I whole-heartily Glenn, but as evidenced by some state legislatures it's happening anyway. Normally I'm for a state having certain rights but this obviously crosses a line. That's why I posted the subject as totalitarianism because various City/County cops are pushing for this interpretation and it's being accepted from a state level. So what is happening is cops who are acting out of self-interested (which is unbased in this instance) turns into state law, and from state law it conceivably be proposed as Federal Law. I don't need to tell anyone anywhere that our Federal government is acting out of whack. The right says we're drifting from our original intent, the left is saying we're abandoning our Constitutional writ. Different directions but both agree we're not going where we're supposed to.
I really don't want to convey a conspiracy theory or fear-mongering, but when such things develop one must question just how far are we from things like totalitarianism, dystopic and/or oligarchy rule. Even if it's to assure ourselves we are no where near these things, the question must be asked.
For those who aren't familiar with the necessities for setting up such a government, there are a few things you need. One being general acceptance. Whether it be through fear, public opinion or coercion, a general acceptance insures no large threat in form of revolution or insurgency. Another requisite is the military enforcement to keep what you place in order. It can be an army acting as an occupation, it can be a Statist organization (such as the KGB or SS) or even a brute squad (see Princess Bride). Denying the right for a civilian to provide proof of innocence against the will of an enforcing organization (such as the Police) is a major step in protecting the interests of the government.
