Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Now will people believe me when I say we live in a de facto police state? [View all]immoderate
(20,885 posts)118. How about we all agree that we can call it a "police-ish" state?
Would that satisfy the semantical differences we are encountering?
There is little disagreement over the issues. Few are disputing that the police are militarized, tend toward brutality, are protected from prosecution, and are hypocritical of civil rights.
But we can post about it! So this can't be a police state. I propose the compromise term, "policeish" to denote a state where police can exceed their legal authority, assault and arrest peaceful assemblies, and they are covered and exonerated by the system.
--imm
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
251 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Now will people believe me when I say we live in a de facto police state? [View all]
Kelvin Mace
Dec 2014
OP
precisely! thought it required more than mere "allowance" to get what they wanted. n/t
wildbilln864
Dec 2014
#143
Why should they suffer any consequences for exercising their first amendment rights?
brooklynite
Dec 2014
#14
No. Its your problem that you don't know the difference between a real Police State
onenote
Dec 2014
#111
If that's what you think my point was, there's no point in continuing the discussion
onenote
Dec 2014
#179
So you're saying life for an black South African during Apartheid was better than life
onenote
Dec 2014
#178
Your logic is fail. Requiring cops to show respect to the people tjat employ them is far from asking
ncjustice80
Dec 2014
#120
You are the one that will give the 1% absolute control of the police by destroying the union
hack89
Dec 2014
#237
Get back to us when the military is unionized and gets collective bargaining rights.
hack89
Dec 2014
#137
a police state is not one where 'one ruler has all the power'. it could be, but it doesn't have to
NewDeal_Dem
Dec 2014
#16
What's your point? That everything is cool? It could be worse but it's bad enough. nm
rhett o rick
Dec 2014
#7
The police are killing citizens, esp black citizens, with impunity. With out control it will get
rhett o rick
Dec 2014
#11
I am still searching for a point. I hope you are not rationalizing this. nm
rhett o rick
Dec 2014
#58
My computer appears to be missing the hyperbol key that many of you seem to have
hack89
Dec 2014
#83
There is a term for when the armed forces overthrow an elected government.....
Spitfire of ATJ
Dec 2014
#55
We still do. Not as much as we should. But politicians still get punished. Police get punished.
onenote
Dec 2014
#131
The single most characteristic feature of a police state -- DEATH WITHOUT TRIAL -- is present.
Octafish
Dec 2014
#136
And the reasoning -- Efficiency and morale of the police trumping civil liberties
cprise
Dec 2014
#140
If that's the characteristic feature of a police state, then the US has always been a police state
onenote
Dec 2014
#163
And thank you as well. 2014 sucked, but I have to hope 2015 will start to turn things around
onenote
Dec 2014
#185
There haven't been many times in US history when the CIA was under control.
True Blue Door
Dec 2014
#204