I Think It Is Time We Got Involved.
I just read a news story that just pissed me off. It seems that the Cops can now down load your mobile devices in the field. It is buried in the link, but some cops in Maryland just got these devices. I am going to stop carrying my cell phone. FUCK THE PIGS!!!
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/42/4259.aspSomeone got the story wrong, I'm sure.
We were required to have a search warrant to download data. I can't envision a traffic officer downloading data. I think the reporter got it wrong
It's not an error. Some agencies/jurisdictions, are doing this now. They can't monitor your content, but they can get WHO you called, WHEN you called, and the NUMBER you called - no warrant required. This is "metadata", and it's the same thing the NSA is getting on all of us.
"Your metadata is now my data" Say hello to "1984" :mad:
The Patriot act and others like it, have substantially broadened the scope of legal intrusion by the gov't, into our lives.
WAKE UP, PEOPLE! We need to repeal most, if not all, of the provisions in these laws. Conservatives and Libertarians - hell, everyone concerned with individual liberty, have been talking about this for years already.
:lol:
I have heard dozens upon dozens of people complain about the Patriot Act, and not one of them has been conservative.
One of my biggest disappointments with Obama is that he kept the Patriot Act and keeps the NSA bullshit going.
...he kept the Patriot Act and keeps the NSA bullshit going
Not-On-My-Watch is a powerful political argument.
I don't have a problem if they're busting people who cause accidents 'cause they're screwing around with their cell phones. The guy who totaled my 2 week old car was fucking with his phone. It was my word against his. I should've sued his cocky ass.
So leave your phones at home! All the better for the other drivers on the road.
I'm really sure this story is bullshit
I'm really sure this story is bullshit
I hope so.
http://news.yahoo.com/u-justices-reject-call-review-intelligence-court-action-152617078--finance.html
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court said on Monday it would not review a ruling by a secretive intelligence court that authorized government access to millions of Verizon Communications Inc (VZ.N) phone-call records.
I'm really sure this story is bullshit
Why? The law is in place to direct camera revenue to limited areas, and it fits right in with the militarization of police forces around the country.
I think fargon misinterpreted,
...and the purchase of a $12,083 mobile device used to crack the passwords and grab the data from mobile phones while in the field.
to mean every cop will be doing this, but it continues...
"The upgrade will allow police investigators to pull data from the most technically advanced cell phones and tablets," Salisbury Police Major David Meienschein wrote in a September 5 memo. "The Cellebrite UFED Touch is a device that is used to perform data extractions from cell phones, tablets, iPads, GPS and other electronic devices. Investigators have been able to obtain stored and deleted data files to include but not limited to: text messages, photographs, videos and contact lists."
Bold mine.
Keep in mind, the cop on the "beat" doesn't need any high tech bullshit to kick the shit out of you and throw your ass in jail for obstruction, resisting, or looking suspicious.
I didn't expect this level of outrage-able news would come as an aside in this small source.
Well, if the cops are going to pull this shit during routine traffic stops, they're going to get reined in by the courts quick enough. On the other hand, someone could truly consent to a search of their phone to prove their own innocence. In that case, getting it done by a certified device, instead of a human cop, would be a good thing.
http://www.cellebrite.com/mobile-retail/products/standalone/cellebrite-touchAmerica is dying. Quickly.
You know, it's a shame about Ed,
Oh, it was, That was really a shame,
To go so suddenly like that,
He was dying for years,
Sure,
But the end was very, very sudden,
He was in intensive care for eight weeks,
But I mean the very end, when he actually died,
That was extremely sudden,
Paraphrasing some comedian:
...it said he died suddenly. Well, how else can you die? I mean, you're alive, you're alive, you're alive, you're alive, thenyou'redead!
Some drivers along a busy Fort Worth street on Friday were stopped at a police roadblock and directed into a parking lot, where they were asked by federal contractors for samples of their breath, saliva and even blood. It was part of a government research study aimed at determining the number of drunken or drug-impaired drivers.
"It just doesn't seem right that you can be forced off the road when you're not doing anything wrong," said Kim Cope, who said she was on her lunch break when she was forced to pull over at the roadblock on Beach Street in North Fort Worth.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which is spending $7.9 million on the survey over three years, said participation was "100 percent voluntary" and anonymous.
But Cope said it didn't feel voluntary to her -- despite signs saying it was.
"I gestured to the guy in front that I just wanted to go straight, but he wouldn't let me and forced me into a parking spot," she said. Once parked, she couldn't believe what she was asked next. "They were asking for cheek swabs," she said. "They would give $10 for that. Also, if you let them take your blood, they would pay you $50 for that." At the very least, she said, they wanted to test her breath for alcohol.
linkI can't say what I want to say because Big Brother is watching.
Here is another story that upset me, and Cops wonder why they are hated.
http://gawker.com/dad-arrested-for-complaining-about-schools-absurd-pick-1467819079
That was a school resource officer enforcing a school policy. SRO's essentially enforce school policies and provide security for schools. When you are on school property, you lose many of your rights concerning search and seizure, etc. It is the same thing as when you enter a military post. Have you ever taken the time to read the warning at the gate of what rights you surrender and that you are subject to arrest if you do not comply??
Another important point, SRO's salaries are paid through the Department of Education in response to school shootings. Their police powers come through an agreement with the law enforcement agency where the school is located. The local law enforcement agency has very little control over the actions of these officers. They essentially work for the school superintendent and school principal. BTW, their salaries are paid with Federal Grant money.
link
Bruce - You realize the local police were only assisting a Federal agency, the NHTA, in this incident. The NHTA provides large grants to local agencies to enforce DUI and Seatbelt enforcement. This includes paying the salaries of officers for enforcement, patrol cars, in car video cameras, intoxilyzers, etc. The local agency was likely caught in a situation that if they refused to help the NHTA, they would lose grant funding the next year.
I have first hand knowledge of the NHTA. Years ago I worked as a Metro DUI Officer (a 4 department task force) and our primary duties were to enforce DUI and safety restraint. Our results were submitted monthly to the NHTA through our State Grant Coordinator. Later as a police chief, I wrote grants to receive funds for officer salaries and equipment. Your agency's performance (stats) directly impacted how much funding your department received.
What I am trying to say is the blame should fall on the Federal Agency that makes state & local departments puppets.
It's bullshit "for the sake of the children". Oh, won't someone please think of the children. :rolleyes:
Private property? No, public property, who do you think paid for that fucking place. It's clearly a kidnapping, illegal restraint minors, by an asshole with a little authority. The only thing that should concern him is nobody takes the wrong kids.
He's being a dick because they're not kowtowing to the mighty Deputy Dawg. I've met dozens of these assholes who feel everyone must kiss their ass, because their whims trump the law, or anyone else's rights.
Down the road, he may meet George Zimmerman.
Bruce - how many years have you worked in law enforcement? You are making generalizing an entire profession based upon sensationalism in the media. Sure there are some bad apples, but that can be said about any profession.
I was merely pointing out that SRO's work for the school administrators and follow their rules.
fargo - you make so pretty demeaning comments. If someone is breaking into your home in the middle of the night are you going to call 911 and say fuck the pigs?
You have to have been a cop to make a judgment on cop behavior is a huge pile of steaming red herring bullshit.
SRO's work for the school administrators and follow their rules
Looked to me like rent-a-cop was making up his own rules.
Sensationalism in the media? Probably some, but more straight out reporting like most papers used to do.
But from personal experience. FBI, no problem. State Police, a few dickheads, but mostly square shooters. Local cops, they tend to go by department, if the top brass is cool, most of the cops under them will be. But other departments are rotten top down, constantly breaking the law, bullying people, and acting like Buford T Justice in the video.
The one big flaw with all cops, top to bottom, is their willingness to cover up for other cops, and even go so far as trying to justify it.
Here is another story that upset me, and Cops wonder why they are hated.
http://gawker.com/dad-arrested-for-complaining-about-schools-absurd-pick-1467819079
Local ABC affiliate WATE reached out to Sheriff Butch Burgess, who said he doesn't need to see the video "because it won't tell the whole story" and "Aytes was just doing his job."
Who are you going to believe, his upstanding never-wrong police officer or your lying eyes and ears?:right:
"The Cellebrite UFED Touch is a device that is used to perform data extractions
OMG, what evil hath the Cellar wrought?;)
You have to have been a cop to make a judgment on cop behavior is a huge pile of steaming red herring bullshit.
Why do kids need special checkout procedures? At what point were we at so much risk when we just walked home without any parents? Today, crime rates are even lower than back when it was safe to walk home. Why do so many parents wait at bus stops because their kids cannot walk 1000 feet from bus to home?
The entire thing is based on a completely unjustified fear. Then confrontational people make it a local gossip TV story. Why so much bureaucracy over how students walk out the building?
Why ? Because crime news is no longer local... crimes against children are nationally broadcast over and over and ...
I routinely carried a pocket knife to school. I usually had a shotgun or a .22 rifle in the rear window of my truck in high school. BTW, we got our licenses at age 15. Strange thing is we didn't have any mass shootings. I wonder why?
I think it is because the media has sensationalized school violence and the bullied or mentally ill see it as a chance to become "famous".
BTW, we got our licenses at age 15. Strange thing is we didn't have any mass shootings. I wonder why?
Because nobody had guns anywhere, then we did not have fist fights in school.
We know that the 1960s were more dangerous than streets and subways today. Those are facts and numbers. But a majority believe something else for one simple reason. They ignore numbers. And listen to liars who note trends without any numbers. Fear (emotion) works for the same reason why a majority *knew* smoking cigarettes increase health.
Because nobody had guns anywhere....
:lol2:
I feel like I've mentioned this here before, so forgive me if I have, but in 3rd grade, in Tuscon, Arizona in 1976, my friend brought a handgun to school for show and tell. I think it was a Luger.
The teacher asked to hold it in her desk for the day, but gave it to him for the show and tell portion so he could show it and tell about it.
He had found it in the desert, and his dad let him keep it. He told the story about how he fired it at a cactus one time, and when he went to look at the hole in the cactus, he saw a dead lizard behind the cactus that the bullet had also hit.
At the end of the day, the teacher gave him the gun back, and he went home. Maybe there were some phone calls that I wasn't aware of, but the boy was back in school the next day and seemed perfectly normal. No evidence that he had gotten in trouble.
A coincidence of NY Times news articles today and Glatt's post above.
...maybe a bit of "deeper thinking" is creeping into society at large
NY Times
JANE GROSS
12/3/13
Born of Grief, ‘Three Strikes’ Laws Are Being Rethought
<snip>A few noted criminologists predicted at the time that “three strikes” laws,
which would sweep the nation, were unlikely to have much effect on crime,
would fill the nation’s prisons to bursting and would satisfy frustrated voters
at the expense of bad public policy. They were largely ignored.
As this Retro Report points out, [COLOR="DarkRed"]California voters eventually concluded
that its three strikes law was excessive in its zeal and financial burden,[/COLOR]
and last year they amended the law that Mr. Reynolds had put before them two decades earlier.
<snip>
——————
NY Times
LIZETTE ALVAREZ
December 2, 2013
Seeing the Toll, Schools Revise Zero Tolerance
<snip>The Florida district, the sixth largest in the nation, was far from an outlier.
In the past two decades, schools around the country have seen suspensions,
expulsions and arrests for minor nonviolent offenses climb together
with the number of police officers stationed at schools.
The policy, called zero tolerance, first grew out of the war on drugs in the 1990s and became
more aggressive in the wake of school shootings like the one at Columbine High School in Colorado.<snip>
But in November, Broward veered in a different direction, joining other large school districts,
including Los Angeles, Baltimore, Chicago and Denver, in backing away from the get-tough approach.
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Rather than push children out of school, districts like Broward are now doing the opposite: [/COLOR]
choosing to keep lawbreaking students in school, away from trouble on the streets,
and offering them counseling and other assistance aimed at changing behavior.<snip>
YEARS ago I guess everyone who could afford a pocket knife, had one in school. I've carried my shot gun to school and left it in the principle's office. Then on school bus to spend the weekend with friend in the country. If you had a problem with someone, you carried it to the football field and sorted it out. No teachers involved. I've had to go get stitches afterwards. No 3 day pass or anything.
I guess I'm in the camp where assault isn't the answer to minor disagreements and children should not be carrying fucking guns everywhere.
And the
beat goes on...
Three Edison students who were charged with disorderly conduct pleaded not guilty in court. The boys were with about a dozen basketball teammates Wednesday morning on Main Street waiting for a school bus to take them to a scrimmage at Aquinas. There was no school that day and their coach had arranged for a pick-up at a central meeting spot.
An officer asked the boys to disperse and they refused. The young men say they tried to explain to him they were waiting for a school bus. The officer arrested three of the players.
The police report says the students were obstructing "pedestrian traffic while standing on a public sidewalk...preventing free passage of citizens walking by and attempting to enter and exit a store...Your complainant gave several lawful clear and concise orders for the group to disperse and leave the area without complaince."
Their coach, Jacob Scott, who is also a district guidance counselor, arrived at the location as the three students were placed in handcuffs. Scott said he pleaded with the officer to let the boys go, saying he was supervising them.
"He goes on to say, 'If you don't disperse, you're going to get booked as well,'" Scott said. "I said, 'Sir, I'm the adult. I'm their varsity basketball coach. How can you book me? What am I doing wrong? Matter of fact, what are these guys doing wrong?'"
And of course...
Scott said a sergeant showed up and backed up his officer.
Rochester school board member Mary Adams showed up to the arraignment.
"I think the charges should be immediately dropped and I think the district attorney's office should be stepping in an looking at these kinds of matters," Adams said.
I'm with Mary Adams. The DA didn't have to take the case on. And they are elected. Vote the fascists out.
Yeah, I was surprised to learn how much power DAs actually have in that regard. Just about any crime, they can simply choose not to prosecute and the whole thing disappears. Of course the fear of getting voted out is supposed to keep them in line, but if there's no big media coverage of a particular crime, it can be swept under the rug without too much hassle at all.
But DAs do need convictions to show they are earning they're keep, and if they offend the cops they won't get the cooperation/support they need to do that.
The DA has no business in this matter. It is a municipal court matter that will be prosecuted by the city prosecutor. The kids have the option to file a civil rights violation that would be investigated by the FBI, but it would more likely end up a civil suit
I'm confused, Sarge. Don't all the city prosecutors work for the DA's office?
I'm confused, Sarge. Don't all the city prosecutors work for the DA's office?
District Attorneys prosecute felony cases that occur in their jurisdiction. Municipal Prosecutors handle misdemeanor cases in their jurisdiction. Justice Courts or County Courts, which use the County Prosecutor, handle misdemeanor cases generated by the sheriff's department, set bonds in felony cases unless it is one of the 5 heinous crimes which can result in the depth penalty or life in prison, and handle preliminary hearings for District Court.
To be charged by the District Attorney in a felony case, he can take a case directly to the grand jury and seek a secret indictment. That forgoes all of the pretrial hearings and takes the suspect directly to trial reducing the discovery time.
So to answer your question, a municipal prosecutor or county prosecutor can tell the DA to fuck off. Now it really gets interesting when we factor in the federal prosecutors and the duties of Federal magistrates, district judges, and circuit judges.
The whole problem in understanding in who does what can be boiled down to police dramas and that totally unrealistic piece of shit show CSI. Who has ever heard of a forensic investigator making arrests? A forensic investigator only collects and analyzes evidence. The results are given to the criminal investigators ( sworn and commissioned officers) who interpret the evidence and decide whom to arrest.
Whew! That felt good to get off of my chest
I guess I'm in the camp where assault isn't the answer to minor disagreements and children should not be carrying fucking guns everywhere.
I'm afraid we have cultural differences. Maybe we didn't have school shootings back then because we settled problems with our fists. I was small and picked on till I stood up and knocked a kid out with my trombone case applied to his head.
As for guns, Addie has been shooting .22's since she was 4 yoa. Just a different culture
I was small and picked on till I stood up and knocked a kid out with my trombone case applied to his head.
Nowadays, you would have gotten in just as much trouble as the bully. Maybe more, if the only thing the school employee saw was you hitting him, and none of the harassment leading up to it. Another side effect of zero tolerance.
I'm afraid we have cultural differences.
Right, you were raised that way and so it is just fine with you, Q.E.D.
So to answer your question, a municipal prosecutor or county prosecutor can tell the DA to fuck off.
Who do these local prosecutors answer to? Are they elected or appointed? If appointed, are their bosses elected? Where does the public apply political pressure to get them reigned in?
Maybe we didn't have school shootings back then because we settled problems with our fists.
We did not need fist fights. And, of course, never had guns. But then I grew up where virtually everyone went to college or something equivalent.
Closest we came to a fight was a football game where refs completely lost control. Made numerous bogus calls on both sides. It was the only game we lost. The coach ordered everyone to immediately sit on the bench so that no 'after game' confrontation could happen. Another reason why no one did something only lesser people do - fist fights. 'Powers that be' averted such low intelligence silliness before it could happen by using a fundamental management concept called "attitude and knowledge".
Unfortunately many go on as adults using same low life concepts; to advocate military actions as a solution for everything. Or need big guns because of threats that only exist in their fears.
Those fist fights illustrate people worried about being dissed (their ego) rather then dealing facts and reality. The most responsible also ask "what does he see; why is he angry." Then fists and guns become unnecessary.
Every time I read this thread title, it reminds me of this commercial.
[YOUTUBE]s8shSrRIEyo[/YOUTUBE]
[YOUTUBE]y4XdZOGRYYo[/YOUTUBE]
Right, you were raised that way and so it is just fine with you, Q.E.D.
It is caused a cultural norm. Were you raised in a rural or urban environment? Have you ever been hunting? Have you ever been a knock down kick ass fight where it didn't matter if you won or loss? What matter was you stood your ground.
What makes your thoughts or beliefs on this matter correct?
Who do these local prosecutors answer to? Are they elected or appointed? If appointed, are their bosses elected? Where does the public apply political pressure to get them reigned in?
City prosecutors are hired by the city. County prosecutors are an elected position. District Attorneys are elected. All Federal prosecutors are appointed, except for assistants who are hired through civil service
Unfortunately many go on as adults using same low life concepts; to advocate military actions as a solution for everything. Or need big guns because of threats that only exist in their fears.
Those fist fights illustrate people worried about being dissed (their ego) rather then dealing facts and reality. The most responsible also ask "what does he see; why is he angry." Then fists and guns become unnecessary.
Tw, I do believe you are a sheep. Have you ever physically defended anything? Have you ever defended your country from enemies, both foreign and domestic? I envision you as a timid little engineer who likes to Monday morning quarterback and try to talk down the people who have to make decisions in a split second.
You are a sad little man
Tw, I do believe you are a sheep. Have you ever physically defended anything?
Disarming big dics with reasoning and logic is easy when an ego is not attached to every decision. Standing your ground means an ego is more important than adult thought. Ego comes from a brain that children use. Intelligent thought comes later in brain development. Many adults use a childhood brain to prove their manliness with fists. Adults eventually form a part of the brain that discovers the stupidity of ego.
Fools and the dumbest among us think fisticuffs defend a nation. They even forget that the world's strongest nations got that way by having less military. They are so attached to a child's brain as to even prove their manliness with insults.
The military spends so much time teaching discipline. Otherwise too many children in adult bodies would entertain their ego rather than be professional.
Unfortunately this may be too cerebral. Research in adolescent development notes some adults never fully develop a pre-frontal cortex. Then ego is more important than a grasp of reality. Only children (ie George Zimmerman) need to 'stand their ground'.
It is caused a cultural norm. Were you raised in a rural or urban environment? Have you ever been hunting? Have you ever been a knock down kick ass fight where it didn't matter if you won or loss? What matter was you stood your ground.
What makes your thoughts or beliefs on this matter correct?
IDK,
PROGRESS?
Cultural norms are bullshit groupthink, proof of nothing. Slavery was a cultural norm.
The idea that might makes right is barbaric and sad. Would you apply that method between an 18 year old and a 70 year old? Would you apply it between an 18 year old in good condition and an 18 year old paraplegic? Would you apply it between a man and a woman? Well why not?
People who fight should be charged with crime and jailed. One can be hurt, paralyzed or killed in a fight. What more do you need to know? We're not fucking cavemen any more!
Well one of us isn't.
I went to a high school like what Sarge remembers. I think that mindset is still in play there as there was recently another gay teen suicide. There is nothing brave or romantic about teen violence.
That's not what phone sex means.
Disarming big dics with reasoning and logic is easy when an ego is not attached to every decision. ....
Can't be that easy, Trayvon Martin couldn't do it.
Many adults use a childhood brain to prove their manliness with fists. ...
Like Trayvon Martin used his fists.
... Fools and the dumbest among us think fisticuffs defend a nation. ...
Many, both nationally and internationally, believe Trayvon Martin was justifiably defending his rights in this nation by perpetrating violence.
... Then ego is more important than a grasp of reality. ...
Like Trayvon Martin engaging someone with fists knowing they
could have a gun.
... Only children (ie George Zimmerman) need to 'stand their ground'.
Just sayin', since you've dropped a name.
... One can be hurt, paralyzed or killed in a fight. ...
But, but, it's so easy a caveman could do it!
Think of the cavechildren.
Many, both nationally and internationally, believe Trayvon Martin was justifiably defending his rights in this nation by perpetrating violence.
Reality says Trayvon Martin was not armed to the teeth and therefore was not trolling for trouble. But an adult who is still a child did. No wonder Zimmerman even beat up girlfriends. After all, his manliness was at stake. His ego even justified that attack and his need for guns.
Unfortunately those same type people also want to solve problems with immediate and illogical military deployments (ie Vietnam, Mission Accomplished, Syria). Unfortunately those same type people created our recent economic malaise using soundbyte reasoning rather than learn from history. Plenty of Zimmermans exist out there justifying violence, destruction, their need for 155 mm howitzers, and even fist fights.
Reality says Trayvon Martin was not armed to the teeth and therefore was not trolling for trouble. ...
You seem to be implying that whether or not the person who brings a situation to fisticuffs is being childish, depends on whether or not they were trolling for trouble.
You also seem to be implying that whether or not a person is trolling for trouble, depends on whether or not they were armed.
Reality says that tw applies different standards to different people depending on his opinion of them, circumstances permitting.
I admit it. I'm a caveman not nearly as cerebrally evolved as the rest of you. However, I can walk the streets in the roughest areas because I project a stance of don't fuck with me. The criminals sense this and go after the easier target, sheeple.
If someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night and you & your family are locked in a bedroom, who do you want to come rescue you? A highly evolved man who will try to explain to the suspects error of their ways or a simple caveman whose sole intent is to save you and your family? Remember the decision of the responding officer must be made in a split second.
Oh, while you are pondering that don't forget the police have an average of a 10 minute response time. Are you going to defend your family for those 10 minutes or discuss with them how they aren't evolved?
I can walk the streets in the roughest areas because I project a stance of don't fuck with me. The criminals sense this and go after the easier target, sheeple.
In ten years you will be a weak old man, but still living in the might-makes-right world. No "stance" will protect you while you walk with a cane.
If someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night and you & your family are locked in a bedroom, who do you want to come rescue you?
It's a fantasy scenario you paint but I don't have a family and there simply aren't many home invasions where I live. In fact I can't remember one being reported.
In peaceful Montco, the cops and their ridiculous cop personalities are as much or more of a threat to me than criminals. A good friend of mine was arrested for driving while hippy, and the bullshit he was put through and continues to be put through is truly remarkable. A few months ago I got a knock on my front door by a statey, who decided to be weirdly threatening... on the basis of an old moving violation.
In Philly one of the main questions is how much the city will have to set aside for lawsuits against the
criminal activity of shitty cops.
If I was victimized I might not even call them. My experience in calling the cops after being victimized 25 years ago is the cop was a truly unhelpful dick who borderline accused ME of shit while I sat bleeding in an ER, and proceeded to do nothing at all whatsoever.
Editor's note. this post has been heavily edited from the original to be less abrasiveBTW this is not a referendum on your entire lifestyle, much of which I admire. That was a change in subject. The original discussion came from this:
assault isn't the answer to minor disagreements and children should not be carrying fucking guns everywhere
and that's what I would like to continue to argue, not that you aren't a proud caveman and whatnot. The point that got side-tracked is: just cos we were brought up with certain stuff doesn't make it right, and that applies to all of us, not just you. We must all struggle to get past what we were brought up with. At least a third of all our thoughts are superstition and bullshit that just got passed along.
UT, I harbor no ill will towards you. This is just a passionate debate. Evidently, we have had different experiences with law enforcement.
As far as being an old man with a cane, we have a saying, "don't fuck with old folks, they'll kill you." The use of force continuum allows them to use a higher level of force based upon their age and infirmity compared to the youth and physical ability of the attacker. I'm 53, but my disability status heightens the level of force I can use to defend to defend myself.
Here, we have open carry without a permit. Also, we have concealed carry with an easily obtained permit. We have the Castle doctrine which gives you enhanced rights to defend your property. This also extends to your automobile and allows you to carry a concealed weapon on your property and in your car without permit. Finally, we have had a stand your ground law in various forms for many years based upon case law.
As far as kids go, a good fist fight benefits the loser. It shows he stands his ground and stops bullying. Kids with guns, many kids have a hunting firearm in their car because they hunt before or after school. My 20 yoa daughter carries a pistol in her truck because she works late at night. My 6 yoa daughter has her own rifle and knows the consequences of what happens when she pulls the trigger. She can skin a rabbit or a squirrel with a little help. She has graphically learned what the consequences of pulling a trigger.
You seem to be implying that whether or not the person who brings a situation to fisticuffs is being childish, depends on whether or not they were trolling for trouble.
A child worries about his ego. Only a child (of any age) needs to stand his ground to be respected. Those are reasons (actually emotions) and justifications that Big Sarge provided to justify fisticuffs. Unfortunately too many adults still feel that way to justify fist fights, wars, revenge, or even torture.
Also amazing how one so fears an attack especially when America has never been safer. Superstitions replace reality when emotions replace knowledge. More big weapons and a need to justify violence exists because one fears rather than thinks? Because one's ego is so important? Because it is essential to stand your ground and prove you are a man like a childish Zimmerman?
Men solve confrontations by eliminating a need for violence. Yes, some violence is unavoidable when one adult is so much a child. But in most cases, violence is mostly due to someone who fears to be dissed rather than solve the problem. Too many adults actually fear their ego might be bruised.
Big Sarge called that being a sheep. Reality: a good fight only benefits the emotions in a child. Nobody wins - no matter what the emotions say. Violence is not how a responsible adult or responsible nation solves problems. Scary are so many who refuse to understand the difference between an adult and an emotional pre-16 year old child.
Children have not yet developed a part of the brain necessary to be responsible. So we do not let children drive cars. And should fear children carrying guns for the same reason. And yet we still have some adults who only think like children. Who justify their actions (violence) to protect an ego.
Scary is that some just don't get it. They actually think fisticuffs (or shooting your Uzi at a rival drug gang) solves problems.
That's what I said, you have a double standard. One for people who live the way you want them to and another for those who don't. Then you try to spin rationales for it. So childish.
... No wonder Zimmerman even beat up girlfriends. After all, his manliness was at stake. His ego even justified that attack and his need for guns. ...
[SIZE="5"]George Zimmerman's girlfriend recants
allegations he threatened her with gun[/SIZE]
Samantha Scheibe, who refers to Zimmerman as her "boyfriend," said in a sworn statement obtained by NBC News that she felt intimidated when she was questioned by police about the Nov. 18 incident.
"I believe that the police misinterpreted me and that I may have misspoken about certain facts in my statement to the police. I do not feel that the arrest report accurately recounts what happened," she said.
"I am not afraid of George in any manner and I want to be with him," Scheibe stated.
:p: Back atcha.
Her father was also lying about a threatening Zimmerman? Amazing how many girls are beaten up ... and later know he loves her. O J Simpson also needs women like this.
These guys need big weapons to protect themselves from women who threaten their ego. Otherwise they might have to use their fists.
I feel like I've mentioned this here before, so forgive me if I have, but in 3rd grade, in Tuscon, Arizona in 1976, my friend brought a handgun to school for show and tell. I think it was a Luger.
The teacher asked to hold it in her desk for the day, but gave it to him for the show and tell portion so he could show it and tell about it.
He had found it in the desert, and his dad let him keep it. He told the story about how he fired it at a cactus one time, and when he went to look at the hole in the cactus, he saw a dead lizard behind the cactus that the bullet had also hit.
At the end of the day, the teacher gave him the gun back, and he went home. Maybe there were some phone calls that I wasn't aware of, but the boy was back in school the next day and seemed perfectly normal. No evidence that he had gotten in trouble.
Not merely nostalgic here, but this story is what you get when you let adults exercise JUDGMENT, instead of shackling them with zero-tolerance policies.
Ugandan Lawmakers Pass Measure Imposing Harsh Penalties on Gays
By ALAN COWELL
Published: December 20, 2013
LONDON — The Ugandan Parliament announced Friday that
it had approved legislation imposing harsh penalties on gay people,
including life imprisonment for what it called “aggravated homosexuality,”
effectively brushing aside previous objections to antigay legislation from outside powers, including President Obama.
... but this story is what you get when you let adults exercise JUDGMENT, instead of shackling them with zero-tolerance policies.
We should let banks invest in anything they want. We should never require automobile safety features. We should never require all children to be educated. If the driver sees nobody coming, then he has a right to run a red traffic light.
Not all adults are adult enough to make responsible decisions. Many adults, using emotions for reasoning, make some blanket restrictions necessary. A majority is limited by many laws because only a minority, incapable of exercising responsible judgement, make some blanket laws essential.
We know from the worst recession since 1929 that adults in banks (who are supposed to be most responsible adults) made major, blanket restrictions necessary. Because many if not most bankers are not sufficiently responsible. Which restrictions are necessary? That's why restrictions are made pragmatically; not based in rhetoric and political biases.
We know that most adults will use a 155 mm howitzer properly. But some adults who cannot think like an adult means sales of 155 mm howitzers should be banned.
TW - Did you know that you can own a 155mm howitzer legally in the US? Same thing with flame throwers and machineguns. Tanks and armored vehicles are legal too. When was the last time one of these legal weapons used in a robbery or murder?
I personally own a Confederate 24pdr iron expedient mortar. It took no permits or background checks to purchase. It fires a 5.82 inch exploding ball with a range up to 1,700 yards. Though the carriage is being rebuilt, my oldest son and daughter fired it in the past.
Tom, we need to meet up. I could take you target shooting with some of my more exotic large weapons. I bet you would have a blast and it might change your mind. Plus we could go riding at night in an urban where there are lots of drug sales, muggings, and car jackings. That way you could see first hand some of the animals that roam at night and maybe understand why we carry concealed weapons.
Serious offer and maybe we could see things through each other's eyes
But some adults cannot think like an adult means sales of 155 mm howitzers should be banned.
Uhhh - NO.
Well, if the cops are going to pull this shit during routine traffic stops, they're going to get reined in by the courts quick enough.
Wasington Post: Can the cops search your phone without a warrant? The Supreme Court intends to weigh in.TW - Did you know that you can own a 155mm howitzer legally in the US?
Could I carry a 155mm howitzer concealed in your state? Or is that open carry?
Must be nearly impossible to find a good comfortable rig for that.
TW - Did you know that you can own a 155mm howitzer legally in the US? ...
With a concealed carry permit you should be able to haul it behind your deuce as long as you stay one masking terrain feature away.
With a concealed carry permit you should be able to haul it behind your deuce ...
Is that a 155 mm in your pocket or are you just ...
Until I am allowed to carry a personal tactical nuclear weapon on my person without being hassled, the Second Amendment is a joke.
Until I am allowed to carry a personal tactical nuclear weapon on my person without being hassled, the Second Amendment is a joke.
So why is nobody laughing? Some people need that, 155 mm howizters and assault rifles for personal protection. No joke.
You can possess mortars, cannons, etc with a Destructive Device License. Machineguns only require a Class 3 permit
Well, if the cops are going to pull this shit during routine traffic stops, they're going to get reined in by the courts quick enough.
Wasington Post: Can the cops search your phone without a warrant? The Supreme Court intends to weigh in.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/25/us-usa-court-mobilephone-idUSKBN0F01R320140625
(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that police officers usually need a warrant before they can search an arrested suspect's cellphone, a major decision in favor of privacy rights at a time of increasing concern over government encroachment in digital communications.
In an opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court said that the right of police to search an arrested suspect at the scene without a warrant does not extend in most circumstances to data held on a cellphone. There are some emergency situations in which a warrantless search would be permitted, the court noted.
The unanimous 9-0 ruling goes against law enforcement agencies, including the U.S. Department of Justice, which wanted more latitude to search without having to obtain a warrant.
9-0.
Apple expands data encryption under iOS 8, making handover to cops moot
"On devices running iOS 8, your personal data such as photos, messages (including attachments), email, contacts, call history, iTunes content, notes, and reminders is placed under the protection of your passcode," the company wrote on its website Wednesday evening. "Unlike our competitors, Apple cannot bypass your passcode and therefore cannot access this data. So it's not technically feasible for us to respond to government warrants for the extraction of this data from devices in their possession running iOS 8."
Is that new iOS 8 encryption an effective defense against the so-called "ISMI catcher" surveillance
that's been in the news lately now that a new phone has been released that detects such snooping?
The article linked above said that in only 2 days of driving around DC recently, the following locations appeared to have surveillance devices trying to trick cellphones into thinking they were connecting to their carrier when in fact they were connecting to a device that was collecting their data.
[ATTACH]49095[/ATTACH]
It would not be a defense... after data leaves your phone, your phone's encryption won't matter.
That sucks.
I always assumed in a fatalistic sort of a way that nothing on my phone is safe, because, you know, the NSA. But part of me never wanted to fully believe it, and I just use my phone as if it is my phone and nobody else can read it.
But apparently, it's constantly being read. I work inside one of those red dots.
Fuckers.
I can see recording the phones passing by with these IMSI 'check points' for lack of a better description. With the ISMIs hooked together, individual phones could be tracked, even in real time if they were watching a particular phone/person. But to listen to snatches of phone conversations hoping to catch something juicy seems a waste to me.
Well Senator, we've logged eleventy seven gigs of grocery lists, half that much of spousal excuses/apologies, and several gigs of heavy breathing.
I'm a little surprised my employer hasn't shut down all our phones. We have a lot of highly confidential client business information that's sent around by company emails and all that can be read by these things.
I imagine Wall Steet is loaded with these devices, but owned by private parties. It's like in the old days when people were using unscrambled wireless office phones when they were new and you could just listen in on conversations and get insider trading information.