Florida's driver-and-vehicle database, the system that can help law enforcement identify victims of fatal crashes and decipher the identity of a suspect, can be a useful tool for cops.But the system — known as D.A.V.I.D., for Driving and Vehicle Information Database — can also be easily abused.Data obtained by the Orlando Sentinel show the number of Florida law-enforcement officers suspected of misusing D.A.V.I.D. skyrocketed last year. At least 74 law enforcers were suspected of misusing D.A.V.I.D. in 2012, a nearly 400 percent increase from 2011, according to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-la...----You can't trust the government. Not even if they have 'good intentions'. t.
You can't trust the government. Not even if they have 'good intentions'. I think this is not because government is inherently malevolent, but because government is inherently incompetent.
I think this is not because government is inherently malevolent, but because government is inherently incompetent.Government is inherently about some people having power over others.Therefore it inherently attracts people who are malevolent and whose particular form of malevolence causes them to seek power over others. No psychopathic killer NOT in government could have killed nearly as many people as Hitler or Stalin or Mao or probably even Castro. No sick person who gains pleasure from forcing others to suffer and watching them do it, without being in government, could have caused as many people to suffer as North Korea's Kim family do.The more such people infiltrate the government, the more they will arrange to have the government seize (or be granted) more power; and the more power the government has, the more it will attract such people.Therefore, in effect, government is inherently prone to malevolence.The people who wrote the Constitution attempted to set up a government of multiple parts that would be opposed to each other. But at least two major mistakes have been made in that effort:* Taxing, borrowing, and spending all require the consent of both houses of Congress. If they moved control of taxing and borrowing strictly to one house, and control of spending strictly to the other, there would be a stronger rivalry and opposition between the two houses* It was intended that the House would represent the people of the various states, while the Senate would represent the states as entities. This is why the House was to be chosen by popular vote, while the Senate was to be chosen by the state legislatures. We removed that by Constitutional amendment. Now both bodies represent the people, and neither has to answer to the states as entities for weakening their separate sovereignty - and thus weakening their ability to oppose the national government.
Now I'm depressed.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |