- 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 fourth amendment
The Apple Case Could Violate The Thirteenth Amendment
If Apple is compelled to create a program that doesn’t exist for the government, that would be a type of slavery.
From Reason.com:
Instead, the DOJ has obtained the most unique search warrant I have ever seen in 40 years of examining them. Here, the DOJ has persuaded a judge to issue a search warrant for A THING THAT DOES NOT EXIST, by forcing Apple to create a key that the FBI is incapable of creating.
There is no authority for the government to compel a nonparty to its case to do its work, against the nonparty’s will, and against profound constitutional values. Essentially, the DOJ wants Apple to hack into its own computer product, thereby telling anyone who can access the key how to do the same.
If the courts conscripted Apple to work for the government and thereby destroy or diminish its own product, the decision would constitute a form of slavery, which is prohibited by our values and by the Thirteenth Amendment.
Apple, Privacy and the FBI
It’s way more complicated than the pundits are saying. To be fully informed read these articles.
From the EFF:
…the FBI’s demands reflect a familiar pattern of security agencies leveraging the most seemingly compelling situations—usually the aftermath of terror attacks—to create powers that are later used more widely and eventually abused. The government programs monitoring the telephone system and Internet, for example, were created in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Those programs came to undermine the rights of billions of people, doing more damage to our security than the tragic events that prompted their creation.
ArsTechnica discusses Fifth Amendment issues:
But the Fifth Amendment goes beyond the well-known right against compelled self-incrimination. The relevant part for the Apple analysis is: “nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
The idea here is that the government is conscripting Apple to build something that it doesn’t want to do. That allegedly is a breach of its “substantive due process.” The government is “conscripting a company’s employees to become agents for the government,” as one source familiar with Apple’s legal strategy told Ars. The doctrine of substantive due process, according to Cornell University School of Law, holds “that the 5th and 14th Amendments require all governmental intrusions into fundamental rights and liberties be fair and reasonable and in furtherance of a legitimate governmental interest.”
Reason discusses the political battle over encryption:
This incident is only the latest conflict in a years-long encryption and security war waging between privacy- and security-minded groups and the law enforcement community. As more communications are digitized, authorities have been calling for industry assistance to build so-called government “backdoors” into secure technologies by hook or by crook.
Those in law enforcement fear a scenario where critical evidence in a terrorism or criminal case is beyond the reach of law enforcement because it is protected by strong encryption techniques that conceal data from anyone but the intended recipient. Hence, leaders at agencies like the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, and the National Security Agency, along with President Obama, have weighed in against strong encryption.
Fourth Amendment Should Cover Your Digital Life
From Fox News:
In an era of constant political gamesmanship and gridlock, getting things done in Congress is never easy. That was never clearer than the last Congress’ failure to pass long overdue reforms to an antiquated that today threatens the very thing it was intended to protect – the privacy of Americans’ digital communications and records.
A bipartisan group of more than 270 members of the House of Representatives co-sponsored legislation with the same underlying objective — to update the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). And yet, these bills were left to die without a vote.
Laura Poitras Sues U.S. Government
Posted by Brian in Law, News, Threat Watch on 9/Aug/2015 07:00
From EFF:
Washington, D.C. – Academy and Pulitzer Prize Award-winning documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras sued the Department of Justice (DOJ) and U.S. transportation security agencies today demanding they release records documenting a six-year period in which she was searched, questioned, and often subjected to hours-long security screenings at U.S. and overseas airports on more than 50 occasions. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is representing Poitras in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security, DOJ, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
Tell Congress Not To Authorize Section 215 of PATRIOT Act
From the EFF:
Tell Congress: Stop S. 1357. No reauthorization of Section 215 of the Patriot Act—no matter how short.
Congress has a chance to vote no on the NSA’s mass phone record surveillance under Section 215 of the Patriot Act. But NSA apologists are trying to broker a deal to extend Section 215 for another two months. That’s two more months of the NSA sweeping up millions of people’s phone records unconstitutionally. With your help, we can stop Congress from simply rubber-stamping this reauthorization. Tell Congress: no reauthorization of Section 215, no matter how short.
Tell This Guy “No One Wants To Take Your Guns”
Posted by Brian in Law, News, Threat Watch on 1/Apr/2015 07:00
Brian Aitken was arrested, is now a felon and hasn’t seen his son in 5 years.
FOIA Docs Show DOJ and White House Targeted CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson
From Judicial Watch:
On October 4, 2011, Holder’s top press aide Tracy Schmaler tells White House Deputy Press Sectary Eric Schultz, “I’m also calling Sharryl’s [sic] editor and reaching out to Scheiffer. She’s out of controlâ€
Schultz responded, “Good. Her piece was really bad for the AG.â€
Schultz also detailed to Schmaler that he was working with a journalist (Susan Davis, formerly of the National Journal) to target Rep. Darryl Issa (R-CA), the House Republican leading the charge on Fast and Furious:
“And I sent NJ’s Susan Davis your way. She’s writing on Issa/FandF and I said you could load her up on the leaks, etc.â€
(Davis authored a critical profile of Issa a few weeks later.)
Mrs. Attkisson gave an interview with The Blaze.
NY Sheriff’s Deputy Turns Into Fascist
Posted by Brian in Law, News, Threat Watch on 11/Nov/2014 15:04
This is what happens when you give the government power over you. Police officers like this disgrace the profession. Police are there to serve the citizens. The citizens are not the enemy.
P.S. Note to cops everywhere: Act as though you are being filmed, because you are.
Update:Â The officer has been arrested, resigned and is now facing assault charges.
Fourth Amendment Negated By AOL Terms of Service
From TechDirt:
The ACLU’s Jameel Jaffer alerts us to a district court ruling in NY that effectively says that by merely agreeing to AOL’s terms of service, you’ve waived your 4th Amendment rights. The case is the United States v. Frank DiTomasso, where DiTomasso is accused of producing child porn — with most of the evidence used against him coming from AOL. DiTomasso argues that it was obtained via an unconstitutional search in violation of the 4th Amendment, but judge Shira Scheindlin rejects that, by basically saying that AOL’s terms of service make you effectively waive any 4th Amendment right you might have in any such information.
All the more reason to use services like Silent Circle and encrypt your email.
NY Gun Store Forced To Give Sales Records To Police Under S.A.F.E. Act
Posted by Brian in Law, News, Threat Watch on 20/Sep/2014 07:39
From Townhall:
A SWAT team raided co-owner Joe Palumbo’s Albion Gun Shop without a warrant. They were acting on orders from the Narcotics Enforcement Unit, who asked the shop to hand over a customer list so they could determine how many people had purchased New York SAFE Act compliant rifles. The gun owner was forced to present approximately 170 sales records. Under the state’s anti-gun law, this intrusion was completely legal.
Critics claim that exchanges such as these prove that the SAFE Act is arbitrary and confusing:
“The New York S.A.F.E. Act is being enforced arbitrarily on a case by case basis,†Tresmond said. “That amounts to unconstitutional vagueness under the Supreme Court’s Morales standard, and the law should be enjoined for that reason alone.â€
Primer for Protesters and “Anti-Government Extremists”
Posted by Brian in Comms, Law, News, Threat Watch on 31/Aug/2014 12:14
From EFF:
Cell Phone Guide For US Protesters, Updated 2014 Edition
With major protests in the news again, we decided it’s time to update our cell phone guide for protestors. A lot has changed since we last published this report in 2011, for better and for worse. On the one hand, we’ve learned more about the massive volume of law enforcement requests for cell phone—ranging from location information to actual content—and widespread use of dedicated cell phone surveillance technologies. On the other hand, strong Supreme Court opinions have eliminated any ambiguity about the unconstitutionality of warrantless searches of phones incident to arrest, and a growing national consensus says location data, too, is private.
Protesters want to be able to communicate, to document the protests, and to share photos and video with the world. So they’ll be carrying phones, and they’ll face a complex set of considerations about the privacy of the data those phones hold. We hope this guide can help answer some questions about how to best protect that data, and what rights protesters have in the face of police demands. Read the rest of this entry »