Catch us live on BlogTalkRadio every

Tuesday & Thursday at 6pm P.S.T.

Wednesday, September 30, 2015


These California Public Records Act guidelines describe the prescribed steps necessary for requesting access to inspect and/or obtain copies of public records maintained by the Department of California Highway Patrol (“the Department”) OR ANY CA POLICE DEPT...
The legislative enactment of the California Public Records Act (“the Act”) constituted a statement of policy that access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business is a fundamental and necessary right of every person in this state. This policy was made part of the California State Constitution in 2004. It is the policy of the State that governmental records will be disclosed to the public upon request, unless the law provides an exemption from disclosure.
The general assumption is that all records held by state agencies are public and must be made available to the public promptly upon request. However, the Legislature has recognized the need to balance the public’s right to know against compelling rights to privacy and the government’s need to perform its functions in a reasonable efficient manner. As such, the Act contains several specific exemptions from disclosure and incorporates several other statutes that prohibit state employees from disclosing certain types of public records. It is the Department’s burden to justify any withholding of public records.
The Act also establishes reasonable procedures providing for prompt disclosure while allowing state agencies the time to locate records and to determine which records, if any, are exempt from disclosure. The Department’s policy is to provide all members of the public convenient access to, and to promptly make the fullest possible disclosure of, its public records. Department personnel are available to assist persons making such requests and will solicit the assistance of the requestor when clarification of requested records is needed so as to make focused and effective requests that reasonably describe identifiable records. As a law enforcement agency the Department is entitled to treat certain records as exempt from disclosure, and express provisions of the Act, Penal Code, and Vehicle Code, among others, preclude public disclosure of certain records. When a request to review or obtain records is received, whether made in person, by mail, or by other means, it may be necessary for staff to first locate, then secure, and then review the requested items so that a determination can be made whether one or more exemptions apply, prior to having the records made available for viewing or copies provided.
Anyone wishing to make a public records request in person may do so during regular business hours at any Department office that is open to the public. Department personnel shall not ask or demand that persons requesting to inspect records provide their identification or the reasons for wanting to inspect records. However, if records are to be picked up or mailed to a requestor, relevant identifying information must be provided. Written requests to inspect or to obtain a copy of a public record should be
addressed to the Department, to any area office, field division office, or to Department Headquarters. The Headquarters address is
California Highway Patrol
601 North 7th Street
Sacramento, CA 95811
Attention: Public Records Coordinator
The Headquarters facsimile for requests under the Act is 916-322-3219. The written request need not be in any particular form, but should sufficiently describe the requested records to enable Department personnel to identify and locate the records sought. While not required by the Act, it is helpful for the request to include a telephone number or address where the person requesting the record can be reached to expedite the resolution of any questions concerning the request that may arise.
If the records are clearly disclosable, they will be made available as soon as possible. However, in most cases staff will have to review the records to determine whether all or part maybe privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure. Within 10 days from the date the request is received, the Department will determine whether the request, in whole or in part, seeks copies of disclosable public records in the Department’s possession and notify the requestor of such determination. In unusual circumstances, the 10-day time limit may be extended up to an additional 14 days by written notice to the requestor, setting forth the reason for the time extension (i.e., the request is too voluminous, seeks records held off site, or requires consultation with other agencies). The Department may need to request additional information if the request is not specific enough to permit the identification of the requested records. If the determination by the Department is made to comply with the request, the records will be made available as promptly as is reasonably practicable. While the Department will disclose or otherwise make available identifiable and existing records, the Act does not require the Department to create, synthesize, manufacture, or summarize records: the Act specifically does not obligate the Department to develop new records so as to be able to respond to a request.
Any request may be denied if the records sought are determined to be privileged, confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure, or are not found in the Department’s files or records. Notification of such a determination will be provided. The Department must justify the withholding of any record by demonstrating that the record is exempt under the Act or that the public interest in nondisclosure outweighs the public interest in disclosure. In most circumstances, when the Department removes or redacts exempt information from the record, it will disclose the remainder of the record.
Public records may be reviewed during regular business hours (generally weekdays from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. excluding holidays), at Department offices open to the public. Individuals who are interested in viewing public records are encouraged to make an appointment in advance. Appointments are not mandatory but can help Department staff facilitate the request, and the failure to make an appointment may result in a delay while the records are located and reviewed. Persons wishing to enter secured parts of the Department buildings must comply with the Department’s security protocol, including providing identification.
The Department will make copies of records for members of the public upon request. The Act provides that copies of records will be made promptly available upon payment of fees that cover the direct costs of duplication. The Department currently charges $0.30 per page for copying. The direct cost of duplication includes the pro rata expense of the duplicating equipment and the staff required to make a copy of that record. Direct costs of duplication does not include the staff person’s time in researching, retrieving, redacting and mailing the record. When the Department must compile electronic data, extract information from an electronic record, or undertake computer programming to satisfy a request, the Department may require the requestor to bear the full costs, not just the direct cost of duplication.
A public record that is not exempt from disclosure that is in an electronic format will be made available in an electronic format, if requested, but only if it does not jeopardize the security or integrity of the record or any proprietary software. The requestor will be charged the cost of producing an electronic copy of the record. Alternative charges apply for public records that are maintained in other formats, such as audio or video.
Under the Act any person may seek mandamus, injunctive or declarative relief in any court of competent jurisdiction to enforce the right to inspect or to receive a copy of any public record.
These guidelines are posted in a conspicuous public place at Department offices that are open to the public, are available free of charge to any person who requests them, and are also available on the Department’s website (

Red Snapper Day xxx

Description:                          Description:                          cid:part10.07000103.05060709@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part11.04070406.06070500@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part12.04000801.07040504@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part13.09030501.03040402@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part14.00090400.05050403@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part15.06000406.02030206@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part16.00010103.06060900@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part17.02070605.02060708@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part18.03000309.05090505@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part19.09090607.08060208@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part20.04090508.02090106@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part21.05030300.02080702@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part22.06020407.02030503@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part23.07020308.03030603@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part24.02050306.04080207@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part25.04080508.03050603@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                
Happy Snapper Day, Buddy!
Ashes to ashes Dust to dust
If Rock Hudson ate pussy
He'd still be with us.....
 Description:                          Description:                          cid:part27.03080303.06040202@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part28.00020408.08060805@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part29.06040604.02070108@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part30.02060106.07010904@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                


Tuesday, September 29, 2015

Veterans Affairs Bans iPhones For Veterans

Bans iPhones
Veterans are now receiving leaflets from Veterans Affairs prior to diagnostic appointments that show iPhones are among a short list of “prohibited items” at VA medical centers. Other items on the list are pistols, knives and backpacks.
The decision is a violation of due process and numerous laws protecting the rights of disabled Americans. Let me explain why.
The key here seems to be that VA forgets that veterans are also Americans who are protected by the Constitution and who also possess unalienable rights. Did we sign our rights away forever by fighting our country’s battles?
#veterans need #iphones to help with their #tbi... VA should stop interfering. Click to Tweet
Based on the photo, does this mean iPhone or all cell phones are “prohibited”? Does that also include banning the well-known “Obama Phone”? I wonder if they called the White House before running this one up the flagpole?
Ten-year-olds across the country can bring a backpack and iPhone wherever they want… but a disabled veteran will need to leave her medications, records and iPhone in the car before reporting to her traumatic brain injury (TBI) exam?
According to the leaflet, veterans who show up with an iPhone (or presumably other cell phone types) will be denied due process rights including a disability examination, according to the leaflet.
VA Prohibited Items
The leaflet does not explain what to do if the veteran is prescribed use of an iPhone or backpack as an accommodative device that helps the disabled veteran with a disability.
Changes to policy like this are coming on the back of recent revelations that VA violated the due process rights of more than 300 veterans with reported traumatic brain injuries. There, at Minneapolis VA, at least one veteran (a client of mine) openly recorded his appointment with VA staff in a legal manner because it occurred in Minnesota. In Minnesota, it is legal to record so long as at least one person is aware of the recording. Federal laws do not restrict this. But don’t try that in California and some other dual party states where all parties to a conversation must consent to recording. (It is up to you to ensure you are legally recording a VA official.)
Based on the leaflet going around, VA is apparently afraid such transparency – (ie recording what VA staff are saying to veterans) – will cause some kind of risk severe enough to ban all iPhones. What kind of risk are they working to prevent?
Lately, VA has shown a deeper paranoia of veterans of the current wars and has implemented certain policies that infringe on our due process rights.
Previously, I reported on VA using secret committees when using its “patient flag” system. That system allows VA employees to limit a veteran’s access to health care without notice or an opportunity to confront the accuser. Instead, the veteran is notified only after VA makes a decision.
RELATED: Soviet Style Patient Flag System Exposed
Similarly, last October VA implemented a new policy that would restrict a veteran’s access to her disability compensation records – contained within the CPRS medical record system – under the claim that some veterans are violent.
RELATED: Paranoid VA Officials Paint Veterans As Crazed Psychos
The anecdotal claim is now used to justify denying access to the records until after Veterans Benefits Administration makes a decision on the claim. VA is trying to redefine a medical diagnostic exam as not being the practice of medicine where errors could result in medical malpractice claims.
RELATED: Fear Of Violence Justified Denial Of Medical Records
However, such policies limit access to electronic medical records and may violate HIPAA as a result. But VA never seems to mind making policy decisions that violate clearly established laws and regulations.
RELATED: Is VA Misleading Veterans About The ‘Blue Button’?
Now, VA will deny a veteran access to a lawfully mandated disability examination if that same veteran has an iPhone or backpack. Iphones are routinely used to help veterans suffering from traumatic brain injuries take notes and remember appointments. VA doctors often prescribe use of these devices to help disabled veterans.
Additionally, veterans with bad backs, using crutches, or using wheelchairs will also be prohibited from using backpacks as accommodative devices under threat of losing our due process and legal right to receive a disability examination. Many paralyzed veterans will not be able to house their colostomy bags, apparently.
Does this seem strange or is it just me? How many of you receive leaflets like this prior to receiving non-VA health care?
I don’t know about you, but my next step was to file a FOIA request yesterday. It is important to push any Federal agency to follow the law. Otherwise, we will get nothing less then the Communist government we all fought hard to defeat over the years.
How ironic is that? While we fought the Cold War, the Communists were busy infiltrating the Department of Veterans Affairs to give us nothing less than the same horrific and hatefully oppressive treatment we fought 60 years to defeat?

Are current VA policies a sign that we actually lost the Cold War in an ironic twist of fate? When should we call Apple to let them know VA is unlawfully banning their phones?


Monday, September 28, 2015

European Union laws require you to give European Union

European Union laws require you to give European Union visitors information about cookies used on your blog. In many cases, these laws also require you to obtain consent. 

As a courtesy, we have added a notice on your blog to explain Google's use of certain Blogger and Google cookies, including use of Google Analytics and AdSense cookies. 

You are responsible for confirming this notice actually works for your blog, and that it displays. If you employ other cookies, for example by adding third party features, this notice may not work for you. Learn more about this notice and your responsibilities.


Stephani Kittel

I'm a 22 year old fun loving, happy go-lucky Showgirl and model for BSV (Best Showgirls in Vegas.) I'm not your typical cookie-cutter kind of model either. I'm five-foot and curvy, and I'm proud to say that all of our girls at BSV are all completely different in our own unique ways. I've been modeling for a short time now, but I know I have so much room to grow and I am more than excited to continue to learn more and become the best model I can be. I finally feel like I know who I am and what I'm supposed to be doing—I want to inspire more girls like myself: not the cookie-cutter model; That there is a chance for everyone to follow their dreams and become who they want to be. 

Best way to contact me:

Do you support this new law? Or is it a recipe for disaster?


Is it ever legal to shoot a cop? A growing number of states are passing laws that say that yes, in fact, sometimes it is well within a citizen’s rights to shoot a police officer.
While other states have ruled in favor of citizens shooting police officers in self-defense – even hip-hop legend Tupac walked after shooting to cops in self-defense –, in the state of Indiana, if a police officer initiates aggression without cause in someone’s home, violence can be used against them – in self-defense – including using lethal force.
The new law was drafted to “recognize the unique character of a citizen’s home and to ensure that a citizen feels secure in his or her own home against unlawful intrusion by another individual or a public servant.”
This should hardly be seen as profound. In the past, self-defense was viewed as a human right. The Bill of Rights does not grant rights to the citizenry of the United States, it recognizes natural rights. One of those rights – a veritable law of Nature – is the right to resist.
No matter what one does, or takes from you, nothing can stop the innate right to follow our natural impulses of resistance. That does not mean all will exercise that right. But the right itself is natural, primordial, inborn.
The new amendment in Indian recognizes this. It makes it clear that badges do not grant special rights to break into someone’s house and commit acts of violent aggression. If they do, the resident has the right to resist those illegal actions and defend themselves.

The Free Thought Project notes that many police officers “have already begun to fear monger the passage of this bill,” saying things like “if I pull over a car and I walk up to it and the guy shoots me, he’s going to say, ‘Well, he was trying to illegally enter my property.'”
That’s according to Joseph Hubbard, 40, the president of Jeffersonville Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 100, who asserts “somebody is going get away with killing a cop because of this law.”
In spite of his fear-mongering, here’s what the law actually states:
(i) A person is justified in using reasonable force against a public servant if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary to:
(1) protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force;
(2) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful entry of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle; or
(3) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person’s possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person’s immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect.
 What do you think about this law? Would you like to see more states adopt laws like this, or is this a recipe for disaster?

(Article by M. David)


I attached my Goat Head run. It's the 9th not tbe 8th duh.... huge ooops. Lol I also enclosed the 4 flyers if our past Vietnam Veteran wall fundraiser, pictures of the  run we had when we escorted the Wall to it's new hone in Dinuba. And a cut and past media  clip tbe news broadcast but Of Course ...the media did not give us  bikers any credit. 300 motorcyclist escorting tbe wall and donating hard earned  money and the got NO CREDIT. what's new

(Please copy and paste in your browser)
Vietnam Memorial Replica Wall Dedicated In Dinuba - KMPH FOX 26 | Central San Joaquin Valley News Source

Sunday, September 27, 2015

Emailing: Firearms - Fuck Obama and Hillary Clinton and the rest of the democrats.

Jefferson Memorial

Thomas Jefferson
President 1801 -1809

Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who do not                   Thomas Jefferson


Those who trade liberty for Security have neither

John Adams

John Adams
President  1797 - 1801


An armed man is a citizen.
An unarmed man is a subject


Gun control is not about guns; it's about control. 

Free men do not ask permission to bear arm

You only have the rights you are willing to fight for. 
Know guns, Know Peace, Know Safety.
    No Guns, No Peace, No Safety.

Guns have only two enemies:
Rust and Politicians

You don’t shoot to kill, you shoot to stay alive

Assault is a behavior, not a device. 
64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday

When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves. 

The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control

American Revolution Era Flags

Only a government that is afraid of its citizens
tries to control them.

The United States Constitution  
The Second Amendment is in place in case the politicians ignore the others. 
What part of
'shall not be infringed'
do you NOT understand? 


The Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment

                  "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason - Co-author of the Second Amendment 
during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

              Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and
keystone under independence … from
            the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." George Washington - First President of the United States

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the
                          people always possess arms and be taught alike,
especially when young, how to use them." Richard Henry Lee - American Statesman, 1788



In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control.  From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------                                                     In 1911, Turkey established gun control.  From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------                                         Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------                                              China established gun control in 1935.  From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964.  From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------                                           Uganda established gun control in 1970.  From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
------------------------------                                        Cambodia established gun control in 1956.  From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-----------------------------                                        Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

With guns, we are 'citizens;' without them, we are 'subjects'.

You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens

The purpose of fighting is to win.  There is no possible victory in defense.  The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either.  The final weapon is the brain.  All else is supplemental.

Why Fight?



Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!  The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.

Just think how powerful our government is getting!  They think these other countries just didn't do it right.  I'm a firm believer of the 2nd Amendment! If you are too, please forward.  Learn from history!!!  If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends.


Saturday, September 26, 2015

Friday, September 25, 2015

Facebook Calls the Cops When They Think You’re Posting About Criminal Activity

Facebook has a new little known software that monitors your profile chat and pictures for criminal activity. The software will proceed to alert an employee at the company who will then decide whether to call authorities or not.
The software will monitor individuals who have a ‘loose’ relationship on social media networks, according to an interview with Facebook Chief Security Officer Joe Sullivan.
Reuters interview with the security officer explains,  Facebook’s software focuses on conversations between members who have a loose relationship on the social network. For example, if two users aren’t friends, only recently became friends, have no mutual friends, interact with each other very little, have a significant age difference, and/or are located far from each other, the tool pays particular attention.
The scanning program looks for certain phrases found in previously obtained chat records from criminals, including sexual predators (because of the Reuters story, we know of at least one alleged child predator who is being brought before the courts as a direct result of Facebook’s chat scanning). The relationship analysis and phrase material have to add up before a Facebook employee actually looks at communications and makes the final decision of whether to ping the authorities.
“We’ve never wanted to set up an environment where we have employees looking at private communications, so it’s really important that we use technology that has a very low false-positive rate,” Sullivan told Reuters.
The software has been used to help gather information on potential murder suspects as well. In just one case, 62 pages of information, pictures, chat and posts where gathered and handed over to local authorities by Facebook in a recent subpoena request.
Facebook most likely wants to keep this software secret since most people do not think fondly of someone rummaging around their private messages and photos looking for criminal activities. Also how far is this system willing to go and will they soon pursue minor crimes or even thought crime?

This article (Facebook Tells the Cops When You Talk About Criminal Activity in Private Messages), by Kristan T. Harris at is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article with attribution to the author and Tune-in to the THERUNDOWNLIVE Monday-Friday @ 9pm

AUS - Legal screws turn on bikies

The State Government is set to roll out some of the toughest anti-bikie laws in the country as part of a new push aimed at driving criminal gangs out of WA.

Attorney-General Michael Mischin said gang laws were being overhauled to include what he said were the most effective aspects of Queensland, NSW and South Australia’s legislation — described by critics in these States as draconian.

The changes have been signed off by Cabinet and work is under way on redrafting the Criminal Organisations Control Act which was introduced in 2013 but has never been used.

“There is no place for criminal organisations in WA and the State Government will continue doing everything in its power to eliminate them,” Mr Mischin said.

The West Australian revealed in February that the State Government was eyeing off Queensland’s laws after it survived a High Court challenge.

The laws enable the Attorney-General to declare a gang a “criminal organisation” and effectively ban membership overnight without the need for long or costly court hearings.

Twenty-six gangs were outlawed in Queensland within two weeks of the laws being introduced. Under WA’s existing legislation, a Supreme Court judge determines whether a gang should be outlawed based on evidence provided by police that members are heavily involved in organised crime.

Bikies are able to challenge that evidence during special hearings and appeal against the court's decision all the way to the High Court, potentially dragging the process out for years.

It is understood WA Police have had their first application ready to go for some time, but it was put on hold while the legislation was being reviewed.

NSW has a different model from Queensland. It prevents two or more gang members from associating if one has a significant criminal record.

Associating includes face-to-face meetings, phone calls or other forms of communication such as email or through social media. Breaching the laws carries up to three years jail.

Mr Mischin said the NSW laws had also survived a High Court challenge, which meant they could be rolled out in WA without fear of further delays.

It is understood some of the harsher aspects of WA's existing laws would also be retained, such as mandatory minimum sentences for certain types of offences and control orders which restrict where individuals can live, travel and work.

Famous Presidential Lies Contest

Famous Presidential Lies Contest
Written by, To The Point News
• None of our boys will die on foreign soil
• I am not a crook
GHW Bush:
• Read my lips - No New Taxes
• I did not have sex with that woman... Miss Lewinski
GW Bush:
• Iraq has weapons of mass destruction
• I will have the most transparent administration in history.
• The stimulus will fund shovel-ready jobs.
• I am focused like a laser on creating jobs.
• The IRS is not targeting anyone.
• It was a spontaneous riot about a movie.
• I will put an end to the type of politics that "breeds division, conflict and cynicism".
• You didn't build that!
• I will restore trust in Government.
• The Cambridge cops acted stupidly.
• The public will have 5 days to look at every bill that lands on my desk
• It's not my red line - it is the world's red line.
• Whistle blowers will be protected in my administration.
• We got back every dime we used to rescue the banks and auto companies, with interest.
• I am not spying on American citizens.
• Obama Care will be good for America.
• You can keep your family doctor.
• Premiums will be lowered by $2500.
• If you like it, you can keep your current healthcare plan.
• It's just like shopping at Amazon.
• I knew nothing about "Fast and Furious" gunrunning to Mexican drug cartels.
• I knew nothing about IRS targeting conservative groups.
• I knew nothing about what happened in Benghazi.
• I have never known my uncle from Kenya who is in the country illegally and that was arrested and told to leave the country over 20 years ago.
• And, I have never lived with that uncle. He finally admitted (12-05-2013) that he DID know his uncle and that he DID live with him.
• If elected I promise not to renew the Patriot Act.
• If elected I will end the war in Iraq and Afghanistan within the 1st 9 months of my term.
• I will close Guantanamo within the first 6 months of my term.
• I will bridge the gap between black and white and between America and other countries.
And the biggest one of all:
• "I, Barrack Hussein Obama, pledge to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America."
I believe we have a winner

Thursday, September 24, 2015

AUSTRALIA - Court to hear legal challenge to Victoria Police fines for motorcycle helmet cameras

WA Police officer fitted with helmet camera as part of a blitz on texting drivers


A Melbourne motorcyclist is going to court to contest a fine for wearing a camera on his helmet in a case lawyers hope will stop police from issuing similar penalties.
Max Lichtenbaum was fined $289 and lost three demerit points for failing to wear an approved helmet after being pulled over by police in Frankston, in Melbourne's south-east, in March 2014.
That fine will be contested in court today on the grounds the helmet was of approved Australian standard and was in fact compliant with the law despite having a camera attached.
The prosecution argued the camera was a rigid projection of more than five millimetres, which is against standard, but Mr Lichtenbaum's legal team said that only applied to the manufacture and sale of the helmet.
Mr Lichtenbaum's lawyer, Malcolm Cumming of Maurice Blackburn, said his firm took the case on pro bono after the issue was repeatedly raised by motorcyclists.
"Over the years many motorcyclists have been issued with infringements and have paid fines and have lost demerit points for using helmet cameras based on the premise that there is an ongoing system of regulation of helmets beyond point of supply," Mr Cumming said.
"Our argument is that there is no such system of regulation at all and all those infringements have been paid in error."
Video from helmet cameras is some of the best evidence you can have if you are in a collision.
Malcolm Cumming, Lawyer
GoPro cameras are becoming increasingly popular with motorcyclists who use them like a dashboard camera.
Mr Cumming said it was an important safety tool which should be allowed.
"The repeated feedback from motorcyclists to us is there's a marked change and improvement in driver behaviour when drivers become aware that they are, or are potentially, being recorded," he said.
"In our work supporting riders injured in road accidents, we know that video from helmet cameras is some of the best evidence you can have if you are in a collision."
Mr Cumming said he would also argue the Australian Standard that governs motorcycle helmets is not freely accessible to the public, and riders could not be found guilty of breaching a law that is not publically available.

National standard applied differently across states

Victoria is one of the only states in which motorcyclists are fined for wearing cameras in breach of the Australian Standard.
Deputy chairman of the Victorian Motorcycle Council Peter Baulch said police in Western Australia and Queensland were issued with motorcycle helmets with cameras attached to record intercepts.
"It seems a little bit odd when we talk about compliance with an Australian Standard that it's ok in Queensland and Western Australia but not ok in Victoria," he said.
"Because we're talking about a national standard not a state one.
"So there's something a little cock-eyed about that."
Victoria Police has declined to comment.

Massachusetts - Unlisted Law Enforcement M.C. Club

The Time Keepers
Correctional Officers
American Motorcycles

Wednesday, September 23, 2015

Defending Sonny’s Brand

George Christie’s television show has problems.
The other night  Outlaw Chronicles: Hells Angels was cablecast opposite Kurt Sutter’s The Bastard Executioner and its audience dwindled. It is now averaging about 915,000 viewers per airing. The show’s audience peaked with the second episode. Entertainment executives usually prefer that television shows build audiences rather lose them.
On top of that the production has obviously offended Ralph “Sonny” Barger, a founder of the Hells Angels and, for most of the world, the face of the club. Christie, who was run out of the Angels in disgrace, has blamed Barger for his expulsion and has insinuated, and more, that for the last half century he has been the seminal member of the club. That is the most basic lie Christie’s “reality” program tells. Anybody who knows anything about the Angels knows that the club is fiercely egalitarian and decision making is widely dispersed. Then there is the matter that Christie didn’t join until about 20 years after Barger did.
The club simply has no single decision maker but Barger is a sort of spiritual leader who has led by fierce example and with a humility that is beyond Christie’s grasp. Christie has long sought to discredit Barger, for reasons that would seem to be more explicable in a novel – something by Dostoevsky maybe – than in a cheesy TV show. But that seems to be the dramatic arc the producers have plotted. The big climax of Outlaw Chronicles is supposed to be an episode titled “Sonny versus George.” In an instant, in a mere three words, Christie has declared himself to be Barger’s equal or more. It seems like a short step from that to the worldwide marketing of “George Christie An American Legend” tee shirts.

The Brand

This week Barger’s intellectual property attorney (yes he has an intellectual property attorney) wrote a letter to A&E Televisions Networks, the History Channel, Shaw Media and Shaw Communication who collectively produce and profit from the stories Christie is telling.
“As you are aware,” the letter begins, “Mr. Sonny Barger is an actor, author, speaker, and businessman who has achieved success and notoriety due, in part, to his role as a prominent member of the Hells Angels Motorcycle Club. Mr. Sonny Barger’s fame and reputation has resulted in the Sonny Barger brand (the ‘Sonny Barger Brand’) becoming a commercial asset of great value to Mr. Sonny Barger and his affiliated companies. In addition to common law rights, Mr. Sonny Barger and his affiliates own a federal trademark registration for the SONNY BARGER mark as well as several pending trademark applications for various goods and services (collectively, the ‘Sonny Barger Marks’).”
Want to read more?
“It has come to our attention,” the letter continues, “that HISTORY plans to air an episode of the Show titled “Sonny vs. George” on or about September 22, 2015, and we are under the belief that there has already been a great deal of marketing utilizing the Sonny Barger Brand and/or the Sonny Barger Marks.”

Cease And Desist

“Please be advised, you or your related business entities are not licensed or in any way authorized by Sonny Barger or his affiliated companies to use the Sonny Barger Brand or the Sonny Barger Marks for any purpose whatsoever, specifically including any use in or connection with the Show. We believe that, absent the express written consent of Mr. Sonny Barger, the use of the Sonny Barger Brand or the Sonny Barger Marks by you or your related business entities is an infringement of Mr. Sonny Barger and his affiliated companies’ rights, including, but not limited to, rights to the Sonny Barger trademarks and brand, and may further constitute other violations of statutory and common law rights.”
“Mr. Sonny Barger and his affiliated companies take violations of their intellectual property and their rights thereunder very seriously,” the letter concludes, “and plan to protect such rights utilizing any legal avenues available in both law and equity. Accordingly, on behalf of Mr. Sonny Barger and his affiliated companies, we hereby demand that you and your subsidiaries, networks, and affiliates immediately comply with the following:
1.    Cease and desist from any and all use of the Sonny Barger Brand and the Sonny Barger Marks and any versions of such brand or marks; and
2.    Cease and desist from any and all development, sale, distribution, promotion and airing of any and all products and services in connection with the Sonny Barger Brand and the Sonny Barger Marks, or any names or marks confusingly similar to Sonny Barger.


Sweetwater Harley - Join Us For Happy Hour

sweetwater happy hour.png

Tuesday, September 22, 2015

The Drop Dead Letter

George Christie’s reality television program, Outlaw Chronicles, will end tomorrow night with an episode titled ‘Sonny vs. George.’ So far the show has been equal parts fantasy, vengeance and profit opportunity and there is no reason to expect that the final episode will be different.
The History Channel describes the show like this. “In an outlaw organization that prides itself on secrecy and anonymity, one man has held the spotlight as the most famous Hells Angel of all: Sonny Barger. A member for more than 50 years, Barger has represented the Angels in the news and in movies, and behind the scenes has wielded power as the club’s de facto leader. But there emerged rivals to his supremacy, and one of Barger’s greatest adversaries was George Christie. Christie reveals how Sonny rose to power, expanded the club’s empire, and made it the most feared group of outlaws in the world. But Christie also exposes how Barger’s actions threatened to topple the Hells Angels from their throne, and ultimately led to Christie’s expulsion from the band of brothers he rode and fought with for more than 30 years. In his own words, this is George Christie’s view on how his clashes with Sonny Barger changed both men’s lives – and the Hells Angels – forever.”
Whatever the show claims tomorrow night is likely to be a lie. It is not a production for anthropologists, sociologist, criminologists or historians. It is a business enterprise to make Christie and the History Channel money from an audience of people who want to pretend to be motorcycle gang experts around the water cooler on Wednesday morning. Some few people, like some number of Hells Angels, are profoundly offended by Christie’s show – which is why the thing has gotten so much attention here. The entertainment industry, and most of the world at large, probably sees the show’s almost million fans in the same category as fantasy football fanatics.


Christie’s show is mostly an attack on his former motorcycle club masquerading as an homage. But Christie’s, and the History Channel’s, hostility to the motorcycle club that wears red and white is unmistakable. Two days ago on his Facebook page, Christie let his true feelings show. “When does a club become a cult,” he asked rhetorically. “When they fear their members leaving and feel compelled to destroy them with intimidation and false statements.” The implication is that his ex-club brothers are angry with Christie because he abandoned them.
Some uncounted number of people think truth matters which is why it is worth a minute to talk back to George. Christie has recently, publically characterized this page as “fiction” and has blatantly stated that his plea deal is still sealed because “The Aging Rebel forced the prosecutors to seal the deal.” Christie has also said dozens of times that he left the Hells Angels Motorcycle Club, voluntarily, on good terms and that he was put out bad retroactively on the orders of Ralph Barger. Presumably, tomorrow night will be George Christie’s chance to settle that score.
The truth is that Christie resigned from his motorcycle club because other club members detested him and distrusted him and at least some of those members still want the world to know what actually happened. Christie didn’t quit to pursue other interests because he outgrew the club. George Christie quit shortly after he got a letter from another Hells Angel named “Sam” dated April 16, 2011. Sonny Barger had nothing to do with it. Christie’s aspirations to celebrity may have had something to do with it. Christie’s desire to stay out of jail by any means necessary had a lot to do with it.

The Drop Dead Letter

“You just don’t know when to shut up,” Sam begins. “So just shut up and keep oral COPulating with your law enforcement buddies. You don’t have to open and close every door for everyone. If they want to be involved they don’t need you to involve them. They can do it themselves. This Club would be much better off if you’re not a part of it. Stick your head back up your ass and quit letting the cops pull it out every time they need a motor-mouth to fill in the blanks with words that are yours not ours. Our words are ‘I have nothing to say,’ not the endless hours of ass kissing, mumbling, jerk-off mouth bullshit you talk with law enforcement about our Club and its members. The Ventura Police Department and all the other law enforcement agencies are laughing at the Ventura charter behind their backs because you’re still in the Club. The cops know as long as you are in the Club, they can manipulate the Ventura Charter.
“If I am wrong I will see you at the South Run on May 21, 2011.
“I said it before and I am saying it again. For the benefit of the Hells Angels Motorcycle Club, the Ventura charter members and yourself, QUIT THE CLUB.”
It was an invitation to a confrontation. Christie didn’t go to the run. He quit the club instead. Within days after he left, the number of club rules he had broken became evident and all his former club brothers were forbidden to have anything to do with him.


Monday, September 21, 2015

Save the date! Tag and share ‪#‎rd4c‬ ‪#‎rollingdeep4charities‬

You Might Be From Chicago If:

You Might Be From Chicago If:
1. The 'living room' is called the 'front room'.
2. You don't pronounce the 's' at the end of Illinois and, you become irate at people who do.
3. You measure distance in minutes (especially 'from the city') and you swear everything is pretty much 1/2 hour away.
4. You have no problem spelling or pronouncing Des Plaines.
5. You go to visit friends, or family, down south and laugh when they complain about the traffic.
6. You understand that no person from Chicago can be a Cub fan AND a White Sox fan.
7. It's 'Kitty corner' not 'Katty corner'.
8. You know the difference between The Loop and Downtown.
9. You eat your pizza in squares, not triangles, and you never refer to it as 'pie.'
10. You own celery salt.
11. You understand that the primary is the official local election.
12. You have drunk green beer on St. Paddy's Day.
13. Stores don't have sacks, they have bags.
14. You end your sentences with an unnecessary preposition. Example: 'Where's my coat at?' or 'Can I go with?' My English teacher had fits with this one.
15. Your idea of a great tenderloin is when the meat is twice as big as the bun, 'everything' is on it and a slice of dill pickle is on the side.
16. You carry jumper cables in your car.
17. You drink 'pop'- not ‘soda.’
18. You understand that I-290, I-90, I-94, and I-294 are all different roads.
19. You know the names of the interstates: Stevenson, Kennedy, Eisenhower, Dan Ryan, and the Edens.
20. You call the interstates 'expressways.
'21. You refer to anything South of I-80 as 'Southern or Central Illinois.'
22. You refer to Lake Michigan as 'The Lake.'
23. You refer to Chicago as 'The City.'
24. 'The Super Bowl' refers to one specific game in January 1986.
25. You have two favorite football teams: The Bears, and anyone who beats the Packers.
26. You buy the 'Trib’, not the 'Tribune' or the 'Times', not the 'Sun Times.'
27. You know that despite being on the lake, there is no such place as the Waterfront.
28. You think 45 degrees is great weather to wash your car.
29. You picnic or ride your bike in the 'forest preserve'.
30. You know the number of Empire Carpet.
31. You know what goes on a Chicago style hot dog.
32. You know what Chicago Style Pizza REALLY is.
33. You know why they call Chicago 'The Windy City.'
34. You understand what 'lake-effect' and ‘lower-near-the-lake’ mean.
35. You know the difference between Amtrak and Metra, and know which station they end up at.
36. You have ridden the 'L'.
37. You think your next door neighbor is a cousin to Tony Soprano.
38. You can distinguish between the following area codes: 847, 630, 773, 708, 312, & 815.
39. You respond to the question 'Where are you from?' with a 'side'. Example: 'West Side,' 'South Side’ or 'North Side.’
40. You have, at some time in your life, used your furniture . . . or a friend's body, to guard your parking spot in winter….

Saturday, September 19, 2015

CA - Mongols Motorcycle Club will keep logo after judge dismisses federal indictment

  Brian Day

California -
SANTA ANA >> A U.S. District Court judge this week dismissed a federal indictment by which the government sought to seize control of the Mongols Motorcycle Club's iconic logo.
Federal Judge David O. Carter granted a defense motion for dismissal Wednesday filed on behalf of Mongols by attorneys Joe Yanny and Elliot Min of the Los Angeles-based law firm Yanny and Smith, court documents show.
detail of a logo on one of the motorcycles seized by Sheriff's deputies and ATF agents during a sweep that resulted in numerous arrests involving the Mongols motorcycle gang. (Staff Photo by Keith Durflinger)
Federal prosecutors obtained the indictment in February of 2013, alleging the Mongols logo, often scene on the patches on the distinctive leather vests worn by club members, was subject to government forfeiture under the RICO Act.

Following Wednesday's ruling in federal court in Santa Ana, "Their whole basis for attempting to forfeit the collective membership mark is dead meat," Yanny said.
Yanny commended the judge in the case, adding he could not recall another instance of a federal indictment being dismissed by a judge.

"It took a lot of guts for this judge to do what he did. He had to go against the grain," he said. "He was a courageous enough man to do the right thing. It restores my faith in the system."

members rally Saturday, March 29, 2013 at The House Lounge in Maywood in support of the Mongols who are facing a federal trial seeking to take away their trademark patch. (Photo by Sarah Reingewirtz/Pasadena Star-News)
Prosecutors asserted the Mongols' logo was subject to forfeiture because the club is a criminal organization which uses the logo, "to identify its members and facilitate the coordination of criminal activity," according to Carter's order.

Federal prosectors continued weighing their options Thursday.
"We are reviewing the ruling and will consider pursuing an appeal," U.S. Attorney's Office spokesman Thom Mrozek said.
Yanny said Carter's ruling leaves the Mongols on solid legal footing to combat any further litigation, and he's confident any appeal will be unsuccessful.
In his 23-page ruling, Carter found the government had failed to show the required elements for prosecution under the RICO statute.
RICO prosecutions require that a specific person or entity be charged with crimes that are committed through a separate criminal enterprise. But Carter found the federal government's assertion the Mongols Nation is an entity that conducts criminal activity through a separate enterprise, the Mongols gang, amounted to "a distinction without a difference."

"There is simply no substance to the Mongols Gang enterprise independent of Mongol Nation, an association of its leadership and official membership," Carter wrote.
Having determined the indictment was insufficient, Carter declined to rule on the other principal arguments made by the Mongols.
The Mongols had also argued their logo was constitutionally protected as a collective membership mark, and that the organization, rather than individual people, is not capable of committing "intent crimes," such ass murder or assault, Yanny said.

"I'm very happy about the result," Yanny said.
But the judge declined to order sanctions against the prosecution, which Mongols attorney's sought due to allegations of prosecutorial misconduct.
"While the indictment is legally deficient for the reasons explained above, this does not demonstrate that the action is vexatious, meaning that the Government acted with 'ill intent,'" Carter wrote.
The previous judge assigned to the case, Judge Otis Wright II, recused himself from the case in May, after Mongols attorneys filed a motion seeking a new judge, alleging Wright had demonstrated bias against the Mongols.
The indictment, filed in February of 2013, came on the heels of another federal case in which 79 Mongols members pleaded guilty to a variety of criminal charges following a six-state operation targeting the Mongols known as "Operation Black Rain."