The Prometheus League
Breaking News and Updates
- Abolition Of Work
- Ai
- Alt-right
- Alternative Medicine
- Antifa
- Artificial General Intelligence
- Artificial Intelligence
- Artificial Super Intelligence
- Ascension
- Astronomy
- Atheism
- Atheist
- Atlas Shrugged
- Automation
- Ayn Rand
- Bahamas
- Bankruptcy
- Basic Income Guarantee
- Big Tech
- Bitcoin
- Black Lives Matter
- Blackjack
- Boca Chica Texas
- Brexit
- Caribbean
- Casino
- Casino Affiliate
- Cbd Oil
- Censorship
- Cf
- Chess Engines
- Childfree
- Cloning
- Cloud Computing
- Conscious Evolution
- Corona Virus
- Cosmic Heaven
- Covid-19
- Cryonics
- Cryptocurrency
- Cyberpunk
- Darwinism
- Democrat
- Designer Babies
- DNA
- Donald Trump
- Eczema
- Elon Musk
- Entheogens
- Ethical Egoism
- Eugenic Concepts
- Eugenics
- Euthanasia
- Evolution
- Extropian
- Extropianism
- Extropy
- Fake News
- Federalism
- Federalist
- Fifth Amendment
- Fifth Amendment
- Financial Independence
- First Amendment
- Fiscal Freedom
- Food Supplements
- Fourth Amendment
- Fourth Amendment
- Free Speech
- Freedom
- Freedom of Speech
- Futurism
- Futurist
- Gambling
- Gene Medicine
- Genetic Engineering
- Genome
- Germ Warfare
- Golden Rule
- Government Oppression
- Hedonism
- High Seas
- History
- Hubble Telescope
- Human Genetic Engineering
- Human Genetics
- Human Immortality
- Human Longevity
- Illuminati
- Immortality
- Immortality Medicine
- Intentional Communities
- Jacinda Ardern
- Jitsi
- Jordan Peterson
- Las Vegas
- Liberal
- Libertarian
- Libertarianism
- Liberty
- Life Extension
- Macau
- Marie Byrd Land
- Mars
- Mars Colonization
- Mars Colony
- Memetics
- Micronations
- Mind Uploading
- Minerva Reefs
- Modern Satanism
- Moon Colonization
- Nanotech
- National Vanguard
- NATO
- Neo-eugenics
- Neurohacking
- Neurotechnology
- New Utopia
- New Zealand
- Nihilism
- Nootropics
- NSA
- Oceania
- Offshore
- Olympics
- Online Casino
- Online Gambling
- Pantheism
- Personal Empowerment
- Poker
- Political Correctness
- Politically Incorrect
- Polygamy
- Populism
- Post Human
- Post Humanism
- Posthuman
- Posthumanism
- Private Islands
- Progress
- Proud Boys
- Psoriasis
- Psychedelics
- Putin
- Quantum Computing
- Quantum Physics
- Rationalism
- Republican
- Resource Based Economy
- Robotics
- Rockall
- Ron Paul
- Roulette
- Russia
- Sealand
- Seasteading
- Second Amendment
- Second Amendment
- Seychelles
- Singularitarianism
- Singularity
- Socio-economic Collapse
- Space Exploration
- Space Station
- Space Travel
- Spacex
- Sports Betting
- Sportsbook
- Superintelligence
- Survivalism
- Talmud
- Technology
- Teilhard De Charden
- Terraforming Mars
- The Singularity
- Tms
- Tor Browser
- Trance
- Transhuman
- Transhuman News
- Transhumanism
- Transhumanist
- Transtopian
- Transtopianism
- Ukraine
- Uncategorized
- Vaping
- Victimless Crimes
- Virtual Reality
- Wage Slavery
- War On Drugs
- Waveland
- Ww3
- Yahoo
- Zeitgeist Movement
-
Prometheism
-
Forbidden Fruit
-
The Evolutionary Perspective
Daily Archives: March 10, 2015
Appeals court to hear sailor's case that pits military rules against 5th Amendment
Posted: March 10, 2015 at 3:50 am
WASHINGTON (Tribune News Service) Seaman Nancy L. Castillo was already in hot water with the Navy when she was busted near Bremerton, Wash., for suspected drunken driving.
What didnt happen next has now brought Castillos case all the way from Washingtons Kitsap County to the nations highest military court.
On Wednesday, in a dispute potentially important to myriad servicemembers, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces will consider whether the Navy can require sailors to self-report civilian criminal charges, despite the Fifth Amendments protection against self-incrimination.
The self-reporting requirement provides a real and appreciable danger of legal detriment, Castillos defense attorney, Navy Lt. Carrie E. Theis, argued in a brief, adding that it is reasonable for a service member to believe that disclosing would lead to incriminating evidence.
Theis, who declined to comment Tuesday, has some support for her argument, although in the end she may be going against the tide in a court respectful of military discipline.
In a 2009 case also involving an unreported drunken driving charge filed against an East Coast-based Navy enlisted man, a divided U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals concluded a self-reporting requirement covering alcohol arrests violated the Fifth Amendment.
The Navy-Marine Corps court noted that a self-reporting rule demands the revelation, directly or indirectly, of facts relating a service member to an offense. The higher-ranked U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces also struck down the rule concerning alcohol offenses, although not on constitutional grounds.
The appellate court could also on Wednesday try to resolve Castillos case without digging deep into the Fifth Amendment.
Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, a former governor of Mississippi, issued new regulations in July 2010. Sailors must now report the basic civilian charges, but not all the factual details. For doing so, they receive Navy immunity unless military investigators independently obtain evidence.
Arrest records are not covered by the Fifth Amendment privilege, Marine Corps Capt. Matthew H. Harris wrote in a brief for the Navy, adding that the fact that (Castillo) was arrested and charged, by itself, could never form the basis for prosecution against her.
Excerpt from:
Appeals court to hear sailor's case that pits military rules against 5th Amendment
Posted in Fifth Amendment
Comments Off on Appeals court to hear sailor's case that pits military rules against 5th Amendment
Former sailor fights Navy rules on civilian offenses
Posted: at 3:50 am
WASHINGTON Machinists Mate Fireman Nancy L. Castillo was already in hot water with the Navy when she was busted near Bremerton, Wash., for suspected drunken driving.
What didnt happen next has now brought Castillos case all the way from Washingtons Kitsap County to the nations highest military court.
On Wednesday, in a dispute potentially important to myriad service members, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces will consider whether the Navy can require sailors to self-report civilian criminal charges, despite the Fifth Amendments protection against self-incrimination.
The self-reporting requirement . . . provides a real and appreciable danger of legal detriment, Castillos defense attorney, Navy Lt. Carrie E. Theis, argued in a brief, adding that it is reasonable for a service-member to believe that disclosing would lead to incriminating evidence.
Theis, who declined to comment Tuesday, has some support for her argument, although in the end she may be going against the tide in a court respectful of military discipline.
In a 2009 case also involving an unreported drunken driving charge filed against an East Coast-based Navy enlisted man, a divided U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals concluded a self-reporting requirement covering alcohol arrests violated the Fifth Amendment.
The Navy-Marine Corps court noted that a self-reporting rule demands the revelation, directly or indirectly, of facts relating a service member to an offense. The higher-ranked U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces also struck down the rule concerning alcohol offenses, although not on constitutional grounds.
The appellate court could also on Wednesday try to resolve Castillos case without digging deep into the Fifth Amendment.
Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, a former governor of Mississippi, issued new regulations in July 2010. Sailors must now report the basic civilian charges, but not all the factual details. For doing so, they receive Navy immunity unless military investigators independently obtain evidence.
Arrest records are not covered by the Fifth Amendment privilege, Marine Corps Capt. Matthew H. Harris wrote in a brief for the Navy, adding that the fact that (Castillo) was arrested and charged, by itself, could never form the basis for prosecution against her.
The rest is here:
Former sailor fights Navy rules on civilian offenses
Posted in Fifth Amendment
Comments Off on Former sailor fights Navy rules on civilian offenses
Criminal Procedure tutorial: Limitations on the Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule | quimbee.com – Video
Posted: at 3:49 am
Criminal Procedure tutorial: Limitations on the Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule | quimbee.com
A brief excerpt from Quimbee #39;s tutorial video on the important exceptions to the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule, including standing, use in criminal tria...
By: Quimbee.com
Posted in Fourth Amendment
Comments Off on Criminal Procedure tutorial: Limitations on the Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule | quimbee.com – Video
Drew Clark: Threats to cloud computing require a solution from the 18th century
Posted: at 3:49 am
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution articulates the right of Americans sources of private informational documents to be secure "against unreasonable searches and seizures." We need this principle to address threats to cloud computing.
Alena Root, Thinkstock
Enlarge photo
SALT LAKE CITY As a medium of expression that blossomed in popular consciousness in the late 1990s, the Internet is beginning to reach its adolescent years.
We've evolved from static Web pages to social networking to "cloud computing," which means that personal documents aren't stored on our computers and smartphones but on servers throughout the world.
And yet citizens' security in their digital possessions has never been more threatened. Fortunately, there are two bills one co-sponsored by Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, the other co-sponsored by Utah Sen. Mike Lee that go a long way to restoring constitutional protections for Internet information.
It's important at the outset to dispense the shibboleth that the Internet changes everything. What the Internet needs is a strong dose of 18th century legal wisdom, not words about "freedom of expression in the 21st century," to quote the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission during last Thursday's vote by the agency on network neutrality.
The Constitution says that we have the right to be secure in our "persons, houses, papers and effects." We have the right to speak free from regulation by the government. There are some who say that the Internet has rewritten the laws of supply and demand, or changed common decency and morality, or altered the possibility of being free from police surveillance. They are mistaken.
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution articulates the right of Americans sources of private informational documents to be secure "against unreasonable searches and seizures." This doesn't prevent the government or the police from obtaining information upon probable cause or reasonable suspicion; it simply bars the issuance of general warrants.
On Feb. 4, a bipartisan group of senators and representatives introduced the Electronic Communications Privacy Amendments Act of 2015. The bill we are introducing today protects Americans digital privacy in their emails, and all the other files and photographs they store in the cloud," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, who has long been seeking to update this law that first passed in 1986.
The rest is here:
Drew Clark: Threats to cloud computing require a solution from the 18th century
Posted in Fourth Amendment
Comments Off on Drew Clark: Threats to cloud computing require a solution from the 18th century
DOJ report says Ferguson PD routinely violated rights of African-Americans
Posted: at 3:49 am
The Ferguson Police Department routinely violated the constitutional rights of the local African-American population in the Missouri city for years, the Department of Justice has found in a searing report.
The investigation, launched after the August shooting of Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager, found that the department violated the Fourth Amendment in instances such as making traffic stops without reasonable suspicion and making arrests without probable cause.
The report provides direct evidence of racial bias among police officers and court workers, and details a criminal justice system that through the issuance of petty citations for infractions such as walking in the middle of the street, prioritizes generating revenue from fines over public safety.
The practice hits poor people especially hard, sometimes leading to jail time when they can't pay, the report says, and has contributed to a cynicism about the police on the part of citizens.
The official release of the report could come as early as Wednesday. The details were provided to Fox News on Tuesday by law enforcement officials familiar with the department's findings.
The Justice Department alleges that the discrimination was triggered at least partly by racial bias and stereotypes about African-Americans, a violation of the 14th Amendment. The report details a November 2008 email on an official Ferguson municipal account which joked that President Obama would not be president for long because what black man holds a steady job for four years?
From 2012 to 2014, the report found, African-Americans comprised 85 percent of people pulled over for a traffic stop; 90 percent of those given citations; and 93 percent of arrests.
Also, African-American drivers were more than twice as likely to be searched during a traffic stop than white drivers, but that those black drivers were 26 percent less likely to be found to be holding contraband.
The report also accuses the Ferguson police of using unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and that 88 percent of those cases involved African-Americans.
Overall, blacks make up 67 percent of Ferguson's population.
Read more from the original source:
DOJ report says Ferguson PD routinely violated rights of African-Americans
Posted in Fourth Amendment
Comments Off on DOJ report says Ferguson PD routinely violated rights of African-Americans
Officials: DOJ report finds racial bias in Ferguson police
Posted: at 3:49 am
The Ferguson Police Department routinely violated the constitutional rights of the local African-American population in the Missouri city for years, the Department of Justice has found in a searing report.
The investigation, launched after the August shooting of Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager, found that the department violated the Fourth Amendment in instances such as making traffic stops without reasonable suspicion and making arrests without probable cause.
The report provides direct evidence of racial bias among police officers and court workers, and details a criminal justice system that through the issuance of petty citations for infractions such as walking in the middle of the street, prioritizes generating revenue from fines over public safety.
The practice hits poor people especially hard, sometimes leading to jail time when they can't pay, the report says, and has contributed to a cynicism about the police on the part of citizens.
The official release of the report could come as early as Wednesday. The details were provided to Fox News on Tuesday by law enforcement officials familiar with the department's findings.
The Justice Department alleges that the discrimination was triggered at least partly by racial bias and stereotypes about African-Americans, a violation of the 14th Amendment. The report details a November 2008 email on an official Ferguson municipal account which joked that President Obama would not be president for long because what black man holds a steady job for four years?
From 2012 to 2014, the report found, African-Americans comprised 85 percent of people pulled over for a traffic stop; 90 percent of those given citations; and 93 percent of arrests.
Also, African-American drivers were more than twice as likely to be searched during a traffic stop than white drivers, but that those black drivers were 26 percent less likely to be found to be holding contraband.
The report also accuses the Ferguson police of using unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and that 88 percent of those cases involved African-Americans.
Overall, blacks make up 67 percent of Ferguson's population.
More here:
Officials: DOJ report finds racial bias in Ferguson police
Posted in Fourth Amendment
Comments Off on Officials: DOJ report finds racial bias in Ferguson police
Ep. 69: The 2nd Amendment at the Supreme Court (with Alan Gura) – Video
Posted: at 3:49 am
Ep. 69: The 2nd Amendment at the Supreme Court (with Alan Gura)
This week Alan Gura joins us for a talk about gun rights at the Supreme Court. What does the text of the Second Amendment say, and how have courts interpreted it over the years? What #39;s...
By: Libertarianism.org
Read the original post:
Ep. 69: The 2nd Amendment at the Supreme Court (with Alan Gura) - Video
Posted in Second Amendment
Comments Off on Ep. 69: The 2nd Amendment at the Supreme Court (with Alan Gura) – Video
Proposed Ban on M855 – Video
Posted: at 3:49 am
Proposed Ban on M855
Remember to join Gun Owners of America, the NRA, the National Association for Gun Rights, the Second Amendment Foundation, etc... They could use your support and you can use theirs. Contact...
By: CR Williams
Visit link:
Proposed Ban on M855 - Video
Posted in Second Amendment
Comments Off on Proposed Ban on M855 – Video
Man convicted of misdemeanor 25 years ago has Second Amendment rights restored
Posted: at 3:49 am
Published February 19, 2015
A man convicted 25 years ago in Maryland on a misdemeanor charge for carrying a firearm without a license will see his Second Amendment rights restored, under a new federal court ruling issued Wednesday.
Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive director of the Washington-based The Second Amendment Foundation, which represented Julio Suarez, called the ruling significant.
Under existing federal law many people convicted of non-violent state-level misdemeanors have lost their Second Amendment rights because theyve been lumped together with convicted felons due to indeterminate sentencing laws, Gottlieb said.
Thats not right, and cases like this help restore some perspective and narrow some broad legislative brush strokes.
The case provides a building block on which similar cases can be challenged, Gottlieb said.
Suarez, originally pulled over by police in 1990 on a suspected DUI charge, was convicted instead of possessing a firearm without a permit and sentenced to 180 days in prison, 1 year probation and a $500 fine. Court records show the terms of imprisonment and fine were both suspended.
The father of three, who has been married for 20 years and is an active member of his local church, has since led an exemplary life, Gottlieb said, but he noted the conviction was enough to cost Suarez his ability to buy and keep a firearm for defense of his home and family.
In a 26-page decision, Middle District Court Judge William W. Caldwell said Suarez is no more dangerous than a typical law-abiding citizen and poses no continuing threat to society.
A person should not lose his or her constitutional rights for non-violent indiscretions that occur once in a lifetime, said Second Amendment Foundation Attorney Alan Gura, who represented Suarez.
See the article here:
Man convicted of misdemeanor 25 years ago has Second Amendment rights restored
Posted in Second Amendment
Comments Off on Man convicted of misdemeanor 25 years ago has Second Amendment rights restored
Second Amendment activists gather at South Carolina Statehouse rally in midst of domestic violence debate
Posted: at 3:49 am
About 100 Second Amendment activists gathered at the Statehouse on Saturday to push for gun rights in the midst of the General Assemblys debate over taking guns from convicted abusers. Thad Moore/The Post and Courier
COLUMBIA Second Amendment activists rallied Saturday at the Statehouse, three days after the Senate voted to bar anyone convicted of a high-level domestic violence crime from possessing guns.
About 100 people gathered outside the capitol holding signs, flags warning Dont Tread on Me and even a pitchfork. The rally was planned before the Senate took up the domestic violence bill, organizers said. But, for some, the passage of the gun ban underscored why they were holding the rally.
Our timing couldnt be better, said Andrew Miller, state coordinator of Gun Rights Across America, which organized the rally.
Sen. Lee Bright, a Spartanburg Republican who was one of three Upstate senators who voted against the domestic violence bill, attended the rally along with three other lawmakers.
When it comes right down to it, weve got to fix this house, Bright told the crowd, gesturing to the Statehouse behind him. Weve got problems in South Carolina.
The gun ban was hotly contested during Senate debate, and was passed only after a compromise was reached that requires a judges approval to take away firearms in the least serious domestic violence crimes. The measure still needs to pass the House, where the bill does not include a gun ban.
Federal law already barred anyone convicted of domestic violence from possessing a gun, but victims advocates argued that a state ban was needed to enforce the law.
Bright called the gun ban an assault on the Second Amendment, but not all those who rallied to defend gun rights disagreed with taking guns away from abusers. A February poll found that 76 percent of South Carolinians would support a law that kept convicted batterers from acquiring guns.
Posted in Second Amendment
Comments Off on Second Amendment activists gather at South Carolina Statehouse rally in midst of domestic violence debate