Red Mosquito

This is why you should use an alias and post on a site like RM

My question was more along the lines of:

Do people not expect police to see what you say/write and follow up on certain things you say/write?

What this women posted is important.
What the police are doing is important.

The fact that people "are monitoring social media" is to be expected. No? Do we know that the police initiated this search of posts? Or were they called/emailed about it by concerned friends/neighbors?

It's one of the most incredible achievements of the state that this mindset has so fully taken hold.

But yes, I do expect the state to do whatever it can to control its population - and to increase its power over the population at every opportunity - and that includes monitoring us. It's not good though. They shouldn't, and we'd be better off if they didn't.

America is thankfully a (slight) laggard in this trend toward more state control, but it seems to be inevitable everywhere that this will become more accepted. Worse is already the norm in UK.

I think one has to seriously consider that the vast majority of humanity simply wants to be controlled. With loss of faith in sky daddy, they create state daddy.

BurtReynolds wrote:It's one of the most incredible achievements of the state that this mindset has so fully taken hold.

But yes, I do expect the state to do whatever it can to control its population - and to increase its power over the population at every opportunity - and that includes monitoring us. It's not good though. They shouldn't, and we'd be better off if they didn't.

BurtReynolds wrote:America is thankfully a (slight) laggard in this trend toward more state control, but it seems to be inevitable everywhere that this will become more accepted. Worse is already the norm in UK.

I think one has to seriously consider that the vast majority of humanity simply wants to be controlled. With loss of faith in sky daddy, they create state daddy.

*knock knock knock*

We’d like to have a word with you, Mr. Reynolds.

ATTENTION EMPLOYERS: the above comments were just a thought experiment. I'm playing Devil's advocate. Without order there would be chaos.

BurtReynolds wrote:ATTENTION EMPLOYERS: the above comments were just a thought experiment. I'm playing Devil's advocate. Without order there would be chaos.

See if we had reset the board two days ago you’d already be begging us to do it again

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:ATTENTION EMPLOYERS: the above comments were just a thought experiment. I'm playing Devil's advocate. Without order there would be chaos.

See if we had reset the board two days ago you’d already be begging us to do it again

I'm in favor of monthly resets.

Again, no one has yet demonstrated how or why this visit happened. It's a video with no other context, and you guys are taking it and running... all the way to #policestate.

I'm not saying it's good or bad. I'm just wondering if folks actually believe that what they put on the internet is considered private. Emails and DMs/PMs not included, I still would like to know if this was government monitoring, or if someone reached out to authorities/government with concern.

Points to Burt for incorporating the word “laggard” into the conversation.

Rob wrote:Again, no one has yet demonstrated how or why this visit happened. It's a video with no other context, and you guys are taking it and running... all the way to #policestate.

Ok. Let's say we don't know what happened. But I'm trying to understand what you actually believe.
Let's say she wasn't calling for violence or anything like that, and the cops initiated the monitoring of people on their own. No one called them expressing concern.

Are the cops wrong in this scenario, or do you think that's what the police should do?

BurtReynolds wrote:

Rob wrote:Again, no one has yet demonstrated how or why this visit happened. It's a video with no other context, and you guys are taking it and running... all the way to #policestate.

Ok. Let's say we don't know what happened. But I'm trying to understand what you actually believe.
Let's say she wasn't calling for violence or anything like that, and the cops initiated the monitoring of people on their own. No one called them expressing concern.

Are the cops wrong in this scenario, or do you think that's what the police should do?

I would be on your side here. I don't think police should initiate the monitoring of people on a whim.

Now say this woman has neighbors, and said some wild, scary shit to them about a protest she was planning to attend. Neighbors alert the cops, and they just come to check up and remind her of her rights (this is the Canadian version, remember). Is this what police should do?

We don't know where on the spectrum this visit falls.

Rob wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

Rob wrote:Again, no one has yet demonstrated how or why this visit happened. It's a video with no other context, and you guys are taking it and running... all the way to #policestate.

Ok. Let's say we don't know what happened. But I'm trying to understand what you actually believe.
Let's say she wasn't calling for violence or anything like that, and the cops initiated the monitoring of people on their own. No one called them expressing concern.

Are the cops wrong in this scenario, or do you think that's what the police should do?

I would be on your side here. I don't think police should initiate the monitoring of people on a whim.

Now say this woman has neighbors, and said some wild, scary shit to them about a protest she was planning to attend. Neighbors alert the cops, and they just come to check up and remind her of her rights (this is the Canadian version, remember). Is this what police should do?

We don't know where on the spectrum this visit falls.

Right. In your scenario burt, what are they monitoring? In Rob's scenario, it seems like pretty typical police work.

And I haven't seen anything that says they only went to this lady's house and asked her about her internet habits.

My understanding is they went door to door to ensure people knew accurate information about vaccines & masks.

elliseamos wrote:And I haven't seen anything that says they only went to this lady's house and asked her about her internet habits.

My understanding is they went door to door to ensure people knew accurate information about vaccines & masks.

Well, that’s definitely something the police should be doing. Not Orwellian at all.

Rob wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

Rob wrote:Again, no one has yet demonstrated how or why this visit happened. It's a video with no other context, and you guys are taking it and running... all the way to #policestate.

Ok. Let's say we don't know what happened. But I'm trying to understand what you actually believe.
Let's say she wasn't calling for violence or anything like that, and the cops initiated the monitoring of people on their own. No one called them expressing concern.

Are the cops wrong in this scenario, or do you think that's what the police should do?

I would be on your side here. I don't think police should initiate the monitoring of people on a whim.

Now say this woman has neighbors, and said some wild, scary shit to them about a protest she was planning to attend. Neighbors alert the cops, and they just come to check up and remind her of her rights (this is the Canadian version, remember). Is this what police should do?

We don't know where on the spectrum this visit falls.

Yeah I think so. But with the minor caveat that random shit posted in a Facebook groups would require a bit higher bar.

Oh so now it's a police state, huh.

I bet the police wouldn't be able to surveil so many citizens if you reduced their funding, maybe even to zero. Just something to think about.

Orwellian to get facts out during a pandemic. What a horrible and intrusive thing to do. about what could get you arrested if you choose to participate in a protest.