Too much privacy advocacy is done by a self-appointed expert class who, believing their own preferences to be universal, beseech legislators and regulators to mold or even remake the information economy. I have nothing against self-appointed experts—I am one, and some of you have been falling for my schtick for a decade. But the hubris of claiming to know how things should come out? That’s too much.
So the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s “Who Has Your Back?” report is real stand-out. Using a clear, six-star grid, they assess how well major Internet companies and ISPs do when it comes to key dimensions of privacy protection. (Jim Harper/Cato@Liberty)
It’s worth going to the link above and determining who (or if) your ISP has your back. Remember a couple years back when *blog name redacted* had his Internet service terminated, and his home raided w/o benefit of a warrant because of potentially inflamatory statements he made in his blog? It was Massachusetts, so, the State revoked his gun permit and confiscated his firearms, too! With no due process involved and the full cooperation of his ISP with the authorities.
So much for protecting the customer…
Go check out the grid, and be enlightened.
…who was a friend, a mentor, a good guy. A gun guy, Gunsite graduate. A libertarian. Sadly, we are no longer in touch.
He used to say he’d not know how he’d react if things got so bad in this country, that if he was stopped and asked,
“Papiere, bitte!” “PAPERS, PLEASE!”, what he might do?
I’m sorry to say, Bud, that day has come.
Here’s hoping none of us loses their cool if asked.
h/t/ wirecutter, John
(What follows has some language that is Not-Safe-For-Work. I thought it best not to edit or censor it, to give it it’s full impact - Guffaw)
This is the crux of the libertarian, Constitutional argument. Why are we so against all these ubiquitous encroachments on our civil liberties? And why we should continue to be.
Every time I see something like this, be it use of a no-knock warrant (or no warrant at all), surveillance cameras everywhere, GPS on modern cell phones that we cannot disconnect, institutionalized warrantless searches at airports (and elsewhere) or beating a confession out of a suspect, I recognize we have lost something beyond price. And, I know we probably won’t get these liberties back without a fight.
Kent’s “Hooligan Libertarian” Blog touches on the most recent of these issues. The lock-down and methodical search of an entire city to locate a terrorism suspect. He says, in part:
The same goes for imposing a police state and illegally/unethically/immorally locking down a city and invading homes to catch a suspect. Every cop who entered any property without the explicit permission of the owner/renter deserved to be shot dead. Immediately. Good thing for those stormtroopers that the “people” there gave up their responsibility and guns long ago, and are cheering fans of Big Brother. Makes me furious to even think about.
Follow this up with Lurking Rhythmically’s screed regarding some folks disdain for an individual’s natural rights. She says, in part:
From a comment on my previous post:
You know, I like most of what you post, and followed you even though I disagreed with you on your position on so-called “gun rights”.
Oooh. Isn’t that just delicious contempt ? It’s so thick and creamy you could drizzle it on a pancake. I especially like the one-two punch of so-called and the scare quotes. They aren’t rights, they’re “rights”. That’s quality passive-aggression right there.
Here’s the lovely thing about rights: They aren’t up for a vote. That’s why they’re rights.
Let’s put it another way:
Are you offended yet? You should be. You should be screamingly furious that anyone would diminish these rights with the phrase “so-called”.
And yet my inalienable right to defend myself with the most effective means possible is threatened because one, ONE asshole out of 10 million law-abiding gun owners decided to commit a raft of crimes that another law would not have stopped.
You say, “Compromise.” I say, ”Fuck you, you mewling cowards. I will not embrace victimhood. I will not willingly disarm. If you demand I give up my life just to make you feel better, you are selfish on a level that is beyond comprehension.”
I believe this is how most of us feel, even if we can’t quite put our feelings into words. Individual rights are individual rights. Whether ‘natural’ or ‘derived from our Creator’, it doesn’t matter. They are not up for debate or vote. Period.
And to allow them to be voted on is yet another encroachment.
Go and read the entire Declaration of Independence, and then the two links above. Then look at the news, and read what we accept as a normal course of government business every day.
Then, perhaps become angry about the state of our Nation. And cry a little.
A recent solicitation from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) reveals that the agency is seeking a “massive” online database capable of pulling up individuals’ personal information, connections and associates.On March 28, ATF posted the notice on FedBizOpps.gov, entitled “Investigative System.” The solicitation was updated on April 5 with a few minor changes.The document says that the system will be utilized by staff “to provide rapid searches on various entities for example; names, telephone numbers, utility data and reverse phone look-ups, as a means to assist with investigations, and background research on people, assets and businesses.”The system is described as a “massive online data repository system that contains a wide variety of data sources both historically and current that can be utilized in support of investigations and backgrounds.”An overview of the solicitation states, in part:The investigative system will allow ATF to “obtain exact matches from partial source data searches such as, incomplete social security numbers, address, VIN numbers, etc.”
Wirecutter gets rather earthy in his response to this development. I shan’t quote him here. Not that I don’t have exactly the same feelings.
The ATF was formerly part of the United States Department of the Treasury, having been formed in 1886 as the “Revenue Laboratory” within the Treasury Department’s Bureau of Internal Revenue. The history of ATF can be subsequently traced to the time of the revenuers or “revenoors” and the Bureau of Prohibition, which was formed as a unit of the Bureau of Internal Revenue in 1920, was made an independent agency within the Treasury Department in 1927, was transferred to the Justice Department in 1930, and became, briefly, a division of the FBI in 1933.
In short, it was established for tax collection. After all, violating federal laws regarding cigarettes, booze and guns is bound to generate heavy fines and taxes.
It appears now they are trying to enlarge their purview, as all government agencies do, when it’s ‘gotta verify what your agency is doing is worth while’ time. Especially after Gunwalker/Fast & Furious.
And, of course, we’re looking at U.N. Arms Treaties, and another Assault Weapons Ban, and Lord knows what else.
As I mentioned in a previous post, they keep testing the fences…
How apropos, I was led here by wirecutter!
…is up to her old tricks!
I remember the Clinton Assault Weapons Ban passing. Twenty years ago? The Senate was getting ready for a Thanksgiving weekend break. The media were all saying it wouldn’t pass. Then, after some midnight
negotiation double-dealing, it passed!
Fast-forward to the current pending legislation. A filibuster is threatened – looks like the bill could go away. Suddenly, someone waves their wand, or wiggles their nose, or makes a cash deposit (/supposition), and the filibuster is history, and the bill goes to the floor for 30 hours of debate. Unless they change the rules again!
Sixteen Republican Senators voted to block filibuster, and go for a hearing and vote! So much for differences between the parties. Shame on my Senators McCain and Flake.
Is this all window dressing for the next election in 2014? Don’t want to look pro-gun and lose?
Of course, none of these measures would have prevented Tucson, Aurora or Connecticut massacres.
But the fat lady has yet to sing!
What kind of smoke-filled, backroom, double-dealing is awaiting inclusion into the final bill? Will we be lulled into complacency, yet again, only to have the rug pulled out from under us?
Oh, I forgot, no smoking allowed in the backrooms, now. Who knows what else will be restricted secretly?
Keep those card and letters coming in, folks! And call and email your Senators, again before it’s too late!
Drang @ The Clue Meter has the actual text of the current bill, S649. You should go read it, and make certain there are no late-night anti-rights amendments before the vote. Proposed ‘pro’ amendment excerpts:
Section 122, FIREARMS TRANSFERS
It affirms your right to “transfer” a gun to a relative (t) (2) (C):
…the transfer is made between spouses, between parents or spouses of parents and their children or spouses of their children, between siblings or spouses of siblings, or between grandparents or spouses of grandparents and their grandchildren or spouses of their grandchildren, or between aunts or uncles or their spouses and their nieces or nephews or their spouses, or between first cousins, if the transferor does not know or have reasonable cause to believe that the transferee is prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm under Federal, State, or local law
Otherwise, private transfers are legal if
“(B) the transfer is made between an unlicensed transferor and an unlicensed transferee residing in the same State, which takes place in such State, if-
“(i) the Attorney General certifies that State in which the transfer takes place has in effect requirements under law that are generally equivalent to the requirements of this section; and
“(ii) the transfer was conducted in compliance with the laws of the State;
In other words, the status quo.
IF THIS PASSES WITH THIS AMENDMENT, this bill has been much ado about nothing…
Part of my morning routine, after doing my blog post thing, is to peruse other blogs on my blogroll, The Gun Blog Black List, and elsewhere. And I read the ‘news’ (such as it is.) To search for blogfodder, jokes, and to see the state of the World.
Manasquan, NJ --(Ammoland.com)- Remember all those who denied that firearms confiscation as a result of New York’s new gun laws was too “insane” to even consider?
That it was strictly in the realm of paranoid conspiracy theorists and the “it cant happen here crowd”?
Those were and remain some of the standard replies to anyone who even thought about the possibility, let alone gave voice to it, despite the fact that Gov Cuomo and numerous other officials made public comments about such a plan, as I discussed in my article “Feinstein & Cuomo Admit Planning Australian Style Government Gun Buy Back” .
Elected Officials, the media, various Gun Control Groups and their zealous forced disarmament supporters, even some firearms owners themselves all insisted it was to crazy to even consider.
There’s just one huge problem it is happening now in New York State!
It seems those that tried desperately to warn of such an insidious plot had hit the bullseye with their warnings after all. News came from multiple NY State based firearms enthusiast websites late Friday that confiscations of Pistol Owner ID Cards, as well as firearms and accessories has commenced in NY under the provisions of the horribly flawed, draconian and blatantly unconstitutional NY SAFE Act.
Those folks having their weapons and FID cards confiscated have been discovered to have been prescribed multiple different types of psychotropic drugs, such as those for Depression or Anxiety.
These are known as SSRI ( Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors) class drugs and have the potential to cause serious and adverse side effects, something I wrote about extensively last week in an article that went viral in days and caused multiple Anti Gun and Progressive News Groups to initiate a concentrated denial of service hacker attack against Ammoland Shooting Sports News (see Daily KOS ” Keeping Track Of The RKBA Crowd” http://tiny.cc/ug67uw), in an effort to keep the information from the public.
From NY http://tiny.cc/nyfirearms
“John Doe, an upstanding professional with no outstanding criminal convictions and no history of violent action received a letter from the Pistol Permit Department informing him that his license was immediately revoked upon information that he was seeing a therapist for anxiety and had been prescribed an anxiety drug. He was never suicidal, never violent, and has no criminal history. The New York State Department of Health is apparently conducting a search of medical records to determine who is being treated for anxiety drugs and using this as a basis for handgun license revocation.
Those are the facts. Nothing more, nothing less.”
We’re in for a truly bumpy ride, folks!
h/t Brock Townsend
I don’t know about you, but with the now-ubiquitous attempts to deprive us of our natural rights to assemble, access the Internet (or tax it – a vote TODAY! Call D.C.!), speak freely, worship (or choose not to), keep the constabulary from our homes without benefit of warrant, eat unhealthy food and of course, deprive us of the right to keep and bear arms, there seems to be more and more of a movement on the part of the Fourth Estate to POLL US with these concerns:
I’m sick of seeing such polls. I don’t care if the entire population of New York votes en masse to prohibit me from having a soft drink larger than 16 oz., or a firearm magazine greater then 7 round capacity, or a poll in USA Today (the primary coloring book of newspapers) supports such a vote.
My rights are my individual rights. Period. Guaranteed. And no attempt at ‘democracy’ (tyranny of the majority) will convince me otherwise.
Take your polls elsewhere, about other things. Like a preference for apple or cherry pie.
~During an interview with the Wall Street Journal posted on January 30, the Rev. Jesse Jackson said “anti-government people” espousing what amounts to a “Confederate ideology” will engage in terrorist activities unless the government enacts draconian laws restricting the possession of firearms.~
~Jackson, a former Democrat presidential contender and the founder of the Rainbow Coalition, said in August that the AR-15 semiautomatic rifle is the preferred weapon “for domestic, homegrown terrorism.”~
~The Southern Poverty Law Center has also linked Second Amendment activists to terrorists. The organization argues the “radical right” is exploiting the gun rights issue to push a white supremacist political ideology. The SPLC has worked closely with the Department of Homeland Security. In 2009, a leaked DHS document revealed the agency’s obsession with “Rightwing Extremists.”~
~In early December, sports columnist Jason Whitlock likened the NRA to the Ku Klux Klan, the racist organization established during Reconstruction by former Confederate soldiers.~
~“You know, I did not go as far as I’d like to go because my thoughts on the NRA and America’s gun culture — I believe the NRA is the new KKK,” Whitlock told CNN’s Roland Martin.~
I sense a trend in propaganda cohesiveness rarely seen in this day and age. Coordination of disinformation/misinformation of the highest order. I smell George Soros’ invisible hand.
Didn’t Rev. Jackson’s son have some legal issues regarding possession of ‘prohibited’ firearms in his district? Funny how that wasn’t mentioned. I believe either the good Reverend is a ‘true believer’, or a ‘useful idiot’. Guess it really doesn’t matter what he is.
In Jennifer’s Head recently wrote about it having been the fifth anniversary of her first gun purchase! Congratulations!
One of the commenters brought up the issue of private versus licensed dealer sales. And that got me to thinking.
Back when I had a gun safe (with a small
arsenal collection, therein) I kept my licensed dealer guns in one part of the safe, and my W.O.P. guns in a separate part. (In politically-incorrect slang a wop was an illegal alien – it stood for With Out Papers!) The firearms I purchased legally, but privately.
Now that this has become an issue, yet again (the whole fictitious gun show loophole) and as Senator Feinstein’s
Further Remove Your Natural Rights Assault Weapon Ban bill includes a measure requiring documentation of private, personal sales, I thought it appropriate to mention.
If indeed legislation is passed banning private, undocumented transfer of firearms, and all become ‘registered’, and ‘they’ come for them, do we really think ‘they’ will just take those in the register? Or will they use metal detectors to look for ‘illegal’ guns secreted in the walls or buried in the yard? Or detain individuals until they give up their stash? (See the War on Drugs and Prohibition for historical context.)
Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun – Mao Tse Tung
‘They’ (many local governments) now require you to present ID to vote, have a social security number, file your taxes, maintain your home and yard to an arbitrary standard, put your kids in school, have them vaccinated, not have church meetings in your home-if not so zoned, not sell unpasteurized milk-without a license, separate your recyclables, have your auto emissions tested for license, get a permit to carry your gun, get a safe to secure it unloaded in your own home. Ad infinitum, ad nauseum
And most of these rules, if disobeyed, will eventually result in a confrontation with armed government authorities. Government is force.
Of course, in the coming socialist utopia, that would never happen. Or we’d never read about it in the socialist-utopia controlled media, if it did.
As soon as tomorrow, President Obama will announce his administration’s initial steps for dealing with gun violence. It is expected that he will propose measures for congressional action. But recognizing that most legislative proposals will attract powerful resistance, including from some in his own party, the president has indicated that he is prepared to act unilaterally. “My starting point is not to worry about the politics,” the president said. “My starting point is to focus on what makes sense, what works.”
Of course we should all want our president focused on what works. We have more than enough dysfunctional and counter-productive federal policies in place, thanks to both Congress and the president. But there is one consideration that is even more important than whether an executive action will work to reduce gun-related violence: whether the president has the constitutional authority to implement it.
Either way, any executive action on gun violence would come through an executive order. By announcing his intention to bypass Congress, President Obama has alerted us to the possibility, if not likelihood, that he intends to act without regard for the constitutional limits on executive authority. As Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) told CBN News, “I think having a monarch is what we fought the American Revolution over and someone who wants to bypass the Constitution, bypass Congress — that’s someone who wants to act like a king or a monarch.”
The Divine Right of Kings? President Nixon did state being President was like being a king.
Every president since George Washington has used executive orders in exercising the “executive Power” granted in Article II, Section 1 and in “tak[ing] Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” as required in Section 3 of the same article. Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus and emancipated the slaves by executive order. FDR interred 120,000 Japanese-Americans and launched the New Deal by executive order. Truman took over the nation’s steel mills, Eisenhower desegregated the schools, Kennedy and Johnson barred racial discrimination in federal housing and Reagan forbid the use of federal funds to advocate for abortion, all by executive order.
Only twice in the nation’s history has an executive order been invalidated by the courts (Truman’s seizure of the steel mills and a Clinton order forbidding federal contracts with organizations with strike-breakers on the payroll). Up until 1983, Congress asserted authority to independently veto executive orders, but in Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha the Supreme Court held that legislation purporting to overturn an executive order must be presented to the president for his signature like all other legislation. Given the two-thirds vote of both houses necessary to override an almost certain presidential veto, it is now nearly impossible for Congress to repeal an executive order.
With the courts apparently unwilling and Congress unable to block executive orders, we’re left with self-restraint on the part of the president or the ballot box as the only controls on the abuse of executive authority through the use of executive orders. This president has made it clear that, because he won the election, he will do whatever it takes to achieve what he knows to be best for the American people. Before his re-election, Obama would have been more interested in the ballot box; indeed it would have been his “starting point.” But as a second-term president, he can act like a king with only history to judge him. All too often it seems that Obama wouldn’t mind if history judges him to be the best king we’ve ever had.
excerpted from The Daily Caller – Jim Huffman Dean Emeritus, Lewis & Clark Law School
GUN VIOLENCE? What ever happened to CRIME? And Individual Rights? And The Constitution? The President has appointed The Center for American Progress to design his firearm policy. You know, a George Soros funded entity.
These are the times that try men’s souls. – Thomas Paine