archives

The Bill of No Rights

This tag is associated with 77 posts

Bob Dylan Arrested, Police Officer Says “That’s Not Bob Dylan”

(From the ‘News of the Weird’…)

Bob Dylan likes to wear hoodies in public — it helps him stay inconspicuous. But this time, it led to his detainment.

Bob Dylan Arrested, Police Officer Says “That’s Not Bob Dylan”
Caleb J. Murphy June 29, 2017 I Love Rock N Roll No Comments
Bob Dylan likes to wear hoodies in public — it helps him stay inconspicuous. But this time, it led to his detainment.
Bob Dylan
Bob Dylan
On a rainy night back in 2009 in some New Jersey suburbs, police responded to a call about an “eccentric-looking old man” wearing a hoodie wandering in someone’s yard.
Police officer Kristie Buble was the responding officer.
“We got a call for a suspicious person,” Buble told ABC. “It was pouring rain outside, and I was right around the corner so I responded. By that time he was walking down the street. I asked him what he was doing in the neighborhood and he said he was looking at a house for sale.”
When she detained the man, he said his name was Bob Dylan.
“Now, I’ve seen pictures of Bob Dylan from a long time ago and he didn’t look like Bob Dylan to me at all,” Officer Buble said. “He was wearing black sweatpants tucked into black rain boots, and two raincoats with the hood pulled down over his head.”
So she started questioning this man.
“Okay, Bob,” she asked him. “What are you doing in Long Branch [New Jersey]?”
He said he was touring the country with Willie Nelson and John Mellencamp.
“So now I’m really a little fishy about his story,” she explains.

Bob Dylan likes to wear hoodies in public — it helps him stay inconspicuous. But this time, it led to his detainment.
Bob Dylan
Bob Dylan
On a rainy night back in 2009 in some New Jersey suburbs, police responded to a call about an “eccentric-looking old man” wearing a hoodie wandering in someone’s yard.
Police officer Kristie Buble was the responding officer.
“We got a call for a suspicious person,” Buble told ABC. “It was pouring rain outside, and I was right around the corner so I responded. By that time he was walking down the street. I asked him what he was doing in the neighborhood and he said he was looking at a house for sale.”
When she detained the man, he said his name was Bob Dylan.
“Now, I’ve seen pictures of Bob Dylan from a long time ago and he didn’t look like Bob Dylan to me at all,” Officer Buble said. “He was wearing black sweatpants tucked into black rain boots, and two raincoats with the hood pulled down over his head.”
So she started questioning this man.
“Okay, Bob,” she asked him. “What are you doing in Long Branch [New Jersey]?”
He said he was touring the country with Willie Nelson and John Mellencamp.
“So now I’m really a little fishy about his story,” she explains.
Bob Dylan
photo via The Odyssey Online
Then she asked him for his ID, but he didn’t have any on him. She asked where he was staying and he said in a tour bus parked at a hotel by the ocean.
She found this very suspicious.
But she went along with his story as her training taught her. She asked him to take her to this hotel, so she put him in the back of her cruiser and off they went.
“To be honest with you, I didn’t really believe this was Bob Dylan,” she said. “It never crossed my mind that this could really be him.”
Buble made small talk on the way to the hotel, never believing a word he said.
“He was really nice, though, and he said he understood why I had to verify his identity and why I couldn’t let him go,” she said. “He asked me if I could drive him back to the neighborhood when I verified who he was, which made me even more suspicious.”
But she pulled into the hotel parking lot and what do you know — there were huge tour buses parked in the lot. Also, Buble’s Sargent was there waiting for her.
“Sarg,” she said. “This guy says he’s Bob Dylan,’”
The Sargent looked in the window.
“That’s not Bob Dylan,” the Sargent said.
But they went over to the tour buses and knocked on the door. Soon enough, Bob Dylan was able to prove his identity to Buble and her Sargent with his passport.

“Okay,” Buble sheepishly said. “Um, have a nice day.”

h/t Crazy4Rock

There is, of course, a larger message here.  (One’s opinion of Bob Dylan and the misspelling of Sergeant, aside…)

Persons being ‘detained’ because they cannot identify themselves.

Do you have to carry ID with you at all times? – link

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that these kinds of laws can be legal, as long as the officers had reasonable suspicion to detain you in the first place.

And how sad is THAT?

When I took a Criminal Law course (back in the olden days) there was a then famous case wherein a subject was walking along along a beach with no ID.  At 0300.  The police stopped and questioned him, as he appeared ‘suspicious’  Seemed he was carrying a large beach ball, and wearing swim fins!

He wasn’t harming anyone or anything.

(This may have been the case that made it to the Supreme Court)

Turned out, the subject was a local city councilman testing the police’s authority!

My point is, in a free society, we shouldn’t have to ID ourselves, unless the police have at a minimum reasonable suspicion of a crime having been committed nearby.  OR, probable cause you might be a viable suspect. (and NO, I am NOT a lawyer…)

“Papiere, bitte.” (translation, “Papers, please”)

From the history of that country who brought us those Nazis everyone is talking about!

Second Amendment Guarantee Act Would Protect Popular Rifles, Shotguns from Antigun Politicians

(from NRA/ILA)

This week, Congressman Chris Collins (R-NY) introduced legislation that would shield popular rifles and shotguns, including the AR-15, from being banned under state laws. The bill, known as the Second Amendment Guarantee Act (SAGA), would also protect parts for these firearms, including detachable magazines and ammunition feeding devices.
The bill is a response to antigun laws in a small handful of states – including California, Connecticut, D.C., Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York – that criminalize the mere possession of highly popular semiautomatic long guns widely available throughout the rest of the country. Although rifles or shotguns of any sort are used less often in murders than knives, blunt objects such as clubs or hammers, or even hands, fists, and feet, gun control advocates have sought to portray the banned guns as somehow uniquely dangerous to public safety.
Ask Your Representative to support the Second Amendment Guarantee Act
Please contact your U.S. Representative and ask him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 3576, the Second Amendment Guarantee Act. You can call your U.S. Representative at 202-225-3121.
TAKE ACTION TODAY
Anti-gunners’ focus on these so-called “assault weapons” was renewed after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. That decision made clear that handguns – by far the type of firearm most commonly used in crime – were subject to Second Amendment protection and could not be banned. This led gun control advocates to seek out other sorts of guns to demonize, and they’ve since been strenuously promoting the myth that semiautomatic rifles and shotguns with certain features such as detachable magazines, pistol grips or adjustable stocks are “weapons of war” with no legitimate civilian use.
Yet Americans overwhelmingly choose these types of firearms for legitimate purposes, including protection of their homes and properties, “three-gun” and other practical shooting sports, and hunting and pest control. And, indeed, the states’ legislative attempts to ban these guns has spurred a market for innovative products that use the same basic calibers and firing mechanisms, but with stock, grip, and accessory configurations that comply with legislative guidelines.
Although the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to review any of these state bans, lower courts have come up with increasingly strained readings of the Second Amendment and Supreme Court precedents to try to justify them. The Seventh Circuit, for example, held that even if a ban’s incursion on Second Amendment rights had no beneficial effect on safety whatsoever, it could still be justified on the basis of the false sense of security it might impart to local residents with exaggerated fears of the banned guns. “[I]f it has no other effect,” the majority opinion stated, the challenged “ordinance may increase the public’s sense of safety.” That’s hardly an acceptable offset for the infringement of a constitutional right.
Members of the Supreme Court have criticized their colleagues for failing to review these cases and the lower courts for misapplying Supreme Court precedent. As noted in a dissent filed by Justice Clarence Thomas and joined by Heller’s author, the late Justice Antonin Scalia, “Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles.” Moreover, the “overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting.” “Under our precedents,” Thomas concluded, “that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons.”
With states’ violating Americans’ rights and federal courts allowing them to act with impunity, it is up to Congress to ensure that all Americans, wherever they may live, have access the best, most modern and innovative firearms for their lawful needs, including the protection of themselves and their families.
The SAGA would ensure that state regulations could not effectively prevent the manufacture, sale, importation, or possession of any rifle or shotgun lawfully available under federal law or impose any prohibitive taxes, fees, or design limitations on such firearms.
The NRA thanks Rep. Chris Collins for leading this important effort and urges his colleagues to cosponsor and support this staunchly pro-gun legislation.
Please contact your U.S. Representative and ask him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 3576, the Second Amendment Guarantee Act. You can call your U.S. Representative at 202-225-3121.

IT’S ABOUT TIME!

Where were bills like this when the various ‘assault weapon bans’ were introduced?  Of course, the political climate has changed.

Let’s support bills like this before the pendulum swings back again the other way!

The truly sad part is if State and federal legislators truly followed their oaths, none of this would be necessary.

Does Possession Of A Firearm Justify A Stop And Frisk?

(from Tamara, via FB)

No automatic alt text available.

Guy A. Relford

If you carry a gun, you should know that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit has ruled that you have relinquished your rights under the Fourth Amendment (contrary to the holding of the Indiana Supreme Court).

Please share!

http://www.wibc.com/…/indiana-ag-citizens-dont-forfeit-thei…

(AND, the comment posted below which takes the Internets!)

Ed Blade Sooo…exercising one right negates another???

 

Florida Got It Backward

TWICE!

(from Wirecutter)

Florida arms tax collectors

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “A Central Florida tax collector says a new policy will allow his employees to openly carry firearms while they work,” The Associated Press reports. “Seminole County Tax Collector Joel Greenberg told the Orlando Sentinel that according to Florida law, he and his employees are considered ‘revenue officers’ and are exempt from the state’s ban on the open carrying of firearms while performing their duties.”

The rationale behind the move is to save taxpayers money by eliminating the need to hire private security.

“Tax collector Joel Greenberg says he is a ‘big believer in the Second Amendment,’” letter to the editor writer Gordon Crawford points out in the Orlando Sentinel. “If that is truly the case, he would know that this constitutional amendment was put in place to protect the public from government tyranny, not to arm the government.”
MORE
-JD

Not to mention, just this past week, a Floridian judge backed-off of the State’s Stand Your Ground Law.

We must remain vigilant, People!  ‘They’ aren’t done yet.

They should understand, neither are we.

Happy Independence Day

Today is the 241st anniversary of our Declaration of Independence from the tyranny that was the British crown against the colonies.

And, it will be celebrated with fireworks, picnics, barbeques and other family get-togethers.  Some parades and even some solemn remembrances.

We should acknowledge this day, but we should also remember tyranny never stops, and government never stops growing unabated.

YES!  WE HAVE A BILL OF RIGHTS! – but how many of them are forgotten or stepped-on today?

Freedom of Speech?  Hardly.  Colleges and university restricting or stopping speech with which they disagree WHOLESALE!

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms?  I will acknowledge much improvement has happened over the past 20 years in this area, but we must not sit on out laurels.  Just this past week, the Supreme Court declined to hear how possession (carrying) of weapons outside the home factors in.  Leaving an erroneous District Court finding to stand.

Search and Seizure?  Do we even have a Fourth Amendment, anymore?  Blanket wiretapping of cellular phone and Internet communications.  DUI checkpoints.  The TSA.  Anyone see any warrants affiliated with these actions?

Trial by a Jury of one’s Peers?  Seriously?  How often?

And don’t even get me started on seizure of assets and jury nullification!

I thank God that we didn’t elect Barack 2.0 (aka Hillary).  This doesn’t mean that the current White House occupant is close to being a diamond in the rough.

He is a populist, and certainly NOT a libertarian!  And surrounds himself with statist conservatives.

We have won some battles, but are nowhere close to winning the war.

The quote “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty” is often mistakenly attributed to the Irish lawyer and politician John Philpot Curran and frequently to Thomas Jefferson.

In fact, Curran’s line was somewhat different. What he actually said, in a speech in Dublin on July 10, 1790, was:

       “The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance.”

And, according to Jefferson scholars there is “no evidence to confirm that Thomas Jefferson ever said or wrote, ‘Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty’ or any of its variants.”

Whoever said it, it is TRUE!  Stay vigilant, My Friends!

Happy Independence Day

 

We Are FOOLS For The Internet

Remember when we were told that our Internet searches might be watched over surveilled ‘reviewed’ by the Intelligence ‘Community’ (“Jesus, you guys are kind to yourselves!” ‘Joe Turner (Condor)’, in Three Days of the Condor)

Now, my friend Borepatch brings us this:

Amazon Echo, Google Alexa, and the NSA

Amazon Echo and Google’s Alexa are Internet Of Things devices that listen for your voice commands and then do not particularly interesting things for you.  The minor convenience and gee whiz factor are way outweighed by how you are painting a big bulls eye on your house:

As a rule, IoT devices lack security and these are no different. Unlike other IoT devices, these personal assistants compromise your security in even more ways they you may think. In general, most users don’t read the Terms of Service (ToS) associated with IoT devices or software being installed. Users have a basic understanding that Amazon and Google will maintain your profile information, such as what music you listen to, when you turn off your lights, or even the coffee you order, in an effort to provide a better over-all experience. Over time these devices learn your preferences; the more intuitive and responsive the device, the more we tend to use it.

What is more alarming is what you don’t think about when using these voice activated devices including those from Apple and Microsoft. There has been a lot of discussion around the security and privacy of these devices over the past few months. One of the biggest concerns is the question of whether the devices are always listening. Both Amazon and Google say the devices listen for hot words that activate them, such has Hello Google or Echo/Alexa, but because these devices are controlled by and interact with by Amazon and Google, the hot words and or the device itself can be easily manipulated to allow for an always on “listening mode” by the vendor at any time by the way of a crafty term of service

How’s the security of these devices?  You can’t know.  What will the Terms Of Service provide to protect your privacy?  You can’t know:

Amazon:In order to keep the Amazon Software up-to-date, we may offer automatic or manual updates at any time and without notice to you.

Google:When a Service requires or includes downloadable software, this software may update automatically on your device once a new version or feature is available…

So the services can update the software without your knowledge, whenever they want, for any reason they want.  The terms of service state that they may sell or share your data to other organizations.  And this is creepy but entirely to be expected:

In addition to the vendor maintaining access to the device, it isn’t unfathomable that cyber-criminals could gain access as well. These are, after all, IoT devices and are just as vulnerable to being pwnd (geek speak meaning owned/or controlled) as any other IoT device. Both devices have indicators when they are in listening mode, however this can be easily disabled by a hacker. A hacker could be listening to your every word and you would not be aware.

And so would NSA listen in?  The Snowden revelations suggest that they might already be listening in.  How much data do they have?  Who knows?

It will be a cold day in Hell when one of these things shows up at Castle Borepatch.

It’s probably good we at Guffaw de alquiler cannot afford such things.  My roomie is not particularly tech savvy (less than I) , but loves toys!  Between the two of us, we have a PC, a laptop, two tablets, two smartphones, and she has a smart watch!
If indeed, United States intelligence (or Israeli?  They reportedly have a listening post not far from Fort Huachuca) is actually paying attention to what we email, and to whom, and records our cellular calls, and computer searches, adding a voice-actuated room-wide link to the Internet just seems like overkill.
Inviting what is essentially an open wiretap into one’s home, with which to do Internet searches, order products and services, pay bills, etc. seems a little self-defeating.  If privacy is your goal.
If we ever get out of this financial hole we are digging (with her working little, and surgery pending – putting her off for six to twelve weeks), I can see her wanting one, though.
Sigh.

 

Just When You Thought It Was Safe – To Travel By Air…

TUAK so informs us…

Remember, Citizens: It is a federal crime to shout “help, rape,” during your comprehensive physical screening*…

U.S. Airport Pat-Downs Are About to Get More Invasive

While few have noticed, U.S. airport security workers long had the option of using five different types of physical pat-downs at the screening line. Now those options have been eliminated and replaced with a single universal approach. This time, you will notice.The new physical touching—for those selected to have a pat-down—will be be what the federal agency officially describes as a more “comprehensive” physical screening, according to a Transportation Security Administration spokesman.

Denver International Airport, for example, notified employees and flight crews on Thursday that the “more rigorous” searches “will be more thorough and may involve an officer making more intimate contact than before.”

tsa-rapist
*It actually is.

Is there a NEED for more strict (illegal) searches?  Have more people passed through with ‘inappropriate’ items?  More terrorists or attacks tracked to air travel?

NO.

Has Amendment the Fourth been excised from the Bill of Rights?

NO.

For the many good things (translation – things of a semi-Constitutional nature) the current President is doing (in comparison to the last guy!), we must remember he is only a Law and Order guy, but he is NOT a libertarian!

He is willing to (attempt to) abolish the Departments of Education and Energy, but not the TSA and Homeland Security.

What does that tell you?

In my mind, more of the same brought to us by George W. Bush and continued (and expanded) by Barack Obama.

(As the President does hold a N.Y. State CCW permit, I think he should continue to push for universal, nation-wide reciprocity.  Then abolish the TSA and let the passengers, ground crew and airline crew deal with the threat of terrorism!  Fewer repeat offenders?)

Rights

A good friend (and former co-worker) has been posting on FB regarding the schism in American Politics.

Those who believe Rights are given to them by government, versus those who believe Rights are inherent, and only partially enumerated by government.

And the piling-on and discussion brought me back to the ubiquitous question – WHAT constitutes a Right?

There’s the Right to keep and bear arms

The Right to free speech, assembly and worship

Trial by jury

The Right NOT to self-incriminate.

Due process

The Right to legal representation

Speedy trial

No search without a warrant (I know, pretty funny!  Given the NSA, FBI, DHS, Border Patrol, DUI checkpoints, etc.)

But, then, folks pile on…

The ‘Right’ to Drive?

The ‘Right’ to Health Care

The ‘Right’ to ‘Free’ College

The ‘Right’ to a base income from government

Gay rights

Women’s rights

Animal rights

The right to privacy

Ad infinitum, ad nauseaum…

Subscribing to a libertarian philosophy, I believe in self-ownership, and by extension, personal property.  And the non-aggression principle.  Neither persons (or corporate persons or governments) may deprive me of my self-ownership (life, liberty or property) without due process of law.

This includes my labor and the fruits of my labor (taxation is theft).

AND compelling me to support someone else involuntarily is also! (paying for anothers’ health care, college, income.  Redistribution of wealth (socialism/Fabianism/communism) are methods by which this is achieved.

NOT compatible with our capitalistic constitutional Republic.

NOW, if I CHOOSE to help others voluntarily with the fruits of my labor, that’s a whole ‘nother thing!  Then it becomes my choice.

What does this mean for the ‘right’ to drive?  Well, if that person purchases fuel, which has road use taxes, I suppose.

What do you guys think?

Social Media Is NOT Your Friend!

fedbook-spying-social-mediaPrivacy mavens have been going on for some time regarding the complete lack of privacy on the Internet.  Coupled with private industry and public intelligence, license plate readers and facial recognition software, the NSA listening to our cellular telephone calls and reading our email, and cameras everywhere, from about 2002, lets face it…

We’re hosed. 

Now, another factor has entered the arena.

(from Peter)

“Militarizing” social media?

According to Motherboard, it’s a real threat.

A global conference of senior military and intelligence officials taking place in London this week reveals how governments increasingly view social media as “a new front in warfare” and a tool for the Armed Forces.

The overriding theme of the event is the need to exploit social media as a source of intelligence on civilian populations and enemies; as well as a propaganda medium to influence public opinion.

. . .

The event, the Sixth Annual Conference on Social Media Within the Defence and Military Sector, is sponsored by the Thales Group, the tenth largest defense company in the world, which is partially owned by the French government.

Participants in the conference—chaired by Steven Mehringer, Head of Communication Services at NATO—will include military and intelligence leaders from around the world, especially “social media experts from across the armed forces and defense industry.”

. . .

“Social Media is increasingly important to the portrayal of armed forces, at home and abroad on operations; raising awareness of institutional issues; and gaining support through successful recruitment campaigns,” said conference Chairman, NATO’s Steven Mehringer, in an invitation brochure for the event.

The military’s goal of using social media to influence the beliefs of populations to win wars is alluded to in the description of other panels. A proposed panel titled ‘NATO’s Digital Outreach: Creating a Global Conversation’, describes NATO’s aim of “cultivating a global audience through social media to support The Alliance.”

Another panel discussion makes direct reference to the role of social media in covert US military ‘psychological warfare’ operations—i.e. propaganda—as well as the use of social media to support mass surveillance.

There’s more at the link.

At first I assumed that the conference was about nothing more or less than the usual propaganda exercises employed by all sides in any conflict.  However, reading between the lines, it appears that they’re talking about more active – and more covert – interventions, such as ‘sock-puppeting‘ comments on or reactions to articles, blog posts, etc. that they don’t like.  In other words, they wouldn’t act openly, or say that this is the view of a particular party;  so one wouldn’t be able to exercise informed judgment on what they have to say.

I know some of the more totalitarian governments have been doing this for decades.  (The so-calledGreat Firewall of Chinais a good example, and it’s now morphing into acitizen scorefor every person, upon which will depend their ability to get good jobs, get loans, or even eat well.)  If Western nations are now starting to venture into the same territory, we’ll have to be on our guard.

To coin a phrase: Big Brother is not your friend.

Facebook Has Become The Weekly World News!

(Originally, I was going to say The National Enquirer, but that periodical appears to have achieved more gravitas of late than The New York Times and Time magazine, combined!)  🙂

Let’s see.  In the past week…

  • Hillary WILL DEFINITELY be indicted
  • Hillary WILL DEFINITELY NOT be indicted
  • Global Warming is real (as determined by bribed/blackmailed scientists)
  • Oklahoma Fracking is causing the increased earthquake activity there (as determined by the same ‘team’ of scientists)
  • Assange states Wikileaks will release astounding information damning to Hillary in the next couple of days. – from Saturday last  (We’re still waiting, Julian!)
  • GMO foods are killing us.
  • Vaccinating is bad
  • Vaccinating is good.
  • More BEE species are facing extinction (due to Monsanto pesticide and GMO development)
  • Big corporations (like Monsanto) are bad.  Just because they are big, and make money.
  • Hillary will win (because the fix is in, ballot box stuffing, voter fraud, Soros, Illuminati, etc.)
  • Hillary will win (based on some Quija board predictions in the past – see Groundhog Day)
  • Trump will win (see above Hillary win stuff for reasons)

One thing I have noticed.  Many of the same scientists are aligned with the same forces who believe in global warming, are anti-GMO and ANTI-vaxxer types, and have the ‘humans are bad for the Earth’ (and obtaining oil is bad, and think we need a global government to solve everything) way of thinking.

IF YOU HAVE NOT VOTED, PLEASE DO SO.  IF NOT, YOU WILL HAVE NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN.

Thank GOD today is Election Day, and it will all be over soon!

One way or another…

God save The United States of America, from herself!

 

 

"Round up the usual suspects."

In Loving Memory…