Defeating the Fourth Amendment

Posted on by

This is rather scary stuff:

Liberty Defense is developing Hexwave, a new disruptive technology that was exclusively licensed from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) uses 3D radar imaging and artificial intelligence to detect concealed weapons in urban settings.

…

Hexwave could be the next technology that replaces X-ray machines, such as for scanning bags in airports or other venues, and it also provides 3D scans of a person’s exterior as where X-ray can only provide 2D scans.

“Hexwave provides 3D imaging at a rate that is in real time — it can assess for threats while the person is still walking, which means it is well suited for higher, faster throughput,” Riker told VentureBeat.

The urban security market by 2020 to 2025 in North America is set to increase by 33%. The new 3D detection machine can revolutionize security at indoor high traffic crowded areas, like schools, malls, hotels, and places of worship, and protect outdoor high traffic areas, like airports, sports venues, government buildings, and bus/subway stations.

Will this sneak by the Fourth Amendment? If used in a common access public place, does this constitute an unwarranted search? The courts danced around the Fourth Amendment issues when doing searches at airports by saying, in essence, “You can still drive, ride a bus, and walk without being searched hence you are consenting to these searches.”

Also of great concern is the often used phrase “concealed means concealed” will no longer be true. Statists will use this technology to claim you don’t need to have a gun to protect yourself because they have the ability to prevent bad guys (everyone except agents of the state) from having a gun. While individual and groups of criminals are of obvious concern and a reasonable justification for private ownership and carry of self-defense firearms that isn’t the primary reason we have the Second Amendment. The primary reason is defense against the state. This technology could tip the balance in favor of dependency of the state for personal protection. This leading to inability to justify in the public eye the private carry and eventual ownership of firearms. This, of course, puts people at great risk of wholesale slaughter when our government goes completely rogue:

Computer security truth

Posted on by

I work in computer security. You have to know a little computer software lingo to fully appreciate this but, including the hover text, xkcd gets it exactly correct:

stack

If the 2nd Amendment doesn’t apply to modern weapons

Posted on by

Via Boomstickbiker @Boomstickbiker:

NoModernWeapons

I could see this having potential for some home defense situations but in the more general case I’m going to stick with semi-auto small arms.

Quote of the day—Thomas Sowell

Posted on by

The only reward for putting up with craziness is more craziness.

Thomas Sowell
March 6, 1999
THOMAS SOWELL: Back again – random thoughts
[Barb and I have decades of experience with this on a personal level. And we all are seeing the clear and irrefutable truth of this in the political arena. We see it in economics, immigration policy, and especially with our specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.

The only way to deal with crazy is to not tolerate it. In many cases it is quite surprising how quickly they can put on a semi-rational face when you just say “No!” and have the means and will to enforce it..—Joe]

Voting out of big government

Posted on by

Just a few days after being sworn into office President Trump signed an executive order which required federal agencies to cut two existing regulations for every new regulation they implement. A year later he made a big deal out of repealing 22 regulations for each new rule issued.

Since I don’t spend that much time in Idaho and I live in Washington state, which it is a bigger threat to me, I don’t pay much attention to Idaho politics. But Joel M. was paying attention and sent me an email with nothing but a link to how the Idaho state legislature opted to—in essence—repeal the entire state regulatory code. Wow!

Following a link I learned that even though the Governor is an advocate of reducing regulations he wasn’t a significant force being this regulation reset:

All of those rules expire on July 1 — except the ones Little chooses to keep on a temporary basis until the Legislature can consider them early next year.

“This is an unusual situation,” said Jaclyn Kettler, a Boise State University political scientist. “It does open up a pretty big opportunity for Gov. Little.”

The situation in Idaho contrasts with other states, like Wisconsin, where the GOP-controlled Legislature sought to limit the powers of the Democratic governor.

Little said residents can trust him to be fair.

“I’m not looking at this as an opportunity to do mischief,” Little said during a public appearance Tuesday. “I do not want to exacerbate this thing. This was not our deal. We did not do this.”

Little has made clear his desire to cut regulations in Idaho, issuing an executive order in January requiring state agencies cut two rules for every new one.

A lot of people have said things that amounted to “we can’t vote our way out of big government.” But there is now some evidence that assertion may be in error.

We live in interesting times.

.

Sign the petition

Posted on by

The 2nd Amendment does not give us the right to keep and bear arms. It guarantees it won’t be infringed. This is clear from the wording and from the U.S. Supreme Court:

The right there specified is that of ‘bearing arms for a lawful purpose.’ This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed; but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress.

Chief Justice Morrison Waite
U.S. Supreme Court
U S v Cruikshank
92 U.S. 542 (1875)

Sign the petition to change the wording on the White House web site to reflect the correct meaning of the 2nd Amendment. Background is here.

Time is important. A total of 100K signatures are needed in 30 days. At this time it needs 99,039 signatures by July 27, 2019 to get a response from the White House.

The relationship between guns and boxcars

Posted on by

Via ripper.

This was certainly true in Europe a few decades ago:

BoxcarsWillingly

Is it true at on this continent at this time? Maybe not. But if we decide it isn’t true, act accordingly, we are making that choice for not only ourselves but all of our descendants and probably for all time. If that is the wrong choice we won’t get to change our response.

The risk far too great to take the chance. Do not give up another inch of our right to keep and bear arms.

Quote of the day—Hellhound Phoenix #AKF‏ @PhoenixTruths

Posted on by

There are two types who want gun control: those who understand the failures inherent to it but use it to further an ulterior motive.

Then there is you: not able to put the pieces together to see you are nothing more than what Lenin would have called a useful idiot.

Hellhound Phoenix #AKF‏ @PhoenixTruths
Tweeted on June 27, 2019
[Excellent observation!—Joe]

Looks indicate which men have cheated

Posted on by

This is almost unbelievable:

People can predict with modest accuracy whether a man (but not a woman) has cheated before based solely on the appearance of his face, according to a recent study published in Royal Society Open Science. In other words, we seem to have a limited ability to pick out men who have committed infidelity just by looking at them.

I’m having trouble coming up with plausible reasons for this to be true. Perhaps a particular physical appearance gives them more opportunities/temptation.

Posted in Sex

Democrats offer nationwide concealed carry permit reciprocity

Posted on by

If only satire were less believable.

Democrats Offer Nationwide Concealed Carry Reciprocity in Exchange for One Cent Per Round Bullet Tax That They Pinky-Swear They Won’t Jack 100-Fold the Second They Get Back Into Power

Quote of the day—Ilya Shapiro and Matthew Larosiere

Posted on by

In 1986, Congress enacted the Firearm Owners Protection Act (“FOPA”), which includes a ban on the transfer or possession of a machinegun not lawfully possessed and registered by May 19, 1986. 18 U.S.C. § 922(o). But before § 992(o) came 26 U.S.C § 5861(d), which makes it unlawful “to receive or possess a firearm which is not registered” (emphasis added). After FOPA, the Bureau of Alcohol,

Tobacco and Firearms (“ATF”) no longer accepted the registration of and payment of taxes on new machineguns. In stripping § 5861(d) of all revenue-raising potential, § 922(o) mooted § 5861(d)’s constitutional warrant under Congress’s Taxing Power.

In addition, § 922(o) renders § 5861(d)’s application a violation of appellant’s right to due process. Because ATF will not accept the registration of new machineguns, compliance with § 5861(d) is impossible. Section 5861(d) is thus in irreconcilable conflict with § 922(o), and since Congress enacted the latter after the former, it controls.

Amici also caution against what we perceive to be a concerning departure from fundamental rights jurisprudence. By refusing to present an analysis of why the regulation of machineguns is beyond the scope of the Second Amendment, the courts are glazing over an important constitutional question. If a class of arms can be regulated nearly to the point of a categorical ban—which machineguns may well be—the American people deserve to at least know the constitutional justification.

Ilya Shapiro and Matthew Larosiere
June 20, 2019
BRIEF OF THE CATO INSTITUTE AND FIREARMS POLICY COALITION AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT-APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC
[My translation is as follows:

The original constitutional justification for the regulation of machine guns was that it was a transfer tax ($200) each time the gun changed ownership. Since congress had the constitutional power to tax they could require the registration of machine guns to enable them to collect the taxes.

In 1986 congress declared the ATF shall no longer accept registration and taxation of new machine guns. This removed the possibility of collecting taxes on new machine guns. This means that the original constitutional justification for the regulation of machine guns no longer exists.

Hence, we, the people, are entitled to either the ability to purchase new machine guns or a constitutional justification as to why not.

I did not expect a challenge to machine gun law for at least several more years. I hope it’s not too soon. I would have preferred it wait until Trump has appointed another SCOTUS justice or two and we had a ruling that said semiautomatic rifles were protected.

We live in interesting times.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jeff Williams

Posted on by

Los Angeles and San Francisco usually control most of what we get in the state of California. We don’t appreciate them dictating to us like they’ve been doing.

Jeff Williams
Mayor of Needles California
June 24, 2019
Needles declared itself a “2nd Amendment Sanctuary” city; wants exemption to some state gun laws
[You have to wonder what all the geniuses who thought of up the “sanctuary city/county/state” stuff for criminals think of sanctuary for people exercising their specific enumerated rights. I suspect we are soon going to find out.—Joe]

Eating their own

Posted on by

It’s long been observed that the political left frequently eats its own when it gets enough power. Just look at what happened in the USSR. Tens of millions murdered by their own government or put in the gulags. Read The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation (Volume One) for a taste of what went on there. Large numbers of those people believed they were loyal supporters of the communist government.

The problem that once you have purity tests and people to maintain political purity the requirements get more and more strict. Just think of the “micro aggression”, “dog whistle”, and “code word” criteria being enforced in many instances in this country. It becomes a positive feedback loop with escalating standards of purity.

I review this as background for what is happening at Google (via an email from Chet who describes it as “Google’s civil war”):

San Francisco Pride organizers say they won’t ban Google from the annual Pride Parade on Sunday, despite receiving a letter signed by almost 100 Google employees concerned about how their company handles hate speech.

The employees asked for Google to be banned from the pride parade on June 30th. The company came under fire this month for refusing to remove homophobic videos targeting a journalist. Instead, YouTube banned hate speech and demonetized the channel. However, the company still offered a platform for the pundit, Steven Crowder, to direct his viewers to a site to purchase merchandise.

Google management will have some “interesting” choices to make if the DOJ and/or congress tells them they need to cut the crap on attempting to swing elections at the same time 10s of thousands of employees are demanding they adhere to more higher and higher levels of leftist politically purity.

Quote of the day—Nate McMurray @Nate_McMurray

Posted on by

YEP. I’M COMING FOR YOUR AR15

You heard me. No apologies. The same reason you don’t need a lion to protect your home, is why you don’t need a rifle that shoots at 3X the speed of sound and splits concrete like ice. It’s an unreasonable risk.

Nate McMurray @Nate_McMurray
Tweeted on June 24, 2019
[McMurray is not some random troll bot. He is running for U.S. Congress.

It looks to me like he is confessing to the violation of 18 USC 241 and is trying for 18 USC 242 as well.—Joe]

Area One USPSA results

Posted on by

I had relatively modest goals for my Area One performance:

  1. Don’t get hurt or hurt anyone.
  2. Don’t get DQ’d.
  3. Don’t finish last.

I met my goals. In Limited I came in 81st out of 118 shooters. If you just look at Limited B class shooters then I came in 32nd out of 38. Or if you just look at Limited Seniors then I came in 9th out of 15. And finally, my favorite view, in Limited, Senior, B class shooters I came in 2nd out of four shooters.

I had a good time at the match. My squad was very pleasant to be with. The last time I went to Area One, over 20 years ago, it was sometimes very uncomfortable. Some shooters were very aggressive in asserting their bullets had touch scoring rings that the R.O. called as out. I didn’t like that atmosphere. These were nice people to be with.

One of the most unusual event I have heard of at a USPSA match is that one guy got DQ’d at the chronograph stage:

image

image

I have a lot more to say about the event. But that is going to wait until I have time to edit the video.

Addition to the family

Posted on by

For years I’ve wanted to be able to legally conceal carry in Oregon. It seems that there are several times a year when Barb and I go through there. Last weekend I shot in the USPSA Area One Championship (results here, I came in 81st out of 118 in Limited) outside of Bend Oregon. About a year ago we visited Crater Lake (where Barb proposed to me) and several other interesting parks with interesting geological attractions. We have gone to Portland to Powell’s City of Books and Voodoo Donuts. And while Lava Beds National Monument is actually in California, I would like to take her to visit that someday. It is just over the border from Oregon and we would probably drive from Washington. The problem is that Oregon doesn’t recognize concealed carry license from any other state.

Since I was going to be in central Oregon for several day for the match I looked up the requirements for getting an Oregon Concealed Handgun license.

Most of the counties will not accept non Oregon residents even though the law allows for it. The counties add further restrictions such Columbia County:

You must have a current Washington State Concealed Handgun License to qualify for your Oregon permit. This permit can be used as one piece of identification when applying for your Oregon CHL. You must write a letter to Sheriff Dickerson stating why you want an Oregon Concealed Handgun License.
Your reasons must be compelling in nature. There will be a $10.00 administrative fee. The fee is applied to the cost of regular monitoring of criminal histories of Washington residents holding any type of Columbia County licenses or permits through the Sheriff’s Office.

Or Gillian County:

OUT OF STATE APPLICANTS: All out of state new applicants and renewals must include a statement of compelling business interest or other legitimate demonstrated need which exhibits a correlation to Gilliam County.

Oregon has 36 counties. I looked up the CHL requirement for 17 of them, working my way outward from my travel paths for the match, before finding one. The Grant County Sheriff’s office was very friendly to me. I made an appointment for 9:00 AM, showed up about 8:20 because I was concerned about finding the place. I offered to come back at the appointment time but the nice deputy, Anne Marie (I think), told me to come on in and she would take care of it.

About a half hour later I walked out with my Oregon CHL. It’s a nice addition to the family:

image

Quote of the day—Jen Gennai

Posted on by

Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And like, I love her but she’s very misguided, like that will not make it better it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don’t have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it’s like a small company cannot do that.

Jen Gennai
Head of Responsible Innovation, Google
May 2019
Insider Blows Whistle & Exec Reveals Google Plan to Prevent “Trump situation” in 2020 on Hidden Cam
[Via a comment by Chet.

Watch the video. Genai explicitly says they are implementing “fairness” and that their definition of fairness is completely different from the definition of fairness used by the people who voted for Donald Trump. She says everyone got screwed over with the election of Trump and they can’t let that happen again in 2020.

Read her response to the video here.

Click to enlarge the images of the internal documents and read them. They are incredibly damning.

One of my first thoughts was, “It’s a good thing I’m not allowed to own a few tactical nukes at an affordable price. Otherwise Google would own radioactive craters instead office buildings and data centers.” I have since decided there are other, legal and moral, remedies available.—Joe]

Gun cartoon of the day

Posted on by

ClassroomPointer

We have SCOTUS decisions. They have insulting cartoons.

Quote of the day—The Annoyed Man

Posted on by

I think we are ultimately headed for some kind of violent showdown between the left and everyone else. They no longer know when to back off, and they lack the moral filters necessary to coexistence. We’re going to end up in an existential fight for our most fundamental rights, and literal self-preservation.

The Annoyed Man
June 22, 2019
Comment to MN: Self defense shooting trial built on gun control bumper sticker
[Certainly a case can be made for that. But it seems to me that they back off when they get some serious push back. I think at least some of them are more in touch with reality than we sometimes give them credit for. They may be crazy but they may not be stupid. They can “sober up” for short periods of time if they really need to.

Think about it. For a while there were marches with vandalism and sometimes riots nearly every week all over the country. And now how often do you see that?—Joe]

Gun cartoon of the day

Posted on by

This is what they think of you:

GunLove

Who, when they really think about it, can possibly believe that?