Can I call America a police state now

[Jamisjockey]

Lots of things, in rural Montana. 

Though it would sorta depend whether you considered something like livestock brand inspections to be "interferrence" considering that it is in place to protect the legitimate owner.

But living in town sucks :(

Lots of things, like....? Name it.

[Rick Finsta]

A friend and former work associate of mine has TWICE been pulled over by, and I *expletive deleted*it you not, a black SUV with DHS logos.  I told him no way, I'd call 911 but never pull over for an unmarked vehicle that I didn't reconize (locals, Sheriff, or SP), but honestly, how do you deal with your sudden disbelief when that happens?  I might just go "deer in the headlights" trying to wrap my head around another alphabet soup agency thinking they have the authority to bother me and just give in... 

[Tallpine]

Lots of things, like....? Name it.

Well, I can build anything I want (short of a nukular power plant) anytime anywhere on my own land.  Just go buy the materials and start building, or hire somebody to do it (who probably doesn't have any kind of license).  The only permits are for major electrical (new service) or new septic systems.  Of course if you do any digging you ought to check where the buried phone lines are.

Can shoot any type of firearm on my own place as long as I don't endanger anyone else.  Can hunt deer/elk on my land (with license) and can kill vermin like coyotes, porcupines, stray dogs, etc with no license, no restrictions, no consequences.

Can have any kind of livestock (well okay - NOT wild game, anymore), and can have as many vehicles of any type and/or condition parked on my place.  If I don't do anything too stupid then I can drive unlicensed and uninsured vehicles out here on county roads (it's ten miles down to the hiway from here).  Lot's of people use ATVs/UTVs for local driving.

I can legally carry open, or concealed outside of city limits, without a permit.  I have happily chatted with the county sheriff while open carrying with no mention of that subject.

It's pretty hard to list all the things I CAN do because there are so few things that I can't do.

Of course the feds take a dim view of growing MJ and operating a still.

[dogmush]

I'm not going to nitpick your post, but there's all sorts of regulations concerning what you can and can't build on your land, and codes telling you how to build what you choose to.

The fact that those laws are rarely enforced in your locality doesn't make them not there.  Dam a creek and see what happens.

Need a license to hunt.  You can shoot any of the firearms you've waded through the morass of federal laws and regulation to own.

I'm not a farmer but I'd bet there's laws and regulation saying how you can and can't keep that livestock (animal cruelty laws and the like).

It goes on and on.  There's more regulation on you then you think.

[Tallpine]

there's all sorts of regulations concerning what you can and can't build on your land, and codes telling you how to build what you choose to

No, there are not - unless perhaps you were building some sort of commercial structure, open to the public.

If you go a few miles south into Yellowstone County, things are much more restrictive which is why we are not there.  We checked into all this before we moved/bought property into Montana, and talked to the One Guy who is responsible for issuing septic permits for a five county area.

Oh yeah - you can drill a water well without any sort of permit, but if you want to establish water rights then you do need to register it with DNRC.

Need a license to hunt.  You can shoot any of the firearms you've waded through the morass of federal laws and regulation to own.

Just for specific "game" animals: deer, elk, bear, mtn lion, antelope, and some fur bearers are regulated.  Rabbits, coyotes, and most everything else are totally unprotected.

morass of federal laws and regulation

There is always that, and will be until the coming collapse of the USSA.

[Nick1911]

Find one aspect of your life that doesn't have any sort of .gov regulation or interferrence in it.

Well, I can build anything I want (short of a nukular power plant) anytime anywhere on my own land.  Just go buy the materials and start building, or hire somebody to do it (who probably doesn't have any kind of license).  The only permits are for major electrical (new service) or new septic systems.  Of course if you do any digging you ought to check where the buried phone lines are.

Do you have to follow the NEC?  How about fire codes?  How about setbacks?  Can you build on your property line?

Can shoot any type of firearm on my own place as long as I don't endanger anyone else.  Can hunt deer/elk on my land (with license) and can kill vermin like coyotes, porcupines, stray dogs, etc with no license, no restrictions, no consequences.

Firearms and hunting are both aspects of your life that are very much regulated.  Can you setup any kind of trap you want on your land?  Can you cut down the barrel of a shotgun you own?  Can you install an autosear on an AR?  Heck, can you file a S/N off a firearm?  And the 4473 + FBI phone call?  This isn't interferrence?

Can have any kind of livestock (well okay - NOT wild game, anymore), and can have as many vehicles of any type and/or condition parked on my place.  If I don't do anything too stupid then I can drive unlicensed and uninsured vehicles out here on county roads (it's ten miles down to the hiway from here).  Lot's of people use ATVs/UTVs for local driving.

Just because you're not getting caught, doesn't make it legal.  Also - if one of your livestock was found to have mad cow disease, the state would kill your animals and disinfect your farm.

I can legally carry open, or concealed outside of city limits, without a permit.  I have happily chatted with the county sheriff while open carrying with no mention of that subject.

And a fair point.  Provided what you're concealing isn't on the illegal list.  Which is government regulation.

[Tallpine]

The flip side is that if you are looking to buy a house out in this area, you better look into it well because there are some unique amateur built structures.

Gee, I thought that I was the only anarchist here 

[dogmush]

No, there are not - unless perhaps you were building some sort of commercial structure, open to the public.

Clean Air Act
Clean Water Act
Montana Electric codes (80Mb PDF)
Montana DEQ

And that's just off the top of my head.

The sad thing is you're still better off then 99% of us. And one day I hope to move someplace similar.  The best you can really hope for these days is to get far enough out that enforcement doesn't bother.

[Jamisjockey]

Clean Air Act
Clean Water Act
Montana Electric codes (80Mb PDF)
Montana DEQ

And that's just off the top of my head.

The sad thing is you're still better off then 99% of us. And one day I hope to move someplace similar.  The best you can really hope for these days is to get far enough out that enforcement doesn't bother.

ding ding ding! We have a winner.

That unzoned building you want to add? Somewhere, some beauracrat has already decided if you can or cannot. Is your property considered a wetland?  
The lead in the bullets in your guns? Highly regulated.  The manufacture of the gun you're open carrying? Highly regulated.  The sale of the gun? Yep.
You only take game on your property, even the varmints, at the granting of the state. 

The inescapable fact that every move, every decision in your life is either directly or indirectly affected by federal government regulation and interferrence.
And much of this interferrence is doubled at the state level.

[Balog]

Liberty is an anachronism in modern America.

 

Not sure what country in the world is better off though. 

[Tallpine]

We actually have a county ordinance that protects agriculture and agriculture related activities against any encroachments or complaints that might be lodged by newer residents.

[Jamisjockey]

We actually have a county ordinance that protects agriculture and agriculture related activities against any encroachments or complaints that might be lodged by newer residents.

Does that include complaints by the State Dept. of Ag, or the fed.gov? 

[Tallpine]

Does that include complaints by the State Dept. of Ag, or the fed.gov? 

As Mal Reynolds would say: "that will be an interesting day."


There's a reason that my location over on GRM is listed as "Occupied Montanistan" 


I suppose that when the Evil Empire gets done bombing Crackistan, that they will start bombing our people for building un-permitted lambing sheds 

[Jamisjockey]

As Mal Reynolds would say: "that will be an interesting day."


There's a reason that my location over on GRM is listed as "Occupied Montanistan" 


I suppose that when the Evil Empire gets done bombing Crackistan, that they will start bombing our people for building un-permitted lambing sheds 

Not that far fetched man. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/03/rawsome-raid-_n_917540.html

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

I'm not going to nitpick your post, but there's all sorts of regulations concerning what you can and can't build on your land, and codes telling you how to build what you choose to.

parts of wva were permit free zones

The fact that those laws are rarely enforced in your locality doesn't make them not there.  Dam a creek and see what happens.

Need a license to hunt.
in va i can hunt on my land sans license 

You can shoot any of the firearms you've waded through the morass of federal laws and regulation to own.

I'm not a farmer but I'd bet there's laws and regulation saying how you can and can't keep that livestock (animal cruelty laws and the like).

It goes on and on.  There's more regulation on you then you think.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

i can build still a pretty serious structure sans permits and the only inspection i need is to get electric service hooked up.  and then all they do is look at the box to make sure its correct.  after box is hot you are on your own IF you swear thats its for a "bonafide agricultural purpose"  if your hoa will let you

[roo_ster]

Whatever the particulars of Tallpine's situation or any of our situations, the point is:
The list of thingss we can do without gov't intervention is orders of magnitude shorter than the list of things we can not do without gov't intervention.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=g55A2wUJMTU#t=691s

[Jamisjockey]

Whatever the particulars of Tallpine's situation or any of our situations, the point is:
The list of thingss we can do without gov't intervention is orders of magnitude shorter than the list of things we can not do without gov't intervention.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=g55A2wUJMTU#t=691s

Ding ding ding! Winner winner, get that man a chicken dinner!

[MrsSmith]

Since they're public employees, who they are should be public record. Create a popular movement that advocates shunning them/shaming them and their families in all aspects of life possible.  Feel bad for spouses or kids? Too bad. In WWII the vast majority of Germans were just 'folks doing their job' and not hard-core foaming the mouth party members either. All the ones we shot were somebody's husband or son. And hell, we bombed the spouses and kids back in their hometowns too. So some ugly public interactions is getting off pretty light IMO.

Trick is getting it to that point. You'd have to work people up to be angry enough to do it, then stick with it.

Passive resistance. Crowd/clog the checkpoints so badly, it shuts down the travel completely, until the .gov folds.

There's more, but this is a public forum, and the APS TOS probably prevents discussing those ideas further anyway.

Passive resistance is always a good starting point. But without some amount of organization, it's just one person out there making a stand and hanging out to dry alone. Few are willing to do that on a scale large enough to gain momentum and garner attention. The risk of personal sacrifice is far greater than the potential for effecting positive change.

But. We're on the right path with this discussion. 

[AJ Dual]

If a peaceful march of 1000 people just pressed through the security area into an airport terminal... that would be interesting.

[birdman]

Given that the TSA's "constitutional" reason for the airport activities was airports are points of entry, and thus probable cause is met (due to customs aspects) for search.  For purely domestic (mass transit, driving, etc) activities, I can't see how a search could be constitutional, especially since they do not have police powers.
Take the Hampton roads tunnel checkpoints...there is Zero argument that it isn't a domestic travel point.

Even a stretch of the already stretched search/checkpoint rules used to allow DD checkpoints doesn't support this, and right to movement/travel domestically is absolute, ie true probable cause is required.

WTF

[RevDisk]

Given that the TSA's "constitutional" reason for the airport activities was airports are points of entry, and thus probable cause is met (due to customs aspects) for search.  For purely domestic (mass transit, driving, etc) activities, I can't see how a search could be constitutional, especially since they do not have police powers.
Take the Hampton roads tunnel checkpoints...there is Zero argument that it isn't a domestic travel point.

Even a stretch of the already stretched search/checkpoint rules used to allow DD checkpoints doesn't support this, and right to movement/travel domestically is absolute, ie true probable cause is required.

WTF

The Constitution has an envelope for government authority. Some things are pretty tight ("Can't make Americans shelter troops in homes"), others loose ("Short of executions, dang near anything is allowed at the borders").  Governments by their nature push their legitimate envelope. Not always for bad reasons.

In this case, the TSA started off well within their legitimate envelope.  Another point of order, just because something is Constitutional does not mean it's a good idea. It may be theoretically Constitutionally permissible to search all persons thoroughly at the border. Does not mean it should necessarily be employed.

They've now moved from the very loose border envelope to the (for now) somewhat tighter but still loose interstate commerce envelope. Plus side is, unlike at the border, you still retain your Constitutional rights under interstate commerce envelope. Mostly. As you pointed out, SCOTUS has determined that Constitutional rights to a lawyer, against self-incrimination, against unreasonable search and seizure, et al if alcohol is potentially involved. (No, really.)

It's not legal under the 4th (unreasonable search, with no PC), but they will undoubtedly claim interstate the first time they are sued. Fourth Amendment protections are not what they used to be, birdman.

[RocketMan]

As asked in another thread, I wonder how far away we are from internal passports being required for travel among the various States?  How many years? How long until checkpoints on Interstates and US Highways are the norm?
Will those things being instituted (if they are instituted) finally spark some serious pushback from the citizenry to .gov, saying "WTF? You're going too far!"? Or will they just be another loss of liberty so gradual and expected as to go unnoticed by most?
I suspect that, should these things happen, that it will go, not unnoticed, but unchallenged for the most part.  They will become the new norm, the expected condition.
The Republic is dying, folks.  Dying of old age.  I'm not sure much can be done about it, really.  Everything dies eventually, and perhaps it's just time.

[MrsSmith]

If a peaceful march of 1000 people just pressed through the security area into an airport terminal... that would be interesting.

Except that with TSA involved, I'd lay high odds it wouldn't remain peaceful for long and someone would end up dead. If it were to take place very early in the morning before the airport is full and security lines are long, it might be less of a risk. Thought provoking though.

As asked in another thread, I wonder how far away we are from internal passports being required for travel among the various States?  How many years? How long until checkpoints on Interstates and US Highways are the norm?
Will those things being instituted (if they are instituted) finally spark some serious pushback from the citizenry to .gov, saying "WTF? You're going too far!"? Or will they just be another loss of liberty so gradual and expected as to go unnoticed by most?
I suspect that, should these things happen, that it will go, not unnoticed, but unchallenged for the most part.  They will become the new norm, the expected condition.
The Republic is dying, folks.  Dying of old age.  I'm not sure much can be done about it, really.  Everything dies eventually, and perhaps it's just time.

Drive to CA for a visit Rocketman. You must pass through a checkpoint to enter the state. Though on I-5 from your direction it's several miles inside the state line. You're required to submit for a search if they choose to do so. The justification? To make sure you aren't transporting fruit or other organics into the state. This isn't a couple vehicles on the side of the road doing random checks, it's highway lanes diverted through toll booth-like structures and every vehicle must stop. For agriculture police. In America.

But isn't it already a law that you must have identification and be able to prove who you are, at all times?

[brimic]

The justification? To make sure you aren't transporting fruit or other organics into the state.

Really? They can do that?
It would be mighty fun if other states ban an import of Californian produce.