I've heard now of several cases of cops accosting unsuspecting civilian subjects of investigation, while giving no clear indication to the accostee that they're law enforcement. The civilian then ends up getting charged with assault, resisting arrest, obstruction of justice, driving to endanger, eluding the police, or worst of all, murder of an officer of the law, when he does something rash but perfectly understandable from the perspective of someone who's just been surprise attacked by a total stranger for no clear reason. In a couple of these cases I've read, the cops had the wrong suspect, so the crime for which the raid was conducted was never prosecuted, but the charge(s) that came from the civilian's self-defense did stick.
The message these incidents send to the public is, "If a stranger on the street treats you badly, you'd be wise to bow your head and take it without complaint, because you never know when that's someone in an official position, operating, out of professional necessity, incognito. We apologize for the inconvenience, especially if you don't deserve it, but unfortunately we need to do our jobs to keep the public safe, and appreciate your patience and cooperation in this matter." The irony of such a message is that it assumes upon utopian-fantasy-novel levels of trust between the government and the governed, and in so doing, actually swells the ranks of the distrustful and disaffected.
Back in the days of Legal Discussion, I once had a heated debate over whether I ought to pull over whenever any rotating or flashing red or blue light comes on inside any vehicle behind me, period. Basically my platform was, if I don't live in a police state that rules by fear, a defense of, "Anyone can mount a flashing red/blue light in/on their car, so I had no way of knowing whether that was really a LEO" should fly in court no problem. If, as many suggested at the time, I'd be lucky to make it alive to my court date if I even tried such a thing, then yes, we definitely live in a police state.
"
