Obama asks Congress to fund 50,000 police body cameras

[wwest5829]

If he's talking about federal police forces such as the FBI, DEA, ATF, Secret Service, etc, etc, all of which are controlled by the Executive Branch he has but to instruct the invidual heads of departments to budget for it. If he's talking about state and local governments it is absolutely none of his affair and reeks of pandering and shit stirring.

Never the less, it seems to be a very good idea, in The USA. To be honest, it seems that some parts of the Police force, is a bit out of control.

Your avatar is Washington?

Ok, good ideas? No, this is a bad idea for the very reasons stated above: "It is none of [his] affair." It is none of federal governments business. One cannot point to one single thing for which the federal government has done lately for which is has real constitutional authority or actually even achieved its objective. Few recall one of Obamas priorities has been a lesser known desire to create or unify of national police force with near military capability- paraphrasing obama pretty closely.

Never let a crisis go to waste is the hallmark of obama, as described and stated by his chief of staff. It is a very bad thing to force through coercion or the withholding of money federal intrusion. Look at every other facet of life progressive apparatchiks have F--d up life in America. Cameras may be a good thing but not a federal option at all.

Damn those seat belt laws where the federal gov't threatened a cutoff of highway funds if states did not adopt mandatory seat belt laws.... Sorry, I am in favor of progress if it adds the the greater welfare of the American people. If it were not so, we would all still have outhouses and unsafe drinking water, as well.

I don't consider it progress, I consider it regressive. Progress suggests moving toward the new, evolution. This is not evolution. After all, we have repeated histories of governments with overwhelming power and the slippery slope that ensued from such unchecked authority; in fact, much of the US jurisprudence is predicated upon facts not responded to or rebuked becoming new facts of precedent. Indeed, it has been said (paraphrase) "when we exchange our freedoms for safety we lose both and deserve neither." Society is filled with examples of smart choices that have aided our culture, improved the quality of life, and seem on the face, a good idea. However, this is not the purview of the Federal, this is a states issue. The Federal powers are few and clearly enumerated; all other powers belong to the States. Using the stalking horse of the Commerce Clause and perversion of

the 10th amendment, enumerable acts have now been inflicted upon the American people under the guise of "For the Children" and other sick, twisted language that serves to obfuscate rather than really explain the authority. The Federal government is supposed to be tightly shackled in a constitutional prison. Noting that it is run amuck, and that American is a dystopia, it can be reasonably concluded that among the causes of the problems is the asinine, endless levy of laws and regulations devolving from a detached Federal Branch upon the American people like fiat, or decree. Whenever a rule or law must appeal to the emotive rather than cite its authority one should grease up because they will be bent over.

I hardly think it is reasonable logic to presume that there would be no bathrooms nor safe drinking water had x y z not happened. It is invariably true that when people decide to do something they can act locally. There have always been Federalists and Anti Federalists, however, the argument is supposed to be relatively settled by the construction of law, our constitution and Bill of Rights. In this expression the points of view on both sides were worked out in convention and consensus achieved.The increasing federalization of every aspect of American life is not familial, loving Dear Uncle care. It is oppressive and history informs us that for every act of unchecked usurpation by an overwhelming force- government- that power further colaces and risks despotism. Having a nationalized police force or the seeds toward that end is a dream worthy of the Stasi!

I certainly think we have a substantial area of agreement concerning such areas as NSA, Patriot Act over reach. But I cut more slack than you, I think, in regards to looking to the Federal Government, rather than states or locales, when appealing to the courts for protections under the Bill of Rights. There are a substantial number of issues than cannot or will not be handled by locales or states. We can see these issues most decidedly in education. No, for my money, I do not think 50 state education systems, in this day and age is what serves the people best. I favor riding herd and raising holy hell to reign in those who over reach but I think there is a definite role for federal actions.

[Zpete]

If he's talking about federal police forces such as the FBI, DEA, ATF, Secret Service, etc, etc, all of which are controlled by the Executive Branch he has but to instruct the invidual heads of departments to budget for it. If he's talking about state and local governments it is absolutely none of his affair and reeks of pandering and shit stirring.

Never the less, it seems to be a very good idea, in The USA. To be honest, it seems that some parts of the Police force, is a bit out of control.

.

The only honest god fearing cops are on TV Shows.

[finnomick]

Which country's gold is he going to use to fund this one I wonder ?

[VegasVic]

I'm all for cops wearing cameras, but that will put poor ole Rev. Al out of business, or will it? Perhaps even when presented with vetted eyewitness trestimony backed by by those new cop cameras, good ole Rev. Al will still protest and incite riots Some people will do anything to make a lot of noise and try and keep peopeles minds off the fact that he is a tax cheat