Author Topic: Police State - Official Thread  (Read 1212367 times)

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 42964
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5575 on: September 16, 2025, 11:51:54 AM »
Stephen Miller : “The power of law enforcement, under President Trump’s leadership, will be used to find you, will be used to take away your money, take away your power, and, if you’ve broken the law, to take away your freedom.”
https://x.com/atrupar/status/1966679244454408279



Stephen Miller is not a nice or smart person, IMO. Rather than being intimidating, his comments are annoying. And, they are not helpful to Trump.

B_B_C

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2909
  • change is the lot of all
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5576 on: September 18, 2025, 01:37:31 PM »
c

B_B_C

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2909
  • change is the lot of all
Re:deep Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5577 on: October 09, 2025, 06:58:27 AM »
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/09/anti-fascism-mark-bray-rutgers-university
US anti-fascism expert blocked from flying to Spain at airport
c

Skeletor

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17437
  • Silence you furry fool!
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5578 on: October 31, 2025, 09:28:21 PM »
As it has been mentioned several times in this topic: criminal gangs


2 Mississippi sheriffs and 12 officers charged in drug trafficking bribery scheme



Federal authorities on Thursday announced indictments against 20 people, including 14 current or former Mississippi Delta law enforcement officers, that allege the officers took bribes to provide safe passage to people they believed were drug traffickers.

Two Mississippi sheriffs, Washington County Sheriff Milton Gaston and Humphreys County Sheriff Bruce Williams, were among those arrested. Some bribes were as large as $20,000 and $37,000, authorities said at a news conference.

The indictments say law enforcement officers provided armed escort services on multiple occasions to an FBI agent posing as a member of a Mexican drug cartel. The indictments allege the officers understood they were helping to transport 55 pounds of cocaine through Mississippi Delta counties and into Memphis. Some of the officers also provided escort services to protect the transportation of drug proceeds.

Gaston and Williams are alleged to have received bribes in exchange for giving the operations their “blessing,” one indictment said. It also alleged that Gaston attempted to disguise the payments as campaign contributions, but did not report them as required by law.

https://nypost.com/2025/10/31/us-news/2-mississippi-sheriffs-and-12-officers-charged-in-drug-trafficking-bribery-scheme/

AbrahamG

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 20100
  • Affeman Is Numero Uno
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5579 on: November 01, 2025, 12:18:28 AM »
Most likely they dindu nuffin.

chaos

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 60556
  • Ron "There is no freedom of speech here" Avidan
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5580 on: November 01, 2025, 08:29:39 AM »
Sorry, there was no need to google this, therefore no link was provided. It is simply a fact. If you believe otherwise, disprove me.
Maybe you should have googled

Quote
Direct Answer: Does the National Guard Have Arrest Powers?

The National Guard does have the authority to make arrests, but the scope of their arrest powers is limited. In most cases, the National Guard can only make arrests when they are operating under the authority of the Governor or the President. When activated by the Governor, the National Guard is subject to the laws and regulations of the state, and their arrest powers are generally similar to those of state and local law enforcement agencies.
Liar!!!!Filt!!!!


Skeletor

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17437
  • Silence you furry fool!
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5582 on: November 01, 2025, 04:11:23 PM »
Police cameras track billions of license plates per month. Communities are pushing back.

Sandy Boyce, a 72-year-old retiree in Sedona, Arizona, first saw the cameras around town this summer. They were black and sleek, mounted on tall poles under large solar panels and positioned at intersections to snap images of cars as they drove by. Boyce had read that Sedona had quietly signed a new contract with Flock Safety, the country’s largest provider of automatic license plate readers (ALPRs), which had installed 4 cameras to build a database of every car that drove by. 8 more were planned for later in the year.

She was furious to learn that she was being tracked by a system paid for with her tax dollars and without her consent. So Boyce took action, rallying her community to push for change.

She is one of a growing number of Americans who have gotten involved in local politics to dispute the use of Flock equipment in their towns. NBC News spoke to activists and local politicians pushing back in seven states — Arizona, Colorado, New York, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia — who have worked to end their cities’ and towns’ contracts with Flock and get the cameras removed.

Their politics fall across the spectrum, from conservative constitutionalists to progressives aghast at the idea of their communities’ potentially sharing location data with the Trump administration as Flock did this year, united by growing worries about their privacy.

The scale of Flock’s network and the amount of data its users have access to are unique.

Flock contracts with more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies across the United States, its CEO has said, and scans over 20 billion license plates per month, according to Flock's website. More than 75% of those offices opt in to provide information to Flock’s live national database, which allows law enforcement agencies from across the country to view drivers’ license plate numbers, locations and directions and the times of recording without warrants, Flock told the office of Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.

Flock’s databases are augmented by information provided by nongovernment businesses and people who use certain products.

Flock contracts with more than 500 businesses and brands and more than 3,000 private organizations, like homeowners’ associations, which have the option to automatically share the data they collect with their local police, a spokesperson said. In October, Amazon’s Ring signed a contract with Flock that will allow police to request Ring doorbell camera video from people’s doorsteps, the company said. Previously, Ring allowed police to request video from Ring customers through its Neighbors app, but that feature was discontinued last year outside of emergencies.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/flock-police-cameras-scan-billions-month-sparking-protests-rcna230037

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 42964
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5583 on: November 03, 2025, 01:17:41 PM »
Police cameras track billions of license plates per month. Communities are pushing back.

Sandy Boyce, a 72-year-old retiree in Sedona, Arizona, first saw the cameras around town this summer. They were black and sleek, mounted on tall poles under large solar panels and positioned at intersections to snap images of cars as they drove by. Boyce had read that Sedona had quietly signed a new contract with Flock Safety, the country’s largest provider of automatic license plate readers (ALPRs), which had installed 4 cameras to build a database of every car that drove by. 8 more were planned for later in the year.

She was furious to learn that she was being tracked by a system paid for with her tax dollars and without her consent. So Boyce took action, rallying her community to push for change.

She is one of a growing number of Americans who have gotten involved in local politics to dispute the use of Flock equipment in their towns. NBC News spoke to activists and local politicians pushing back in seven states — Arizona, Colorado, New York, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia — who have worked to end their cities’ and towns’ contracts with Flock and get the cameras removed.

Their politics fall across the spectrum, from conservative constitutionalists to progressives aghast at the idea of their communities’ potentially sharing location data with the Trump administration as Flock did this year, united by growing worries about their privacy.

The scale of Flock’s network and the amount of data its users have access to are unique.

Flock contracts with more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies across the United States, its CEO has said, and scans over 20 billion license plates per month, according to Flock's website. More than 75% of those offices opt in to provide information to Flock’s live national database, which allows law enforcement agencies from across the country to view drivers’ license plate numbers, locations and directions and the times of recording without warrants, Flock told the office of Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.

Flock’s databases are augmented by information provided by nongovernment businesses and people who use certain products.

Flock contracts with more than 500 businesses and brands and more than 3,000 private organizations, like homeowners’ associations, which have the option to automatically share the data they collect with their local police, a spokesperson said. In October, Amazon’s Ring signed a contract with Flock that will allow police to request Ring doorbell camera video from people’s doorsteps, the company said. Previously, Ring allowed police to request video from Ring customers through its Neighbors app, but that feature was discontinued last year outside of emergencies.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/flock-police-cameras-scan-billions-month-sparking-protests-rcna230037

FYI Sedona, CA AZ does not currently have automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) because the City Council voted to remove them in October 2025.  :)

illuminati

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 25629
  • The Strongest Shall Survive.- - Lest we Forget.
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5584 on: November 03, 2025, 01:29:20 PM »
FYI Sedona, CA does not currently have automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) because the City Council voted to remove them in October 2025.  :)


They should never have been installed in the 1st place - spying Khvnts.

chaos

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 60556
  • Ron "There is no freedom of speech here" Avidan
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5585 on: November 03, 2025, 03:32:01 PM »
FYI Sedona, CA does not currently have automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) because the City Council voted to remove them in October 2025.  :)
What about Sedona, AZ ???
Liar!!!!Filt!!!!

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 42964
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5586 on: November 03, 2025, 03:46:57 PM »

They should never have been installed in the 1st place - spying Khvnts.

Which explains why these 11 cameras were up for less than four months.

Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington have had stop light and speeding cameras for quite awhile. So does Great Britain have stop light and speeding cameras. These were first installed in 1991, ten years before those in Beaverton OR, which were first installed starting in 2001. Portland has had speeding cameras since 2116.

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 42964
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5587 on: November 03, 2025, 03:50:58 PM »
What about Sedona, AZ ???

Right. Well, I meant AZ not CA. Not sure why I wrote CA. -Must have been another senior moment. At 81 years of age I am allowed senior moments. ;)

chaos

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 60556
  • Ron "There is no freedom of speech here" Avidan
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5588 on: November 03, 2025, 04:30:49 PM »
Right. Well, I meant AZ not CA. Not sure why I wrote CA. -Must have been another senior moment. At 81 years of age I am allowed senior moments. ;)
Having a lot of those lately huh?
Liar!!!!Filt!!!!

Skeletor

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17437
  • Silence you furry fool!
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5589 on: November 03, 2025, 05:31:08 PM »
Sedona, CA is the only place with a direct flight to Dubai, India.

Skeletor

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17437
  • Silence you furry fool!
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5590 on: November 03, 2025, 05:32:51 PM »
Bondi DOJ Backs Warrantless Invasion Of Gun Owners' Homes

The Department of Justice under Attorney General Pam Bondi is advancing an argument that threatens to hollow out the Fourth Amendment's core protection: that Americans may be secure in their homes against warrantless searches.

The lawsuit is Case v. Montana. After a difficult breakup, William Trevor Case was at home alone when police arrived for a so-called "welfare check." They spent nearly an hour outside his house. Officers walked around the property, shined flashlights through windows, and even discussed calling his relatives or reaching him directly. They never did. Instead, they retrieved rifles and a ballistic shield, broke down his door without a warrant, and shot him.

The Montana Supreme Court upheld the police's warrantless entry. Apparently, the government's "reasonable suspicion" that Treavor Case might need "help" was sufficient to justify an armed warrantless intrusion into his home. That standard is alarmingly low. The Fourth Amendment requires probable cause and judicial approval before government agents may enter a home. It does not permit entry based on a hunch.

And it was not as if obtaining a warrant would have been difficult. A recent Harvard Law Review study found that 93 percent of warrants are approved on first submission, often in less than three minutes. With modern technology, police can draft and submit warrant requests directly from their phones. The officers in Montana had nearly an hour to seek judicial approval. They chose not to.

The facts in Montana look nothing like an emergency. Body camera transcripts reveal that officers themselves doubted that Case required immediate aid. One noted that "chances are pretty slim" he needed urgent medical attention. They discussed staging medical personnel outside but decided against it. After forty minutes of hesitation, they declared the situation an "emergency" and broke in anyway.

In any other context, an armed entry without a warrant would be understood as unlawful. The Constitution does not stop at the property line of a gun owner. If a homeowner responds defensively to armed intruders, the law recognizes the basic right of self-defense. What transforms that same scenario into a police action is supposed to be the warrant requirement. Strip that away, and the police have no more right to enter than anyone else.

Pam Bondi's Department of Justice, however, has sided with Montana.

In an amicus brief, DOJ argued that when police are "providing aid" rather than investigating a crime, they should not need probable cause or a warrant. That claim, if accepted, creates a dangerous loophole: police may simply reframe their role to avoid constitutional limits.

The risks are obvious. A neighbor calls for a welfare check. Officers arrive, say they are caretakers, and enter without a warrant. Inside, they confront a homeowner startled by strangers in his house. The encounter escalates, and the mere presence of a firearm becomes justification for force. What began as a welfare check ends as a shooting.

The Framers wrote the Fourth Amendment to prevent precisely this kind of abuse.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/bondi-doj-backs-warrantless-invasion-gun-owners-homes

chaos

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 60556
  • Ron "There is no freedom of speech here" Avidan
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5591 on: November 04, 2025, 07:13:03 PM »
Bondi DOJ Backs Warrantless Invasion Of Gun Owners' Homes

The Department of Justice under Attorney General Pam Bondi is advancing an argument that threatens to hollow out the Fourth Amendment's core protection: that Americans may be secure in their homes against warrantless searches.

The lawsuit is Case v. Montana. After a difficult breakup, William Trevor Case was at home alone when police arrived for a so-called "welfare check." They spent nearly an hour outside his house. Officers walked around the property, shined flashlights through windows, and even discussed calling his relatives or reaching him directly. They never did. Instead, they retrieved rifles and a ballistic shield, broke down his door without a warrant, and shot him.

The Montana Supreme Court upheld the police's warrantless entry. Apparently, the government's "reasonable suspicion" that Treavor Case might need "help" was sufficient to justify an armed warrantless intrusion into his home. That standard is alarmingly low. The Fourth Amendment requires probable cause and judicial approval before government agents may enter a home. It does not permit entry based on a hunch.

And it was not as if obtaining a warrant would have been difficult. A recent Harvard Law Review study found that 93 percent of warrants are approved on first submission, often in less than three minutes. With modern technology, police can draft and submit warrant requests directly from their phones. The officers in Montana had nearly an hour to seek judicial approval. They chose not to.

The facts in Montana look nothing like an emergency. Body camera transcripts reveal that officers themselves doubted that Case required immediate aid. One noted that "chances are pretty slim" he needed urgent medical attention. They discussed staging medical personnel outside but decided against it. After forty minutes of hesitation, they declared the situation an "emergency" and broke in anyway.

In any other context, an armed entry without a warrant would be understood as unlawful. The Constitution does not stop at the property line of a gun owner. If a homeowner responds defensively to armed intruders, the law recognizes the basic right of self-defense. What transforms that same scenario into a police action is supposed to be the warrant requirement. Strip that away, and the police have no more right to enter than anyone else.

Pam Bondi's Department of Justice, however, has sided with Montana.

In an amicus brief, DOJ argued that when police are "providing aid" rather than investigating a crime, they should not need probable cause or a warrant. That claim, if accepted, creates a dangerous loophole: police may simply reframe their role to avoid constitutional limits.

The risks are obvious. A neighbor calls for a welfare check. Officers arrive, say they are caretakers, and enter without a warrant. Inside, they confront a homeowner startled by strangers in his house. The encounter escalates, and the mere presence of a firearm becomes justification for force. What began as a welfare check ends as a shooting.

The Framers wrote the Fourth Amendment to prevent precisely this kind of abuse.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/bondi-doj-backs-warrantless-invasion-gun-owners-homes
This is retarded. Just giving the cops a pass to act how they want.
Liar!!!!Filt!!!!

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 42964
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5592 on: November 07, 2025, 02:41:08 PM »
This is retarded. Just giving the cops a pass to act how they want.
Wow, I am surprised! Someone, (Chaos) took a strong dose of sensible reality today. It would be great if more of your posts were as rational and intelligent as this one is. I wholeheartedly approve.

chaos

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 60556
  • Ron "There is no freedom of speech here" Avidan
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5593 on: November 07, 2025, 06:26:48 PM »
Wow, I am surprised! Someone, (Chaos) took a strong dose of sensible reality today. It would be great if more of your posts were as rational and intelligent as this one is. I wholeheartedly approve.
WOW, I am surprised! Someone, (PrimeLurker) took a strong moment of clarity today. It would be great if your mental decline allowed you to see common sense more often.
Liar!!!!Filt!!!!

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 42964
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5594 on: Today at 03:49:01 PM »
WOW, I am surprised! Someone, (PrimeLurker) took a strong moment of clarity today. It would be great if your mental decline allowed you to see common sense more often.

The definition of a lurker is a person on an internet message board or chat room who does not participate. This does not accurately define me or my actions on Getbig. I suspect that I participate here more often than some folks appreciate.

I frequently have moments of clarity. But I do not always share them lest I confuse some of you who take comfort in thinking I am growing senile. I am not BTW, but I will be sure to let everyone here know if I am. That is, if I remember to do this. LOL!

chaos

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 60556
  • Ron "There is no freedom of speech here" Avidan
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #5595 on: Today at 06:20:45 PM »
The definition of a lurker is a person on an internet message board or chat room who does not participate. This does not accurately define me or my actions on Getbig. I suspect that I participate here more often than some folks appreciate.

I frequently have moments of clarity. But I do not always share them lest I confuse some of you who take comfort in thinking I am growing senile. I am not BTW, but I will be sure to let everyone here know if I am. That is, if I remember to do this. LOL!
I was going to blast your reading comprehension skills and your pretend naivety, but I don't think you are capable of understanding it anyway.  :(
Liar!!!!Filt!!!!