91–100 of 115 posts
European governments see their future survival absolutely requiring a draconian level of surveillance and repression.
This isn't about European governments particularly. Cops everywhere are like this, it's a personality type. Of course they want to use tools that will make their job easier, so would you if you were a cop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The case in NY was police setup a sting on the subway to catch a serial stabber. Instead of stopping him they stood by and watched him attack several innocent bystanders. They were sued for incompetence. For the failed sting. The two police officers who stood and watched him get attacked were ruled to be immune because they had no duty to protect him. Point being, if police see you getting attacked, they have no duty…
If you see two police on the corner and think... Not to speak highly of the NYPD - but it is the character of most violent criminals to refrain from attacking you when police officers are standing close at hand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand this take. There is no real way in which a private person can make law enforcement "more expensive". The government can always find means as long as it is supported by a sufficiently big fraction of its people.
1 person using encryption vs 1 million people using encryption.
Once that's the case, otherwise legal activities (e.g. protesting, or making political statements) run the risk of making you a target. Law enforcement can then punish you for your legal activity by selectively enforcing this other law.
The resulting situation is one where everyone knows to some extent "you better shut up if you know what's good for you", and puts a chilling effect on otherwise legal forms of civic engagement.
You might point out that there are already laws on the books that let them do this, but I'm sure they wouldn't mind another.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They've been pushing for this stuff for ever, at least 20 years ago.
Intelligence agencies have seen the writing on the wall with allowing hostile countries unfettered access to their own citizens minds on social media for a while, I would imagine
European governments see their future survival absolutely requiring a draconian level of surveillance and repression.
This isn't about European governments particularly. Cops everywhere are like this, it's a personality type. Of course they want to use tools that will make their job easier, so would you if you were a cop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let me guess, dispatcher was NOT publicly prosecuted and jailed for life as accessory to murder?
Being bad at your job isn't the same as being an accessory. But then again, doctors can be arrested for being bad at their job. As well as lawyers losing their license to practice. Maybe that's a standard we should hold to our supposed "public servants".
Whenever these people ask for more power in order to "stop/prevent crime", there should be a bot that replies a list of times when the police didn't act to stop crime, despite having full knowledge of the crime occuring and potential to stop it from happening. EU member and supporter of Chat Control, Romania, had a massive scandal where a kidnapped 15 year old girl called emergency services multiple times to report s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even better, in the US, the police have zero obligation to actually protect anybody from crime (unless that person is in government custody). The courts have upheld this time and again.
> the police have zero obligation to actually protect anybody from crime This gets misrepresented on the Internet all the time. What this really means is that you can't sue the city for incompetent policemen, which is the case in basically every country. That only punishes the taxpayers after all. What is different about other countries is that they are much better at firing incompetent police.
The can (and do) stand around with theirs thumbs a up their asses while bad shit happens.
https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-po...
See also uvalde schoool shooting where they did jack shit while kids were executed en mass.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately the courts have repeated ruled that "aware of the Constitutional violation" means knowing that the exact action being observed had previously been ruled a violation of Constitutional rights. It's essentially impossible to prove, which is one of the reasons we don't see that offense prosecuted.
In the Chauvin case all three of the bystanders were sent to prison by federal courts specifically for civil rights violations stemming from their failure to intervene as Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in front of them.
If a cop violates your rights, you just have to pray the DA will prosecute criminal charges. But you still won’t get an monetary damages from the cop. You might talk the state into settling.