Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Berkeley Moves To Reduce Police State

June 22, 2012 by  

Berkeley Moves To Reduce Police State
UPI
OWS protests in Berkeley, Calif., made city leaders rethink how far police can go to stop civil disobedience.

The City Council in Berkeley, Calif., has decided to move to do away with some post-9/11 police powers that assault civil liberties. Those powers made it easier for local, State and Federal authorities to spy on citizens and share information.

The Council began investigating the need for reforms following questions about why police officers were being used to control demonstrators during Occupy protests.

According to Contra Costa Times, the council decided this week to approve recommendations that would make it more difficult for police to report suspected terrorists and criminals to Federal authorities. Another provision restricts police from gathering intelligence about people who are engaged in nonviolent, non-felonious civil disobedience.

They also moved to stop police from holding some people the Federal government wants in jail for immigration violations. The new policy would prohibit the police department from holding prisoners beyond their normal release for the Federal government, unless they have been convicted of a violent or felonious crime in the preceding five days.

The City Council also says it wants police to follow stricter guidelines when they decide to report people they deem suspicious to the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center. The center shares information with local police departments and Federal authorities. The intelligence-sharing hub was created following the Sept. 11 attacks and is one of 50 throughout the Nation.

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Berkeley Moves To Reduce Police State”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Scott in SC
    • Robert Smith

      Have ANY of the new laws actually kept a terrorist from doing bad things?

      Rob

      • SJJolly

        Just not enough terrorists in the USA, foreign or domestic-bred, to keep the police busy.

      • s c

        Comrade ‘r,’ it is HILARIOUS that your W H ‘God’ has done NOTHING to get rid of those nasty laws that utopians SUPPOSEDLY hate. And the thought that a place like Berkeley would be ‘offended’ is off-the-chart funny, comrade.
        I have noticed for many years that most utopians love to whiz and moan when it’s “convenient,” but when utopians get a chance to make a difference, it’s always easier to whiz and moan than to take a stand and DEMAND that their elected icons really CHANGE things and make Amerika better.
        WHY is that, comrade? Is it because utopians are so AVERSE to having functional standards? Whatever it is, the collective mentality in that Big Tent must be devolving. Like it or not, this is NOT the best and brightest administration in Amerikan history. If you will recall, certain politicians tried that ruse back in the ’60s. It was crap THEN. and It’s CRAP now.
        This prez, in particular, is shifty – I’ll give him that much – but when push comes to shove,
        your prez is somewhere between second-rate and third-rate in mental ability. You ought to KNOW that anyone who has to RELY on a teleprompter to communicate has serious problems in the cranial area. Have a nice day – somewhere else, comrade.

    • Thor

      In a word…

      ‘powers that assault civil liberties’ = laws established with the tacit agreement of the people

      ‘State and Federal authorities to spy on citizens’= surveillance warranted by illegal activities

      ‘police officers were being used to control demonstrators during Occupy protests’ = crowd control measures used for over two hundred years to protect the interests of those citizens (usually a majority) who disagree with the protesters

      ‘people who are engaged in nonviolent, non-felonious civil disobedience’ = criminals who warrant surveillance because they break laws that could be changed by legislative means by any majority that deemed it necessary

      ‘They also moved to stop police from holding some people the Federal government wants in jail for immigration violations.’ In other words they violated Federal law to create the very kind of amnesty for which we are berating Barrack Obama.

      Sam, I am beginning to see a problem with the sense of ‘cause and effect’ here. In Charleston, SC there is a union lock out. The local police stay out of sight until the union thugs start breaking things and hurting people; then they show up and break up what is no longer a peaceful demonstration. The next day the commentary in the local paper concludes that if the police had not shown up there would not have been any violence.

      “Occupiers” camp out in the city and are left alone until they start defecating on the public square and blocking people from going to work and raping whom they please, stealing food, etc, etc—and when the police respond to ‘control the demonstrators’ they are violating peoples’ rights.

      Frankly, I am beginning to look forward to a time when each citizen gets to exert his or her own control over whatever comes …let the Zombie Apocalypse roll!

  • eddie47d

    Berkley has been in the forefront for Liberty and Justice for many decades. No surprise that they would be once again be demanding accountability from government and the police. Neither the left or the right wants an overbearing government and having common ground on this issue.

  • http://Firefox John Golt

    Berkeley, the home of Angela Davis. Black Panther, Communist, Hater of White’s and AMERICA! FVCK Berkeley, home also of the Most Fvcked up Gov of Calif TWICE!

    • http://ccopakeman.wordpress.com copakeman

      yea for u cal berkley, may it sink back in the ocean !

  • T. Jefferson

    Never thought I would agree with this bunch of left wing pansies. You Go Berkeley!

  • Chester

    John, not home to Ronnie,and you know it. Want to know who messed California around like no other, take a good look at what Mr. Reagan accomplished in his time in office. Hadn’t been for him tearing things down, a lot of California’s expenses now would be far less, as there would have been no need to repair what he destroyed after he left office. Granted, any idiot can get two terms in office out there, if they grease the right wheels, and Ronny played the Hollywood links to the hilt, while at the same time destroying what had been a decent system for not only welfare recipients, who he hated with a capital H, but anything else that might help those not so well off make a better way of life for themselves.

    • http://google gary gerke

      Once again, a liberal progressive makes a broad statement of blame that is thirty years old without supporting varifiable facts.

      • Robert Smith

        Here is a verifiable fact:

        “Despite the sea of happy children’s faces that graced the “feel-good” commercials, poverty exploded in the inner cities of America during the Reagan years, claiming children as its principal victims. The reason for this suffering was that programs targeted to low-income families, such as AFDC, were cut back far more than programs such as Social Security. As a result of cuts in such targeted programs-including school lunches and subsidized housing-federal benefit programs for households with incomes of less than $10,000 a year declined nearly 8% during the Reagan first term while federal aid for households with more than $40,000 income was almost unchanged.”

        Source: The Role of a Lifetime, by Lou Cannon, p. 516-17 , Jul 2, 1991

        Rob

      • Robert Smith

        Here is another fact:

        “One Republican, however, wrote four single-spaced pages to Reagan defending FAP against Reagan’s criticisms—George Bush. Bush hastened to embrace Reagan’s principles that welfare reform should have as its goal the reduction of the number of people on welfare, a serious work requirements, and a removal of the incentives for family breakup. “Our disagreement is therefore not philosophical but factual,” Bush wrote. Bush thought Reagan had his facts wrong. Bush challenged Reagan’s view that FAP would cost $15 billion instead of $4.4 billion. Bush also thought the work requirement was sufficient, and reduced the incentive for family breakup.”

        From: http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/oped/hayward/99/gipper.html

        Then there was Reaganomics oops, voodoo economics. That was the term applied by George Bush Sr.

        We all know how “trickle down” has worked by the way things are today.

        Rob

        • http://google gary gerke

          Once again a liberal tactic to deflict the conversation from the actual content of the message. No one cares what Bush thought about Reagans policies. You still have not supported your first statement with varifiable sources Here are mine!
          Was Ronald Reagan a good president? – Yahoo! Answersanswers.yahoo.com › … › PoliticsEn caché – Similares – Traducir esta página
          Haz hecho público que te gusta. Deshacer
          20 Sep 2008 – When Reagan took office the economy was one of the double-digit inflation and high interest … Ronald Reagan was a very good President.

          Was Ronald Reagan good or bad for the economy?‎ – 1 Abr. 2011
          How Was Ronald Reagan a Good President?‎ – 25 Jul. 2010
          Was Ronald Reagan a good president or not?‎ – 24 Feb. 2010
          Why is Ronald Reagan considered to be a good president ?‎ – 16 Mar. 2007

  • Ralph Jones

    My comment is directed to the question Robert Smith made “Have ANY of the new laws actually kept a terrorist from doing bad things?” To that I say it is better to free a thousand wrong doers, than to restrict or restrain one lawful citizen… And of course, you all knew I’d quote Benjamin Franklin… “Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety” The price of freedom is insecurity… Might I add, that 50’000 people die every year in auto accidents, and 2000 people died in 911, though it was a heinous act, it really is minor in the grand scale of things… All governments use this sort of occurrence, to sensationalize and relinquish the citizenry from more of their freedoms… Government always seeks to “govern completely”… Don’t fall for their propaganda…

  • FEDUP!

    Robert has called people opposed to gay marriage Tha American Taliban. He is a Moron and doesn’t know the true definition of a terrost which is a big spreading problem. NDAA is a good way to lock up more innocent people.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.