The police state is inevitable. Just sit back and enjoy it.
In a radio interview on Friday, Bloomberg acknowledged there are privacy concerns when asked about the use of drones by the New York Police Department or other entities. He suggested, however, that there’s little people can do to stop the “tides from coming in.”
The mayor said, “We’re going into a different world, unchartered. And, like it or not, what people can do or governments can do is different, and you can to some extent control, but you can’t keep the tides from coming in. We’re going to have more visibility and less privacy. I don’t see how you stop that. And it’s not a question of whether I think it’s good or bad. I just don’t see how you could stop that because we’re going to have them.”
While he acknowledged the practice is “scary,” Bloomberg said that “intellectually” he sees little difference between drones and security cameras mounted around cities. And he appeared to dismiss legislation that would limit how the drones are used to protect people’s privacy.
That is the most horrible defense of privacy I have ever seen.
When it comes to liberal, big government, thought, Bloomberg makes me cringe almost as much as the leader of N. Korea.
He thinks he can control what people drink. What guns they can have, Where they can smoke, But we can’t do anything about the spy in the sky? How about a law?
How about a law?
How about a Stinger missile?
[This comment directed at the liberals who use the, “Second Amendment doesn’t guarantee the right to possess a Stinger missile” argument]
I don’t see any place in the Constitution where it guarantees to the federal government that it can spy on its citizens. In fact, I think it says just the opposite!