It IS a police state.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

If a cop knocks on my door and says he wants to ask me a few questions, I say "Sure, what's up? What can I help you with?"

Because here's the really odd part . . . If I'm not doing anything wrong, he's going to leave. Why? BECAUSE IT'S NOT A POLICE STATE. *ahem* But yes, any normal, sane person doesn't freak out the moment an officer approaches them. Who typically freaks out? People that are guilty or crazy. I've had officers knock on my door before, and I didn't pull out the camera and start threatening to kill them.

But, on the other hand, I've had officers pull me over for no just cause and my first question to them is "Why did you pull me over." If they don't answer, I tell them point blank that unless they have probable cause I don't accept this as legitimate.

If an officer shows up to a potential domestic abuse, quite frankly, I would expect nothing less than what these officers did. Too many women have died because the officers couldn't intervene in domestic affairs. Under a Republican, mind you Bob. As long as the man said nothing was wrong, that was the end of the story.

So what if someone was critically injured, or near dead, or the child would be severely beaten if the woman didn't tell the officers she was okay? Then what? You'd be crying about how incompetent they are.

You're seeing what you want to see, simple as that. For those of us who are rational, we'll wait until there's more information before jumping on the screaming and moaning bandwagon.

Your video, Is California Becoming A Police State?, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Fuck you bob, as usual, you are the most clueless person on the sift. Cuz yeah, shitty cops never existed under Republicans. When can we kick this guy out of here for repeated trolling? You and your incompetence are a blight on the sift.

Anyway. I can't upvote this purely for the title.

1. without context, this video is meaningless. Certainly looks like we're missing a big chunk of why the cops were called out in the first place.

2. Even if it is exactly as it looks without context. One group of shitty cops, a police state doesn't make. A police state requires a systemic change. It takes people at the highest levels endorsing this sort of thing and that isn't happening. We wouldn't need an individual's camera phone to let us know because it would be happening in droves all throughout the state/nation and it would be universally noticed.

Neighbor (or anonymous bystander/prankster, your chlid's ornery friend) calls 911 and claims to hear from YOUR home, all matter of torment, gunshots, pit bulls, kids, etc. and all these or a combination could be a complete fabrication..... Based on an anon call, can the same cops bust your fucking door down if you don't allow them in warrant-less? If so, fuck you, police state.

I know that kinda thing seems cool when you're 15, but it's just not gonna happen.

In the real world, grown ups solve problems through a democratic process. You don't live in a police state. The fact that you get to post on this site with statements like that is in and of itself evidence of that fact.

So calm down, and let's approach this like rational adults.

Based on the information we have available (i.e. the video), it would seem that there is potentially a case to answer for. However, without context, it's incredibly hard to judge whether the cops actions were justified or not.

I don't like the idea of a police state either, but if there are cops at his door because of reports of domestic violence, then that is probably cause. Standing outside a door like that with little ability to see in really puts the cops in a vulnerable state that is unfair to them and their families... if the people inside really had nothing to hide, they would open the door and be normal. Not screaming their rights through a dirty screen door.

The stops are shown on various websites (local authority, news, etc). So people who are in those areas shouldn't be surprised by them. And if you're so "upset" with the checkpoints, or sobriety points, or anything that is similar to this (or just checking into a flight, where they check your ID as well, do you *not* fly?) you can easily check online where they're holding the stops. It's required that they announce/post where the stops are being held. They expect and hope that not everyone has the presence of mind to check where the stops are at, that's the *point* of the stops, to find people who are not of legal status in this country.

And I bring up Illegal Immigrants, because that's the reason as to *why* these checkpoints exist. (hence why in the video they ask what the persons citizenship is)

As for the probable cause debate;
As several law journals suggest (e.g. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/probable+cause ), probable cause is subjective, there can be many instances of probable cause, but there can also be a lesser form called "Reasonable suspicion", which could essentially be used in this instance.

You simplify things way too much, the law isn't just a clear cut black and white instance. The law isn't simple, you can't quantify it in a simple explanation, and lawyers, law enforcement, judges (etc) know all this. Laws aren't water tight either, many contradict each other, or can be interpreted differently (which is why there's a supreme court, they dictate the wording and meaning of the laws).

Edit: I don't know how I got into defending the DHS or the checkpoints, as I said, I think the stops are ridiculous, and probably won't do anything worthwhile. But at this point, we're just going in circles. in the end, this video is just over-sensationalism at it's best.

Are the stops irritating to civilians in those areas (which are *very* limited, and not some wide spread epidemic as many seem to think it is)? Of course they are. Are they some form of "police state"? No, they're not (see examples above), they're localized stops, where the states have enacted laws allowing DHS / Law Enforcement to literally stop *anyone* they want and question them regarding citizenship.

last edit them I'm done, I swear
Where were all these kids and "freedom fighters" when the Patriot act was enacted, the illegal wiretaps, bugging and tracking of students and civilians happened? Oh.. that's right it was to "protect" us from the Terrorists. Everyone was OK with that....

Morality isn't involved into the law because morality is not objective, nor fair. Like I said, morals are of ones own definition, trying to place a blanket over the entire debate with 1 definition doesn't make Morals "standardized".

Morals aren't necessarily "fair" nor always equal. Hence they cannot be in the same group as "morals" (I won't get too far into it, but look at the Gay Marriage debates, many claim "morals" when it comes to against it, etc)

Anyway, again the situation shown may be vaguely like East Germany, but overall it isn't even close. East Germany wouldn't allow any sort of questions to be asked to the authorities, let alone recorded onto any sort of video device. In places where there's a true police state, there's no such thing as convenience, so such a comparison isn't justified. IF this was happening *everywhere* in the country, and not along the southern border, then I'd agree that there's an issue.

The states that this is happening in (south/southwest states & Texas), it was voted on by the people to allow this. They asked, begged and rallied to get additional "border protection", this is what they get.

They didn't know the consequence, so this is on them and the price they have to pay to fight the "illegal immigrant menace". I think it's absolutely ridiculous, but I hope these people realize that if they continue to push for "closing borders" and everything that Arizona (in particular) has done, will end up biting them in the ass.

Fashion Police State! Freedom Math! HAHAHAHAHAHA

MA is a anti-gun state so they get what they deserve for trading their freedom for police state security. You won't see police try this fascist crap in Texas or Virginia.

Who crafts the language of the law and the descriptive terminology used to codify offenders? The argument here (see out-dated scrap of guidelines) is when does your average Joe become the "exigent circumstance" and who decides what, when, who, how, and where such a circumstantial decision leading to action should be brought into play....and at that point, what action and where is the agreed-upon line drawn? The justification for a door-to-door in Boston this week did not come from the referenced, " American law of criminal procedure" which is quite possibly, a fluid, up-for-interpretation piece of horseshit.

At face value...Jack-boots in armor going door-to-door with adrenaline pumping leads to fucking chaos or police state, and, sorry men-in-black, there are better ways to looks for kooks. Fuck the po-lice and their newfangled ways of doing their half-assed assignments! The goddamn bomber would have found his own ass in 3 more hours trying to buy tampons to stick in his wounds if half the cops looking for him were on a 3-day-drunk ANYHOW!

Yeah-The fucking police violated rights and used some jihad-teen's actions and their own balls as license, don't care how the law reads.

That is cool. I wish "authority" figures the world over were more like this. If cop from the US saw this he'd think: "this irresponsible idiot would immediately be to blame if a criminal suddenly crept into the area and killed a bunch of people while they were goofing off", while completely ignoring that people who go on public killing sprees are quite possibly revolting against overbearing police states.

Well, I didn't say tax payer's money, I know it was his personal coin. It came form the same pile of money the cunt bought the election with-He's a fucking piece of human garbage, and all I have to do is watch what he does, and listen to him talk.

These attempts of his to blame the drug and not the user with guns??....Complete horseshit, another baby-step towards the future police state AFAIAC.

"The MAIG was formed on April 25, 2006, during a summit held at Gracie Mansion in New York City that was hosted by Boston Mayor Thomas Menino and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who serve as co-chairs of the coalition."-waki