Catch us live on BlogTalkRadio every



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




Monday, February 29, 2016

BABE OF THE WEEK EMMA DARING






Illinois - Court Calls Cuts Contraband


Court Calls Cuts Contraband

OFF THE WIRE
agingrebel.com
The Second District Appellate Court of Illinois ruled Tuesday that three “Black in Color Leather Vests With Attached Outlaws Motorcycle Club Patches” were a kind of contraband called “derivative contraband” and could be seized by the state.

The ruling affirmed a decision by lower court judge Sharon L. Prather. Her decision had been appealed by the AOA15 Civic Organization, Inc., a legal entity that is closely associated with the motorcycle club. The Outlaws had contended that their patches are private property that belonged to the club and should not be seized.
Plea Deals

The case began with a bar brawl on November 30, 2012. Five men and a woman wearing cut-off jackets or vests with patches on the back that identified them as members of, or a consort of, the Outlaws walked into a bar called the Lizard Lounge in unincorporated Wonder Lake, Illinois. They were looking, according to the local Sheriff, “for a specific person.”

The appeals court noted that a witness named “Ashley Chovanec testified that she was at the Lizard Lounge when the defendants entered, wearing their vests with Outlaws’ patches. She stated that ‘the bar got quiet’ and ‘people got uncomfortable.’ She further stated that everyone else in the bar felt intimidated. Molly M’Gonigle, Robert Borta, and Cody Hutt testified similarly as to the effect the defendants’ entrance had on the atmosphere of the bar.” According to police two patrons were punched and a woman had beer spat in her face.

Four defendants, Robert Bellmore, Luciano Flores, Michael Blumer, and Kathleen McKevitt, negotiated plea deals. Three of them agreed to forfeit their vests and forfeiture proceedings began. Only three vests were subject to forfeiture because the local Sheriff misplaced Blumer’s vest. Since it wasn’t part of the forfeiture case it was returned to after the police found it.
Experts

During a forfeiture hearing two “motorcycle gang experts” testified “that the Outlaws were a commonly recognized gang and that the black leather vests, worn by the defendants during the commission of the crimes charged, were used directly or indirectly to facilitate street-gang activity. As such, the vests were subject to forfeiture.” The two experts were James Duffy, an investigator with the Du Page County State’s Attorney’s office, and Detective Kyle Mandernack.

Duffy testified “that the Outlaws gang members use the Outlaws’ patches on their vests to portray ‘violent intimidation.’ He stated that the intimidation factor of the patches is ‘cultivated through violence’ and that it is ‘systematically approved through their hierarchy.’ He testified that the Outlaws’ patches signify membership in a one-percenter gang, meaning a group that willfully engages in criminal activity. He testified that the vests were used to facilitate street-gang activity.”

Mandernack, “testified that the Outlaws gain their reputation, influence, and membership through ‘violence and intimidation.’ He testified that the vests and patches facilitate street-gang-related activity by identifying Outlaw members to others. He further stated that the vests and patches facilitate street-gang-related activity by creating the impression of dominance and revenge, which warns others of the consequences of ‘messing with’ Outlaws members.”
Illinois Law

The appeals court thought Duffy and Mandernack’s testimony was compelling and cited an Illinois law that says: “The following are declared to be contraband and no person shall have a property interest in them…any property that is directly or indirectly used or intended for use in any manner to facilitate street gang related activity.” The court noted “that there are two categories of contraband. Contraband per se consists of those items whose possession alone constitutes a criminal offense, and such articles need not be returned even if improperly seized…. Derivative contraband consists of articles that are not inherently illegal but were used in an unlawful manner.”

Derivative contraband is analogous to a category of crimes that are malum prohibitum – which is to say, crimes that are crimes not because they are traditional or obvious evils but because a lobbyist has written a new law which invents a new crime. In this case, the Illinois appeals court seems to have made a crime of Constitutionally protected expression based on the testimony of two police appointed “experts.”

The court concluded, based on the testimony of the “experts,” that “wearing the vests facilitated the defendants’ goal, to be achieved by violent means if necessary, to show their dominance to others. Based on this testimony, the trial court could reasonably determine that the Outlaws’ vests and patches facilitated the defendants’ violent actions at the Lizard Lounge. Accordingly, the trial court’s determination that the vests and patches were derivative contraband subject to forfeiture is not against the manifest weight of the evidence.” The vests, the learned justices decided, did not “cause” the violence at the Lizard Lounge but did “facilitate” it.

Joel Rabb, the attorney representing the AOA15 Civic Organization in this case told the Chicago Tribune, “Obviously, we are disappointed with the court’s determination.”


Sunday, February 28, 2016

Saturday, February 27, 2016

Friday, February 26, 2016

Thursday, February 25, 2016

BABE OF THE DAY

Federal Judge Rules Municipal Police Can Never Be Considered Soldiers



OFF THE WIRE
Written by 
As reported by the Washington Post on March 23, a federal judge dismissed a claim brought by a Nevada man claiming that police violated the Third Amendment by "forcibly occupying [his] home in order to gain a 'tactical advantage' against suspected criminals in a neighboring house."
In the opinion, Judge Andrew Gordon wrote that there were two relevant questions in the case of Anthony Mitchell v. City of Henderson. First, "whether municipal police should be considered soliders"; second, "whether the time they spent in the house could be considered quartering."

Gordon ruled that the answer to both questions was "no" — well, mostly.
The judge found that the police officers who took over Mitchell's home were not soldiers and that the Third Amendment was written to protect individuals from "military intrusion into a private home."
In light of his denial of the claim that the police qualified as soldiers, Gordon didn't answer the second relevant question, simply writing that he "suspect[s]" that the time spent by the police occupying Mitchell's home would not qualify as quartering.
While Gordon may have been correct in this ruling, his language is so broad that it may actually set a dangerous precedent. As Ilya Somin explained in the Washington Post: "The reasoning is very plausible and quite possibly correct. But it may too readily conclude that 'municipal police' can never be considered soldiers for purposes of the Amendment."
Somin is correct.
First, some background and context.
The Third Amendment reads: "No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law."
The tale told by Anthony Mitchell of how he and his family were robbed of these rights is compelling and cautionary.
Mitchell was sitting at home in Henderson, Nevada, on the morning of July 10, 2011, when the phone rang. Officer Christopher Worley of the Henderson Police Department was calling Mitchell to tell him that the police were going to take over his house. In order to gain “tactical advantage” over Mitchell’s next door neighbor, Officer Worley reportedly explained, police were going to set up shop in Mitchell’s house.
Mitchell was not asked if he would mind such a surrender of his home. The officer was informing Mitchell that they would be commandeering his house. In his legal complaint against the Henderson Police Department, Mitchell claims that he didn’t want to get involved with the police department’s operation against his neighbor and accordingly refused to let police occupy his home.
Not surprisingly, Mitchell’s refusal didn’t sit well with law enforcement. Again, according to Mitchell’s complaint, Officer David Cawthorn of the Henderson Police Department, one of the members of the force who were named as defendants in Mitchell’s lawsuit, “outlined the defendants' plan in his official report: 'It was determined to move to 367 Evening Side and attempt to contact Mitchell. If Mitchell answered the door he would be asked to leave. If he refused to leave he would be arrested for Obstructing a Police Officer. If Mitchell refused to answer the door, force entry would be made and Mitchell would be arrested.'”
It isn’t hard in the these times of police militarization to predict what happened next.
Just before noon, five (or more) officers of the Henderson Police Department “arrayed themselves in front of plaintiff Anthony Mitchell's house and prepared to execute their plan,” according to the narrative laid out in Mitchell’s lawsuit.
After showing up at Mitchell’s door, the officers allegedly “banged forcefully” on his door and demanded that Mitchell and his family open up.
Seconds later, Mitchell claims, “officers ... smashed open his front door using a metal ram.”
Standing in his living room in shock, Mitchell says that the officers “aimed their weapons” at him and ordered him “to lie down on the floor.” Fearing for his life, Mitchell complied.
Mitchell says that while he was prostrate on his front room floor, Henderson Police Department officers shouted “conflicting orders” at him, some commanding him to “crawl” toward the officers, with others demanding that he stay put.
Mitchell’s complaint continues the account of this incredible afternoon:
Confused and terrified, plaintiff Anthony Mitchell remained curled on the floor of his living room, with his hands over his face, and made no movement.

Although plaintiff Anthony Mitchell was lying motionless on the ground and posed no threat, officers, including Officer David Cawthorn, then fired multiple "pepperball" rounds at plaintiff as he lay defenseless on the floor of his living room. Anthony Mitchell was struck at least three times by shots fired from close range, injuring him and causing him severe pain.
Police then took Mitchell in custody and, as they reportedly planned to do, arrested him for obstructing a police officer. After arresting Mitchell, officers searched his home, then proceeded to rearrange furniture and establish the tactical lookout they wanted all along.
As for the notion that the Third Amendment was added to the Constitution to protect from military intrusion, as defined by Judge Gordon, the spirit of that provision seems to look more to the protection of the home, rather than to the identity of the invader.
While there are few cases on point, one Georgetown law professor quoted in a Wall Street Journal story describes the Third Amendment as the “Rosetta Stone of the Bill of Rights. “[The] Third Amendment can reveal the structure of the Bill of Rights, and its objects,” Professor Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz wrote as reported by the Wall Street Journal. A quote by Joseph Story from his Commentaries on the Constitution confirms Rosenkranz’s view. “This provision speaks for itself. Its plain object is to secure the perfect enjoyment of that great right of the common law, that a man's house shall be his own castle, privileged against all civil and military intrusion,” Story wrote.
As for the ruling's potentially dangerous distinction between soldiers and police, thanks to billions in federal grants gobbled up by local law enforcement, that line is being blurred beyond recognition. In fact, in light of the overwhelmingly military equipment, training, weapons, and vehicles used by local police, these departments may be becoming exactly the type of force the Founders had in mind in 1791.
In commenting on Blackstone’s Commentaries, founding era jurist St. George Tucker speaks as if he foresaw our day and the fatal combination of an increasingly militarized police force and the disarmament of civilians: "Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction."
The connection between this professional, civilian standing army and the attack on the right of the people to keep and bear arms has been recognized by contemporary liberty-minded scholars, as well.
In his essay “The Right to Keep and Bear Arms under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments: The Framers' Intent and Supreme Court Jurisprudence,” Stephen Halbrook writes:
Noah Webster, the influential federalist whose name still appears on dictionaries, stated: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed...." Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States 56 (P. Ford ed. 1888).
In a similar treatise, Joyce Malcolm, a historian specializing in 17th-century English constitutional history, makes the same point:
Where does this leave the American Second Amendment, with its reference to a well-regulated militia necessary to the security of a free state, and its insistence that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed? I would argue that the Second Amendment mirrors English belief in the individual's right to be armed, the importance of that right to the preservation of liberty, and the preference for a militia over a standing army.
In an essay published in the Wall Street Journal last August, Radley Balko presented chilling and convincing evidence of the blurring of the line between cop and soldier:
Driven by martial rhetoric and the availability of military-style equipment — from bayonets and M-16 rifles to armored personnel carriers — American police forces have often adopted a mind-set previously reserved for the battlefield. The war on drugs and, more recently, post-9/11 antiterrorism efforts have created a new figure on the U.S. scene: the warrior cop — armed to the teeth, ready to deal harshly with targeted wrongdoers, and a growing threat to familiar American liberties.
In light of the foregoing analysis, it may be, as Somin writes, that Judge Gordon was "too quick to conclude that 'no municipal police officer' could ever qualify as such."
Please review our Comment Policy before posting a comment

COMMENT
On the part of both this judge, and the New American for failing to point it back out.

The case remains a de facto violation of the Fourth Amendment:

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probably cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

That the police would then, by their own words, utilize the threat of police action, obstruction of a police officer, in violation of the 4th amendment, constitutes a federal violation of Title 18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law:

    Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

The person in question wasn't Mr. Mitchell, and the police had no business seizing his property without a warrant, threatening his life, accosting him, imprisoning him, nor punishing him for refusing to acquiesce to their illegitimate demands! This is no different than beating a confession out of someone.

Wednesday, February 24, 2016

Washington State Proposes Comprehensive Civil Rights Protection For Motorcyclists



OFF THE WIRE

By David Devereaux
A newly proposed law in Washington State would give motorcyclists access to essential civil rights protection currently enjoyed by other protected classes. The Washington State Senate and House, at the request of the Washington State Council of Clubs and the Motorcycle Profiling Project, have both proposed identical legislation, SB 6624/ HB 2950, that would add individuals wearing motorcycle or motorcycle club related paraphernalia to the Washington State Civil Rights Act (RCW 49.60.030) as a protected class. Additionally, SB 6624/HB 2950 adds the right to be free from law enforcement profiling to the list of explicated civil rights protections for all protected classes.

The Washington State Council of Clubs, the Motorcycle Profiling Project, and BOLT of Washington drafted the language for the identical proposals. ABATE of Washington also supported the effort.

The addition of individuals wearing motorcycle or motorcycle club related paraphernalia would provide unprecedented protection against many forms of discrimination if these bills pass. It would be a violation of civil rights to deny an individual employment, public accommodations, or profile them based on their expression or associations with a motorcycle club. Common occurrences like “No Motorcycle Club” policies would be a thing of the past.

SB 6624/HB 2950 individualize guilt and provide constitutional protections of expression and association – despite stereotypes or overly-broad government labeling.

Individuals in motorcycle clubs have a fundamental right of association that should not be infringed upon based on generalized suspicion. Absent proof of the intent to commit criminal activity an individual should not be subjected to government regulation or law enforcement actions.

SB 6624/HB 2950 also gives victims of motorcycle discrimination and profiling access to relief in the form of damages and attorney fees. RCW 49.60.030 states:

“2) Any person deeming himself or herself injured by any act in violation of this chapter shall have a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction to enjoin further violations, or to recover the actual damages sustained by the person, or both, together with the cost of suit including reasonable attorneys’ fees or any other appropriate remedy authorized by this chapter or the United States Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, or the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 3601 et seq.).”

SB 6624/HB 2950 would further solidify civil liberty protections enjoyed by motorcyclists in Washington State and expand civil liberty protection to all protected classes with the right to be free from law enforcement profiling. SB 6624/HB 2950 is a testament to grassroots lobbying that is redefining the politics of the motorcycle rights movement for motorcycle club members everywhere.

http://www.russbrown.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/washington1.jpg

BABE OF THE DAY


Tuesday, February 23, 2016

BABE OF THE DAY



OFF THE WIRE


USA - 3rd Amendment No Longer Offers Protection Under the Police State



OFF THE WIRE
So much for not having to offer quarter to gov't enforcers..
Police The Police like emoticon
Source → http://bit.ly/24j8fbG

Judge Andrew Gordon handed down the decision in February in the case of a Nevada couple and their adult son, who claimed their 3rd Amendment protection against quartering “soldiers” had been violated by the Henderson (HPD) and North Las Vegas (NLVPD) Police Departments, both of which forcibly occupied the plaintiffs’ homes in order to gain a “tactical advantage” in an incident involving their neighbor.


Claire Bernish(The Pontiac Tribune) – A federal district court judge in Nevada made a ruling essentially nullifying protection under the 3rd Amendment, by stating the police do not qualify as “soldiers” under the law. The 3rd Amendment to the Constitution reads:
    “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”

Judge Andrew Gordon handed down the decision in February in the case of a Nevada couple and their adult son, who claimed their 3rd Amendment protection against quartering “soldiers” had been violated by the Henderson (HPD) and North Las Vegas (NLVPD) Police Departments, both of which forcibly occupied the plaintiffs’ homes in order to gain a “tactical advantage” in an incident involving their neighbor. Though the 3rd Amendment is often brought up in jest, this ruling has potentially serious implications with the recent militarization of police, and the rise in reports of their abuses of power. Perhaps because of the seemingly outdated nature of the amendment, this case has garnered very little attention, but its significance cannot be overlooked, particularly if viewed in the context of the successive erosion of Constitutional protections and civil rights.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 1997 marks the beginning of an obfuscation between police and military power in the US. Section 1033 of the act expanded on a program allowing law enforcement agencies (LEAs) to procure military equipment free of charge with federal funding, by adding ‘the prevention of terrorism’ as a reasonable justification for requests. The 1033 Program, as it’s come to be known, ostensibly laid the framework for what many view as a burgeoning police state. Though this program allows for the transfer of such items as bedding, digital cameras, and lawn care equipment, it also means local LEAs can procure tactical vehicles and weapons with significant military capabilities . . . without any mandates requiring accountability for their use. With alarming frequency, the same equipment used in military actions abroad is showing up in executing search warrants, otherwise peaceful protests, and even, in one case, at a pumpkin festival. The inclusion of the ambiguous threat of terrorism into this equipment and funding giveaway was explained best by a Keene, NH, city concilmember, who said in justification of the city’s procurement of a BearCat APC,

    “Our application talked about the danger of domestic terrorism, but that’s just something you put in the grant application to get the money. What red – blooded American cop isn’t going to be exited about getting a toy like this? That’s what it comes down to”.

This must beg the question of the chicken versus the egg: are the people so out – of – control that militarizing local police forces is the only answer? Or has this new military – minded and outfitted police force created a fearful and reactionary populace? Are police, in fact or in theory, now so thoroughly influenced by military culture that they could be considered ‘soldiers’? To examine the 3rd Amendment ruling thoroughly, this question is vital.

The use of this military equipment (i.e. how it is put to use by LEAs) has created a soldier – like mindset for police officers. In response to the 1033 Program and its lack of oversight, and with ever – increasing reports of abuse of police power, the ACLU studied the militarization of police in the use of SWAT (Statistical Weapons and Tactics) for a set period, from 2011 – 2012. What their report, War Comes Home: The Excessive Militarization of American Policing, found is startling, in part finding,

    “American policing has become unnecessarily and dangerously militarized . . . use of hyper – aggressive tools and tactics results in tragedy for civilians and police officers, escalates the risk of needless violence, destroys property, and undermines individual liberties”.

Overwhelmingly, SWAT teams are deployed in carrying out search warrants (most often for simple drug cases), 79% of the time according to the report, and violently so, using flash – bang grenades, battering rams, and screaming commands meant to stun and intimidate people into cooperation. The original purpose in the creation of SWAT was to deal with hostage situations, active shooter scenarios, and various major disasters; but this clearly is no longer the case, as according to the study’s statistics, these accounted for just 7% of all deployments. Utilizing hyper – aggressive tactics and military equipment for such searches, the raids were found to cause property damage, injury, and/or death, and cases where innocent parties suffered harm, or even death, were far from rare.

The deployment of SWAT teams to execute basic, criminal search warrants could be justified if a genuine threat to officers’ safety was present, but the ACLU study revealed this isn’t typically the case. Approximately half of all homes in America have at least one firearm, so police justification for using such violently aggressive tactics could theoretically make sense. But “of the incidents in which officers believed a weapon would be present, a weapon (typically a firearm such as a handgun but rarely an assault rifle) was actually found at the scene in only 35% of cases”, and if those households which do have weapons are likely to use them for defense, employing SWAT for searches simply increases the possibility for the situation to turn even more violent, putting everyone at risk. It simply isn’t logical, so only furthers the negative, militaristic, bullying image that police claim they want to avoid. Absent any regulations or standards governing how and when to employ SWAT, or any record – keeping thereof, paramilitary squads of police in armored personnel carriers (APCs) continue to be a regular fixture in everyday America.

Increasing the parallel between police and military, there has been a significant shift away from traditional police uniforms, “dress blues”, toward “battle dress uniforms” (BDUs), whose moniker belies the similarity to what would likely be found in one of many US military deployments overseas. The government’s official doctrine of policing is a community – based model, where instilling public trust through a mutual relationship with the communities they oversee is paramount, yet BDUs generally increase the feeling of separation between police and the public. At least one informal survey in 2009 by the Johns Hopkins University Public Safety Leadership Program, found public perception much more in favor of traditional uniforms, and that

    “The much more militaristic look of BDUs, much like what is seen in news stories of our military in war zones, gives rise to the notion of our police being an occupying force in some inner city neighborhoods, instead of trusted community protectors.”

Recruitment campaigns and training methods mirror those of the armed services, amplifying rather than downplaying the warrior image. Set to music one might find in an action flick, a recruitment video for the Newport Beach Police Dept depicts officers as the strong arm of the law, in one case employing a chokehold which, for all intents and purposes, looks like the one used by the NYPD in Eric Garner’s death. These videos, which are the norm rather than the exception, target those who are more likely to be attracted to the image of a militarized police force wielding its power against the perceived civilian ‘enemy’, and coupled with the opportunity to try out the high – tech, military ‘toys’, makes a job in policing irresistible. Once in training, the recruits overwhelmingly encounter stress – based, military boot camp style indoctrination, which focuses on paramilitary drills, rigorous physical regimens, intense discipline — both in comportment and punishment for infractions, and general inculcation into the notoriously insular police ‘brotherhood’, in itself reminiscent of military culture. The Dept of Justice’s own e – newsletter devoted to community – oriented policing, COPS, criticizes this most common training strategy as “antithetical to a community oriented policing philosophy that is grounded in trust building, partnering, and developing and sustaining positive relationships with citizen stakeholders”. The site also notes a scholarly study which found this training method results in “police practices contrary to democratic governance”. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck . . .

Perhaps nothing more sharply focused the public’s attention on the militarization of law enforcement than the police response to protest in Ferguson, Missouri. Images of BearCat vehicles and MRAPs driving down city streets, fronted by fully – armed police squads firing tear gas canisters at protesters and journalists alike, brought to the forefront of national debate the question: Has the line between the police and military been erased? Under the original spirit of the Posse Comitatus Act, the answer appears to be a resounding ‘yes’. The act reads:

    “Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

With relatively recent erosion of the law beginning with Pres Reagan employing the military in fighting the drug war, scholars and analysts remain at odds over the extent to which the Posse Comitatus line has been crossed, though there is general consent that a breach has occurred. Even court judgments in cases where excessive police force was used reflect the pervasive military mindset as even egregious overstepping of the law is excused for seemingly no other reason than . . . police state. New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio responded to Constitutionally protected protests over excessive force by police by, astonishingly, giving his police force machine guns to patrol the protests. His response, and the entire Ferguson morass, call into question the standing of the 1st Amendment protections for freedom of speech and assembly. Judgment in the case of Heien vs North Carolina, in which police ignorance of the law led to an arrest for drug possession and the Supreme Court’s decision to let the arrest stand, has essentially nullified our 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. And now the 3rd Amendment, one which had been seen as anachronistic, and certainly worthy of the brunt of jokes, has proven its modern – day worth, right at the moment of its negation.

The militarized police state has permeated the nation, and those who simply theorize about its reality, need only look around. Evidence doesn’t lie. Denying its existence, or excusing infringements on liberties and rights granted by the Constitution, in favor of perceived safety from nebulous threats like terrorism, will only enable its continued expansion. Unless we put our collective foot down, and demand reform, like an end to the 1033 Program and allowing PATRIOT Act provisions to expire, the government will continue to encroach on our private lives. One of the biggest mistakes people persistently make, is in thinking what happens to others couldn’t possibly happen to them. Keeping alert and informed is a veritable duty in a free society.

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” — Dr Martin Luther King, Jr

(Feat. Image: Associated Press)

SO CAL Hells Angels MC

OFF THE WIRE
Go to Hells Angels. Online for all your 81 support gear. Please be patient there's been a high volume of orders over the past few weeks. All orders go out the following Monday thank you for your support love and respect


USA - More Air Miles For Shark

OFF THE WIRE
There was another Iron Order Motorcycle Club involved shooting last night, at the gas pumps of the Kickapoo Convenience Store near Harrah, Oklahoma. Harrah is about 25 miles east of Oklahoma City. The pumps are about a hundred yards from the Kickapoo Casino Harrah.

Shootings involving the Iron Order are becoming increasingly frequent. Three weeks ago, an Iron Order member and Colorado prison guard named Derrick “Kong” Duran murdered one member of the Mongols Motorcycle Club and seriously wounded another at the climax of an altercation at the Colorado Motorcycle Exposition in Denver. Duran, of Longmont, Colorado, is the vice-president of the Firestone, Colorado chapter of the Iron Order. He has not been charged with any crime which is typical of Iron Order shootings.

The Iron Order, which includes numerous sworn peace officers, trains members to use deadly force against members of other motorcycle clubs. Police officers within the club coach other members about what to say to investigating police officers after these shootings. The club has its own “Division of Legal Affairs.” The “Director” of that “Division” is a small town accident lawyer named John C. “Shark” Whitfield. Whitfield flies to the scenes of these crimes, speaks on behalf of the gunmen, lobbies local police, and makes exculpatory statements to the local press. He is good at it. Iron Order members typically explain to police that they are a “law abiding motorcycle club” with many police members and portray themselves as victims. It works.
What Happened

According to both local sources and local news accounts, last night’s shooting involved three men.  Lincoln County Sheriff Charlie Dougherty told television station KWTV that all three men opened fire. One man, a member of the Oklahoma City based Rednecks Motorcycle Club, was shot in the leg. His injury is not life threatening.

According to a local source, as the Redneck passed “a group” of Iron Order riders on Oklahoma Route 62 one of those riders swerved out in front of the Redneck. The source believes that members of the Iron Order followed the Redneck to the gas pumps. According to Sheriff Dougherty, “A couple of them blocked off a guy and an altercation took place. And then from that point it became a gun battle.”

Aerial footage showed five motorcycles at the shooting scene. Two of the motorcycles were overturned.

The shooting is being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Oklahoma Highway Patrol, Lincoln and Pottawatomie County Sheriffs Deputies and Kickapoo Tribal Police.


Monday, February 22, 2016

BABE OF THE DAY


HOORAY – A 53-46 vote

OFF THE WIRE
The U.N. Resolution 2117 lists 21 points dealing with firearms control, but perhaps of most interest is point number 11:

“CALLS FOR MEMBER STATES TO SUPPORT WEAPONS COLLECTION and DISARMAMENT of all UN countries.”;


By a 53-46 vote - The U.S. Senate voted against the U.N. resolution.


This is that brief, glorious moment in history when everyone stands around...reloading.

Now, which 46 Senators voted to destroy us? Well, let their names become known!

See below. If you vote in one of the states listed with these 46 “legis..traitors”… vote against them.


 In a 53-46 vote, the Senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from entering into the United Nations
Arms Trade Treaty.



The Statement of Purpose from the Senate Bill reads:"To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty."
The U.N. Small Arms Treaty, which has been championed by the Obama Administration, would have effectively placed a global ban on the import and export of small firearms. The ban would have affected all private gun owners in the U.S. and had language that would
have implemented an international gun registry, now get this, on all private guns and ammo.

Astonishingly, 46 out of our 100 United States Senators were willing to give away our Constitutional rights to a foreign power.

Here are the 46 senators who voted to give your rights to the U.N.:
 Baldwin           (D-WI)
 Baucus            (D-MT)
 Bennett           (D-CO)
 Blumenthal    (D-CT)
 Boxer              (D-CA)
 Brown            (D-OH)
 Cantwell        (D-WA)
 Cardin            (D-MD)
 Carper           (D-DE)
Casey             (D-PA)
Coons            (D-DE)
Cowan            (D-MA)
Durbin            (D-IL)
Feinstein        (D-CA)
Franken          (D-MN)
Gillibrand       (D-NY)
Harkin             (D-IA)
Hirono             (D-HI)
Johnson          (D-SD)
Kaine               (D-VA)
King                 (I-ME)
Klobuchar       (D-MN)
Landrieu          (D-LA)
Leahy               (D-VT)
Levin                (D-MI)
McCaskill         (D-MO)
Menendez        (D-NJ)
Merkley            (D-OR)
Mikulski            (D-MD)
Murphy             (D-CT)
Murray              (D-WA)
Nelson              (D-FL)
Reed                 (D-RI)
Reid                  (D-NV)
Rockefeller      (D-WV)
Sanders           (I-VT)
Schatz              (D-HI)
Schumer          (D-NY)
Shaheen          (D-NH)
Stabenow        (D-MI)
Udall                (D-CO)
Udall                (D-NM)
Warner            (D-VA)
Warren            (D-MA)
Whitehouse    (D-RI)
Wyden             (D-OR)

Folks, this needs to go viral. These Senators voted to let the UN take OUR guns. They need to lose their next election. We have been betrayed.
46 Senators Voted to Give your 2nd Amendment Constitutional Rights to the U.N.
Please, Send this to  SOMEONE

-----------------------------------------

It's almost like the "D" after those names means "Dumbass."

Here are a few laws being voted on in the state where I will soon live:

Ignoring federal law: HB 2300 would prohibit state or local officials from enforcing any federal gun or ammunition law passed after the bill passes. Sponsor, Rep. Anthony Kern, R-Glendale.

Gun class tax credit: HB 2494 would establish a tax credit allowing an individual to recoup up to $80 spent on firearms training classes taken to meet the requirements for a concealed weapons permit. Sponsor, Rep. Steve Montenegro, R-Litchfield Park.

Guns near any school: HB 2338 would prohibit K-12 or university officials from passing rules banning someone from having a gun in a vehicle on a public right-of-way adjacent to that campus. Sponsor, Rep. Kelly Townsend, R-Mesa.
Guns on college campuses: House Bill 2072 would allow students and faculty at all public universities, colleges and community colleges to carry a concealed weapon on campus. The gun owners would need to get a concealed carry permit from the Department of Public Safety. Sponsor, Rep. Sonny Borrelli, R-Bullhead City.

None of these Pro-gun bills have been
introduced by anyone with a D after
their names.  
Just sayin'



Sunday, February 21, 2016

Saturday, February 20, 2016

Friday, February 19, 2016

Thursday, February 18, 2016

The man you're looking at is 2nd Lt. Billy Walkabout, a Cherokee of the Blue Holly Clan.



OFF THE WIRE
The man you're looking at is 2nd Lt. Billy Walkabout, a Cherokee of the Blue Holly Clan.
Walkabout served as an Army Ranger in Vietnam, in the Company F, 58th Infantry, 101st Airborne Division. Walkabout (then Specialist Four) distinguished himself on 20 November 1968 during a long range reconnaissance patrol southwest of Hue.
After successfully ambushing an enemy squad on a jungle trail, the friendly patrol radioed for immediate helicopter extraction. When the extraction helicopters arrived and the lead man began moving toward the pick-up zone, he was seriously wounded by hostile automatic weapons fire. Sergeant Walkabout quickly rose to his feet and delivered steady suppressive fire on the attackers while other team members pulled the wounded man back to their ranks. Sergeant Walkabout then administered first aid to the soldier in preparation for medical evacuation. As the man was being loaded onto the evacuation helicopter, enemy elements again attacked the team.
Maneuvering under heavy fire, Sergeant Walkabout positioned himself where the enemy were concentrating their assault and placed continuous rifle fire on the adversary. A command-detonated mine ripped through the friendly team, instantly killing three men and wounding all the others. Although stunned and wounded by the blast, Sergeant Walkabout rushed from man to man administering first aid, bandaging one soldier's severe chest wound and reviving another soldier by heart massage. He then coordinated gunship and tactical air strikes on the enemy's positions. When evacuation helicopters arrived again, he worked single-handedly under fire to board his disabled comrades. Only when the casualties had been evacuated and friendly reinforcements had arrived, did he allow himself to be extracted.
This is one of his many actions. His bravery earned him 1 Distinguished Service Cross, 5 Silver Stars, 10 Bronze Stars (5 with V Device) and 6 Purple hearts; making him one of the most decorated Native American soldier of the Vietnam War; retiring as a 2nd Lt.
He died in 2007 at the age of 57 due to Agent Orange.

BABE OF THE DAY

Wednesday, February 17, 2016

CA - Sacramento Bee journalist is now investigating the Safe Handgun Roster.

OFF THE WIRE
By
This article is true. If you walk into any medium to large gun store you will note a display that states LEO only. If you ask the clerk why many are LEO only, it will be because the gun is NOT on the California Gun Safe list. Which comes to the obvious conclusion, only LEO's can buy unsafe guns. Or it could be, as the article notes, extortion

Sacramento Bee journalist is now investigating the Safe Handgun Roster.
https://www.guntraband.com/…/…/14/the-sac-bee-investigating/

The-Sac-Bee-Investigating
Most of the customers we get at Wild Bills Trading Post in Elk Grove, California at are your stereotypical conservatives: people who believe in freedom, and want a firearm for home protection, conceal carry, or to hunt. We get all types of people, and most don’t know anything about California laws, most likely because the laws change so much. It’s tough to track the changes and remain in constant compliance. Some of the folks buying firearms in California have recently relocated here and they get mad when I show them stuff like the bullet button, which prevents from reloading a firearm without a tool, the magazine capacity size, which is limited to 10 rounds, and the Safe Handgun Roster, which is the most laughable because you can purchase, for instance, a Black Glock 27, but not a FDE (Field Dark Earth) Glock 27, with the exception of current law enforcement.

The only reason I can’t sell the FDE Glock 27 to the public is because it is not on the Safe Handgun Roster and the only reason why it is not on the Safe Handgun Roster is because California claims that the manufacturing process is different than the Black Glock 27.  In fact, no civilian can purchase any generation 4 Glocks.   For each style handgun that is sold in the State of California, the manufacturer must pay the state $25,000 to be put on the Safe Handgun Roster.  Did you get confused and think this was about safety? No, it’s about extortion.



The recent threats against America from ISIS and and other terrorist organizations, coupled with fear from our own tyrannical government, have prompted even some of the staunchest liberals to change their views on weapons. One such liberal was former Lt. Gov Cruz Bustamante, who was caught buying a new handgun from a gun shop in Elk Grove.  He personally introduced a bill that banned 90% of all handguns in California in the 1990s.

If you were to look at any article from the Sacramento Bee, you would see how one sided almost everything appears, from the Bullet Train, higher gas taxes, and loads of antigun propaganda. One thing the ill-informed Sacramento Bee has in it’s favor is a liberal employee who is no longer antigun, thanks to my masterful skills of persuasion.

He comes to our shop often, usually to get approval for advertising sales that we have on the Sac Bee. Most recently, he has expressed interest in buying a firearm for protection. He initially had some issues buying one, though I can’t cite the specifics without breaking a law according to HIPPA, but I will say California just made doing this legal, but still prevents you from purchasing a firearm. After getting past some of the legal obstacles, he finally bought a handgun for himself. The threat of ISIS here in America and the threats from our elected officials, according to him, what prompted his decision.

I woke up a sleeping giant, because now he wants another. He fell in love with his new handgun and wants an AR-15, which he first called an “assault weapon”. I quickly schooled him about the AR-15, explaining that is it actually a modern day sporting rifle and that a real assault weapon is select fire. We dont sell any of those type of firearms. He appreciated that.  A week after he picked up his new Glock, he purchased a Ruger 10/22 rifle with a folding stock and pistol grip, one of Rugers latest designs.  He also expressed interest in owning a revolver as well.

This employee at the Sac Bee is also investigating the Safe Handgun Roster as we speak. He has contacted Governor Jerry Browns office and is waiting for a sit down interview with him, in which I hope to go to and help out.  I showed the Sac Bee employee the two different Glock 27s we have, one FDE (Field Dark Earth) and one Black. Believe it or not, color makes a difference in California and because politicians are so smart, they claim that it changes the manufacturing process and that Glock needs to pay the state $25,000 to be sold in California. This roster is renewed every year, so some gun companies have just quit paying California’s extortion fee to be sold in this state. The “Safety Roster” is a farce and I’m glad the Sac Bee is finally investigating this matter.

It’s amazing the lengths it requires to finally get some people to realize that times are different, scary even, and that the best way to protect yourself is not by calling the police, hoping to God that they show up on time, but to arm and protect yourself. Even cops in most of the state of California agree, and I’m glad we helped this soon to be conservative along the way to freedom and personal protection.

BABE OF THE DAY

Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Monday, February 15, 2016

Outlaw Motorcycle Clubs-A Government Lie Exposed


5641886-1x1-700x700

OFF THE WIRE

“In fact, more police officers are charged and convicted of felonies every year than members of outlaw motorcycle clubs. And members of outlaw motorcycle clubs have been heavily involved in the grassroots rights movement concerning civil liberties ranging from helmet choice to profiling”. (Source. Custom Dimension )
The source article got many things about Outlaw Motorcycle Clubs right. Let’s dive a little deeper into the matter. Outlaw Motorcycle Clubs were branded by Law Enforcement as “Outlaw Clubs or OMG’s”. It wasn’t the clubs themselves that put this brand on their club but Law Enforcement. Why did they brand the clubs as OMGs? It’s simple . Clubs and the people inside them didn’t sit there and kiss the cops asses. They stood up to what society said the way people should act. Lets face it. After Vietnam the country turned on the returning vets. They would spit on them returning from Nam. Your dam right these brothers would turn their back on society. They had every right too. Here are veterans returning from war (Most Drafted) the hippies and self loathing liberals treated them like dog shit. So yes they bonded together into clubs to find the brotherhood they had overseas.
Some of the clubs that are branded OMG have been around since WW2 and before. Some of the biggest ones have had hundreds if not thousands wear the club patch. Yes there is going to be some that live in the criminal underground. Does this mean the whole club is a criminal organization as local and federal cops say? The government of the United States has had Senators,Congressman and even a President commit illegal acts. Does that make the United States Senate a criminal conspiracy?
LlRAdUd
Why has Outlaw Clubs came into the public eye? Well Kurt Sutter and the Sons of Anarchy. Since that show first came out, you can bet that those who never rode before ran out and got a bike. After they got a bike they ran out with their friends and bought some patches. They started themselves a club and started going out raising hell like they seen on tv. Problem with that is the club scene was never anywhere near what that dam show tried to project. It was a Hollywood show you dam morons. To think that club life is like that you have to be some kind of fool.
So what about all the fighting and gun battles between clubs? Well in the last 10 years or so their has only been 2 major tussles. Those were directly related to a Pig club Iron Order M/C. This is a club that was started by an ex secret service agent. The club is full of cops. Yea it has veterans in it and regular mojos but the point is the clubs is full of cops. This club has gone around starting shit because these cops think they can do what they want because they are cops. If you ever truly noticed every newspaper article on the Denver Shooting these punk Iron Order were right there talking to their police buddies after the incident. No Handcuffs or ties. This is the problem the lifestyle is now facing. Cop Clubs and not Outlaw Clubs. Outlaw Clubs always kept a low profile, they never went out looking for shit to get into. These cop clubs on the other hand are always in the middle.
Who is really the threat? I have to say if your a cop and running around playing Outlaw Biker you are. You as a cop are suppose to know your place in society. Shit just recently alot of Police Departments are banning officers from clubs because even they know this crap isn’t right. You can’t go around branding other clubs as Outlaw Clubs when you are in fact perpetrating that image with your cop club. I often wonder when a RICO case will hit the Iron Order or Punishers M/C. It is after all that if a member is doing something against the law, then the whole club should be held accountable. Isn’t that what the Feds try pushing on some of the bigger clubs now?
Law-abiding-machine-gun1
I wonder where ATF is in Kentucky? Now if this picture above was on any one else patch you can bet your ass a RICO investigation would be going on. The rise of Cop Clubs should give every biker and citizen a pause. Since when was it alright for government officials or local PD to play both sides of the fence? In the old days a person knew where they stood. Reports come in all the time about these cop clubs started fights and injuring people in bars and rallies. Is anything ever done to them? No. The recent Denver altercation was a drunk corrections officer who fired his gun in a stadium full of people. Where is the outrage? Where is the investigation at? 2016-02-01_14-09-48
As of today’s date no charges have been filed against this person. Not one Mongol pictured above had any weapons out. The cops attorney was claiming self defense? These cops around the country are wondering why the citizens are starting to turn on them. It’s not only in the biker world stuff like this is happening. How many people have been killed because of these cops and the god like mindset they carry around. Now cops are allowed to be Judge and Jury. Your rights have been thrown out the door.
The biggest reason why the government goes after clubs is because of money. Each and every time someone gets arrested it is a free ticket for the cops to confiscate their property. We have seen it not only on a personal level but the club as a whole. Clubhouses, vests, bikes sold at auctions. Think about it. How many millions do they make in these kinds of operations? They have under covers go into a club and most of the time actually instigate the criminal behavior. Their under covers are the ones who start the criminal activity and the clubs are dragged into it. It really don’t take a genius to figure out what the government is up too.
It’s time we as bikers take a stand and say we no longer accept this kind of behavior from police officials. Bikers Lives Matter dammit. Time to tell these cops that hard working men and even some cases women have the right under the constitution to associate with whomever they choose. It isn’t illegal or make you a criminal to belong to a club. It’s not illegal to enjoy and be apart of a brotherhood. A biker should not have to worry about attending an event because some cop club is going to go wild west where thousands of people are at. Pass the word, Share this post and let it be known we won’t stand for it any longer.
Dont forget to follow the Twisted Throttle at https://twistedthrottletattoo.wordpress.com/ for News in the Biker World and the Sexy Pin Up of the Day
Visit us on Twitter @Topfuelabd or https://www.facebook.com/twistedthrottlelifestyle

BABE OFTHE WEEK- Ashland Jean

OFF THE WIRE

Ashland Jean

I'm a 20 year old, audacious, spontaneous, independent young newbie model looking to make a name for herself. Thick and curvy and on my way! I'm the proud mother of a 3 year old pit bull pup who my sidekick. I'm currently enrolled in cosmetology school and love everything to do with fashion and marketing. You can always find me at the salon but I don't mind working in the shop. Through my modeling I hope to inspire people that stereotypes shouldn't determine your course in life, and that you can do anything you set your mind to. I have a lot of room to grow but I'm very excited for what the future holds for me.







Ashland Jean

I'm a 20 year old, audacious, spontaneous, independent young newbie model looking to make a name for herself. Thick and curvy and on my way! I'm the proud mother of a 3 year old pit bull pup who my sidekick. I'm currently enrolled in cosmetology school and love everything to do with fashion and marketing. You can always find me at the salon but I don't mind working in the shop. Through my modeling I hope to inspire people that stereotypes shouldn't determine your course in life, and that you can do anything you set your mind to. I have a lot of room to grow but I'm very excited for what the future holds for me.

BABE OF THE DAY

OFF THE WIRE

Sunday, February 14, 2016

Saturday, February 13, 2016

Waco Judge Orders Feds To Fess Up

OFF THE WIRE
agingrebel.com
The Twin Peaks Massacre case just got a lot more focused.

Ruling from the bench, District Judge Matt Johnson ordered the state of Texas “to reveal the identity of confidential informants and undercover law enforcement officials who were either present at Twin Peaks restaurant in Waco, Texas on May 17, 2015 or who were material witnesses related to the incident that took place.”

The order includes the discovery of the identities “of confidential informants used in connection with ‘Operation Texas Rocker’ that were present at or who had material information regarding the Twin Peaks incident.” The information should be turned over to Dallas defense attorney Clint Broden.
Texas Rocker

Operation Texas Rocker, announced on January 6, was a “joint investigation by the DEA, the FBI, the Texas Department of Public Safety and the U.S. Attorney’s Office” that accused three national officers of the Bandidos Motorcycle Club of declaring they were “at war” with the Cossacks Motorcycle Club. The point of the “war,” according to the indictment, was to get “‘that Texas rocker back,’ referencing the ‘Texas’ bottom rocker worn by Cossacks OMO members without Bandidos OMO permission.” The federal racketeering indictment of Jeffrey Fay Pike, John Xavier Portillo and Justin Cole Forster describes the two clubs as the “Bandidos Outlaw Motorcycle Organization” and the “Cossacks Outlaw Motorcycle Organization.”

The indictment accuses the “Bandidos OMO,” of “Preserving, protecting and enhancing the power, territory, reputation and profits of the enterprise through the use of intimidation, violence, threats of violence, assaults, murder, attempted murder and robbery against rival motorcycle organizations.” The indictment glaringly omits any mention of the spectacularly violent brawl involving Cossacks, Bandidos and members of 21 other motorcycle clubs at the Twin Peaks restaurant in Waco last May.

Broden represents Scimitar Motorcycle Club member Matt Clendennen who was arrested, indicted and must now defend himself against the accusation that he conspired to kill and assault the nine dead and score of wounded who were victims of the Twin Peaks Massacre. One hundred and six people have been indicted in the case.
Any Witness

Broden’s discovery motion, granted by Judge Johnson today, seeks to discover the identity of :

“Any witness, whether present at Twin Peaks on May 17, 2015 or not, who might testify that law enforcement officials encouraged the violence at Twin Peaks in order to support its ‘Operation Texas Rocker.’”

“Any witness, whether present at Twin Peaks on May 17, 2015 or not, who could testify that not all members of the Cossacks Motorcycle Club or its support clubs were told that the Bandidos Motorcycle Club would be present at Twin Peaks on May 17,2015.”

“Any witness, whether present at Twin Peaks on May 17, 2015 or not, who could testify that one or more members of the Cossacks Motorcycle Club or its support clubs were told that the May 17,2015 (event) was a ‘peace offering’ meeting.”

“Any witness, whether present at Twin Peaks on May 17, 2015 or not, who could testify that one or more members of the Cossack Motorcycle Club or its support clubs were told that the May 17, 2015 was merely a ‘Funday Sunday’ outing.”

The motion granted today stipulates “that the above requests relate to any informants known to the ‘prosecutorial team”’or to whom the ‘prosecutorial team’ had access.”

That “‘prosecutorial team’ includes, but may not be limited to: McLennan County District Attorney’s Office; McLennan County Sheriff’s Department; Waco Police Department; Lorena Police Department; Texas Department of Public Safety; Texas Alcohol & Beverage Commission; Texas Parks & Wildlife Department; United States Drug Enforcement Agency; Federal Bureau of Investigation” and the “United States Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Texas.”

In the same session today, Judge Johnson postponed Clendennen’s trial, which had been scheduled to begin on February 29, and scheduled a hearing for April 1 that will determine whether Clendennen can get a fair trial in Waco or if his trial must be relocated.

Broden, who has been restrained by Judge Johnson from discussing the case with the press, declined to comment on today’s rulings.


BABE OF THE DAY

OFF THE WIRE


Friday, February 12, 2016

USA - Feds: No link between pot and car crashes



OFF THE WIRE
By Jesse Byrnes
"Studying car accidents in Virginia Beach, Va., during a 20-month period ending in 2012, researchers randomly sampled 3,000 accident-involved drivers and found no evidence suggesting those with marijuana in their system were more prone to accidents, according to a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report released Friday."

Marijuana use has not been found to increase the risk of car crashes, according to a new federal report.
Studying car accidents in Virginia Beach, Va., during a 20-month period ending in 2012, researchers randomly sampled 3,000 accident-involved drivers and found no evidence suggesting those with marijuana in their system were more prone to accidents, according to a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report released Friday.
When researchers controlled for factors such as age and gender, they found no evidence marijuana use increases accident risks. This was despite the fact that, in the study, drivers who tested positive for marijuana use happened to be involved in more accidents.
By comparison, the study found drivers with breath alcohol of .08 to be about four times more likely than sober drivers to be involved in accidents. Those nearly double the legal limit, at .15, were 12 times more likely to crash.
The study is billed as the largest ever conducted to assess the relative crash risk of drivers who consume alcohol compared to pot.
Officials contend more research must be conducted in the wake of recreational pot legalization in Colorado, Oregon, Alaska and Washington state.
“Drivers should never get behind the wheel impaired, and we know that marijuana impairs judgment, reaction times and awareness,” NHTSA associate administrator for research and program development Jeff Michael said in a statement.
“These findings highlight the importance of research to better understand how marijuana use affects drivers so states and communities can craft the best safety policies," Michael added.
Correlation between pot use and crashes is of considerable interest as fewer people drive under the influence of alcohol and more drive under the influence of marijuana, according to another study released Friday by the NHTSA.
That study found that the number of nighttime weekend drivers with marijuana in their system grew by 48 percent, from 8.6 percent in 2007 to 12.6 percent in 2013-2014. During the same period, the number of drivers with alcohol in their system dropped nearly a third.

CA Gun Law Stupidity Knows No Bounds

OFF THE WIRE
CA-Safe
As a gun enthusiast living in California, I can tell you that the gun laws in this state make no sense.  As a cop who works in California, I will tell you that the gun laws make absolutely no sense.  I can think of nothing that better exemplifies the baffling stupidity of California gun laws than a situation that just reared its head a few weeks ago, and continues to remain in SNAFU status.
Background
First, a little background is necessary to understand just how insanely stupid this situation is.
Years ago, (effective January 1, 2001) California legislators enacted PC 12131 which established the “Safe Handgun Roster.”  The stated justification behind this law was to get all those “unsafe Saturday night specials” off the streets, you know, because the guns were rampantly killing all sorts of people all on their own.  Now, in order for licensed gun dealers to sell new handguns in this state, the gun would now need to be on an official list maintained by the California Department of Justice (DOJ), and that list is known as the “Safe Handgun Roster.”  Since it is relevant to this article, please note that this law specifically exempts Law Enforcement.
In order for a gun to be on the list as a “safe” handgun, the manufacturer has to submit every model they want to sell in California to the state for drop safety testing.  Since this is California, and the state wants to make it difficult for guns to be sold here (only logical explanation for this process), and it can’t hurt to make a little money in the process, in addition to submitting the actual guns for testing, there are fees associated with submitting the guns.  Not only are those fees due at the time of testing, but the guns somehow magically become unsafe after 1 year and the manufacturers have to pay a renewal fee to keep the guns on the list.
By the way, “every model” is interpreted by California to include different calibers, different frame sizes, barrel lengths and even color changes.  Every model that has a different part number, no matter what the reason, needs to be submitted.  You know, because the trigger mechanism between a Gen 3 Glock 17 in FDE is different from a Gen 3 Glock 17 in black which is different from a Gen 3 Glock 23 in OD….  (just in case you don’t know, they all have the exact same trigger mechanism)
An excellent analysis of the “Safe Handgun” law can be found here, but it was written in 2009, and prior to the implementation of what I discuss in the next paragraph.
Then in 2007, as another barrier to gun manufacturers, which was fictitiously sold to the public as way to aid law enforcement in solving crimes, legislators passed AB 1471 which mandated that all semi-automatic pistols must employ microstamping technology.  Since it is relevant to this article, please note that this new law also specifically exempts Law Enforcement.  At the time the law was passed, the technology did not even exist, so it was put on hold until it could be developed.  On May 17, 2013, California Attorney General Kamala Harris announced that microstamping had passed all legal and technical hurdles, and effective immediately, any new semi-auto pistols to be sold in the state would now have to employ microstamping technology.  With this new requirement being essential to get new models added to the “Safe Handgun Roster,” the hurdles for gun manufacturers to get new guns added to the list became economically unfeasible.
Current Situation
California, just like many other states, has varying levels of law enforcement and a large number of agencies at both state and local levels.   The California Penal Code defines all the various levels of law enforcement in sections 830.1830.2 and 830.3.  Most of the state level agencies have specializations in which they generally deal.  The California Alcoholic Beverage Control agency (ABC) is an agency that not only deals with licensing issues of both retailers and manufacturers, but they also conduct undercover buy operations in an attempt to close down businesses illegally selling alcohol to minors.  They are covered under CA PC 830.2, the same section that covers the CA Highway Patrol.  While they are not out handling calls for service like police officers, CHP and deputies do, they are indeed doing law enforcement work.  I do not think anyone would try to argue they are not law enforcement officers.
Well, the ABC recently updated their issue weapon to Gen 4 Glock 19’s.  Some of their agents wanted to purchase smaller guns, such as the Glock 26 and 43, for backup use.  The dealership they ordered them through was later contacted by the California DOJ and told that they can no longer sell Gen 4 Glocks to the ABC or their employees because the Gen 4 Glock is not on the “Safe Handgun Roster.”  Both the gun store and the ABC were stumped so they asked for clarification.
In response, the DOJ emailed the gun store the following memo.  Yes, the PDF file the DOJ sent was actually a horribly scanned copy of a photocopy of a printed out version of the memo.  Very professional I must say…
Memo
The pertinent portion of that memo, at least as far as this article is concerned, is the first section which the DOJ themselves titled “NON-ROSTER HANDGUNS (UNSAFE HANDGUNS).”
There are a great number of law enforcement agencies missing from that list, notably all probation departments, all park ranger departments (both local and state), and as far as this current situation concerns, the ABC is also not mentioned even though they are covered under the same penal code section as the CHP.
The DOJ has been contacted by the ABC and thus far, the DOJ is not budging.  Prior to this attempted purchase, the DOJ and all dealers were working off an exemption the DOJ had granted to cover all law enforcement agencies, but now some bureaucrat somewhere has decided that exemption is no longer valid.
Issues
This situation brings up a number of issues that as a gun owner, a cop, and a halfway rational human being, all completely stump me.
1) If these guns are “UNSAFE HANDGUNS” like the DOJ seems to think they are, why on earth would any person in their right mind choose to carry them, let alone the heads of many law enforcement agencies, up to and including their tactical teams?
2) As many non-cop gun owners will likely point out, why are these guns okay for cops to carry by not okay for private citizens?
3) Why is the DOJ picking and choosing which law enforcement agencies can purchase off list guns?  If up until now, all agencies were exempt, what suddenly changed to make only certain agencies are now?

Getting beyond the insanely stupid concept that the CA DOJ is currently preventing the CA ABC from purchasing guns for their cops, the whole entire issue of the “Safe Handgun List” is so ridiculously flawed, the whole damn thing should be thrown out.  From a strictly logical standpoint, there is no possible way to justify it.  But, since when do gun laws stem from logic?

Would You Try Marijuana Gum For Chronic Pain?

OFF THE WIRE
If upcoming study results are positive, people with multiple sclerosis may have a marijuana gum available for treatment of symptoms by 2017. The gum is made by AXIM Biotechnology, Inc. and is called MedChew Rx.
The marijuana gum has been tested for treatment of pain andspasticity in multiple sclerosis, and the company expects the Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency to approve the product for this use. MedChew Rx contains 5 mg of cannabidiol (CBD) and 5 mg of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and will be available by prescription.
Cannabidiol is one of more than 100 cannabinoid chemicals found in marijuana plants. It does not make people high and has been shown to possess multiple health benefits, including an ability to treat seizures and other neurological conditions. THC, another type of cannabinoid, has psychoactive properties as well as medicinal abilities.
How marijuana gum works
According to Dr. George E. Anastassoy, MD, DDS, MBA, chief executive officer of AXIM Biotechnology, the marijuana gum is unique because of its “precise, controlled release mechanism to the oral mucosal capillary circulation,” which means it bypasses the liver. Obtaining the marijuana components via chewing also is safer, associated with fewer side effects, and more socially acceptable than traditional methods, such as smoking or oral consumption, according to Professor John Zajicek, an expert on medical cannabis and the individual responsible for conducting AXIM’s clinical trials on pain and spasticity in multiple sclerosis.
Zajicek noted in a company statement that “Chewing gum is a potentially good route as it would avoid respiratory irritations” that some people experience when smoking and that “it will deliver a prolonged dose without peaking too much.”
The gum also provides “neuroprotective and neurostimulatory benefits” derived from chewing, an activity which itself has a therapeutic impact. In fact, research has shown that chewing (mastication) promotes generation of neurons (neurogenesis), stimulates the cardiovascular system, and enhances oral health, as well as helps with stress reduction and loss of cognition associated with aging.
By: Deborah Mitchell

USA - DMV to Conduct Background Checks Before Issuing Licenses


DMV_logo,_De_Meijerij_Veghel

OFF THE WIRE
Beginning on February 8, DMVs across the nation will conduct background checks before issuing driver licenses to applicants. The decision comes amidst numerous online complaints that it’s too easy to obtain a license and that some people who are given licenses should be vetted more comprehensively.
“Cars are dangerous weapons,” a DMV spokesperson said in a recent interview. “We can’t just hand driver licenses out willy-nilly. If a collision occurs, at even just 10 miles per hour, it can do serious damage. We need to make sure these licenses are going into the hands of safe, responsible people, and our previous efforts were not accomplishing that.”

The head of the DMV in Washington, D.C. confirmed, “We evaluated our current processes and found we weren’t doing nearly enough. Right now, people just come in and leave with a license to drive– we can’t let that happen anymore. So, we decided to take action. We met with several government consultants who developed our initiative for change
.”

With a sigh, he continued. “I can’t believe we were so lenient on giving people access to such weapons. They’re so dangerous, and we just had no oversight. None. Thank goodness we will be able to rectify this situation.”