Iowa police comparing logbooks against Pilot Rewards Cards?

Herein lies the root of the problem. Most countries throughout the world were founded for the benefit of the government rather than that of the people. I'm not picking on you, so please don't take this like that. From previous posts you have made, a reasonable supposition is you are of European or British/Scotish/Irish/Welsh descent. In almost all of the countries in that part of the world, people are taught from a very early age to comply without complaint with the demands of government. Hence, the viewpoint illustrated above.

The United States is kind of an anomally in this respect. This federation was founded on skepticism of government's ability to do anything to benefit people. It was founded on the idea that a government afraid of its people is the healthiest government to have. Hence, the existence of the First and Second Amendments: Freedom of Association and Speech and Right to Bear Arms. At one time, our children were taught to be free thinkers and to be suspicious of government. It was considered normal and healthy to ask, "Where's your warrant, flatfoot?" When faced with such invasions of privacy.

Since the race toward Socialism began, this new theory of, "Well, if you have nothing to hide..." has taken root, almost to the point of simple refusal for questioning and search becomes Probable Cause for an officer to initiate detention and search anyway. This is not natural for this federation. That's why you're seeing such resistance to invasion of privacy. And I wholeheartedly support said resistance and plan on joining it if ever given the opportunity.

 

America used to be innocent until proven guilty, that's quickly changing to guilty until you prove yourself innocent...And lilililil is right, it's these little situations that take us further to the latter scenario...You can't just say, I'm ok so I should have no problem with it...If IT'S not right in the first place, I shouldn't have to do it...

 

Good points!...Can you ever remember a time when Americans were more afraid of what their Govt was going to do to them than the people we're fighting in a war?...I'm 46 and I can't...

 

Actually, I'm from the UK, but you are right. That's exactly my attitude. I see LEOs as protection from those who would seek to harm me, mine and the society in which I live. I really hope I'm not being hopelessly naive.

I have worked in countries where you are expected to pay a ticket, just because what passes locally for a cop needs some money for breakfast. In fact, I've even had a "cop" tell me that I can afford to pay him, and therefore I should, both of us knowing full well that the payment was going into his back pocket.

I'm told that when customs controls ceased between EU countries, certain officers were in tears because their lucrative trade with willing truck-drivers was at an end.

Stop and search was banned as a police tool in the UK years ago, and I find it uncomfortable having to prove that a) I have not been drinking while b) unopened booze in the car may be considered proof that I have. A quick "blow in the bag" like we had in the UK was a far better system.

That said, I expect the LEOs who are concerned with the enforcement of rules in an industry that considers itself professional, while displaying all the time that it is not, to have powers to exercise that enforcement professionally, completely and above all fairly. That is one reason I'll hand over any info that they ask for; so that I can get on with my job, and they can get on with theirs. I admit with some shame that I didn't always feel this way. There was a time in my life when I resented having to prove that I was not doing wrong. The years have mellowed my attitude, I guess.

So far as American law-enforcement is concerned, my encounters have been generally favorable. In one case, the Idaho POE on I-15 was showing me that I should report. As I pulled into the inspection lane, a call came over the CB telling me to proceed as I wasn't wanted, and that they had forgotten to change the signs back after the last truck was pulled in. They even apologized to me for causing my confusion.

 

I fully support your position, Injun, except where it applies to officers of the law whose remit is to do what they can to preserve public safety, and push the standards of our industry to where they should be, rather than in the toilet where they are now.

How many of us would be happy to board an aircraft if the FAA were not there to enforce minimum, and extremely high, standards. In an industry that is almost always on the verge of bankruptcy, who would really trust Air Nigeria to do the right thing and maintain exacting safety standards when they can barely afford to pay their pilots. (I don't know whether Air Nigeria exists. This is for illustration only.)

 

And Injun... thank you. You put into words the thoughts I had in my head, but couldn't find the words to express.

 

Whoops! Triple post. I expect a kicking for this one. Sorry!

American law is essentially based on British law. Britain supposedly enshrines the concept of "Innocence until guilt is proven" but it doesn't really operate that way. France, as an example, believes that anyone who comes into contact with law enforcement has some explaining to do. There is no presumption of innocence, although, in effect, the law operates in exactly the same way.

 

Bingo.

Alot of it in the last 10 years since the 9/11/01 attack. With the implementing of the aggressive patriot act, not aimed at any party, it was the first step toward the police taking a different stand toward the public.

When will it stop?

Not anytime soon.

 

I would venture to suggest that the Patriot Act is used to prove that the USA is becoming a police state a little too much.

One thing that sticks in my mind for some reason is something I read in a trucking magazine many years ago. It was written by a trucker who was describing the actions of the DoT at a certain scale. Years have passed so the quote is not exact, but essentially it was as follows:

"In those days, most of us drove cab-overs and the first indication was when a voice said "Keep your hands on the wheel, driver." Then the mirror mounted on a pole would appear in front of the windshield. They made a lot of money from us in seat-belt tickets in those days."

I don't think much has changed really. The reason I remember this is that I wondered who would be stupid enough to roll across a scale with his seatbelt off, rather than as an example of draconian action by an overzealous police force. I suppose it could be looked at as either if it were viewed by someone who considers his personal freedoms are being denied by the law demanding he wears a seatbelt.

 

Exactly, but you got be smart enough to tell them you don't have one.

You'd likely be arrested by "homeland security" for being a terrorist for doing that these days.

I've got to say thats probably the best post i've read in a long time and dead on.