As I said yesterday, America may be a free nation, but its people are no longer at liberty. Why do I say this? Well, two links from today help explain.
First, an editorial by the LVR: How free are we on this July Fourth?
The cameras at every major intersection will only be used to spot traffic tie-ups, we’re assured.
Police helicopters fly circles over our homes, shining spotlights into our backyards at night.Now we’re told the very kinds of robot drones used to assassinate terrorists overseas will be used by domestic police agencies, as well, presumably checking to see if junior has some pot planted out back.
And if the past couple of months have taught us anything, it’s that the federal government — very often its unelected officials — have no problem whatsoever separating us from our freedoms. The Internal Revenue Service quashes countless groups’ efforts to gain nonprofit status, simply because these groups lean conservative and disagree with big government’s ideas on politics, economics, health care or, God forbid, on religious bounds — in a country founded in part on freedom of religion. This is the same IRS that will be responsible for enforcing ObamaCare regulations, through which we gain the “right” to see our neighbors taxed to pay for our health care, even if we choose to live on beer and Twinkies.
And then, police invade a private home at gunpoint and arrest its occupants so the police can use the house for "tactical advantage" for an investigation.
It continues: “At 10:45 a.m. defendant Officer Christopher Worley (HPD) contacted plaintiff Anthony Mitchell via his telephone. Worley told plaintiff that police needed to occupy his home in order to gain a ‘tactical advantage’ against the occupant of the neighboring house. Anthony Mitchell told the officer that he did not want to become involved and that he did not want police to enter his residence. Although Worley continued to insist that plaintiff should leave his residence, plaintiff clearly explained that he did not intend to leave his home or to allow police to occupy his home. Worley then ended the phone call.
The complaint continues: “Defendant Officer David Cawthorn outlined the defendants’ plan in his official report: ‘It was determined to move to 367 Evening Side and attempt to contact Mitchell. If Mitchell answered the door he would be asked to leave. If he refused to leave he would be arrested for Obstructing a Police Officer. If Mitchell refused to answer the door, force entry would be made and Mitchell would be arrested.’”
And arrested he was, with guns drawn and his family terrorized.
Posts
