Ax to Grind

2001-10-4 20:16:00

Larry:
Currently I don't think that the authorities are lacking very much in their ability to monitor "bad guys". Consider for example that the FBI currently can obtain permission from a secret court to detain a non-citizen indefinitely. The detainee has no right to a lawyer, to know what charges might be brought against him, or any effective appeal process. In effect if you are a foreign national the government can legally lock you up and throw away the key.

JJ
Perhaps, but are you are aware that this power has not been used even once? The government is over timid about using this power instead of being over aggressive as you assume.

If they had used this power on real suspects, maybe the disaster of 911 would not have happened.

Many of our worries about government abuse do not happen because (fortunately) they just do not have either the manpower or the will to enforce the laws on the books.

Larry:
That is in part why I find your proposals for increased surveillance so ill advised. We already have many of the ingredients necessary for a real police state and there are only a few things holding us back from becoming a real one where those who oppose the Beast will be thrown into jail, or killed.

JJ
What proposals are these? Again you need to dispute what I do say. Not what I do not say. I do not propose any increased surveillance for citizens.

Larry:
Now combine that with really effective surveillance and you have a nightmare where almost anyone can be found guilty of something.

JJ
If the powers that be want to get the average person they can pretty much do it, surveillance or not.

Some have outsmarted the beast such as Lech Wallesa of Poland who the authorities were unable to destroy with thousands or laws and unlimited surveillance.

Larry
I think you are terribly naive in your view of how our government really works today. True, many go about their jobs and are law abiding and are not molested. Some are not so lucky.

JJ
I think I am more savvy than you suppose. I have been closely following these arguments for thirty years and have seen no real increase in the abuse of power. In fact I think abuse has actually diminished somewhat.

Take for example the above law you mentioned that gives the government power to detain foreign nationals, yet not once has this law been used.

If this law existed in the Fifties, believe me it would have been used many times.

Larry:
For example, just about any gun owner who puts a gun in his or her car and drives a few miles is in most cities is in violation of the law, even though he or she may not know it.

JJ
This may be true and is a great example of the surplus of law problem that I previously pointed out. I know quite a few gun owners here in Idaho and have never heard anyone being arrested for any of these excessive gun laws. Because of the lack of manpower the only people who usually have a problem in connection with these selective laws are those with whom the government has an ax to grind - such as the Aryan nations people in Northern Idaho.

I think that so few people are currently under government surveillance that unless a person is a threat to the government there is not a lot to worry about.

Have you ever been put under surveillance or arrested for an unjust gun law?

I would be surprised if you have.

Now if you had lived in the old Soviet Union you would definitely have had a problem. Fortunately, we are a long way from there.

I think the core solution for maintaining our freedoms is to eliminate 90% of the laws we now have. If this were to happen then surveillance of innocent citizens would become futile, because there would be nothing to charge them with.

Perhaps even more important than this, is to raise the consciousness of the nation as a whole. If we are ruled by a people of higher consciousness then we will be safe during times of good laws and bad laws and in times of legal surveillance and not so legal.