Quantcast

Is America turning into a Police State? It certainly seems that way in my New York City

dublin9 2011/09/09 16:40:56

Do you feel comfortable having government authorizing police to walk around with Machine guns? At the same time, do you feel comfortable with disarming peaceful citizens?

New York City
is frequently viewed as a test bed for liberal government policies. But I fear that the very real threat of Islamist terrorism is being used as an excuse for stripping Americans of their individual liberty.

For example, we have as many armed and uniformed police in NYC as we have troops in all of
Iraq. Over 1,000 of them are authorized to carry machine guns which they do from time to time.

Machine guns in
New York City? Can you imagine the civilian carnage when machine guns are fired on crowded streets? And no passerby’s can't say anything about being shot because it falls within “police guidelines.”

Whatever happened to marksmanship, where you aim at what you want to shoot? That seems to be out the window in NYPD philosophy. If there are two terrorists in a crowd of 50,000 in
Times Square, doesn’t aiming at a target matter anymore?

I’m a big believer in the 2nd Amendment and have been a firearms owner for decades. In
New York City, you can only carry a pistol if you are a retired police officer, politically connected, or wealthy and carrying large sums of money. The rest of us are severely restricted to even possess a rifle or shotgun and rules can be changed any time by the Chief of Police to the point of total restriction of anything.

The New York Police Department has military armored vehicles, streets are filled with surveillance cameras and you can be stopped and searched at whim. Of course, all of this must be done with political correctness. You can’t for example, do this to a suspicious looking Muslim for fear of violating rules against profiling.

Every American must be viewed as a potential terrorist, which means that if you mindlessly suspect everyone, the true terrorists slip through.

I suspect that Barack Obama and his vastly expanded Homeland Security are watching
New York City. How far can government go in controlling the American people? When will Homeland Security’s Janet Napolitano spring her announced plan for bringing airport nudie scanners and government sanctioned sexual molestation to the street corners of America?

Welcome to the impending American police state, or “
Iran west.” The Obama motto of “Never let a crisis go to waste,” is becoming a reality when it comes to individual liberty and I fear the Presidential election of 2012 or even before, will determine the fate of our constitution and personal freedom.



What do you think?

Read More: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/09/08/exclusive-e...

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Evan 2011/09/17 22:46:15
    Evan
    +1
    I could not agree more. The terrorists have already won, actually.
  • 4570GOVT 2011/09/15 15:39:05
    4570GOVT
    +1
    You said " What do you think? " ? ----------- I think you are absolutely correct !
    Having been to the city several times ( my wife was from Malba , Whitestone Queens ) , I can say that it is a Police State and I have " NEVER " felt more uncomfortable visiting anywhere . I could say " it's a nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there " but I would be lying . I married my wife 10 years ago and being gone from that place has brought a whole new prospective to her life . She can look at this experiment in socialism for what it is ............ scary !
    If NYC is is the Obama " vision " for America ............. God help us all !
  • Andrew 2011/09/12 20:58:11
    Andrew
    +1
    Yes, too much intrusion.
  • STU~PWCM~JLA~POTL~AFCL 2011/09/11 16:23:41
    STU~PWCM~JLA~POTL~AFCL
    +1
    At a national level, erosion of Second Amendment rights may lead to even more government tyranny than we are noe experiencing. At a city level, the bigger issue is crime. Criminals will obtain guns regardless of what the rules are. If they know most citizens are unarmed, robberies and other types of home invasions will go up, and street crime like mugging and rape will increase. Statistics show that crime is lowest where legal gun ownership is highest. Less than 1% of crime involving guns is committed by licensed gun owners. Almost all of it is committed with black market firearms. NYC may turn out to be an exception due to the pervasive police state currently present there, but that is not a desireable environment, and it is very expensive to maintain that level of security. Prevention of both crime and government tyranny is made most effective by law abiding citizens owning firearms.
  • DavE 2011/09/11 15:16:18
    DavE
    +1
    There are 535,000 illegal immigrants in New York City alone. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    NYC Mayor Bloomberg testifies that NYC would collapse without illegal immigrants. http://www.foxnews.com/story/...

    The tail is wagging the dog, America.
    A Nation without enforced national sovereignty standards will soon have no freedoms.

    That's the plan of the One-World Socialist Ideologues.
    enforced national sovereignty standards freedoms plan one-world socialist ideologues obama socialist
  • Simms 2011/09/11 14:51:56
    Simms
    +1
    They are not machine guns. They are rifles. Most are single-shot, semi-automatic. Some have the three round burst selector switch. They can't search anybody on a whim. And they would lose their job and be prosecuted for shooting an innocent passerby. Also, I like how the article kept saying that there were all these tanks. I would be shocked if any of the city police departments had one tank. They have armored personnel carriers to transport SWAT units. Those are to protect police from rifle fire and explosives.

    That being said, I agree with you about how liberal New York. They are very anti-gun, and they make it very difficult for the un-connected to own firearms. Hell, they wouldn't even arm their volunteer police. In 2007, two were gunned down in the middle of the street by a guy that robbed a pizza parlor. They were keeping an eye on him and reporting in over the radio. They were easy tagets becauses they couldn't even defend themselves or the pizza parlor employee that got shot.
  • dublin9 Simms 2011/09/11 15:02:58 (edited)
    dublin9
    I wrote this article and have a few corrections to your reply: (a) I use the term "machine gun" in it's popular terminology. The NYPD has fully automatic 600 RPM arms. They are as much of a "machine gun" as a fully automatic AK47, MAC10 or UZI. It is totally inappropriate for a high density urban area. (b) The police have the right to search "anybody on a whim" based not on probably cause but the broadbased "reasonable suspican" as defined by "feelings." (c) I never used the term "tanks." I said "armored vehicles." (d) As to your claim that "police would lose their job and be prosecuted for shooting an innocent passerby," you are quite incorrect. New York Police Department "guidelines" are quite broad. Unintentionally shooting passerbys with inappropriate weapons for an urban area would be excused.

    Other than that, we are in agreement. I suspect we are on the same side.
  • Simms dublin9 2011/09/12 19:28:56
    Simms
    +1
    1) I was referring to the article (CBS news) that you have linked to, by Marcia Kramer. In that article, she referred to tanks multiple times.

    2) Reasonable suspicion is not a whim and still requires they articulate specific facts that support the reasonable belief that the person stopped has been, is, or is about to engage in criminal behavior. They may search if they can articulate specific facts that would cause a reasonable officer in their shoes to belief that the person was armed and a danger to them or someone else.

    3) A Colt M4 with three round burst is nothing like a fully automatic AK-47. The cyclic rate is actually in the 700-950 rpm range. However, even on three round burst and quickly changing magazine, you would approach nowhere near that. Cyclic rates are hugely misleading and aren't really worth discussing. I cannot say for 100% certainty that NYPD didn't go mad and purchase over 1000 fully automatic M4s, but I find it highly unlikely and I cannot find any proof that they have either. I don't know of any state or local police departments that carry fully automatic weapons. Even our soldiers generally only carry M4 with the 3-round burst select fire, unless they are part of a Special Operations Forces. Also, the cost for training in ammo and time is muc...



    1) I was referring to the article (CBS news) that you have linked to, by Marcia Kramer. In that article, she referred to tanks multiple times.

    2) Reasonable suspicion is not a whim and still requires they articulate specific facts that support the reasonable belief that the person stopped has been, is, or is about to engage in criminal behavior. They may search if they can articulate specific facts that would cause a reasonable officer in their shoes to belief that the person was armed and a danger to them or someone else.

    3) A Colt M4 with three round burst is nothing like a fully automatic AK-47. The cyclic rate is actually in the 700-950 rpm range. However, even on three round burst and quickly changing magazine, you would approach nowhere near that. Cyclic rates are hugely misleading and aren't really worth discussing. I cannot say for 100% certainty that NYPD didn't go mad and purchase over 1000 fully automatic M4s, but I find it highly unlikely and I cannot find any proof that they have either. I don't know of any state or local police departments that carry fully automatic weapons. Even our soldiers generally only carry M4 with the 3-round burst select fire, unless they are part of a Special Operations Forces. Also, the cost for training in ammo and time is much higher for full auto. The training that NYPD is giving their recruits is a one day weapon familiarization course where they expend 10 rounds of live ammo. This further reinforces the belief that they do not have fully automatic weapons. Just about every article or newscast I see about firearms that comes from mainstream media, refers to any semi-automatic pistol or rifle as automatic and/or assault weapons, and usually gives the impression that you can pick up a full auto AK-47 at any gun show. I have even seen one where the reporter fired a fully automatic AK-47 (seized by police) to reinforce the idea. If I am wrong and you have some proof that NYPD is issuing the fully automatic (not 3 round burst) M14A1 to ordinary patrol officers, please post or link to the evidence.

    4) You are incorrect. Unintentionally shooting civilians with automatic weapons would lead to firing, lawsuits, and criminal prosecution. Even justified uses of force against criminals often lead to administrative leave, transfers, criminal prosecution, and civil lawsuits. Police department guidelines may be broad, but I would like you to point to any police that alludes to it being okay to shoot civilians not engaged in violence against the officer or a third party. Besides, policy does not prevent law suits or criminal prosecution. Any prosecuting attorney is going to have a field day suing NYPD for firing automatic weapons into crowds or densely populated areas. They are pretty much going to get aroused by any use of an automatic weapon even if the person is a criminal, unless they are firing back with automatic weapons or heavier weaponry.

    I totally agree with the officers having shotguns or rifles. Even pistols can over penetrate or miss and kill. It happens. It is horrible when it does. I agree that training is an issue, and I would like to see more departments pushing for more range time, weapon familiarization, sim training, etc. I think not enough attention is paid to that. I also don't like the way I see a lot of people carrying the rifles with fingers in the trigger guard or barrels pointed out at the hip. And I agree with you New York being what it is, and the almost disregard for rights that its government seems to have at times.
    (more)
  • dublin9 Simms 2011/09/13 14:54:13
    dublin9
    +1
    I appreciate your explanation of fireamrs, but I know them well. Some 1,000 police are authorized to carry automatic weapons. As to "probable suspician," NYPD definitions are very lax. They can pretty much stop anyone although they prefer those who are less prone to complain. In point of fact, this actually does cut down on crime, but it's rather abused.

    I never claimed that NYPD would be casual about shooting civilians. That's obviously not true. But I'm a believer in marxmanship and presence of mind over the tendency to be careless when you have an automatic weapon. It's very dangerous in an urban environment with people packed close together.
  • Simms 2013/04/30 08:23:27
    +3
    The police may need reasonable suspicion to search a person, but that can be for carrying a backpack or bag which millions of NYers do. If you have been or live in NY you may have had this happen to you or someone you know. There have been tons of complaints by citizens of NY being unreasonably searched during stop and frisks. The police were given quotas of how many stop and frisks they needed to do per month. There has recently been a trial going on where police officers recordings of supervisors forcing quotas or else were played in court. And I have noticed an increase of police forces on the streets of NYC in the past few month, even armed military units. There hasn't been an increase in crime in the city, so I'm left wondering why. It just makes me feel more unsafe rather than protected.
  • dublin9 2013/04/30 13:48:45
    dublin9
    I've lived in New York all my life. In my opinion, New Yorkers are all too quick to surrender their constitutional rights for the perception of safety. But they are not alone. I fear that most Americans have become like this.

    In the aftermath of the Boston Marathon Islamist Terrorist Bombing, police and federal officers in full military style gear with brandished machine guns, stormed out of the type of armored fighting vehicles used in military combat zones.

    The cordon was placed around a Middle Class district of 20 blocks. Setting aside the fact that the Terrorist was captured outside the cordon and discovered by a civilian, thousands of innocent Americans became rounded up captives of government authority. The area was transformed into a Gulog with its citizens deprived of their Constitutional protections.

    At first, thousands of American citizens were ordered to remain in their homes. Given the fact that Massachusetts citizens have been deprived of most means of self defense, they greeted the the demands of the paramilitary force with relief.

    But that was only step one. Shortly afterward, machine gun wielding make believe soldiers went house to house. They banged on doors and sometimes bashed them in if people didn't respond quickly enough. Machine guns were brandishe...

    I've lived in New York all my life. In my opinion, New Yorkers are all too quick to surrender their constitutional rights for the perception of safety. But they are not alone. I fear that most Americans have become like this.

    In the aftermath of the Boston Marathon Islamist Terrorist Bombing, police and federal officers in full military style gear with brandished machine guns, stormed out of the type of armored fighting vehicles used in military combat zones.

    The cordon was placed around a Middle Class district of 20 blocks. Setting aside the fact that the Terrorist was captured outside the cordon and discovered by a civilian, thousands of innocent Americans became rounded up captives of government authority. The area was transformed into a Gulog with its citizens deprived of their Constitutional protections.

    At first, thousands of American citizens were ordered to remain in their homes. Given the fact that Massachusetts citizens have been deprived of most means of self defense, they greeted the the demands of the paramilitary force with relief.

    But that was only step one. Shortly afterward, machine gun wielding make believe soldiers went house to house. They banged on doors and sometimes bashed them in if people didn't respond quickly enough. Machine guns were brandished and sometimes pointed at people as they were ordered to leave their property. At that point, local and federal authorities invaded each home, rummaging through private property and memories at whim.

    Sadly and rather prophetically, the citizens of Watertown didn't seem to mind. They appeared happy to become part of the experiment in Martial Law. The vast majority seemed relieved to surrender everything America stands for, preferring the mindless denigration of transformation into cattle of the slaughter house.
    (more)
  • sara 2011/09/11 14:43:34
    sara
    +1
    After 911 America woke up & realized how vulnerable they were to attack due to their open door policy. Since then we've had 40 attempted attacks. I believe we'll see another attack worse than 911. I don't know what other way homeland security would protect citizens
  • dublin9 sara 2011/09/11 15:06:31
    dublin9
    Minor correction: We have had 124 attempted attacks by Islamists based on Department of Justice figures. In point of fact, I suspect it's much higher. But to make excuses for Islamists, the homegrown Muslim threat and treat everyone as if they were a terrorist in the interest of political correctness is not a way to preserve liberty and keep America safe.
  • NoName sara 2011/09/11 16:45:13
    NoName
    +1
    Perhaps, for one, if our intelligence agencies actually was able to share their data with each other efficiently / competently, then that would go a long, long way.
  • whipnet 2011/09/11 05:03:04
    whipnet
    +1
    We are still at least a decade behind the UK in the big brother department.

    *
  • texasred 2011/09/11 00:34:43
    texasred
    +1
    There is absolutely no place for police carrying machine guns in any of our cities.
  • Hula girl - Friends not Fol... 2011/09/10 20:27:57
    Hula girl - Friends not Followers
    +3
    Hey New York has a Socialist Mayor that is anti God so why would anyone be surprised. The Government only gets away with what the people let them get away with.
  • sara Hula gi... 2011/09/11 14:45:49
    sara
    +1
    kinda like men. Looks like Americans have been in a coma if they allow our country to get so near economic collapse. Lets not offend the muzzies. Let Islam into our country & set up their rules
  • Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO 2011/09/10 15:35:58
    Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO
    +1
    you were good up until you started in on the "its all because of Obama" garbage.

    DO you really think this is confined to JUST Obama?
  • dublin9 Joe Shw... 2011/09/10 16:15:33
    dublin9
    +2
    No I do not. But Obama is President and sets the standard. It's like that with every serving President.
  • Joe Shw... dublin9 2011/09/10 16:22:32
    Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO
    +1
    you know its been going on for decades then, and is not confined to just one political ideology?
  • dublin9 Joe Shw... 2011/09/10 16:34:24
    dublin9
    +1
    The coercive power of government only grows. But as I said, Obama is President and he has accelerated the process.
  • Joe Shw... dublin9 2011/09/10 18:24:37
    Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO
    +1
    and under the previous administration with warrantless wiretaps, and the Patriot Act ... were you also as critical?
  • dublin9 Joe Shw... 2011/09/10 18:38:36 (edited)
    dublin9
    +1
    I was never keen on the newer aspects of the Patriot Act. Most of the rest were restatements of existing legislation. As to warrantless wiretape, they were restricted to calls to foreign countries with terrorist connections. I don't object to that either. On the other hand, Obama has expanded this drastically, but nobody seems to say anything.

    I wasn't keen on creating Homeland Security either. Remember though that both Republicans and Democrats fell over themselves to pass both the Patriot act and Homeland Security. I might also add that it was Robert Kennedy who was the biggest abuser of warrantless wiretaps.
  • Joe Shw... dublin9 2011/09/10 20:12:48
    Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO
    Restatements of existing legislation? The PA was over 2000 pages of NEW written, ready to be passed legislation and only needing a catalyst to push it through.

    And NO ... the illegal wiretaps were not restricted. They were not even required to be signed by a judge .. thus making them illegal, no restriction on who they felt like looking into. The only way you can make that assertion that is all they were doing is because the GOVT said that is all they were doing ... NOT because they have even entered a defense. They have only sought to block any lawsuit and used the "states secrets" as the sole defense.

    And in cleaning up the entire ABUSE ... the telecoms were one of the first to receive immunity. A clear abuse of power and I didnt hear any of RW MSM pounding the table about abuse of power. NONE! Fair & Balanced my A$$
  • dublin9 Joe Shw... 2011/09/10 21:06:54
    dublin9
    +1
    I'm stating facts. Much of the Patriot Act restated existing legislation. That's a fact. I'm not even claiming that I agree with the previous legislation. It was rewritten and placed into the law.

    I'm not even stating that I feel comfortable about wiretaps on calls to foreign countries with terrorist backgrounds, but I can understand it's purpose and have no objections. I object strongly to warrantless wiretaps domestically, although Obama now does this and Robert Kennedy did it extensively.

    If you want to argue these points, you're choosing the wrong person. We are in agreement on many points although not all.
  • Joe Shw... dublin9 2011/09/10 21:46:08
    Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO
    +1
    See this is the one big difference .... I am not comfortable with it AT ALL... because these people (regardless of party) consider anything put under the auspice of "national security" then its all good. Laws dont matter at that point.
    Which means they can declare ANYONE a terrorist for whatever reason ... and whatever nationality.
    Bobby Kennedy did it but he STILL GOT a warrant signed through the FISA courts. He just didnt bypass the checks and balances.
  • dublin9 Joe Shw... 2011/09/10 23:19:29
    dublin9
    +1
    Bobby Kennedy performed many illegal wiretaps, particularly on Martin Luther King. As to the rest of what you wrote, we are not in fundamental disagreement.
  • Joe Shw... dublin9 2011/09/10 23:57:54
    Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO
    you mean to tell me Bobby (Attorney General) couldnt get a court ordered tap? I am going to have to ask for a source, please.
  • dublin9 Joe Shw... 2011/09/11 00:25:11
    dublin9
    +1
    Look it up yourself. It's no secret. Many books have been written that contain this information.
  • dlsofsetx 2011/09/10 15:02:50
    dlsofsetx
    +2
    I don't like all the surveillance cameras either.
  • Bevos 2011/09/10 14:42:06
    Bevos
    +2
    I would move out of NY. All Patriotic Americans should never be treated like that and I would never put up with it. I would leave. And so should they. Then the Muslims could bomb the hell out of it.
  • dublin9 Bevos 2011/09/10 14:47:10
    dublin9
    +1
    Remember that NYC is a testbed for what will spread through the rest of America.
  • Bevos dublin9 2011/09/10 14:58:05
    Bevos
    +2
    That was why I said after the legitimate American Patriots are out of it, then they can bomb it. And if they don't do it fast enough, well, we still have our own Military.
  • dublin9 Bevos 2011/09/10 15:09:12
    dublin9
    +1
    Have a heart. I've lived in NYC all my life and love it, minus the liberal statism. And while it is primarily composed of liberals, some of us 10-15% aren't. This means that some one million of us are sane.
  • Bevos dublin9 2011/09/11 15:05:41
    Bevos
    +1
    I am sorry. That was a bit off the wall. I get carried away sometimes. I think it is the fear of Dictatorship that Obama is after. It makes me want to destroy anyone that threatens to destroy our America!!! And our way of life liberty and pursuit of happiness!!!
  • dublin9 Bevos 2011/09/11 15:23:46
    dublin9
    We are on the same side.
  • Bevos dublin9 2011/09/15 13:51:18
    Bevos
    +1
    Thank you!!!
  • dublin9 2013/04/30 00:09:21
    +4
    A person being liberal has nothing to do with them being sane or not. I'm guessing your comment was made in jest though. I don't put myself into a certain box, but I know some liberals and they are far from crazy. It also depends on your idea of what you mean by liberal..whether in terms of economic, political, ethical, or just generally. I am also a fellow NYer and like living here minus the unwarranted stop and frisks and rude people that often walk the streets.
  • dublin9 2013/04/30 13:50:53
    dublin9
    I joking call myself one of the 12 conservatives in my Park Slope Brooklyn neighborhood. But I must say that it really rubs me the way liberals battle to take away the right to own firearms and therefore, be unable to defend my family. At the same time, they don't seem to mind police and RETIRED police having the right to own high capacity firearms to protect their own families.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/12/20 03:00:46

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals