Government now has right to track you using GPS

[Adios]

This is horrible news for strip clubs, fetish shops and preachers wanting to go to a good old peep show and do some meth.

After all, if government agents can track people with secretly planted GPS devices virtually anytime they want, without having to go to a court for a warrant, we are one step closer to a classic police state — with technology taking on the role of the KGB or the East German Stasi.

The guy who invents a face-stomping machine will be one rich motherfucker.

I think Martin-Lockheed already has the contract.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

And since most of them are also poor, marginalizing this type of "right" on the basis of who can own property big enough to secure their belongings makes a clear path to which way the courts were awarding this one.

I wanted to comment on this, because it's not true. Most smudgy people in the US are middle or working class. A higher percentage of smudgy people are impoverished than the percentage of white people based on the total population, but the widespread idea that "most" brown people are poor, uneducated, or have gang affiliations is purely a media misrepresentation designed to make white people afraid of us.

[Cain]

Given the government has recently asserted it can legally kill the fuck out of you without any kind of trial or given reason whatsoever, is it just me or do things like this come across as small fry?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I expect that this clashes fairly heavily with some existing laws about vandalism... I'd be interested in seeing someone approach it from that angle.

[Requia ☣]

And since most of them are also poor, marginalizing this type of "right" on the basis of who can own property big enough to secure their belongings makes a clear path to which way the courts were awarding this one.

I wanted to comment on this, because it's not true. Most smudgy people in the US are middle or working class. A higher percentage of smudgy people are impoverished than the percentage of white people based on the total population, but the widespread idea that "most" brown people are poor, uneducated, or have gang affiliations is purely a media misrepresentation designed to make white people afraid of us.

define 'not poor', for the purpose of this conversation, anybody who lives in an apartment building, or who doesn't have a garage at their house, is 'poor'.  That sounds like a good chunk of the working class to me.

[Don Coyote]

And since most of them are also poor, marginalizing this type of "right" on the basis of who can own property big enough to secure their belongings makes a clear path to which way the courts were awarding this one.

I wanted to comment on this, because it's not true. Most smudgy people in the US are middle or working class. A higher percentage of smudgy people are impoverished than the percentage of white people based on the total population, but the widespread idea that "most" brown people are poor, uneducated, or have gang affiliations is purely a media misrepresentation designed to make white people afraid of us.

define 'not poor', for the purpose of this conversation, anybody who lives in an apartment building, or who doesn't have a garage at their house, is 'poor'.  That sounds like a good chunk of the working class to me.

Basically anyone who cannot maintain physical control over their property unless physically present.

car on the street? tagged
you don't have a gated yard/drive way? tagged
you left your gate open? probably tagged.

If a civilian does this it's stalking.
If the cops do this it's tailing someone with out being physically present.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

And since most of them are also poor, marginalizing this type of "right" on the basis of who can own property big enough to secure their belongings makes a clear path to which way the courts were awarding this one.

I wanted to comment on this, because it's not true. Most smudgy people in the US are middle or working class. A higher percentage of smudgy people are impoverished than the percentage of white people based on the total population, but the widespread idea that "most" brown people are poor, uneducated, or have gang affiliations is purely a media misrepresentation designed to make white people afraid of us.

define 'not poor', for the purpose of this conversation, anybody who lives in an apartment building, or who doesn't have a garage at their house, is 'poor'.  That sounds like a good chunk of the working class to me.

How has this been established? Are we redefining "Not rich" as "Poor"? Because that's stupid.

[Don Coyote]

And since most of them are also poor, marginalizing this type of "right" on the basis of who can own property big enough to secure their belongings makes a clear path to which way the courts were awarding this one.

I wanted to comment on this, because it's not true. Most smudgy people in the US are middle or working class. A higher percentage of smudgy people are impoverished than the percentage of white people based on the total population, but the widespread idea that "most" brown people are poor, uneducated, or have gang affiliations is purely a media misrepresentation designed to make white people afraid of us.

define 'not poor', for the purpose of this conversation, anybody who lives in an apartment building, or who doesn't have a garage at their house, is 'poor'.  That sounds like a good chunk of the working class to me.

How has this been established? Are we redefining "Not rich" as "Poor"? Because that's stupid.

For purposes of this particular case I think it makes sense.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Yeah, I guess it's cool if we just decide words mean whatever we want them to in any given situation.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I mean, I own a $400,000 house across the street from Irving Park but I'm poor, because I don't have a gate. Sure, totally. And most brown people are poor, because they don't have gates.

Impeccable logic! Blue ribbon time.

[Cain]

I would define most "not rich" as poor in the USA, if only because the middle class is shrivelling up over there like a dessicated husk.

I'm sure there is a downside to that, though.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Goddammit, I am a fucking dragon.

[Jenne]

And since most of them are also poor, marginalizing this type of "right" on the basis of who can own property big enough to secure their belongings makes a clear path to which way the courts were awarding this one.

I wanted to comment on this, because it's not true. Most smudgy people in the US are middle or working class. A higher percentage of smudgy people are impoverished than the percentage of white people based on the total population, but the widespread idea that "most" brown people are poor, uneducated, or have gang affiliations is purely a media misrepresentation designed to make white people afraid of us.

Working poor--does that suit better?  Sorry, but most of the poor in San Diego/CA don't tend to be white. 

And I need to see data on what you're talking about.  Most data sets I know of on government assistance programs and school performance data DO show a significant gap in income levels across cultural, racial and language differences.

[Jenne]

And since most of them are also poor, marginalizing this type of "right" on the basis of who can own property big enough to secure their belongings makes a clear path to which way the courts were awarding this one.

I wanted to comment on this, because it's not true. Most smudgy people in the US are middle or working class. A higher percentage of smudgy people are impoverished than the percentage of white people based on the total population, but the widespread idea that "most" brown people are poor, uneducated, or have gang affiliations is purely a media misrepresentation designed to make white people afraid of us.

define 'not poor', for the purpose of this conversation, anybody who lives in an apartment building, or who doesn't have a garage at their house, is 'poor'.  That sounds like a good chunk of the working class to me.

How has this been established? Are we redefining "Not rich" as "Poor"? Because that's stupid.

The distinctions between working poor and underemployed middle class are growing thin, according to US and world data collected in recent years since the economic crash.

So, across subsets, Blacks and Latinos have lost their homes at faster rates than Asians and Whites.  I think we can agree that if you have equity, you're not, technically, poor.  You rarely have food stamps and unemployment, free school lunch programs and qualify for Head Start.

However, there's a lower middle class (the underemployed or single income folks--and most of these are what my family consist of, actually) that do not own homes but are also not POOR either.  Yet they really need the above services to not continue to go into debt because the cost of living is so damned high, especially for renters.

[Jenne]

I mean, I own a $400,000 house across the street from Irving Park but I'm poor, because I don't have a gate. Sure, totally. And most brown people are poor, because they don't have gates.

Impeccable logic! Blue ribbon time.

No, turn it around, upside down.

Those without the means to gate their property from the nuisance that is the government and the public usurption are likely poor, and less likely to be White, though of course they exist as well.

I was saying this was another way for those with the power (who still are mostly white) to not give a shit about what's happening to the people who can't afford to care about such overreaching.