Hell, there's no lack of whiners no matter what we do. Me, I'd find the whining a whole lot easier to swallow if we weren't paying three-quarters of a trillion dollars a year for the privilege of being whined at.
No American democracy for Americans?
- Thread starter china
- Start date
Let me put it this way: Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin.
Very easy to transpose freedom for liberty.
Security is a myth. It doesn't exist because the only constant in the Universe is change. The idea of security is like trying to stand still in the middle of a rushing creek. It cannot be done. May I suggest a book by Allan Watts: The Wisdom of Insecurity. Easy, short read by a brilliant man.
Very easy to transpose freedom for liberty.
Security is a myth. It doesn't exist because the only constant in the Universe is change. The idea of security is like trying to stand still in the middle of a rushing creek. It cannot be done. May I suggest a book by Allan Watts: The Wisdom of Insecurity. Easy, short read by a brilliant man.
I'd posit that the notion of privacy in public spaces, is an even more erroneous myth than that of security.
Last edited:
This is certainly true. What I question is the necessity of constant surveillance. It just smacks of Orwellian totalitarianism.
There are no surveillance cameras up here in the forest. The biggest worry around here is the deer eating our carrots.
Just because a piece of fiction can imagine a way in which a technology can be abused, doesn't mean it will be. While Orwell penned a great cautionary tale, it doesn't make it reality, it only makes it a caution.
If you question the need for constant surveillance, you need only talk to a mayor, and a city police force, and ask them what people look to as the metrics that define their success. People look at crime rates. And they expect action to be taken on crime. They expect something be done. Businesses expect their assets to be protected, and moms expect their children to be safe. And they expect their politicians and police to deliver that. That's reality. The cameras are delivering on that, because that is, directly, not theoretically, what keeps them in their jobs.
TC - You have to know that he is an all white type of guy- Off white does not cut it.
China
From you fav country.
Prison Camps are hitting the news in China-
China’s public shocked as magazine reports details of prisoner abuses at notorious labour camp | World | News | National Post
Let's see. My closest neighbour is an octogenarian, lovely man but I doubt he could help much during a home invasion. And then there's his thirty something son that lives with him, a schziophrenic who occassionally decides beer is a good substitute for his meds.
Nah, I think I'll stick with the handy-dandy emergency responders.
Well I do know my neighbors but that is beside the point. So abolish the police and organize... a police force?
Just like in the Sudan. We didn't get involved and the same people that b*tch about us sticking our nose everywhere was demanding we stick our nose into it.
I do not think Ben was an anarchist either.
There's another couple of names for those.... Lynch mobs and vigilante groups.
Sounds about right... The only thing I would add is that when you do get involved, it's magically about stealing oil or river rocks or some such nonsense.
So then our neighborhood watch will need some training. Then we'll have to screen out the ones that just aren't right. Then we'll need some kind of uniform to distinguish us from roving "people" to let everyone know we're actually on duty.
Complete nonsense.
While that's a very sad story, there's nothing preventing communities now from organizing and keeping an eye on neighours for added safety. Beyond that it doesn't follow logically to dismantle the police force simply because crimes still occur even though we have a police force.
There would either be complete chaos if we did or the following will happen.
... and let's not forget neighborhood boundaries. Perhaps some neighborhoods do not have the right amount of people to cover their neighborhood. So we cannot really allow chaos to reign in adjoinging neighborhoods now. We'll organize a town or city force to spread our resources...
And what do you have... anyone?...anyone? ... Bueller? Bueller?
And what do you have... anyone?...anyone? ... Bueller? Bueller?
Last edited:
Did her neighbours ignore her and leave it to emergency responders? Sorry, but bad **** happens. The best plan of action is protection, protection, protection. Know your neighbours, have a weapon, have 9-1-1 at hand. It's not a case of 'pick one'.... make use of all of it.
Privacy in public places? Interesting concept. Let me know where you can find that.
Quite.
OK, so clearly, the concept of someone who is motivated by community and someone who is motivated by a paycheck from City Hall escapes you. Too bad.
OK, OK, I get it. The current police/law enforcement/security structure cannot be questioned.
Sorry.
That leads to my comment about letting me know where in public places that you can find privacy. There is not much point in putting cams in places where there are few humans, and even fewer criminal humans. In cities where there may be 3 or 4 banks in a block, traffic is congested enough for crashes to occur fairly frequently, etc., a cam may prove to be useful.
Heck no, it can be questioned. But, you never answered whether or not they were actually to blame for her situation. You implied that because we have police, we don't avail ourselves of our neighbours, and protect our neighbours, I was looking for some clarification on how that factored into her situation.
Did she call 9-1-1 and get ignored? Did her neighbours call 9-1-1 and then ignore her?
Didn't think it was necessary, since the only purpose of my anecdote was to point out to SLM, who was arguing by anecdote, that arguing by anecdote is useless.
Round here, we don't get involved.
She was kinda tied up at the time.