Not me or mine . . . we're going somewhere else.

Play fantasy-fascist with other innocent dupes.

The NS Microwave site is interesting too. Notice that you have to be a law enforcement official to view the "Covert Cameras -> Concealment" section.

http://www.nsmicrowave.com/products/cameras/index.htm

"How come it's taken this long for this "promoter" to speak out against illegal police state activity?"

Probably because the only "illegal activity" taking place was on the behalf of the drug users. It's a public park, cops are allowed to conduct surveillance.

"All about the money," another says.

Heck, I'm on the hippies side, but they're smokin' way too much pot if they ever thought it was about anything but the money.

The solution is simple. Go back to holding these events on private land instead of government land.

"one of which was disguised as a vent stack on the roof of a restroom building "

On the roof. Not in the stall. Spatial reasoning mom. Of course I'm sure you won't be the only person in this forum today to read that sentence without reading it at all.

macon, not all of there are dopers and as a sober, law abiding, paying customer, I felt very violated when I found out about this.

logrith, 'so long'? I would imagine at first, if he didn't know about it, he was in a bit of shock, secondly, he had to deal with loads of hate mail, including some from yours truly, and then he had to come up with a statement, which he did two days ago, it's just now getting to the LJWorld. I think he's taken a reasonable amount of time to respond and not just react.

I can guarantee you the promoters did not know about

the cameras. Next year, wait until the last minute and

switch the location! One more thing, in order to

prevent this from happening again don't re-elect Sheriff

Trap! Law enforcement from outside the county can't

come into the county to conduct and investigation

without an invitation from the sheriff. If you don't

believe me, call the KBI and ask them!

DHD

BTW. According to the second article (prev. post) the Allied Defense Group (for which NS Microwave is an affiliate) recieved $3.8 million more in funding from those generous DoD fellows.

Now it's more clear. 3.8 mil is a pretty good ROI for a quarter million dollar "spy commercials". Not to mention, all the equipment that they get to sell to the law enforcement officials who got to wet their appetites using it.

The last sentence in the first article (prev post) alludes that Larrytown cops are looking in to getting some of the stuff for themselves.

Can't wait.

An article from Government Security News on the Wak Fest

http://www.gsnmagazine.com/sep_06/surveillance_concerts.html

Here's one about the company who "advertised" the equipement, NS Microwave.

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.asp?Feed=PR&Date=20060810&ID=5937441&Symbol=US:ADG

this is from the second article...

"The current situation in Iraq demands the type of expansible, mobile surveillance system produced by NS Microwave that has been used successfully by the law enforcement community to reduce and deter crime in major urban environments where the war on drugs and violent criminal activity is an everyday event."

Yes, yes. Deciet. Spying. Get those evil doers. Holy crap, man. This is not my America. Someone once said that you can have freedom, or you can have security, but don't count on having both.

BDitty said : I don't remember hearing too many stories about gang shoot outs over the selling of beer or cigs.****

Ever hear of prohibition> It was big during the 1920s and early 30s. I think tecnically the Mafia could have been considered a "gang" and they had lots of shoot outs over beer.

And the cigs wars are looming.

Y'know, pot's illegal. I got no sympathy for people who broke the law, knew they were breaking the law, and got busted. There's no accidentally not knowing possession is against the law. You choose to do that.

Now, should pot be illegal? I don't think so. But till it is, folks in public places need to be taking some care and using some discretion if they want to light up.

On the cameras, I think it was a right heinous thing to do. I think visible police presence prevents crime, where surveillance catches criminals, and I'd rather prevent crime any day. I am willing to bet they didn't clarify the extent of their surveillance with the promoter, and perhaps he and his partner thought 'increased observation' meant more cops?

We can be a culture committed to preventing crime, or we can be a 'gotcha' culture living in fear that we'll cross a line where a camera can see. I know which one I'd rather live in.

Taking down tag numbers and waiting to catch people as they leave the grounds, a POSSIBLE future crime, is not akin to this. They caught people IN THE ACT of breaking the law. Mostly MIP and drug DEALING.
I've had an MIP, guess whose fault it was? MINE! Not the cops for catching me. Have some @@#$#$ personal responsibility. Smoke your pot, I don't care, but stop whining about the police making it hard for you to break the law.

A visible police presence only moves these crimes to another area, it doesn't prevent them. As it was the dealers caught were gone at least for the duration of the event. It's the cost of doing that business.

log, I think you've been having wacky tabaccy before posting. Responses to your most recent post's paragraphs are as follows.

1) If the cops come to your tent, and it is open, and contraband is in plain view, you lose. Consider this similar to parking on the street and having an AK-47 on your passenger seat. Sure, it might be your car, but the gun is in plain view. Your "think of the children" ploy won't work if the children are in plain view.

2) How did they monitor energy use? The cops do not control Westar, and I doubt there are any who know how to read a kilowatt-hour meter. I don't know the particulars of the case and therefore can't make any definitive statement, but warrants are powerful tools that can be used to get information so long as a judge says so. In an open case, subpoenas are powerful too.

3) $12 billion dollars was a cost to whom and for what? "Busted" for marijuana possession could be a low-grade misdemeanor or ordinance violation; how many more severe traffic citations of equal value were handed out in 2005 and how much did they "cost"? Maybe we should ban cars!

4) Find a politician who will get those items on a ballot. The medical one could fly, but the others? Have fun with that.

Last sentence: This is a country of 296 million people. Pot smokers are a minority that do not believe that the laws of this country apply to them. If you're one of them, it isn't your country to take back.

Bditty- You're generalizing.

When have you ever read about a shoot-out over pot? A pot-bust gone bad? Murdered babies in a Marijuana "lab"?

Violence happens because of high-priced cocaine and heroine. Not marijuana.

Again, bottom line, spying on American citizens is wrong. Admit it or not, this is a flat-out case of spying on American citizens by our government. Is that the American way?

It was Ben Franklin that said something about anyone willing to give up a few freedoms for security deserves neither. I agree.

DownHomeDude,

Douglas County Sheriff is Ken McGovern.

"leave the tye dyes at home if you want people to listen to you."

What difference does it make what clothes someone wears? There's a whole lot more BS coming from folks in suits than from those wearing tie-dye, but it's not the suits that are saying it.

"Too many people make up and then whine about too many make believe injustices and conspiracies."

And too many people are rolling over, following blindly and giving up freedoms little by little. I am going to say this again: Spying on American citizens by the government is wrong. Period.

Logrithmic,

Counterpoint 1: "There is an expectation of privacy in everything we do." Please cite the law(s) which detail this. If you are walking down the street and someone sees you picking your nose and they laugh, you can't tell them they weren't allowed to look at you. When it comes to filming children undressing in a tent, well, production of child pornography is a crime. However, that isn't the point here. You are making irrelevant and inflammatory statements to distract people from the actual case: recording to identify drug dealers. Seriously, lets be reasonable. A drug dealer is not going to be found with a camera pointed at kids in a tent. It was a "think of the children" ploy with subtle tones of "Chewbacca Defense" whether you intended it or not.

Counterpoint 2: No, I don't think its fine for everyone's energy usage to be monitored. Perhaps you did not actually read my post regarding warrants, subpoenas, and a police officer's inability to interpret data on a kilowatt-hour meter. Also, the $12 billion dollar price tag didn't have anything to do with this scenario, it was from another that you mentioned, so it seems rather foolish to tell me to "have another drink."

Counterpoint 3: Law enforcement? Yes. Not the kind of law enforcement official most would be familiar with though. Read my profile. Been there, done that, probably will do it again later on in life. I agree that some of our deficits can be helped by taxing the bejeesus out of alcohol and tobacco. I absolutely loathe smoking and am vehemently against irresponsible drinking. If there was an option to levy huge taxes on alcohol and tobacco on a ballot, I would vote for it. I understand what it could mean for our country quite well.

Counterpoint 4: I'm not particularly opposed to anything you replied with here. The problem lies with getting a politician (or several) to support the changes you suggest. Its a big task, and I don't think our society can do it right now. In a few years, its quite possible though.

I did not "fail" to mention nicotine or alcohol, both of which are dangerous, addictive substances. There was no reason for me to mention them; in your post I replied to there was not a single reference to either in any context. However, as I stated above, I think that these should be taxed so hard as to be a deter people from purchasing large quantities of either. This will decrease the amount in the open (because people won't be able to afford them) and will likely reduce deaths and sickness from related conditions stemming from alcohol and tobacco use.

If my 295 million includes children, your 50 million does too. Look at the vast numbers of high schoolers that smoke marijuana. When the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of minorities in cases like civil rights, as you mention, it is because there is some sort of oppression against a class of people, usually race or ethnicity. These are unmodifiable traits, and the miniority wins over the majority because they can't change who they are. Someone who picks up a joint makes a choice: they can put it down again. Using your logic from your comment, it would be unconstitutional to condemn murderers. This doesn't work.

I don't know anything about control over research, and so I can't make an educated comment on it.

I'm curious why you think I'm a "boozer." I said nothing to indicate so. In fact, from time to time, I enjoy a beer with friends or a nice glass of wine with dinner, and thats it. If it is in reference to my "wacky tabaccy" line, I understand; however, you earned it by admitting to smoking weed in one of your posts. Its intriguing though that later you say you do not smoke.

Have a great evening!