Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home

open quoteOverturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer’s entry.

“We believe … a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence,” David said. “We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.”close quote (Read more from nwitimes.com)

Police Officer Summarily Executes a Deaf, Mentally Challenged Woodcarver.

open quoteWhy did you shoot that man? He didn’t do anything!”

The question was wrenched from a woman who had watched in horror as Police Officer Ian Birk pumped four shots into the body of John T. Williams on a Seattle street corner last August 30.

Birk claimed that he had been “threatened” by Williams, a 50-year-old alcoholic woodcarver who was carrying two closed knives at the time of the incident. The autopsy, however, documented that Williams wasn’t facing Birk when he was shot: The officer approached him from behind and to the right, and Williams was shot in the right side of his body from an estimated distance of about ten feet. A fifth shot that missed the target was never accounted for.

No reasonable person would have considered Williams a threat to Birk; in fact, since the victim was partially deaf, it’s likely he never clearly heard Birk’s demand that he drop his carving knife, and died before understanding what was going on. The entire lethal encounter lasted less than eight seconds.

There were several eyewitnesses to the homicide. None of them saw Williams display threatening behavior of any kind. Then again, none of them was a member of the State’s punitive caste, which means that they hadn’t been indoctrinated to perceive even a momentary lack of cooperation by a Mundane as a “pre-attack indicator.” During the January inquest into the shooting, Birk explained that he gunned down John T. Williams on a Seattle street corner because he didn’t like the way the 50-year-old chronic alcoholic looked at him.close quote (Read more from lewrockwell.com)

Homeland Security Demands Mozilla Remove Firefox Extension That Redirects Seized Domains

open quoteApparently, the folks at Homeland Security are not at all pleased with the very, very simple Firefox extension, called MAFIAAfire, that negates ICE’s domain seizures, by automatically rerouting users to alternate domains. Apparently, DHS demanded that Mozilla take the extension down from its listing of Firefox extensions claiming that the add-on “circumvented” DHS’s seizure orders. Thankfully, Mozilla didn’t just fold, but instead left it up and sent DHS a list of questions concerning the request. The list of questions is really fantastic, as it goes way beyond the direct request to really get to the heart of the questionable nature of ICE’s activity with domain seizures:

To help us evaluate the Department of Homeland Security’s request to take-down/remove the MAFIAAfire.com add-on from Mozilla’s websites, can you please provide the following additional information:

1. Have any courts determined that MAFIAAfire.com is unlawful or illegal in any way? If so, on what basis? (Please provide any relevant rulings)

2. Have any courts determined that the seized domains related to MAFIAAfire.com are unlawful, illegal or liable for infringement in any way? (please provide relevant rulings)

3. Is Mozilla legally obligated to disable the add-on or is this request based on other reasons? If other reasons, can you please specify.

4. Has DHS, or any copyright owners involved in this matter, taken any legal action against MAFIAAfire.com or the seized domains, including DMCA requests?

5. What protections are in place for MAFIAAfire.com or the seized domain owners if eventually a court decides they were not unlawful?

6. Can you please provide copies of any briefs that accompanied the affidavit considered by the court that issued the relevant seizure orders?

7. Can you please provide a copy of the relevant seizure order upon which your request to Mozilla to take down MAFIAAfire.com is based?

8. Please identify exactly what the infringements by the owners of the domains consisted of, with reference to the substantive standards of Section 106 and to any case law establishing that the actions of the seized domain owners constituted civil or criminal copyright infringement.

9. Did any copyright owners furnish affidavits in connection with the domain seizures? Had any copyright owners served DMCA takedown notices on the seized domains or MAFIAAfire.com? (if so please provide us with a copy)

10. Has the Government furnished the domain owners with formal notice of the seizures, triggering the time period for a response by the owners? If so, when, and have there been any responses yet by owners?

11. Has the Government communicated its concerns directly with MAFIAAfire.com? If so, what response, if any, did MAFIAAfire.com make?

It’s always nice to see some organizations not just roll over when the government comes calling. Kudos to Mozilla for not just refusing to takedown MAFIAAfire, but for also asking serious questions of DHS. Of course, DHS has refused to respond at all…close quote (Read more from techdirt.com)

The Tucker Car Company

open quoteThe 1948 Tucker Sedan or Tucker ’48 Sedan (initially named the Tucker Torpedo) was an advanced automobile conceived by Preston Tucker and briefly produced in Chicago in 1948. Only 51 cars were made before the company folded on March 3, 1949, due to negative publicity initiated by the news media, a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation and a heavily publicized stock fraud trial (which allegations were proven baseless in court with a full acquittal). Speculation exists that the circumstances which brought the Tucker Corporation down were contributed to by the Big Three automakers and Michigan senator Homer S. Ferguson. The 1988 movie, Tucker: The Man and His Dream is based on Tucker’s spirit and the saga surrounding the car’s production.close quote (Read more from wikipedia.org)

Also, www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/the-tucker-car-did-the-big-guys-do-it-in/

On Osama’s Death

I consider myself fortunate to be in Ukraine on a Fulbright Scholarship. It shelters me from the sensationalism surrounding the announcement that “Osama bin Laden, the terror mastermind killed by Navy SEALs in an intense firefight, was hunted down based on information first gleaned years ago from detainees at secret CIA prison sites in Eastern Europe.”

The reaction has been impossible to avoid altogether, as Twitter, Facebook, and many of the blogs I read exploded with videos of euphoric celebrations beside the White House and in Times Square, affirmations of America’s greatness, wishes by otherwise nice young women to see the bullet riddled corpse, and praise given to all soldiers and veterans, including praise from President Obama.

I remain bewildered by the changing and contradictory justifications for our many wars: the well being of Iraqis and Afghans (and now, Libyans), preventing the use of weapons of mass destruction, establishing democracies, Colin Powell’s Pottery Barn Rule (We broke it, so we own it). Didn’t President Bush announce in 2006 that the pursuit of Osama Bin Laden was no longer a goal of our war efforts in Afghanistan?

Timing and political expedience seems to have swung our rationale back to the pursuit of Osama Bin Laden.

Should we pause to consider the return on our investment of money, blood and reputation? I am two and half years removed from my last day in the military, and life-times removed from the world view I had when I first commissioned as an infantry officer in March 2000.

My doubts centered on the realization that my membership in the military, though full of adventure and challenge, just like the television commercials promised, did not provide a valuable service. For this reason, I politely decline President Obama’s thanks.

The military, myself included, makes America less safe from terrorism, debt, and tyrrany. I began to consider the ancient and noble institution of the Army a gigantic toy for politicians who, with the thinnest pretenses, went adventuring all over the world.

I no longer consider myself at war with Afghanistan or Al Quaida, though I understand that many Americans do. I consider war to be very much the business of demagogue politicians who pretend to defend Americans from Muslims, and demagogue Islam-o-fascists who pretend to defend Muslims from Americans. I wish we could make them fight one another directly without the involvement of so many others, but this would never happen. They are cowards who work hard to convince better men to do the fighting.

I’d like to point out the difficult fact that Afghans killed by errant artillery strikes or nervous, undisciplined soldiers, or what a friend of mine calls “Nobel Peace drones,” are just as innocent and just as human as the New Yorkers who were killed when three skyscrapers collapsed on September 11, 2001.The tragedy is firstly that many innocent people get killed, and secondly, that so many good people are easily convinced to sacrifice blood and money. It is best to have as little to do with our wars as possible.

In contrast to the revelers on the National Mall, my pride and identity now have little to do with national pride and national identity. I am as sovereign an individual as the tax code allows me to be.

The only aspect of this announcement I find comforting is that now politicians will likely be confronted with meek requests to undo the TSA, warrant-less wiretaps, secret prisons, suspensions of habius corpus, the department of homeland security, and the wars in Afghanistan and elsewhere. They will have to again justify these institutions, which they will do very easily. I will take minor comfort when the questions are asked.

I retain hope that America can regains the liberties it lost in the name of our many wars. However as I watched the exuberant masses intoxicated with national pride at the announcement of Osama Bin Laden’s death, I thought of not of the importance of restoring our lost liberties, but of running away; escaping and hiding from the collectivist madness — somewhere where neither my person nor my wealth nor my pride nor my identity can ever be dragged into such a barbaric enterprise again.

“Buy American” mass email

Here’s the mass email I received. My response is below:

open quoteDid you see that Diane Sawyer has a special report coming up this week? They removed ALL items from a typical, middle class family’s home that were not made in the USA . There was hardly anything left besides the kitchen sink. Literally. During the special they are going to show truckloads of items – USA made – being brought in to replace everything and will be talking about how to find these items and the difference in price etc.. It was interesting that Diane said that if every American spent just $64 more than normal on USA made items this year, it would create something like 200,000 new jobs! WAS BUYING FOOD THE OTHER DAY AT WALMART and ON THE LABEL OF SOME PRODUCTS IT SAID ‘FROM CHINA ’

FOR EXAMPLE THE “OUR FAMILY” BRAND OF THE MANDARIN ORANGES SAYS RIGHT ON THE CAN ‘FROM CHINA ‘

I WAS SHOCKED SO FOR A FEW MORE CENTS I BOUGHT THE LIBERTY GOLD BRAND OR THE DOLE SINCE IT’S FROM CALIF.

Are we Americans as dumb as we appear — or — is it that we just do not think while the Chinese, knowingly and intentionally, export inferior and even toxic products and dangerous toys and goods to be sold in American markets?

70% of Americans believe that the trading privileges afforded to the Chinese should be suspended.

Why do you need the government to suspend trading privileges? DO IT YOURSELF, AMERICA !!

Simply look on the bottom of every product you buy, and if it says ‘Made in China ‘ or ‘PRC’ (and that now includes Hong Kong ), simply choose another product, or none at all. You will be amazed at how dependent you are on Chinese products, and you will be equally amazed at what you can do without.

Who needs plastic eggs to celebrate Easter? If you must have eggs, use real ones and benefit some American farmer. Easter is just an example. The point is do not wait for the government to act. Just go ahead and assume control on your own.

THINK ABOUT THIS: If 200 million Americans refuse to buy just $20 each of Chinese goods, that’s a billion dollar trade imbalance resolved in our favor…fast!!

Most of the people who have been reading about this matter are planning on implementing this on May 1st and continue it until June 1st. That is only one month of trading losses, but it will hit the Chinese for 1/12th of the total, or 8%, of their American exports. Then they might have to ask themselves if the benefits of their arrogance and
lawlessness were worth it.

Remember, MAY 1 TO JUNE 1st !!!!!!
START NOW.

Send this to everybody you know. Let’s show them that we are Americans and NOBODY can take us for granted.

If we can’t live without cheap Chinese goods for one month out of our lives, WE DESERVE WHAT WE GET!

Pass it on, America …… BUY AMERICAN !!!!! close quote

My response:

open quoteI’d like to briefly point out two of the several economic fallacies evident in this mass email.

1) The idea of a trade deficit is mostly nonsense. The whole discussion of trade deficits serves only to employ government economists. If I buy bread from the baker across the street, he is profits because of the value he puts on my money, and I profit because of the value I place on his bread. Replace the street with an international border and the example should be identical with both of us enriched by the exchange, however there will suddenly be a $4.99 trade deficit (or whatever the cost of bread). Government economists will write lengthy articles. Opportunistic politicians will make courageous speeches about the controls which need to be placed over the economy. It’s nonsense. Governments don’t trade. People trade. The more they’re allowed to do so, the better.

2) Paying more money for identical goods will not create “something like 200,000 jobs,” regardless of what Diane Sawyer says. It will destroy jobs. Rather than repeating the argument (which I’ve done more often that I thought possible), I would refer anyone who’s interested to chapter 11 of Henry Hazlitt’s classic “Economics in One Lesson.” It’s available for free here: www.hacer.org/pdf/Hazlitt00.pdf

In fact, if you’ve been learning economics from Diane Sawyer, I recommend the whole book — for everybody’s sake.

“The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they know about what they imagine they can design.” ~ F.A. Hayek

Have a good day and please don’t trespass on my property.close quote

Feds going after the Amish selling unpasteurized milk

open quoteApparently the Feds set up an elaborate sting operation to catch Amish Farmers selling raw (unpasteurized) milk to customers. A practice that is legal in 10-12 other states. While we still have real criminals and crime rings to catch and put an end to, I don’t think it is too much to ask to ask the FBI set up sting operations on mob bosses instead of the Amish.

There are arguments to both sides of the story. Both are dumb. One is right.

The argument against is that unpasteurized milk isn’t safe to drink and therefore should be illegal to purchase.

The argument for is that unpasteurized milk is healthier for you because it still has “good” bacteria and also tastes better.

They are both dumb arguments. First off, drinking unpasteurized milk should not be said to be dangerous, but more risky than drinking pasteurized milk. Eating shards of glass is dangerous. There is no benefit and almost certain danger. Not wearing a seatbelt is risky, but in and of itself, not dangerous.

I don’t know what unpasteurized milk tastes like so I can’t attest to that. But science has shown no proven benefits of drinking raw milk. They’re making the wrong argument. The argument they should be making is, “it’s my money and his milk and by golly I’ll drink it!”close quote (Read more from alternativereason.com)