- Comms
- Law
- Medic
- News
- Opinion
- Threat Watch
- Training
- Warrior Tools
- Accessories
- Ammo
- Body Armor
- Books
- Clothing
- Commo
- Gear
- Handguns
- Holsters
- Knives
- Long Guns
- ACC
- Accuracy International
- Barrett
- Benelli
- Beretta
- Blaser
- Bushmaster
- Custom
- CZ
- Desert Tactical Arms
- DPMS
- FN
- Forums
- HK
- IWI
- Kel-Tec Long Guns
- LaRue
- LWRC
- McMillan
- Mosin Nagant
- Mossberg
- Para
- Remington
- Rock River Arms
- Ruger Long Guns
- Sabre Defense
- Sako
- SIG Sauer
- SKS
- Smith & Wesson Long Guns
- Springfield
- Styer
- Weatherby
- Wilson Combat
- Winchester
- Magazines
- Maintenance
- Navigation
- Optics
- Sights
- Tech
- Warriors
Posts Tagged constitution
LEO Encounter With Open Carry
Police who operate in a state where open carry is legal have a duty to know and understand the laws of that state. If ignorance of the law is no defense for civilians, then it is no defense for law enforcement officers. There are many videos just like this one on the ‘net, but I think this is the best one, due to the civilian’s ability to remain calm the whole time and his knowledge of the various laws that the officer admits to breaking. This is a great example of: “Knowledge is power”.
From Portland, Maine:
U.N. Gun Control Treaty
From Forbes.com:
Under the guise of a proposed global “Small Arms Treaty†premised to fight “terrorismâ€, “insurgency†and “international crime syndicates†you can be quite certain that an even more insidious threat is being targeted – our Constitutional right for law-abiding citizens to own and bear arms.
Dick Morris explains the treaty:
Part of Chicago Gun Law Unconstitutional
From the Chicago-Sun Times:
Der-Yeghiayan, in a 30-page ruling, called that part of the Chicago Firearm Ordinance “unconstitutionally void for vagueness,†and said it violated Shawn Gowder’s right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Louisiana Proposes Pro-Gun Change To State Constitution
From Guns.com:
Sen. Neil Riser received backing from the NRA as he pushed the bill through the House, earning a 77-22 vote. A supporter of the bill, Rep. Jay Morris, said, “The right to bear arms is something that’s fundamental. We just need to make sure it stays that way.”
4th Amendment Under Attack Yet Again
This stuff is serious. Maybe most of the “People” protected by the Constitution do not have enough imagination to see how terribly wrong this is going to go for all of us, and I mean ALL of us. Well, I can imagine it because I’ve worked for governments, I know what they are capable of, and I promise you it will not be good. To quote Bogey, “maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of your life”, if you can call existence in a police state a life. Think this is hyperbole? We’ll see.
I know first hand that getting warrants can be a pain in the ass, but too bad, its our job to defend and protect the constitution, not whine about how hard it is to do our jobs and still abide by the “current” law, or to look for shortcuts and ways to get around the only document that stands between freedom and totalitarianism.
But don’t worry, I’m clearly over reacting because if I wasn’t, those vigilant watchdogs of the Fourth Estate would surely mention the trampling of our fundamental freedoms in their newspapers, websites and TV news shows, wouldn’t they?
Here is the latest assault on our freedoms from the EFF
DOJ Official: Any Privacy Protection is Too Much Privacy Protection for Cell Phone Tracking
Jason Weinstein, a deputy assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice’s criminal division, told a panel at the Congressional Internet Caucus Advisory Committee’s “State of the Mobile Net” conference yesterday that requiring a search warrant to obtain location tracking information from cell phones  would “cripple” prosecutors and law enforcement officials. We couldn’t disagree more.
For years, we’ve been arguing that cell phone location data should only be accessible to law enforcement with a search warrant. After all, as web enabled smart phones become more prevalent, this location data reveals an incredibly revealing portrait of your every move. As we’ve waged this legal battle, the government has naturally disagreed with us, claiming that the Stored Communications Act authorizes the disclosure of cell phone location data with a lesser showing than the probable cause requirement demanded by a search warrant. Read the rest of this entry »
Forced Hard Drive Decryption Is Unconstitutional, Appeals Court Rules
From: Threat Level
Forcing a criminal suspect to decrypt hard drives so their contents can be used by prosecutors is a breach of the Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
It was the nation’s first appellate court to issue such a finding. And the outcome comes a day after a different federal appeals court refused to entertain an appeal from another defendant ordered by a lower federal court to decrypt a hard drive by month’s end.
Thursday’s decision by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that an encrypted hard drive is akin to a combination to a safe, and is off limits, because compelling the unlocking of either of them is the equivalent of forcing testimony.
Justice Breyer – Ideology vs Machete
Posted by Gary in Law, News, Opinion, Threat Watch on 17/Feb/2012 11:16
Justice Stephen Breyer
In a bit of timely and ironic justice, Justice Stephen Breyer, who wrote in his dissenting opinion in McDonald vs Chicago, “… the Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self defense”, was robbed by a machete-wielding miscreant a few days ago on the island of Nevis. Despite the island paradise’s complete ban on handguns (much like the Justice would have preferred to be the case in Chicago) there still seems to be the odd armed robber, threatening peoples lives and inconveniencing vacationers. Normally the Justice doesn’t need to bring along his own firearms for protection like the rest of us, that is the job of the U.S. Marshals Service. I wonder where they were during the attack? You see this is the problem, there is never a taxpayer-funded, well trained, armed bodyguard around when you need one, even if you are a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America.
More from CNN
Chicago Mayor Writes $399k Check to Second Amendment Foundation – Ouch!
CHICAGO WRITES BIG CHECK TO SAF . . .
The Second Amendment Foundation received a check for $399,950 recently for recovery of legal fees expended in McDonald v. City of Chicago, the landmark Supreme Court case that struck down the city’s ban on handgun ownership. The check, signed by Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, is the largest the foundation has ever received, said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. According to an Examiner.com news report, the funds will be directed into Moore v. Madigan, litigation that is challenging the constitutionality of Illinois state laws that prohibit the carrying of loaded firearms for personal protection.
Gun owners are compensating for something.
Posted by Jack Sinclair in Law, Opinion on 28/Nov/2011 04:02
Texas concealed handgun carrier thwarts robbery at Denny’s
Posted by Jack Sinclair in Law, News, Threat Watch on 28/Nov/2011 03:31
“Two armed suspects attempted to rob a Denny’s restaurant, but ended up fleeing for safety after a shootout with a customer.
Officials said two armed suspects wearing bandannas entered and attempted to rob the store. The sole customer in the restaurant, a licensed concealed handgun carrier, observed the suspects enter, pulled out his own gun, took cover and fired at the robbers.
Officials said the suspects returned fire and fled the restaurant. The customer followed the suspects, firing as he went. The suspects jumped into a white minivan and fled the scene.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45446615/ns/local_news-houston_tx/#.TtNUGk-kSyN
NRA Interviews Emily Miller
NRA interviews editor Emily Miller from the Washington Times about her quest to acquire a gun in D.C.
UK Police Intercepting Cell Traffic
From: Threat Level
Britain’s largest police force has been using covert surveillance technology that can masquerade as a mobile phone network to intercept communications and unique IDs from phones or even transmit a signal to shut off phones remotely, according to the Guardian.
The system, made by Datong in the United Kingdom, was purchased by the London Metropolitan police, which paid $230,000 to Datong for “ICT hardware†in 2008 and 2009.
The portable device, which is the size of a suitcase, pretends to be a legitimate cell phone tower that emits a signal to dupe thousands of mobile phones in a targeted area. Authorities can then intercept SMS messages, phone calls and phone data, such as unique IMSI and IMEI identity codes that allow authorities to track phone users’ movements in real-time, without having to request location data from a mobile phone carrier.
…
A spokesman for the U.S. Secret Service verified to CNET that the agency has done business with Datong, but would not say what sort of technology it bought from the company.
The FBI is known to use a similar technology called Triggerfish, which also pretends to be a legitimate cell tower base station to trick mobile phones into connecting to it. The Triggerfish system, however, collects only location and other identifying information, and does not intercept phone calls, text messages, and other data.
Gallup Poll: Don’t take away guns
Posted by Jack Sinclair in Law, News on 27/Oct/2011 15:32
By TIM MAK
“This year marks the first time that more people were against a ban than for it.”
“Support for gun control is at its lowest level in more than 50 years, according to a recent Gallup Poll.
In fact, 26 percent of those surveyed think there should be a law banning the possession of handguns, except by the police and other authorized people, reports a Wednesday Gallup poll. On the other hand, 73 percent oppose such a ban — the highest percentage reflecting such sentiment since polling on the issue started in 1959.
Over the past 50 years, the United States has changed its mind drastically on whether a handgun ban is appropriate. In 1959, 60 percent supported a handgun ban, while only 36 percent opposed it.
With regard to semiautomatic guns … 53 percent oppose laws that would make it illegal to manufacture, sell or possess them; only 43 percent agree with that sort of ban. This year marks the first time that more people were against a ban than for it.
A plurality of respondents — 44 percent — want firearms regulations to be kept as they are now, while 11 percent favor less strict gun laws; 43 percent suggest stricter gun laws are necessary.
Views on gun laws have changed dramatically over the past twenty years to the point where no key demographic subgroup favors a ban on handguns. Only those living in Eastern America, Democrats and those without guns in the household still have majority support for stricter gun laws generally, Gallup reports.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66874.html#ixzz1c13r6Fqr