Weird response to a pretty benign question.

Asking whether or not something is new or how frequently it's been done in the past isn't saying it's acceptable nor does it put them on the side of tyranny. In fact, a sign of tyranny would be a significant uptick in the number of these searches, and how else would you be able to see that worrying signal without answering the question they asked?

Sure but that means November will have no impact on what CPB does. It’s always happened and will continue to happen just like stock trading with insider information by congress members will continue to happen regardless of November results. The vote came up and it was voted down and I don’t see that changing. I don’t see the spying on citizens changing. The NSA spied on Congress and they did nothing about it.

It’s disingenuous to imply that November will have an effect on either of those topics.

[dead]

Wikipedia's map is wrong. The "border" includes international airports. There is very little of the population that is not within 100 miles of this "border."

The map also does not show Hawai'i, which would be one green blob, there is no part of Hawai'i not 100 miles from the border. All of the New England states are similarly small enough to be completely covered, even by the erroneous picture of the physical border.

You basically get a few, mostly uninhabited spots out in the West that aren't covered.

37signals has been having border crossing guidance at least since 2020. https://github.com/kspr9/basecamp-37signals-handbook/blob/ma...

The USA is definitely not thevonly one. Great Britain has also an extensive history of tyranical privacy-violating border crossing.

As is Israel and Russia.

The point is, the deeper you look, the better you understand how wide-spread the practice is.

This is why state powers need judicial oversight.

There are some instances where powers need to be exercised in a hurry, but there should always be proper reporting and a paper trail, with stiff reprimanded for misuse or abuse of the system. Accidents can happen, but they should be infrequent and should follow protocol.

It would be great if citizens had more direct involvement in these cases too. I don't see why egregious abuses shouldn't be tried by jury.

Police and intelligence agency employees should be held to a higher standard than civilians (like military personnel are subject to UCMJ), and breeches of protocols should lead to harsher punishments imposed upon them. It would be fine to pay them more if it required more training and accountability.

> police needs power to protect the citizens

Those terms need to be clearly defined. SCOTUS has declared that the police actually have no duty to protect and to serve the people.

And with an overwhelming amount of evidence, the police operate with effectively no accountability and repeated demonstrate that they abuse their powers freely.

So yes, laws without teeth are pointless but the state's monopoly on violence should only be granted when it can be demonstrated to not be abused.