|
I voted no, but it's of course a matter of degrees. There are some cities in America where police control and monitoring is significantly more severe than others, and there are even neighborhoods within given cities where it is more severe.
I voted no, because, I still think it could get a lot worse. Technology is making that much more possible, though it also makes it quite a bit easier for people to monitor the police. Rodney King was taped being beat with a bulky camcorder, today we're getting to the point where citizens can carry something so small that most cops won't even know they're being videoed. In a true police state cellphone cameras would be illegal.
Which is not to say that I don't think that rights are eroding, which has nothing to do with traditional "liberal vs. conservative" labels. Waco TX saw U.S. citizens killed by the ATF (a police, not military organization) using tanks with flame throwers over surprisingly little during the reign of a supposedly "liberal Democrat" who may get to be the first male First Lady soon. But are things really worse today than they were in 1970 when the National Guard opened fire on college students for protesting? I'm really not sure of that. And for "democracies" under survelience, the Brits have got us beat hands down these days, albeit a bit more overtly.
|