wont have to carry anything in your wallet because you wont need one, the privacy that you could care less about will be forever gone,everything will be nice and convienient, the world will be one big happy family and we can all sing Kumbaya while living happily ever after.
    Last edited by HotGuns; April 5th, 2008 at 07:55 PM.
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  15. #30
    Senior Member Array MR D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    South Central PA
    Posts
    864
    Self Defense

    I agree the "Right to Anonymouty" does not exist... But it has been well argued by scholars and other that there are rights "not enumerated" in the constitution (or its amendments) which are still rights...

    you said "Metal detectors are never mandatory thus that is not a search and electronic communications that is not in your possession is certainly not a search." I could not disagree more, try to see your judges, legislators or ride as a fare paying passenger without passing through them...

    last I checked we still had the right to be secure in our persons and papers - so answer me this: in our modern (and increasingly paperless) society - what are our papers? Should government agents be required to get a warrant before they search through the contents of your laptop? (This is commonly done to international travelers as they enter/re-enter the US...

    just a thought

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. ... My Brother's Keeper
    By Lewis128 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: October 13th, 2009, 12:43 PM
  2. Gun complaint from brother-in-law
    By dldeuce in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 155
    Last Post: July 19th, 2009, 03:55 PM
  3. Big Brother for G26 Thanks to the Forum
    By SaddleSC in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: May 23rd, 2009, 01:40 PM
  4. Big Brother
    By dukalmighty in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: September 4th, 2008, 10:48 AM
  5. My brother wants a gun
    By Euclidean in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: August 16th, 2005, 08:33 PM

Search tags for this page

dhs form i-872 and inac 2010

,

how did 9/11 affect big brother government security

,

tennessee ddfivers licenmse 46389

,

the patriot microchip is intended to be implanted in terrorists

Click on a term to search for related topics.