To answer the question that constitutes the title of this post, no. Of course not. What an absurd thought. To those that believe it is, may I suggest moving to Myanmar? Perhaps that will allow you to see what an actual police state is. I am a strong believer in “infringing” on people’s rights. Not their fundamental, inalienable human rights, but the rights that allow them to get away with crime (such as the “right” to privacy). A reason for jeopardizing that right should be necessary, but it is simply too easy to commit crime because it is too difficult for police to do their jobs.
It is said that it is preferable for one thousand guilty men to be free than for one innocent man to be incarcerated. To that, I say, “Huh?”. If one thousand guilty men were free, as well as one innocent man, then there is the potential for at least one innocent person to become something worse than incarcerated. The point of a criminal justice system is to lock criminals away from society (to keep society safe), not to keep innocent people from being locked away from society. At least one possible solution to this is to rid of all these technicalities that free obviously guilty people. And if someone is probably guilty (beyond reasonable doubt), then it makes sense not to free them. I reckon the phrase “beyond reasonable doubt” has become meaningless (or its meaning has transformed into “beyond the slightest possibility of doubt”).
Some actual possible solutions: install conspicuous cameras everywhere (in public, of course), allow for random locker searches (lockers are the property of the school, after all), allow for random drug tests, and give police more power in general, while also limiting it. Personally, I see no harm in any of this. I welcome any arguments as to why it may be harmful.
When I hear of accusations of police brutality, or other such accusations against the police, I am usually skeptical. That someone would make such an accusation for political gain is quite easy to believe. I do think that there should be an independent agency that performs investigations into police conduct, because sometimes these accusations are genuine, but I would conjecture that some people just have an unreasonable sense of what “rights” they are entitled to, and how the police should treat suspects (as if they were their grandmothers, or something). And, given what the police do, I believe they deserve the benefit of the doubt.