Monthly Archives: April 2017

The Second Amendment and ‘weapons of war’ – The Montgomery Herald

Posted: April 7, 2017 at 8:41 pm

Put simply, writes Judge Robert King of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war.

In Kolbe v. Hogan, the court upheld Marylands ban on assault weapons, also known as rifles that look scary to people who know nothing about guns.

As talk radio host Darryl W. Perry of Free Talk Live notes, Kings perversely broad statement would cover a ban on the possession of rocks:

And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang it, and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth. So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote the Philistine, and slew him 1st Samuel, Chapter 17

King also displays a poor grasp of history. No judicial power is required to extend the Second Amendment to cover weapons of war, because theyre precisely what it was intended to cover in the first place.

The Second Amendment was ratified only a few years after a citizen army many of its soldiers armed, at least at first, with weapons brought from home defeated the most fearsome professional military machine in the history of the world, the army of a global empire.

The express purpose of the Second Amendment was to guarantee the continued maintenance of an armed populace. In fact, the Second Militia Act of 1792 legally required every adult able-bodied white American male to own and maintain weapons of war (a musket or rifle, bayonet, powder and bullets) just in case the militia had to be called out.

Even in the 1939 case usually cited to justify victim disarmament (gun control) laws, U.S. v. Miller, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the reason Jack Miller/s short-barreled shotgun could be banned was that it WASNT a weapon of war: [I]t is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.

Yes, you read that right: The Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment applies ONLY to weapons of war. I think thats too narrow myself, but at least it comes at the matter from the correct historical perspective.

The purpose of the Second Amendment is best understood in terms of a quote falsely attributed to Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto of the Japanese navy at the beginning of World War II: You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.

Shame on King and the 4th Circuit for failing to uphold the plain meaning of shall not be infringed.

(Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism, thegarrisoncenter.org. He lives and works in north central Florida. Follow him on Twitter @thomaslknapp.)

See more here:
The Second Amendment and 'weapons of war' - The Montgomery Herald

Posted in Second Amendment | Comments Off on The Second Amendment and ‘weapons of war’ – The Montgomery Herald

Secret Service Says Trump’s Second Amendment People Comment Led to Threats Against Clinton – PoliticusUSA

Posted: at 8:41 pm

National security and intelligence community journalist Michael Best reported on Thursday that he just got the documents from the Secret Service regarding threats against Hillary Clinton, and they indicate that the Secret Service did see threats against Clinton seemingly as a result of Trumps comment about second amendment people.

Secret Service documents indicate they did see threats against Hillary Clinton seemingly as a result of Trumps 2nd Amendment people comment, Best writes on Twitter, adding, DHS reaction to Trumps 2nd Amendment people comments: YIKES!'

On August 9th, 2016, Donald Trump suggested his supporters might shoot Clinton if she got to pick a Supreme Court judge, By the way, if she (Hillary Clinton) gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks. Although, the Second Amendment people maybe there is. I dont know.

On July 20th, CNN reported that the Secret Service was investigating a Trump adviser after he called for Clintons execution on the radio. Trump adviser Al Baldasaro told a radio host that Clinton should be put in the firing line and shot for treason.

Donald Trump didnt distance himself from Baldarsaro.

Days later, Trump made his second amendment people comment about Clinton getting to fill the Supreme Court seat that Republicans stole from President Barack Obama. Trump supporters and Republicans have tried to pretend his comment wasnt an incitement to violence, but the Secret Service says they did see threats seemingly as a result of Trumps comment.

On the day when Senate Republicans are changing the filibuster rule so they can confirm an extremist to the Supreme Court who was nominated by a president who is under investigation for possible collusion with Russia, the Secret Service confirmed that Trumps call for second amendment people to shoot Clinton if she got to nominate a Supreme Court justice seemingly resulted in threats against her.

Republicans have become radical jihadists inciting violence to get their way, so after not even waiting the average period of time to get Gorusch confirmed, they flipped out and voted to change the Senate rules an act they admitted would ruin the senate. This is the modern day Republican Party. They have become the reactionary hot headed destroyers they chide the far left for being in the 60s.

Republicans arent here for the law and order theyre here to violate laws and norms until they get their way. If they dont get what they want, second amendment people might have to fix it for them.

And if that doesnt work, theyll just change the rules to fit their extremist pick for a seat they already violated precedent to steal from the Democratic president.

With the major victim/persecution complex that colors the Right these days, if the shoe had been on the other foot with these comments, we never would have heard the end of it. There would be investigations into investigations, and leaks and so many more leaks, and conservative journalists illegally recording people to prove how horrible Democrats were. And the press would breathlessly report on the drama, the victimization, the persecution.

If the shoe were on the other foot, elected Democrats would be saying Trump should be shot for treason for all of the Russian connections, since Republicans said that over Clintons hyped up email scandal when she wasnt even found guilty of anything. But Democrats dont roll that way. The Democratic President, Barack Obama, was careful and responsible with his rhetoric.

When it came down to actually inciting violence against his Democratic opponent, Trump supporters and the entire Republican Party enabled and supported Donald Trump. If they werent under a fast gathering cloud of sweeping Russian smoke, this would be a new low for the Republican Party.

As it is, facing possible treason and obstruction of justice accusations, inciting threats against a rival is to be expected. Its how dictators do things.

did Donald Trump incite violence, did donald trump threaten Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, second amendment people

Originally posted here:
Secret Service Says Trump's Second Amendment People Comment Led to Threats Against Clinton - PoliticusUSA

Posted in Second Amendment | Comments Off on Secret Service Says Trump’s Second Amendment People Comment Led to Threats Against Clinton – PoliticusUSA

A First Amendment Glossary to Help Readers Understand Key Legal Terms – Huffington Post

Posted: at 8:41 pm

Highline

Science

Education

Weird News

Business

TestKitchen

Tech

College

Media

Pollster

Heroin Epidemic

Donald Trump

Racial Inequality

US Senate

Election Results

HuffPost Hill

Police Brutality

Hate Crimes

Supreme Court

Congress

So That Happened

Entertainment

Comedy

Celebrity

TV

Arts + Culture

Backspace

Movies

Healthy Living

Travel

Style

Taste

Black Voices

Latino Voices

Women

Fifty

Queer Voices

Parents

ALL SECTIONS

Arts + Culture

Black Voices

Books

Business

Candidate Confessional

Celebrity

College

Comedy

Crime

Divorce

Dolce Vita

Eat the Press

Education

Election Results

Entertainment

Fifty

Good News

Green

Healthy Living

Highline

Home

Horoscopes

HuffPost Data

HuffPost Hill

Impact

Latino Voices

Media

Newsletters

Outspeak

Parents

Politics

Pollster

Queer Voices

Religion

Science

Small Business

So That Happened

Sports

Style

Taste

Tech

Teen

TestKitchen

Travel

TV

Weddings

Weird News

Women

FEATURED

OWN

Paving the Way

The Power Of Humanity

Retire Well

Sleep + Wellness

What's Working: Purpose + Profit

WorldPost

04/07/2017 11:44 am ET

For the past year, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE, the nonpartisan, nonprofit organization where I work) has been building up resources in our new First Amendment Library. This week, weve added a feature that I hope will help anyone interested in First Amendment issues understand the terms commonly used in legal and academic discussions about these rights: the First Amendment Glossary.

With over 75 terms included, FIREs First Amendment Glossary is meant to be a quick guide for those who are interested in free speech advocacy but may not have the time or inclination to pore over academic literature and case law in order to understand issues such as the the difference between public forums and limited public forums.

The glossary gives visitors brief definitions for terms that commonly emerge when discussing civil liberties issues, and it additionally directs readers to other areas of FIREs First Amendment Library that offer extended commentary and primary documents, such as Supreme Court opinions that have colored the jurisprudence surrounding particular terms.

For example, if a reader views the term prior restraint in our glossary, they will be directed to the portion of FIREs Guide to Free Speech on Campus that discusses how prior restraint has been interpreted through the yearsfrom the Supreme Courts argument for why the publication of the Pentagon Papers did not necessitate prior restraint, to the battle college journalists have faced to keep the precedent set by a high school student newspaper case allowing for prior restraint from being applied to their campus newspapers.

Read the original post:
A First Amendment Glossary to Help Readers Understand Key Legal Terms - Huffington Post

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on A First Amendment Glossary to Help Readers Understand Key Legal Terms – Huffington Post

MTHS Hawkeye wins First Amendment Press Freedom Award for fourth year in a row – MLT News

Posted: at 8:41 pm

Photo courtesy the MTHS Hawkeye

For the fourth year in a row, the Mountlake Terrace High Schools student newspaper The Hawkeye has won the First Amendment Press Freedom Award from the Journalism Education Association (JEA) and National Scholastic Press Association (NSPA). The paper was given the award during an opening ceremony at a JEA/NSPA conference on Thursday night in Seattle.

The award recognizes free and responsible student media that thrive at the school. While members of the Hawkeye, it is also an accomplishment for the district and school administrators. Board Member Ann McMurray was also in attendance Thursday night to accept the award.

Its an award that is earned by having a community that believes in and values the principles of the First Amendment, a school administration that values and protects students rights, and thriving student media where students are in full control of editorial decisions, Hawkeye teacher adviser Vince DeMiero said. That starts at the community level, so this is as much an Edmonds School District award as it is an MTHS award or a Hawkeye award.

The award was given to ten other schools from across the country.

(I am) incredibly humbled, but also terribly sad that everypublic school in America isnt a First Amendment Press Freedom Award winner, DeMiero said.

Schools compete for the title by answering questionnaires submitted by an adviser and at least one editor. Publications that advanced to the next level were then asked to provide responses from the principal and all media advisers and student editors, indicating their support of the First Amendment. In addition, semifinalists submitted their printed policies.

Those who were selected showed a strong commitment to the First Amendment and student media.

Mountlake Terrace High School has won the award several times, and was among the first to win the award in 2000.

Read the original:
MTHS Hawkeye wins First Amendment Press Freedom Award for fourth year in a row - MLT News

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on MTHS Hawkeye wins First Amendment Press Freedom Award for fourth year in a row – MLT News

NRA Readies Next Attack Against The First Amendment – Media Matters for America (blog)

Posted: at 8:41 pm


Media Matters for America (blog)
NRA Readies Next Attack Against The First Amendment
Media Matters for America (blog)
He then played a preview of a message featuring NRA's CEO Wayne LaPierre in which LaPierre claimed the media has weaponized the First Amendment against the Second, and that America would have fallen long ago had people placed their trust in the ...

Originally posted here:
NRA Readies Next Attack Against The First Amendment - Media Matters for America (blog)

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on NRA Readies Next Attack Against The First Amendment – Media Matters for America (blog)

The First Amendment Appears in Arabic in Campaign From the ACLU – Creativity

Posted: at 8:41 pm


Creativity
The First Amendment Appears in Arabic in Campaign From the ACLU
Creativity
This bold campaign from the American Civil Liberties Union sets out to show how powerful the First Amendment is -- in any language. Conceived out of New York-based Emergence Creative, the out-of-home effort simply, in black and white, features the ...

More here:
The First Amendment Appears in Arabic in Campaign From the ACLU - Creativity

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on The First Amendment Appears in Arabic in Campaign From the ACLU – Creativity

Making Academic and Legal First Amendment Issues More Accessible – Ricochet.com

Posted: at 8:41 pm

Some Ricochet readers may already be familiar with the First Amendment Library, launched last November and maintained by the non-partisan non-profit Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE, where I work). Today, weintroduced a First Amendment Glossary to the library. Featuring definitions and explanations for over 75 terms commonly associated with First Amendment law, we hope this glossary gives people the resources to feel confident entering discussions related to free speech.

For those interested in going beyond the definitions featured, our glossary also serves as a great jumping off point for conducting additional research. Many of the meanings and applications for the terms featured in this glossary have evolved over time, so we have included links that take readers to other parts of the library which offer further explanations and added context.

For example, clicking on obscene material points readers to the portion of FIREs Guide to Free Speech on Campus which provides further analysis of the Miller v. California (1973) test for obscenity. If readers are interested in viewing Miller or any other Supreme Court opinion related to obscenity, the links included in the definition direct readers to related opinions in the librarys First Amendment Case Database.

Here at FIRE we are uniquely understanding of the fact that most people, especially students busy with class work and extracurriculars, do not have the time to sit down and read through the seemingly endless amount of First Amendment scholarship and case law available. Now though, understanding the difference between expressive association and intimate association just a few clicks away. We hope this glossary, along with other library resources, gives readers the foundation required to intelligently argue for and protect their civil liberties.

Read more here:
Making Academic and Legal First Amendment Issues More Accessible - Ricochet.com

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Making Academic and Legal First Amendment Issues More Accessible – Ricochet.com

Florida video game shop owner claims First Amendment violation over town’s inflatable Mario ban – WFTV Orlando

Posted: at 8:41 pm

by: Mark Boxley Updated: Apr 6, 2017 - 11:39 PM

ORANGE PARK, Fla. - The owner of a video game store in Orange Park has filed a federal lawsuit against the town over a 9-foot inflatable Mario that officials say is a sign code violation.

Mario, the iconic Nintendo character, has caused a visible increase in foot traffic and even became a local attraction, Gone Broke Gaming owner Scott Fisher said in the suit.

Fisher opened his store in 2015 on Kingsley Avenue in Orange Park, a suburb of Jacksonville.

After getting the OK from his landlord and neighboring businesses, Fisher decided to put up the towering inflatable Mario character in July.

The impact on his business was immediate, he said.

People who came in often commented to Scott that they never knew the store was there until they saw Mario, the lawsuit said. Others said that Mario made it much easier to find Gone Broke Gamings small storefront on the otherwise busy road.

By the end of the month, though, an Orange Park Code Enforcement officer issued a notice of code violation, saying the inflatable display was an illegal portable sign.

If he left the Mario in front of the store, Fisher could have faced fines of up to $250 a day.

Fisher pointed out in his lawsuit that the towns sign code allowed inflatable displays, specifically if it constitutes a creative idea that lacks a commercial message.

Under (the creative idea) category, a business could display the same exact inflatable Mario that Gone Broke Gaming was displaying, so long as that business was not selling Mario-related products, the lawsuit said.

Fisher claims the towns prohibition of the inflatable Mario under its sign code constitutes discrimination and a violation of his First Amendment right to free speech.

The lawsuit is seeking the court to declare the Orange Park sign code unconstitutional, a permanent injunction prohibiting the town from taking enforcement action against the store for displaying the Mario, attorneys fees and $1 for the violation of Fishers constitutional rights.

As of Thursday, Orange Park leaders had not filed a response to Fishers lawsuit.

2017 Cox Media Group.

Here is the original post:
Florida video game shop owner claims First Amendment violation over town's inflatable Mario ban - WFTV Orlando

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Florida video game shop owner claims First Amendment violation over town’s inflatable Mario ban – WFTV Orlando

Appeals Court Hears First Amendment Tattoo Case – Courthouse News Service

Posted: at 8:41 pm

CHICAGO (CN) The Seventh Circuit heard oral arguments Friday about whether Chicago police officers tattoos are protected by the First Amendment or whether they can be required to cover them up.

In mid-2015, former police superintendant Gary McCarthy implemented a policy requiring Chicago police officers to cover up any visible tattoos while on duty. Tattooed officers were required to wear long sleeves, even during the hot summer, or wear cover-up tape.

Three officers filed a federal lawsuit challenging the policy on First Amendment grounds.

Lead plaintiff Officer Daniel Medici, an Iraq War veteran, has a wings-and-halo tattoo in remembrance of his fallen comrades. The two other plaintiffs, Officers John Kukielka and Dennis Leet, each have a religious tattoo of St. Michael, the patron saint of police.

At oral arguments Friday, U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Posner wanted to know, How does a halo with wings communicate something about people killed in combat?

The officers attorney Linda Friedman said, The symbol is one recognized in the military, but would not go so far as to say it would be readily recognized as a war memorial by a person on the street in Chicago.

The judges were skeptical that the officers could recover any monetary damages for emotional injuries allegedly caused by the policy, which was only enforced for nine months before an arbitrator found that it violated the police unions contract.

The Chicago Police Department scrapped the rules in September, citing the need to boost morale.

But the Seventh Circuit panel also questioned the citys stated interest in preserving the uniformity and professionalism of the force.

Dont you have to say why uniformity is important? Judge Kenneth Ripple asked city attorney Stephen Collins. Uniformity and professionalism we hear that a lot, and it strikes me like a buzzword. What does the city gain by making an officer wear long sleeves in the summer to cover up a halo with wings?

Posner proposed that perhaps a citizen, seeing an officers tattoo of St. Michael, might suppose they were being pulled over for violating the policemans religious sensibilities.

But that has to be in the record, Ripple said.

Judge Diane Sykes sought to compare the tattoo policy to a prohibition on jewelry with a religious connotation, such as a crucifix, but Collins was not familiar with the departments policy.

Judge Ripple said he would be concerned if he was pulled over by an officer wearing a Masonic ring.

In rebuttal, Friedman informed the panel that the uniform policies allow officers to wear up to three rings, and do not regulate the content of those rings.

So an officer could wear a KKK ring, but not a tattoo of St. Michael? Ripple asked.

That is correct, Friedman said.

She repeatedly told the judges that no citizen had ever complained about an officers tattoos, and the policy was simply a result of the former superintendants personal dislike of tattoos.

Friedman asked the panel to reverse the dismissal of the case on standing grounds and allow the officers a trial on the question of damages.

It is unclear when the Seventh Circuit will rule in the case.

Original post:
Appeals Court Hears First Amendment Tattoo Case - Courthouse News Service

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Appeals Court Hears First Amendment Tattoo Case – Courthouse News Service

Share Secure Tips – vtdigger.org

Posted: at 8:40 pm

VDigger offers several ways to share sensitive information with us, including new encryption services through a secure server.

Investigative journalists rely on members of the public to expose corruption and wrongdoing. No system is 100% secure, but weve set up methods to contact us that help protect your identity.

We are making an especial effort to protect our sources. We do not reveal the identities of anonymous sources who wish to give us confidential information. These methods of contact are designed to ensure communication is as secure as possible.

VTDigger for years has offered a place for tipsters to send us information without identifying themselves by name. While our system automatically records IP addresses, we respect your anonymity and do not trace the source of any submission. Here is a link to the tipster form. Here is a link to our document upload form.

Mail delivered through the postal service is a secure means of communication. We recommend that you use a public mailbox a blue box on the corner instead of a post office.

Send a letter with no return address to VTDigger at 26 State St., Montpelier VT 05602.

Signal is an encrypted phone and messaging app for mobile phones. It stores a number, but not your activity while using it. You can also set it to erase content from your phone automatically. For more info, go to https://whispersystems.org

Once youve got the Signal app, you can call or message us at +1 802-595-9159

If you want to send an anonymous tip that does not identify your Internet Protocol address, please use our GlobaLeaks service. You can write to us securely and attach documents which will be encrypted.

Remember that online security starts with you, so here are some simple ways for you to protect your identity.

Update the operating system for your computer so that its more secure. Make sure your computer has been scanned for malware and viruses. Be careful where you access the server. We recommend using broadband or wifi service that is protected by a Virtual Private Network. Do not use it from public places where your screen may be viewed by other people or cameras. Here is a list of popular VPNs.

VTDigger hosts a secure information transmission service on the GlobaLeaks platform, which has been independently verified by journalists around the world. You will need to take precautions to help protect yourself, and download special software to your computer:

1> Get on the internet using a Virtual Private Network connection to mask your computers IP address.

2> Download and install the Tor browser here.

3> Once you load the Tor browser, copy and paste the URL http://loyjvljzuhxzbifk.onion into your browsers address bar. When the page loads, you will see additional information on how to submit your content to us.

NOTE: If the Tor browser does not work, you are most likely on a monitored network and need to find a different network to avoid being detected.

4> On submission of your data, you will be assigned a randomly generated 16-digit code. When we respond to your message, you will use this code to log back into the site and communicate with us.

NOTE: This code is the only way we have of reaching you. To protect your anonymity, we do not ask for other contact information.

Please do not lose that code: it will not be stored in your computers keychain or browser history: you must write it down.

The Globaleaks server is highly secure. All your communication with us is over the Tor network, and we cannot collect any information about your location. Only a few of our most trusted journalists have access to information stored on our Globaleaks server. Its also geographically, physically, and digitally separate from all the rest of VTDiggers servers, email system and identifiable digital assets.

The GlobaLeaks software powering this system is an open-source project used by newsrooms around the world. You can learn more about it here: https://www.globaleaks.org

If the GlobaLeaks system is unavailable or TOR is blocked for you, you can use our PGP keys to send us encrypted email. If you do not wish to identify yourself, create an email address on a free webmail service, such as Gmail, using a pseudonym. Download a PGP extension (we recommend the Mailvelope Chrome extension), and send an encrypted email to [emailprotected] using the encryption at the link below.

VTDigger PGP Keys(Anne Galloway)

If youre going to send us PGP-encrypted email and would like us to encrypt our response, please send your public key.

If you are using the Tor browser you should ensure that there is no keylogging malware on your PC, MAC or tablet. If your computer has already been compromised, we cannot safeguard your identity or the information you are sending us. Its good practice to routinely run malware checkers on your devices.

Any content uploaded to the platform will be treated in the utmost confidentiality by us to protect your anonymity unless you indicate you wish to waive it.

Sending us your material is no guarantee that we will report on it or publish a story using that material.

VTDigger will not set cookies, fingerprint your browser/machine or display third party content when you use our system. Use is ultimately at your own risk. Thank you for helping us to promote secure, independent, not-for-profit journalism.

Originally posted here:
Share Secure Tips - vtdigger.org

Posted in Tor Browser | Comments Off on Share Secure Tips – vtdigger.org