Today’s hour long educational presentation…

Even if you don’t really speak tech, watch it.  He doesn’t really go into deep details, though it does require some understanding of how networking works.

If you still don’t want to take the hour let me synopsize it into one single sentence:

Nothing is safe.

And there isn’t much of a hope for immediate improvement either because the NSA is leaning on organizations to leave a lot of this crap in place.  Not to mention they do not report security threats instead they want them left open for exploitation.

There are couple things that desperately need to change, one of the biggest is security needs to stop being an afterthought in software and systems development.  I’ve said it before folks, we’re in a cold war and one side just doesn’t want to admit the truth of the matter yet.

The Mission of the Modern Militia

Having been a member of a militia (past tense), I was always struck with the question of, “What is our mission?” When I was a member of the Army National Guard, our mission was clear and spelled out. While we could have another discussion about the appropriateness of the current NG mission, it was at least clear. This was never the case as a member of the militia. There were ideas that were discussed, and we had the hope (some believe this to be a 4-letter word) that if there was an emergency we’d be called on, but there was never any formal aid arrangement, response plan, SOPs or defined mission.  This has made me think about what the mission should and shouldn’t be.  I’ll start with the latter…

There are those who believe the militia will be called on by the community in times of need whether this is flooding or all out TEOTWAWKI, but personally, I believe these individuals to be truly delusional in regards to how governments work.  If we’re talking WROL, all bets are off, but I still don’t think the militias will be the first people who the local communities will want to come to their “rescue”.  Those of us who’ve been involved in government know the red tape and complexities associated with it.  If there is ever a disaster, the last thing they will want is a bunch of unaffiliated people with guns running around claiming to have authority.  There are liability issues galore that would prevent the militias from helping in any formal capacity.  There may be unique communities out there where the local government may call on the militia, but at present, I’m not familiar with any of them, and I’m fairly confident they would be a rarity.

I don’t want to dwell too much on what I don’t think the militia is because all too often people tear down something without providing anything constructive in return so I’ll skip any other areas I feel are not fitting of the militia and go to what I believe the militias could be today.

Continuing Education:  Many of us are prior military/LEO in one form or another and would like to maintain some of the skills we learned while serving.  While I don’t see a need for troop leading procedures in my future, there are a lot of other skills I learned in the military that are very useful.  Although I’ve spend many hours doing land nav and map reading, it is a perishable skill and one that can serve you your entire life if you practice it.  Having the opportunity to teach, and relearn, this was of great benefit to myself and hopefully to those I taught.  Communication is another area that is of great benefit both in and out of the military environment.  I’ve recently obtained my HAM radio license and have been learning more about that craft.  There are other areas that can be taught in the militia that will help us maintain and learn skills that we might not have otherwise.

Networking:  Getting to know other people of a similar mindset is always beneficial and usually enjoyable.  These groups can serve as a way of getting to know people who think similarly and have common goals.  This networking also allows you to meet people with different skills sets as discussed above and to learn from those people and share the skill sets you have with them.  In some ways, it’s like Facebook, except you actually have a real relationship with these people.  I think a key part of this area is involvement with other groups.  There are dozens of groups out there that share common goals with the militias, and they, unlike the militia, will actually be called on in an emergency.  Some to look into are ARES (HAM radio), CERT, and Sheriff’s Search and Rescue.  Having members in all of these different areas is a great way to cross train and will also improve communication between these groups in an emergency.  If done properly, the militia could serve as an informal way to tie together a lot of these groups together in a way that will help them be more effective.  The more people who know one another, the better they tend to work together.

The interesting thing about the good things that a militia, or similar group, can do is that none of them necessitate uniforms, patches, websites or playing in the woods with guns.  Although not as glamorous as some of the other depictions of the modern militia, I think it’s a far more practical one.  Getting together with friends (and I would suggest family) and sharing experiences, knowledge, goals, and ideas is a great way to be better prepared for whatever might happen.  And if nothing at all happens, I think you’ll still be better off.

~John

But you can have property!

Can you?  This started as a rant I was sending to Facebook and then I decided to push it here.  You see Chris made a post on Facebook yesterday, the crux of which was this image.

Taxation

The the thread predictably devolved into people saying how taxation is not a form a slavery because you can have property.* Guess he missed all those taxes on that property where if you don’t pay they seize your property (so in reality rent). And my personal favorite, where the state can take your property under eminent domain and give you pennies on the dollar, if the state feels like spending the pennies.  (Seriously check out that link… The City of Seattle is seizing a 103 year old woman’s property, currently a parking lot, to make it a parking lot. I can’t make this crap up.)

So don’t tell me I’m not a slave when there is nothing voluntary about my relationship with my government and I live in fear of them deciding to seize my property without cause and me with no legal recourse. Remember, this is the land of the free, where the mob can vote to have the state steal your stuff to give it to them.

If everyone saw equal services from the state, then I might not call it slavery, but entitlements are horse shit. I should not be taxed to feed someone else’s kids because they squandered their money on a big screen TV.

Go ahead and say I have no heart. Know why I don’t have kids yet? Because I’m paying for someone else’s. But remember I’m the heartless asshole for merely being the responsible person and staying within my means.

I’m paying more now for my healthcare too, why? To subsidize people who didn’t want to take care of it themselves. Pardon me while I say screw all of you who support this BS.

*He also made a comment about the ballot box being involved so it wasn’t really against your will.  Uhh, so because the mob votes to steal my stuff makes it some how morally ok and just?  WTFO!?  Seriously, how does the fact a ballot box being involved make it OK for the state to take, by force, property from one person and give it to another.  If it was really that person’s property it couldn’t be taken in such a way now could it?

**As someone who’s now working as a contractor, I’m well versed in exactly how much I’m paying out in taxes and it’s far beyond most people. For every dollar I earn I see about .46 cents.  I could easily start a family with all that money being dumped into a government who spends more frivolously than a drunken sailor… But I’m not a slave since I can rent property from the state and they can seize at any time to do with as they please.

I’m going to end the rant here because I think I’ve made my point.  But seriously if you think you’re not a slave merely because they’ve provided you some illusions of freedom, you’re an idiot.  The greatest trick the government ever pulled was making the people think they’re free when they’re really slaves, they just don’t know it yet.

A small win, I’ll Take it.

I wasn’t too happy about how they ruled regarding carrying inside the Post Office, but with regards to the parking lot… AWESOME!

By contrast, prohibiting Mr. Bonidy from securely storing his firearm in his vehicle sweeps too far; the parking lot is not similarly sensitive, and the public safety concerns associated with open carry in the building are not similarly implicated. Therefore, as applied to Mr. Bonidy and his request to use the parking lot with his gun securely stored in his car,the USPS Regulation is not substantially related to the government’s public safety interest. It is an unconstitutional burden on Mr. Bonidy’s freedom under the Second Amendment.

In sum, openly carrying a firearm outside the home is a liberty protected by the Second Amendment. The Avon Post Office Building is a sensitive place and the ban imposed by the USPS Regulation is a presumptively valid restriction of that liberty. The Plaintiff has failed to present evidence to rebut that presumption. The parking lot adjacent to the building is not a sensitive place and the Defendants have failed to show that an absolute ban on firearms is substantially related to their important public safety objective. The public interest in safety and Mr. Bonidy’s liberty can be accommodated by modifying the Regulation to permit Mr. Bonidy to “have ready access to essential postal services” provided  by the Avon Post Office while also exercising his right to self-defense.

You can read the entire decision here:

MSJ Order

It’s a win and a loss.  The loss as read doesn’t surprise me and it is one of those things that serves as a solid reminder that you’re playing a game of chess.  Make sure you have a good solid case for anything you bring before the bar.  Miscalculations, especially when you troll for a criminal case against you, can be damaging to future cases and used as precedent.

This guy had a plan and he shot for the moon but he made it to Orbit and didn’t really get burned against us at all.  They merely stated he hadn’t proven his case.  As I said in the title, I’ll take it.

via Gay Cynic.

Quote of the Day–Brian Hauss(6/6/2013)

To be sure, rummaging around through people’s personal papers may well turn up the occasional bad guy, but that is not the only consideration. No doubt law enforcement agents would also find it useful to walk into people’s homes at will, but we don’t allow them to do so because that would intrude on our reasonable expectation of privacy in our homes. And just as we reasonably expect privacy in our homes, so, too, do we expect that border agents will not base their decisions to search through our electronic information on a whim or a hunch. Put another way, requiring law enforcement agents to possess objective reasons for a search is a feature of our constitutional framework, not a bug.

(Emphasis mine.)

Brian HaussDHS Releases Disappointing Civil Liberties Report on Border Searches of Laptops and Other Electronics

June 5th, 2013


[For those who haven’t heard yet.  The DHS is claiming the following line of BS regarding searches at the border.

[A]dding a heightened [suspicion-based] threshold requirement could be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefit. First, commonplace decisions to search electronic devices might be opened to litigation challenging the reasons for the search. In addition to interfering with a carefully constructed border security system, the litigation could directly undermine national security by requiring the government to produce sensitive investigative and national security information to justify some of the most critical searches. Even a policy change entirely unenforceable by courts might be problematic; we have been presented with some noteworthy CBP and ICE success stories based on hard-to-articulate intuitions or hunches based on officer experience and judgment. Under a reasonable suspicion requirement, officers might hesitate to search an individual’s device without the presence of articulable factors capable of being formally defended, despite having an intuition or hunch based on experience that justified a search.

Translation:  “We don’t need to specify a reason why we are seizing and searching your property.”

Now many may have forgotten so I will provide you an extra reminder of the area the DHS would like to claim as free from that pesky 4th Amendment.

For more on that go back and read my article on it (dated 2008).  So think about what the department of homeland security is claiming as within their legal abilities, and then think long and hard about that map where they can put up “border inspection points” at will.  Think your safe just because you don’t regularly travel out of the country?  Get real.

Listen folks, you either have these rights or you don’t.  They’re not predicated on some theory that you surrender them because you want to do X.  NO!  If the government wants to search my personal effects, they must present a case including evidence that I have committed a crime, or that I intend to harm another.  *Note I said harm, the war on drugs needs to go to!*  The only way you end up with this current view of the law is through twisted perversion and a lackadaisical attitude that say “I don’t care, what’s it matter?”

Just because I want to fly to visit my friends in Nashville, doesn’t mean I surrender my 4th amendment rights and agree to have someone fondle me and my wife.  It’s horse crap and frankly if we don’t stop it, it will just get worse.  There’s two options for stopping it, we get the courts to do their damn job, or well, use your imagination for the second option.

News flash folks, in a free land bad people some times end up doing bad things.  Its comes with territory.  Honestly though even in your perfect police state, the crazy guy can still do damage, even more so due to the delayed response.  Grow a pair, embrace the responsibility and with it experience freedom.  It’s freaking AWESOME. –B]

I Don’t Think They Thought This Through…

So Mom’s Demand Action, a wholly owned subsidiary of Michael Bloomberg, Inc. issued the following statement.  Most of note was this line:

The right of mothers to protect our children SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Evidently in their twisted view of the world there are only a few acceptable means of defending your children.  One small problem with that, their statement in and of itself is full of hypocrisy.  Why?  Let me illustrate with 1000 words with help from A Girl.

DefensiveMom_2

A Girl and her daughter E.

You see, my immediate thought when I read that line of garbage, and it is garbage, was of her and E.  Immediately followed by my friend Laurel:

Image via Oleg Volk.

I could continue down the list of mothers I thought of who would stand opposed to what “Moms Demand Action” is claiming to be right.  Not only do they stand opposed, but the desires of Moms Demand Action stands as a direct infringement to prevent them from doing what they claim to be protecting.

No one is forcing you to pick up a rifle to defend your family.  If you don’t want to, fine, that’s your choice and your business.  If however someone does want to pick up a rifle to defend their family, no one has any right whatsoever to tell them they cannot.   Any attempt to tell a woman she cannot pick up a rifle to defend her children is an infringement on the right to protect their children.  As such, any attempt at gun control whereby arms are removed from the hands of law-abiding citizens is just such an infringement.

So I went through and fixed up their document while adding commentary:

A Mother’s Bill of Rights

We, as mothers, have the absolute right to protect our children families from harm. We have the right to know our children are safe from gun violence, from the moment they leave our arms in the morning until they return home later in the day.  (That sentence is false, see Warren v. District of Columbia.)  We have a right and responsibility to defend our families from those who might do them violence.  But the rights of Americans mothers are under attack by criminals, the gun lobby, and legislators and puritans  who wish to trample those rights while still sticking them with the responsibility are unable to stand up for common-sense gun reforms. The right of mothers people to protect their families our children SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

As mothers people, we have the right to…

 

  • Expect that assault weapons will remain in the hands of our military, not civilians that our right to keep and bear arms in defense of our families and children shall not be infringed.
  • Preserve our children’s innocence and shield them from gun any violence by taking any means necessary to stop it abruptly and swiftly without prejudice. in America, real and scripted(Really, scripted, why don’t you just turn off the TV instead of attacking Free Speech).
  • Demand that all public places remain gun-free zones;’ except private homes and shooting ranges allow the carry of defensive arms by those legally entitled to do so.
  • Know our children are safe in their schools: any school, anywhere, by allowing those who wish to defend our children the tools to do so.
  • Expect our teachers to be focused on teaching our children, not training to become armed guards.  (Because what a teacher does in their own time to defend themselves and your children is a bad horrible thing?)
  •  Demand that our government create the same strong regulations for guns as they have for toys, cars and food.  (Umm, did you miss the fact that firearms are more heavily regulated than all those things combined?)
  • Expect our leaders to put our children’s safety above the profit desire for power and influence of the gun industry those who hate and wish to deny us our rights and personal liberties.
  • Have access to complete, accurate information about the impact of gun violence on our families and communities personal responsibilities we have in ensuring our own family’s safety and wellbeing.
  • Hold our elected officials accountable for keeping our children safe from gun violence breaking their oath to support and defend the constitution.

Seriously, in what world does anything they wrote count as not an infringement.  You all keep using these words rights and infringements and I don’t think any of you on the other side really understand what a right is and what it means to infringe on one.

Not to mention it seems that they think some how their opinion is worth more merely because they are mothers.  Tell me, does the father’s opinion not matter?  Does the opinion of the desire of the husband to defend his wife count for nothing?  Just the same, does the opinion of the wife and mother to carry for the defense of her own family not matter?  No they would rather tell you, me, and everyone else how to live our lives.  Our opinion to them counts for jack.

It doesn’t matter we respect them and their decision not to carry firearms, but they want to force their decisions on the rest of us.  To them I say, “NO!”  I’ve had enough of you taking my cake and you will not get a single solitary inch until you give something back.  I am sick of “compromising” where I give up everything and you give up nothing.  GO TO HELL!  There’s a reason I get angry.

I think this version of the picture of A Girl with some additional text says it best:

Everyone has a right to choose their own tools.

Everyone has a right to choose their own tools.

h/t to Sean.

*If you’d like to use the spoof logo I created:

Moms Demand Action

Feel free to use this, just give me credit if anyone asks. 🙂

I’m sure somehow we’ll be blamed for this…

The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Carbon County Sheriff’s Office are asking for help from the public in gathering information about the theft of approximately 559 pounds of high explosives from a USFS explosives bunker located near Red Lodge.

We’re not talking just blasting agent either.

Officials say that various emulsion-type explosives, explosive cast boosters and detonating cord were taken from the facility.

How serious is the ATF taking the theft?  They’re offering a $5,000 reward.  Their warmth and sincerity given the theft occurred with forced entry makes me feel all sorts of warm and fuzzy inside.  Doubly so given the propensity of the government, not to mention the BATFE, is more than willing to throw civil rights and liberties to the wind.

[Sarcasm] But remember, it’s me and you that they need to restrict.  The government could never fail us. [/Sarcasm]

Quote of the Day – Tim (4/30/2013)

“With a terrorist on the loose and literally thousands of police and even military officials searching to no avail, suddenly the idea of having an AR-15 handy to keep a dangerous terrorist from conducting his grand finale in *your* house with *your* loved ones starts to make a hell of a lot of sense, don’t it?”

Tim – The Idiocy of “Outdated”

April 25th, 2013


[Despite the complete trampling of civil liberties, was it a LEO who found the fugitive?  Was it in an area where citizens could easily and readily obtain arms for their own defense?

Tell me, why is it that people grabbed cameras instead of shooting the assailants who were threatening their neighborhood.  Oh calling the police worked great all right, turned the neighborhood into a total war zone and endangered the lives of additional people.  Instead of fighting back to defend themselves and in so doing aiding law enforcement that was risking their lives to protect them, they grabbed a camera.

They grabbed a camera instead of firing one round and taking down the last assailant.  Instead of firing from an elevated position with a clear line of fire to the aggressors, they grabbed a camera.  They grabbed a camera and instead gave the government an excuse to abuse their neighbors and friends at gun point.  They grabbed a camera instead of taking the risk that goes with freedom and liberty.  They grabbed a camera and signed their name as a supporting participant in the death of American Liberty. -B]