wirecutter spells it out. In spades!
Not OWNER. Not LEGAL RESIDENT. Occupant. You know, like all that junk mail you throw away pro-forma says on it.
A further observation from wirecutter personally…
I got news for you – if you even let a cop enter your house he can search it “for his own safety”. I found that out when my psycho ex tried to cut me and I called the cops to get it documented – 7 or 8 cops showed up (it must’ve been a slow night) and they immediately opened every door in the house looking for ‘assailants’, checking closets, behind furniture, even told me to open my safe which I refused to do. The final straw came when one of them opened a small box on the end table and I told them all they did NOT have my permission to go through my personal effects and to hit the porch, we’ll do the paperwork out there ‘for their own fucking safety’. Surprisingly they complied and everybody calmed down including myself. Hell, I even offered them all a cold beer.
But yeah, never let a cop into your house willingly. Besides, they can always say you consented to a search and it’s your word against theirs.
NOW comes the kicker! The vanguard of the dissenters against this decision is (wait for it)
Justice Ruth Bader Ginzburg
Personally, I’d bet I’d agree more often with wirecutter than Justice Ginsburg on most things.
A federal judge who endorsed “suspicion-less” searches of laptops, cameras and cell phones at the border has set up a possible Supreme Court showdown challenging what critics call “Constitution-free zones” and the Obama administration’s dragnet approach to national security.
I don’t normally side with the ACLU. but…
“I think Americans are justifiably becoming increasingly surprised and even outraged by the extent to which the national security state seems to be monitoring and collecting information about us all,” said ACLU Attorney Catherine Crump. “We think that having a purely suspicion-less policy is wrong, because it leaves border agents with no standards at all to follow. That opens the door that people will be [targeted] for inappropriate reasons.”
Constitution-Free Zones? Seriously? Of course, we already have these elsewhere (airports, train stations, sobriety checkpoints,
stop-and-frisk cities (Oh, wait! They stopped doing THAT!) :-) Score one for our side!
h/t Fox News
(I saw this (text) on wirecutter‘s blog, and felt it was meant to be shared – Guffaw)
1) “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”
A. Karl Marx B. Adolph Hitler C. Joseph Stalin D. Barack Obama E. None of the above
2) “It’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few…… And to replace it with shared responsibility, for shared prosperity.”
A. Lenin B. Mussolini C. Idi Amin D. Barack Obama E. None of the above
3) “(We)…..can’t just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people.”
A. Nikita Khruschev B. Josef Goebbels C. Boris Yeltsin D. Barack Obama E. None of the above
4) “We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own … in order to create this common ground.”
A. Mao Tse Tung B. Hugo Chavez C. Kim Jong Il D. Barack Obama E. None of the above
5) “I certainly think the free-market has failed.”
A. Karl Marx B. Lenin C. Molotov D. Barack Obama E. None of the above
6) “I think it’s time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in
(the) entire economy that they are being watched.”
A. Pinochet B. Milosevic C. Saddam Hussein D. Barack Obama E. None of the above
(1) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
(2) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
(3) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
(4) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
(5) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
(6) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
Be afraid. Be VERY afraid! – Guffaw
Former Representative Gabby Giffords remembered her almost fatal assault the other day by skydiving – celebrating her life!
And, Good for Her…as far as that goes…
I’ve friends and relatives on Facebook who praised her as being courageous and brave.
But, she and her astronaut husband Mark Kelly are still actively involved in an organization they helped found with a goal of more gun control for the law-abiding!
I don’t think so.
Here she is with one of the rifles she owns and wants to have further controlled.
Hypocritical AND Cowardly.
No ‘hero’ in my book!
Excerpted from Foreign Policy: The FBI’s creeping advance into the world of counterterrorism is nothing new. But quietly and without notice, the agency has finally decided to make it official in one of its organizational fact sheets. Instead of declaring “law enforcement” as its “primary function,” as it has for years, the FBI fact sheet now lists “national security” as its chief mission. The changes largely reflect the FBI reforms put in place after September 11, 2001, which some have criticized for de-prioritizing law enforcement activities. Regardless, with the 9/11 attacks more than a decade in the past, the timing of the edits is baffling some FBI-watchers.
“What happened in the last year that changed?” asked Kel McClanahan, a Washington-based national security lawyer.
Visit Pat Dollard to see the entire story.
And from the same government that brought you the above…
It’s the same, old, sad story.
The Executive cannot achieve his goals through the proper Constitutional channels, so he just dictates his desires like Caesar, and presto!
last couple of (the vast majority in recent history) shootings were determined to have been caused by left-wing (sorry – not politically correct) nut jobs, mental health suddenly became the cause celebre of the Brady Bunch.
And, why not?
After all, we don’t want escaped mental patients running around, willy-nilly, purchasing fully-automatic weapons and murdering folks, as is the movies, do we?
Except, of course, that doesn’t happen in the real world. Sick people sometimes steal semi-automatic weapons. Or illegally convert them to full auto. (see the word illegally – already a crime!) And kill people.
And, there is a difference between a homicidal, padded-cell, mental patient, and YOU, asking your doctor for some medical help with your depression.
But The President and his administration don’t see it that way! And they don’t believe in current media privacy law, either!
And, as stated earlier, they are doing an end run to bypass H.I.P.P.A.* and make anyone who was ever been depressed and sought mental health aid to be branded a prohibited person – one who may NEVER own or possess a firearm!
Write you congressman and senators, now. The Gun Owners of America has been kind enough to provide us with a link to make it quick and easy.
*H.I.P.P.A. – federal medical records privacy law
Quizikle pointed us to recent judicial
activism political agenda-making in the State of Texas.
I always liked Texas. Not only do they have many ‘libertarian’ laws, but they were once their own Republic! It did take them a while to evolve concealed-carry legislation, but they finally did.
And now some nazi judge says THIS:
“Texas courts have ruled that because legally owned firearms represent “a threat of physical violence” to police, officers may ignore the 4th Amendment rights of Texas residents by treating ALL legally issued warrants as “No Knock” warrants, even if the issuing judge has made it clear that officers “…must knock on the door and announce their identity and purpose before attempting a forcible entry.”
MY Individual Rights (and, of course, YOURS) are NOT up for debate, or a plebiscite! End-of-story.
(Courtesy of Brock Townsend)
Most voters still favor a ban on semi-automatic and assault-type weapons but strongly oppose outlawing handguns in the United States. Seven-out-of-10 would feel safer living a neighborhood where individuals could own a gun for self-defense.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% of Likely U.S. Voters think there should be a ban on the purchase of semi-automatic and assault-type weapons. (Whatever THOSE are?) Thirty-three percent (33%) disagree. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
NOPE. Not moving on this.
MOLON LABE! (pronounced lah’vay) should you need to yell it in some unwelcome intruder’s face.
While suitably armed.
According to Adage.com, “gun control groups spent $14.1 million on TV advertising” in the months following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary. On the other end of the spectrum, pro-gun groups “only spent $1.9 million.”
Yet even after this huge disparity in spending “White House efforts to strengthen gun control laws went no where.” And the House of Representatives “did not even consider addressing gun control legislation.”
Michael Bloomberg led in spending for gun control by “[budgeting] $12 million” for a 2013 ad campaign that began by featuring celebrities who support gun control.
The NRA and others were able to counter this by spending their money “on lobbying instead of advertising.” In fact, the NRA spent $6.2 million on lobbying in its effort to prevent further infringement of the Second Amendment.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins
Message: The Truth and the Facts aren’t always obscured by overspending. But we must keep the pressure on and maintain vigilance or we will eventually lose. Because control-freak Statists will NOT stop - Guffaw
At first glance, I went old-school in my head – ignoring the word Digital – thinking this was an article regarding such folks as Ernesto “the convicted rapist stabbed to death in a bar” Miranda.
Turns out, it’s about bullies, con-artists, hackers, drug dealers and child pornographers who all achieved
fame notoriety using errant electronic means in commission of their crimes. Were caught and convicted. And legal precedents protecting all of us were established therefrom.
How did Jones’ drug-dealing benefit your rights?
In overturning Jones’ conviction and life sentence, the Supreme Court ruled in 2012 that the authorities needed a warrant to affix a GPS tracker to his vehicle and monitor his movements for 28 days, which linked him to various drug houses. The case obliterated the Obama administration’s position that attaching a GPS device to a vehicle was not a search and did not require a warrant from a judge.
Following the ruling, the FBI stopped using thousands of GPS devices it was employing without warrants. “This is one of the biggest Fourth Amendment cases in recent memory,” says Hanni Fakhoury, an Electronic Frontier Foundation staff attorney. “It was huge.”
The Justices also wrote, in the ruling, that they thought they should review the so-called “business-records” exemption that allows the authorities to obtain banking, medical, and telephone records without a probable-cause warrant. Though the court last month rejected without comment a related challenge to the NSA phone metadata program, which allows federal spies to collect all calling information in the United States.
A pretty good read, if you can stomach reading about child pornographers and drug dealers…