"The Makings of a Police State"

[CarlosAndSveta 808]

The purposes served by Google Maps and the likes won't lead to fines, litigation, arrest, prosecution and a lose of liberty. You still don't see a difference? However, your bias is duly noted.

If the EPA was doing their duty they could've actually contacted property owners like they had in the past if they wanted to have a look around, rather than engage in surveillance they kept from the public. Nothing wrong with the EPA doing their job -- let them get a warrant if they want to search private property or get congressional approval.

EPA was not merely taking pretty pics of cattle feeding, they were searching specific targets via the stealth surveillance.

I'll repeat the meme that Right Wingers use all the time. If you aren't doing anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about the Govt. taking pictures of your property. Surveillance can lead to fines, litigation, arrest, prosecution and loss of liberty only if you are doing something wrong.

So you are ok with people committing crimes and getting away with it?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Google Maps, Google Earth, Yahoo! Maps, Microsoft Virtual Earth.

For the record, these companies buy aerial photography that has been already shot. Regarding google street view there is a form floating out there somewhere that you can send in to have your personal property blurred.

[Leatherneck 693]

I'll repeat the meme that Right Wingers use all the time. If you aren't doing anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about the Govt. taking pictures of your property. Surveillance can lead to fines, litigation, arrest, prosecution and loss of liberty only if you are doing something wrong.

Really, are you that willing to take your liberty for granted and risk your property based an erroneous belief in the benevolence of govt? If you climbed from under a rock last week, I could believe you're that naive or incredibly ignorant about govt -- but you didn't.

1. Mike and Chantell Sackett would't agree with you and likely to find your statement laughable. SCOTUS doesn't side with you either in this case.

So you are ok with people committing crimes and getting away with it?

Yeah, right. Are you ok with a govt agency spying on folks that have committed no crime, where they have no approval to do so, with no congressional oversight?

Using your logic, if you aren't doing anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about the Govt. taking pictures of your property knocking on your front door wanting to have a look around your house/property, right?

Edited June 4, 2012 by Leatherneck

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Using your logic, if you aren't doing anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about the Govt. taking pictures of your property knocking on your front door wanting to have a look around your house/property, right?

Fine by me. Health and safety inspections. Building permits. Game wardens. Bail bondsmen. Probation officers. Your front door is not as impervious as you might believe.

Edited June 4, 2012 by ☼

[CarlosAndSveta 808]

Using your logic, if you aren't doing anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about the Govt. taking pictures of your property knocking on your front door wanting to have a look around your house/property, right?

That wouldn't bother me one bit since I have already agreed to let them do that. In my job I am allowed to telework and as part of my agreement they can come and inspect the inside of my house if they want.

[CarlosAndSveta 808]

Using your logic, if you aren't doing anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about the Govt. taking pictures of your property knocking on your front door wanting to have a look around your house/property, right?

Please explain how the hell this case is on point with whether or not the EPA was wrong in using aerial surveillance to monitor compliance with environmental laws? Do you think it is relevant just because the EPA was involved? If you don't like the government of the U.S. then you are free to emigrate to this imaginary land of Libertrarianism that you seek. Let us know when you get there.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

If you don't like the government of the U.S. then you are free to emigrate to this imaginary land of Libertrarianism that you seek. Let us know when you get there.

May I suggest Somalia? No government intrusion there. A true paradise.

[slim 1,533]

There's supposed to be no government intrusion here either. A true paradise.

[Leatherneck 693]

Please explain how the hell this case is on point with whether or not the EPA was wrong in using aerial surveillance to monitor compliance with environmental laws? Do you think it is relevant just because the EPA was involved? If you don't like the government of the U.S. then you are free to emigrate to this imaginary land of Libertrarianism that you seek. Let us know when you get there.

Surveillance can lead to fines, litigation, arrest, prosecution and loss of liberty only if you are doing something wrong.

It's relevant only because of the asinine statement you made, as quoted. So I pointed out a case to illustrate the ignorance or naivety of your statement. Relevant because you don't have to be "doing something wrong," that leads to fines, etc, and yes, because the EPA was involved and it illustrates again an overreach in authority and held themselves above the law. Be it aerial surveillance done with no authority or the referenced case -- EPA overstepped its authority.

[Leatherneck 693]

That wouldn't bother me one bit since I have already agreed to let them do that. In my job I am allowed to telework and as part of my agreement they can come and inspect the inside of my house if they want.

As a condition of your employment, if you agree to that, then so be it. If you want to open your house to any agency outside of your employment to go on a fishing expedition, that's your business also, you're certainly free to do that. What is not ok, is for you to castigate others that would not subject their property to govt scrutiny with the mantra "If you aren't doing anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about."

If you want to take your liberty for grant, ok, your call -- but allow others to stand on principle if they decide its not ok.

[Leatherneck 693]

Please explain how the hell this case is on point with whether or not the EPA was wrong in using aerial surveillance to monitor compliance with environmental laws? Do you think it is relevant just because the EPA was involved? If you don't like the government of the U.S. then you are free to emigrate to this imaginary land of Libertrarianism that you seek. Let us know when you get there.

Save regurgitating that left wing/progressive nonsense. Let me set the record straight, now, I love it here, I like govt -- necessary, Constitutional govt! A Republican form of govt is mandated and guaranteed here, it is you that does not appreciate liberty and freedom -- you leave!

The problem is liberals/progressives demand big govt and/or support politicians that promise and delivery that big govt. That big govt does what big govt always does -- continues to expand and grab more power to justify its existence at the expense of individual freedom/liberty. When small govt types speak out or attempt to put the govt beast back in its proper role, somehow in minds of left-wing whack jobs/progressives, those folks should leave. You got it twisted -- you can find any number of cradle-to-grave govts you want, elsewhere!

Edited June 5, 2012 by Leatherneck

[ready4ONE 5,400]

As a condition of your employment, if you agree to that, then so be it. If you want to open your house to any agency outside of your employment to go on a fishing expedition, that's your business also, you're certainly free to do that. What is not ok, is for you to castigate others that would not subject their property to govt scrutiny with the mantra "If you aren't doing anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about."

If you want to take your liberty for grant, ok, your call -- but allow others to stand on principle if they decide its not ok.

Many if us root for the SWAT team, not for the barricaded moron with an arsenal and a false sense they had every right not to let the County Inspector on their personally sovereign property cause they don't care for the Gubm't.

[Leatherneck 693]

Fine by me. Health and safety inspections. Building permits. Game wardens. Bail bondsmen. Probation officers. Your front door is not as impervious as you might believe.

Health and safety inspections - who's health and who's safety?

Building permits - makes sense to me.

Game wardens - you have illegal wildlife inside your home?

Bail bondsmen - are you out on bail?

Probation officers - are you on probation?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Animal control, child welfare...

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Fine by me. Health and safety inspections. Building permits. Game wardens. Bail bondsmen. Probation officers. Your front door is not as impervious as you might believe.

Obviously rights have been lost if you have a bondsmen or probation officer. I believe animal control needs a court order. You can turn away an assessor or a building inspector.......just expect higher taxes from the assessor and a red flag from the inspector...