Texas becomes first state to open a Department of Pre-Crime

Homeland Security Precrime“Future crime warrant”? May the gods deliver us from “predictive policing” because the courts sure won’t.

And now, your Minority Report moment of the day. Turns out it has nothing to do with the NSA.

Nope, this time it’s our freedom and liberty loving countrymen in Texas.

Last week, an appeals court in Texas ruled that police may obtain a search warrant based on the prediction of a future crime, heightening public fears that we may be heading toward a ‘predictive policing’ era in which we see police powers rapidly growing at the cost of our constitutional rights.

Great. I think “he needed killin'” was already on the books. Now they’ve added “he wuz a-fixing to.”

Categories: Crime/Corruption

5 replies »

  1. Groan…Oh, this is a no good, very bad idea. Just as bad as Gov. Phil Bryant (MS) deciding to issue an executive order for MS to define its own curricula and education without federal guidelines.

  2. I cannot even begin to express how disturbed I am about this, even if I (probably) live North of you. With the current government in Canada, personal security and privacy has also lately taken a beating. Although we’re nowhere near the scenarios promulgated in “This Perfect Day” or “Nineteen Eighty-Four” and anyone suggesting this would be rightfully labelled as truly paranoid, it frankly is dismaying that one must guard ever more vigilantly against governmental intrusion into our personal and private lives, using the logically plausible stalking horse of “it’s good for us” or that “it makes us safer.”

  3. Now society and legal gun owners need to worry about the police producing a scenario of a non-existent (only perceived) crime to further their mission of “Protect and Serve”. I also wonder of how DNA will fit into this?

  4. While previously I was all about States rights over the federal government’s mandates, this would be a mark against that position. I’m still not changing it. Although I see this move of Texas to be very dangerous, it’s still within their right as a State. If they’re willing to sacrifice the numbers (pupolation/citizien opting to live there), then so be it. If, however, they put this in effect, and coerce or force their citizens not to move or leave, that’s when I’d say,”Let ’em have it.”

    But, more than likely, the report isn’t, or this post was reported without full detail. The article to which this post is linked revealed that a neighbor said they were “fixin'” to cook meth. So, it’s not so much that the police went spying on him because they noticed him buying too many batteries or medicine. They went there based on an accusation from a neighbor. If anything, I believe the cops who entered without a warrant should be reprimanded, and, depending on the past of the accused (whether they’ve been convicted of it in the past, or were blatantly advertising meth production), the neighbor who “ratted them out” should probably be sued for something akin to wasting government resources and well, filing a false complaint. Who knows, maybe the neighbors didn’t want competition and decided that since the accused-to-be had enough of the right stuff, then why not let the police take out the competition? Maybe the neighbors who accused them were producing meth and the accused were preppers? (Why they’d want that much cough syrup? I don’t know, but batteries I can see why.