H.R. 45 Filed on First Day

   Representative Bobby Rush (D-IL) filed a comprehensive anti-gun wish-list bill in the 111th Congress on its first day in session.  No sooner were the new members of Congress sworn in than Mr. Rush, a former Black Panther leader, file his bill which he calls the “Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009″.  The bill has no cosponsors and was automatically referred to the House Judiciary Committee.

   If passed, this bill would require that anyone wishing to purchase, own, or possess a “qualifying firearm” – that’s any handgun, and any long gun capable of accepting a detachable magazine – would have to be licensed by the state or the federal government in a licensing program managed by the Attorney General.  To get a license you would have to prove you’re you, provide a passport-style photo, a thumbprint, and take a written exam which includes questions about firearms safety, safe storage, the risks of firearms ownership, and anything else the Attorney General deems appropriate.   All transfers would be required to go through a licensed dealer with the exception of occasional gifts or bequests between parents, children (18 or over), and grandparents, or loans of not more than 30 days between “persons who are personally known to one another.” (It actually says that.  I’m not making this up.)  And all transfers would have to be recorded in a “Transfer Record” established and maintained by the Attorney General.

 

Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009

Dem’s Use “Stimulus” as Cover for More Gun Control

 By CCRKBA  Friday, February 13, 2009

Dear Concerned Citizen,

In a new bill introduced the first day of the present session of Congress, and with zero coverage from the MSM, H.R. 45 (Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009) targets all gun owners in the U.S.A. While the media the world and everyone else is focused on the “phony plan” to spend tax dollars legislation is sneeking through the House and Senate for more gun control. 

This nefarious bill seeks to strip us all of our Constitutional Rights to possess and bear firearms of any distinction. It requires, within the first two years, that all new guns be registered. The bill goes retroactive after two years. Meaning that two years after the passage of the bill, ALL FIREARMS in a citizen’s possession must be registered, not just those purchased after the bill passes, and this apparently applies to antique firearms as well.

Select Here to Reject Gun Bans and Fax to all 100 Senators and all 435 House Representatives

Every five years the firearm owner must go through a complete renewal process for each weapon owned. Failure to comply carries stiff penalties including confiscation of the firearms and jail time (penalties as high as ten years imprisonment in some cases). The bill also authorizes government searches without warrant, the creation of a federal bureaucracy to monitor firearm possession, etc.

The following is a summary of the bill as provided by the Congressional Research Service. If you read the whole bill, you’ll find it will effectively preclude the ownership of any firearms by law-abiding people unless directly licensed by the Attorney General :

1/6/2009–Introduced. Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 – Amends the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to prohibit a person from possessing a firearm unless that person has been issued a firearm license under this Act or a state system certified under this Act and such license has not been invalidated or revoked. Prescribes license application, issuance, and renewal requirements.

Prohibits transferring or receiving a qualifying firearm unless the recipient presents a valid firearms license, the license is verified, and the dealer records a tracking authorization number. Prescribes firearms transfer reporting and record keeping requirements. Directs the Attorney General to establish and maintain a federal record of sale system.

Prohibits:

1. Transferring a firearm to any person other than a licensee, unless the transfer is processed through a licensed dealer in accordance with national instant criminal background check system requirements, with exceptions;
2. Licensed manufacturer or dealer from failing to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements of this Act;
3. Failing to report the loss or theft of the firearm to the Attorney General within 72 hours;
4. Failing to report to the Attorney General an address change within 60 days;
5. Keeping a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm and ammunition for the firearm, knowingly or recklessly disregarding the risk that a child is capable of gaining access, if a child uses the firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury.
   Prescribes criminal penalties for violations of firearms provisions covered by this Act. Directs the Attorney General to:
6. Establish and maintain a firearm injury information clearinghouse;
7. Conduct continuing studies and investigations of firearm-related deaths and injuries; and
8. Collect and maintain current production and sales figures of each licensed manufacturer. Authorizes the Attorney General to certify state firearm licensing or record of sale systems.

Like all other threats against our freedoms, we must rise and defeat this bill, slap it down hard.

In order to stop Schumer and Feinstein and there fellow gun-grabbers—we need to let the Congress know with thousands of faxes telling them to leave guns alone.

Americans like you who understand what our Founding Fathers envisioned for our nation…and who are willing to fight to defend our Constitution and for what it stands.

So please, help the Citizens Committee and me defeat those who wish to gut and trash the United States Constitution.

Help me flood the U.S. Senate and the House with the sea of FAXES big enough to drown each and every Senator and Representative willing to vote away the Second Amendment.

Please, send your Donation and FAX TODAY!

Select Here Fax all 535 in the Congress

Keep calling your Senators today, toll free numbers include 1-877-851-6437 and 1-866-220-0044, or call toll 1-202-225-3121 AND REGISTER YOU’RE OUTRAGE at ongoing efforts to take guns away!

CALL PRESIDENT OBAMA, 202-456-1111 and 202-456-1414 expressing your disdain and ABSOLUTE REJECTION of all GUN BANS.

DO NOT BE SILENCED – MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD! 

http://canadafreepress.com/printpage.php

 

Did Republican’s Civility Hold the Door for Holder?

Collegial Buddies in the Senate Pull a Fast One

    Sometimes we are so busy looking at the forest we don’t see the trees.  It is beginning to look like that is what happened last week in the Senate Judiciary Committee.  After some contentious remarks and posturing during the preceding weeks and a very anti-climactic two days of hearings on the confirmation of Eric Holder as Attorney General, http://www.firearmscoalition.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=339&Itemid=1

Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) announced that Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) had requested that the vote be delayed by a week and that under the rules of the committee he was obliged to grant the delay.  So rather than going to a vote of the committee on Wednesday, January 21 the vote was postponed to Wednesday, January 28.  What wasn’t mentioned was the situation regarding the makeup of the committee.

    With the wrangling over “found” votes and more votes than voters in Minnesota, the contentious appointment of Roland Burris to fill the seat vacated by Barack Obama, questions about the appointment in New York to replace Hillary Clinton, and a few other issues, the Senate leadership was slow about their bi-annual reorganization and committee assignments.  Most of the new assignments were not made official until Wednesday evening, January 21.

    That means that on Wednesday, when the vote was supposed to have taken place, the makeup of the Senate Judiciary Committee was still as it had been in the 110th Congress.  With 10 Democrats and 9 Republicans – but wait – there’s more to that story.  Among the 10 Democrats were Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy.  Biden officially resigned from the Senate on January 15.  Kennedy has been hospitalized since his collapse at an inauguration party on January 20.  So on January 21 when the Judiciary Committee was scheduled to vote on whether to recommend confirmation of Eric Holder there were only 8 Democrats available to vote on the committee and 9 Republicans.  That’s 8 “F” rated Democrats versus 9 “A” rated Republicans to decide whether an anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment political lackey should be the guardian of the Constitution and the nation’s top cop.

    Rather than press the advantage, the “A” rated majority instead asked for a delay of a week during which one of their members was removed from the committee and three additional “F” rated Democrats were added.

    Now I’m as fair-minded as the next guy and I understand that there are professional courtesies to be observed in a body such as the US Senate – though the Democrats have not extended much in the way of courtesy over the past couple of years – but if the Democrats wanted more time so they could stack the committee, they should have admitted that fact and requested the delay themselves rather than having the Republicans request the delay for them and pretend they were delaying to be tough.

    I might be missing something – the rules and traditions of the Senate are a complex mess about which I am nowhere near an expert – but this looks to me like the good old boys maneuvering in an effort to keep the rubes back home – that’s you and me – from realizing that it’s all just a big game.

Dems leak Gun Ban List 2/05/09

by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
Jan. 5, 2009

http://www.gunlaws.com/GunLawUpdate3.htm

 

1. Officials stocking up on AR-15-style long guns
2. Preliminary gun ban list revealed

 

1. S&W sales

With bans on AR-15 and AR-15-styled rifles to the public expected under the Obama administration (see gun-ban lists below), Smith and Wesson has just announced expansion of that market, with the sale of 275 of its M&P15 rifles to the Chicago police department. http://tinyurl.com/742qre

Chicago, president-elect Obama’s home town, has virtual bans on handguns and strict repressive limits on long guns, but police are excluded and criminals blithely ignore the provisions.

The M&P15 strongly resembles the AR-15, a high quality, semi automatic long gun used by the U.S. military and the public for decades. What the Chicago police expect to do with 275 of the guns, vilified as assault weapons by the lamestream media, was undisclosed. Assault, it has been noted, is a type of behavior, not a type of hardware. 

(emphasis added)

In other news, the Minnesota State Patrol has purchased 90 of the high-quality M&P15 firearms, which retail for more than $1,000 each.

In still other news, actor David Spade donated $100,000 to the Phoenix police department, to buy 50 new AR-15 rifles made by Colt, an S&W competitor. Spade was apparently moved by a “news” broadcast that said Phoenix officers had to buy their own rifles due to lack of funding, and he wanted to help them out.

 

2. Gun-ban list proposed

Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress). It serves as a framework for the new list the Bradys plan to introduce shortly.

I have an outline of the Brady’s current plans and targets of opportunity, I’m working on getting that news out asap after these ban lists, probably be ready in the next few days. It’s horrific. They’re going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They’ve made little mention of criminals.

Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment. See what 250 of your peers thought during our recent Bill of Rights Day event at the Wrigley Mansion in Phoenix: http://www.gunlaws.com/BOR-Day-2008-Report.htm

 

The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse):

Rifles (or copies or duplicates):

M1 Carbine, Sturm Ruger Mini-14, AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, AR-10, Thompson 1927, Thompson M1;

AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR;

Olympic Arms PCR; AR70, Calico Liberty, Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU, Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC, Hi-Point Carbine, HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, HK-PSG-1, Thompson 1927 Commando, Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;

Saiga, SAR-8, SAR-4800, SKS with detachable magazine, SLG 95, SLR 95 or 96, Steyr AU, Tavor, Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz).

 

Pistols (or copies or duplicates):

Calico M-110, MAC-10, MAC-11, or MPA3, Olympic Arms OA, TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10, Uzi.

 

Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):

Armscor 30 BG, SPAS 12 or LAW 12, Striker 12, Streetsweeper.

 

Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):

A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a threaded barrel, (iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see below), (iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.

Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rimfire rifles).

A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has (i) a second pistol grip, (ii) a threaded barrel, (iii) a barrel shroud or (iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and (v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.

A semiautomatic shotgun with (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a pistol grip (see definition below), (iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds, and (iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.

 

Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will:

Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.” Note that Obama’s pick for this office (Eric Holder, confirmation hearing set for Jan. 15) wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home.

In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.”

In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.

That presumption can be challenged only by suing the federal government over each firearm it decides to ban, in a court it runs with a judge it pays. This virtually dismisses the principles of the Second Amendment.

The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn’t have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose — is that devious or what? And of course, “sporting purpose” is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent.

If these near-total bans aren’t enough, the most dangerous part may be the phrase “pistol grip” because: “The term ‘pistol grip’ means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” In other words, any semi-auto long gun with a grip (that’s ALL semi-auto long guns) would be banned under the existing proposal. It’s not clear what they hope to achieve by deceptively banning guns with grips instead of just calling to ban the guns — even an idjit can tell it’s the same thing.

I didn’t cover here all the magazine bans, transfer bans, dealer record-keeping and centralized reporting, and a host of nuisance details — there will be time enough for that when the new lists are released soon: “As soon as President-elect Obama is inaugurated and the 111th Congress is sworn in,” according to Ms. Brady. Congress is set to be sworn in on Jan. 6, Inauguration Day is Jan. 20.

No one expects the new proposal to be less abusive than the current one supported by the party of the Democrats. Remember — these bans were proposed when the congressional anti-rights crowd had no chance of success. Now they are ready to run wild, or according to Sarah herself, “I have never been so confident.” The “news” media has failed to report on any of this, preferring instead to blare that the incoming president supports the Second Amendment and commonsense (sic) laws.

To see the whole bill, go to http://thomas.loc.gov and search for HR 1022, (switch to the 110th Congress if the 111th has begun).

The excellent Firearms Coalition started by the late Neal Knox and now run by his family members makes these important points about the upcoming Judiciary hearings for AG nominee Holder:

“The Democrat members of the Judiciary Committee are all sworn enemies to the Second Amendment and are unlikely to be swayed at all by any firearms related arguments, but might hesitate to confirm based on Holder’s participation in the pardons of 16 Puerto Rican terrorists and billionaire financier and arms merchant Marc Rich [and perhaps the Elian Gonzalez abduction by federal agents Holder authorized]. Any letters to Democrats should focus on those issues.

“On the Republican side, Arlen Specter, the ranking Republican on the committee has never been a friend to gun rights, but he owes his reelection to NRA support and has expressed concern over the pardon issues.  Among the other Republicans, most are relatively reliable votes, but only Coburn has routinely taken a leadership role on Second Amendment matters.  All of them need to be pressed hard to do everything they can to block the appointment.

“For more information about Eric Holder and why his appointment must be fought tooth and nail, go to our web site at http://www.FirearmsCoalition.org.”

 

Respectfully submitted,
Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
http://www.gunlaws.com/gloa.htm

 

Permission to circulate or post this Gun Law Update granted.

 

Sign up for future alerts on my home page:
http://www.gunlaws.com

The Whistleblower Who Kick-Started Domestic Spying Revelations

 

December 15th, 2008

News Update by Rebecca Jeschke

Remember how shocked you were back in December of 2005 when you learned that the

government was spying on Americans’ phone calls and emails without warrants? The whistleblower

 who apparently kicked off that New York Times investigation has come forward, and his story is a

timely lesson on how important — and frightening — it can be to do the right thing.

This weekend, Newsweek published the remarkable saga of Thomas M. Tamm, a former prosecutor

in the Department of Justice who saw evidence of illegal domestic surveillance of U.S. citizens.

When his questions to superiors went unanswered, Tamm decided to blow the whistle — calling the

 New York Times from a pay phone. James Risen and Eric Lichtblau eventually won the Pulitzer

Prize for their work in uncovering the scandal that touched the highest levels of our government.

The Risen and Lichtblau investigation sparked another important development: it showed former

AT&T employee Mark Klein the context of the work he did in a secret room in San Francisco.

Mr. Klein decided the time had come for him to blow the whistle himself. His evidence formed the

backbone of our class-action lawsuit against AT&T.

But this whistleblowing does not come without risk. The Newsweek article includes a harrowing account

of an FBI raid on Tamm’s home. And he is still worried about facing legal charges for his actions. But

without Tamm, America may have never learned about this massive illegal spying by the National Security

Agency, and we all owe him our thanks.

Related Issues: NSA Spying

Related Cases: Hepting v. AT&T, Jewel v. NSA, NSA Multi-District Litigation

Government “Spy” Printers and Upadate from EFF

Printers

Is Your Printer Spying On You?

 

 

http://www.eff.org/issues/printers

Imagine that every time you printed a document, it automatically included a secret code that could be used to identify the printer – and potentially, the person who used it. Sounds like something from an episode of “Alias,” right?

Unfortunately, the scenario isn’t fictional. In a purported effort to identify counterfeiters, the US government has succeeded in persuading some color laser printer manufacturers to encode each page with identifying information. That means that without your knowledge or consent, an act you assume is private could become public. A communication tool you’re using in everyday life could become a tool for government surveillance. And what’s worse, there are no laws to prevent abuse.

The ACLU recently issued a report revealing that the FBI has amassed more than 1,100 pages of documents on the organization since 2001, as well as documents concerning other non-violent groups, including Greenpeace and United for Peace and Justice. In the current political climate, it’s not hard to imagine the government using the ability to determine who may have printed what document for purposes other than identifying counterfeiters.

Yet there are no laws to stop the Secret Service from using printer codes to secretly trace the origin of non-currency documents; only the privacy policy of your printer manufacturer currently protects you (if indeed such a policy exists). And no law regulates what sort of documents the Secret Service or any other domestic or foreign government agency is permitted to request for identification, not to mention how such a forensics tool could be developed and implemented in printers in the first place.

With no laws on the books, there’s nothing to stop the privacy violations this technology enables. For this reason, EFF is gathering information about what printers are revealing and how – a necessary precursor to any legal challenge or new legislation to protect your privacy. And we could use your help.

In the preliminary research paper linked below, we explain what we’ve observed so far, briefly explore the privacy implications, and ask you to print and send us test sheets from your color laser printer and/or a color laser printer at your local print shop. That way, we can watch the watchers and ensure that your privacy isn’t compromised in ways that harm your fundamental consitutional rights.

In addition to documenting what printers are revealing, EFF has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, and we will keep you updated on what we discover. In the meantime, we urge you to participate and pass the word along about this research project. Thank you for your support! 23rd, 2009

Background

Tiny Dots Show Where and When You Made Your Print

 

 

San Francisco – A research team led by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) recently broke the code behind tiny tracking dots that some color laser printers secretly hide in every document.

The U.S. Secret Service admitted that the tracking information is part of a deal struck with selected color laser printer manufacturers, ostensibly to identify counterfeiters. However, the nature of the private information encoded in each document was not previously known.

“We’ve found that the dots from at least one line of printers encode the date and time your document was printed, as well as the serial number of the printer,” said EFF Staff Technologist Seth David Schoen.

You can see the dots on color prints from machines made by Xerox, Canon, and other manufacturers (for a list of the printers we investigated so far, see: http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/list.php). The dots are yellow, less than one millimeter in diameter, and are typically repeated over each page of a document. In order to see the pattern, you need a blue light, a magnifying glass, or a microscope (for instructions on how to see the dots, see: http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/docucolor/).

EFF and its partners began its project to break the printer code with the Xerox DocuColor line. Researchers Schoen, EFF intern Robert Lee, and volunteers Patrick Murphy and Joel Alwen compared dots from test pages sent in by EFF supporters, noting similarities and differences in their arrangement, and then found a simple way to read the pattern.

“So far, we’ve only broken the code for Xerox DocuColor printers,” said Schoen. “But we believe that other models from other manufacturers include the same personally identifiable information in their tracking dots.”

You can decode your own Xerox DocuColor prints using EFF’s automated program at http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/docucolor/index.php#program.

Xerox previously admitted that it provided these tracking dots to the government, but indicated that only the Secret Service had the ability to read the code. The Secret Service maintains that it only uses the information for criminal counterfeit investigations. However, there are no laws to prevent the government from abusing this information.

“Underground democracy movements that produce political or religious pamphlets and flyers, like the Russian samizdat of the 1980s, will always need the anonymity of simple paper documents, but this technology makes it easier for governments to find dissenters,” said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Lee Tien. “Even worse, it shows how the government and private industry make backroom deals to weaken our privacy by compromising everyday equipment like printers. The logical next question is: what other deals have been or are being made to ensure that our technology rats on us?”

EFF is still working on cracking the codes from other printers and we need the public’s help. Find out how you can make your own test pages to be included in our research at http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/wp.php#testsheets.

　

Which Printers have the dots?

 

 

http://www.eff.org/pages/list-printers-which-do-or-do-not-display-tracking-dots

　

　

　

　

　

 

Government Computer News Pans Printer Dots

Deeplink by Seth Schoen

In a recent review of the HP Color LaserJET CM3530 printer, the magazine Government Computer News called out the use of tracking codes — which GCN referred to as “a secret spy program” — as the biggest problem with that printer. GCN found that the yellow dots produced by this printer particularly degraded print quality and noted that some people would question the “logic or appropriateness” of having printers produce the dots at all; it concluded that even people who didn’t object to the tracking codes in principle would regret the poor print quality they produced in this case.

The review also credited EFF for discovering and exposing this issue. (In fact, we first learned about it through other journalists’ reports and discussions by privacy activists like Lauren Weinstein — but we were the first to publish how some of the tracking systems work, and we’ve worked to bring this issue to the public’s attention and figure out how the government persuaded printer companies to cooperate.)

MIT researcher Benjamin Mako Hill, who’s collaborated with us to produce the Seeing Yellow campaign, described product behaviors like the printer tracking dots as “antifeatures” in a 2007 article. Hill says “[a]n antifeature [...] is functionality that a technology developer [would] charge users to not include [where i]t is more difficult for [manufacturers] to limit [a product] than it is to leave them unconstrained, and the limit is not something that any user would request”. He also notes that “[s]ometimes, as in the case with many DRM systems, users cannot pay to turn their antifeatures off at all!” That’s true here as well: printer manufacturers haven’t reacted to users’ requests to disable tracking functions.

Sometimes a particular antifeature is ubiquitous within an industry. Documents we’ve begun to receive in response to our FOIA requests suggest that the government may have convinced all printer manufacturers to put some kind of tracking mechanism in every color laser printer. Major music labels used to insist on DRM for virtually all music sold on-line (though not for precisely the same music sold on CD). When an antifeature is extremely widespread, it can start to appear normal, and it can even be surprising when product reviewers characterize it as a problem. If everybody in an industry is doing something, it may seem at best redundant to complain about specific instances of the problem.

But comprehensive product reviews and consumer advocacy by journalists are essential parts of the competitive process. Accepting antifeatures as normal merely because they are widespread guarantees that they will remain widespread, and when product reviewers assume that consumers are powerless to influence industry behavior, they ensure that consumers will remain powerless. Building consumer awareness of product design decisions starts with discussing these decisions in the context of individual products — as the late technology journalist and consumer advocate Ed Foster often did in criticizing DRM antifeatures in his GripeLog. Surely the willingness of people like Ed Foster to insist that consumers can and should complain about these misfeatures has been an important factor in the music industry’s long-awaited move away from them. And they help spread the message that competitors can differentiate themselves in an antifeature-prone industry by doing the right thing for consumers.

So thanks to GCN for recognizing — and highlighting to people who might otherwise not have pondered — that the printer dots are a problem worth talking about. Here’s hoping other reviewers will do the same.

Got Fusion Centers? EPIC

April 13, 2008

WASHINGTON, DC – The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) has obtained a Memorandum of Understanding between the FBI and the Virginia State Police that details federally imposed limitations on the Virginia open government law. The memorandum, a January 2008 agreement signed by the FBI and the Department regarding Virginia’s fusion intelligence center, references federal exemptions that would limit the ability of Virginia citizens to obtain public records from a state agency.

The disclosure comes at a time when Virginia is considering HB1007 (“Fusion Intelligence Center; confidentiality and immunity from service of process”) that would further curtail the state’s open government and privacy laws for the Virginia Fusion Center. The bill before the Governor would also eliminate several long-standing common law rights for citizens harmed by information provided to the fusion center. Press groups have criticized the proposed law, and warned that, if enacted, Virginia citizens can “say hello to Big Brother.” “Fusion centers” are intelligence databases that collect extensive information on ordinary citizens. They have raised substantial privacy concerns.

Statements from Virginia officials have raised questions about the federal ngovernment’s involvement in the pending legislation. Officials for the State Police have denied federal involvement in the legislation, and the official position of the White House is that the federally supported fusion centers should respect state laws. But the documents obtained by EPIC indicate that the fusion center proposal is directly impacting the privacy rights and the open government rights of Virginia citizens.

EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg said, “the FBI memorandum indicates that the federal government is attempting to shroud the Virginia Fusion Center in secrecy and prevent meaningful public oversight. Virginia citizens deserve an open and transparent state government that is not constrained by federal secrecy policies.”

At a hearing yesterday in the General District Court in Richmond, Virginia, Chief Judge Joi Taylor ordered the State Police to provide to EPIC additional documents concerning communications between the Department and federal agencies. The hearing was the latest development in EPIC’s lawsuit against the Department. EPIC sued because the State Police’s response to EPIC’s February 12, 2008 freedom of information request failed to comply with the Virginia open government law. EPIC has requested an expeditious decision from the Court owing to the urgency created by novernor Kaine’s ongoing consideration of HB1007.

The case is EPIC v. Martin and the Virginia Department of State Police, Case No. GV08019225, (Va. Gen. Dist. Ct., filed Mar. 21, 2008). Marc Rotenberg and John Verdi are litigating the case for EPIC.

EPIC is a public interest research center in Washington, D.C. EPIC was established in 1994 to focus public attention on emerging civil liberties issues and to protect privacy, the First Amendment, and constitutional values. EPIC has a long history of open government work. EPIC has filed
freedom of information requests and lawsuits in matters involving President Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program, traveler watch-list rrors, and possible government misconduct in intelligence investigations.

More information is available at:

“Memorandum of Understanding between the Federal Bureau of Investigation
and the Virginia Fusion Center” (Obtained by EPIC. Apr. 7, 2008)

http://epic.org/privacy/virginia_fusion/MOU.pdf

“EPIC v. Virginia Department of State Police: Fusion Center Secrecy Bill”

http://epic.org/privacy/virginia_fusion

EPIC, “Information Fusion Centers and Privacy”

http://epic.org/privacy/fusion

Stop Dangerous ID Rally Richmond VA

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

from Rick Sincere Thoughts Blogspot

‘Stop Dangerous ID’ Rally in Richmond

Last week, while in Richmond on other business, I found myself among a crowd gathered on the grounds of the State Capitol to protest the federal government’s attempt to impose so-called “Real ID” on Virginia and other states. The Daily News Record of Harrisonburg had a report on January 13 about how new Virginia drivers’ licenses are being designed and deployed in a manner consistent with federal Department of Homeland Security’s Real ID requirements. The Daily Press of Newport News published an AP article by Dena Potter on January 2 that laid out the objections that civil libertarians and others have with regard to the imposition of the Real ID Act on the states and citizens.

State Senator Ken Cuccinelli (R-Fairfax) and Delegate Bob Marshall (R-Prince William) have each introduced legislation designed to “stop dangerous ID” in the Commonwealth.

Cuccinelli’s bill, SB841, has been referred to the transportation committee and would do the following:

Prohibits DMV or any other agency of the Commonwealth from using any type of computer chip or radio-frequency identification on licenses and identification cards and from sharing certain data with other states or with any federal government agency. Further provides that no biometric data will be gathered or retained.

Marshall’s companion bill, HB1587, has also been referred to the Committee on Transportation, and it is summarized as follows:

Provides that the Commonwealth will not participate in the compliance of any provision of the federal Real ID Act and of any other federal law, regulation, or policy that would compromise the economic privacy or biometric data of any resident of the Commonwealth.

Neither bill has yet had a committee vote.

The speakers at the rally in Richmond on January 21 were passionate in their opposition to Real ID. I arrived a few minutes late, so I missed the first two or three speakers. I turned on my video camera just as Philip Van Cleave of the Virginia Citizens Defense League took the microphone. He was introduced (as were all the other speakers) by Patrick McSweeney, a former chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia.

more;

http://ricksincerethoughts.blogspot.com/2009/01/stop-dangerous-id-rally-in-richmond.html

International Association of Chiefs of Police HEARTS Eric Holder!

 Gun Ban Love-it’s driving me Mad, it’s making me crazy……

True Love

December 19, 2008

The Honorable Patrick Leahy

Chairman

Senate Committee on the Judiciary

United States Senate

Washington, DC 20510

Dear Chairman Leahy:

On behalf of the more than 22,000 members of the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), I am pleased to inform you of our support for the nomination of Mr. Eric Holder to be Attorney General of United States. The IACP believes that Mr. Holder’s years of service have clearly demonstrated he has the qualifications and experience necessary to be an effective leader of the U.S. Department of Justice.

 

Mr. Holder’s broad base of experience provides him with a unique

UNiQuE ?

perspective on criminal justice issues.  His service as both Deputy Attorney General and Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia gives him a thorough understanding of the crucial role played by state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies.  As a result, the IACP believes that, as Attorney Generl, Mr. Holder’s background will allow him to foster and enhance the crucial partnership among federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies.

The IACP urges you to confirm Mr. Holder’s nomination rapidly.

I look forward to your positive response to this request. If you have any questions on this matter, please

contact the IACP at 703-647-7211.

Sincerely,

Russell B. Laine

President

 http://www.theiacp.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=EJ0YwtiGguI%3d&tabid=392

Gun Owners of America Opposes AG Nominee

Gun Owners of America Opposes AG Nominee
“I have many serious questions about Mr. Holder’s nomination. At the top of the list are his anti-2nd amendment right positions. He’s clearly advocated near universal licensing and registration, and he joined and filed an amicus brief in the District of Columbia v. Heller U.S. Supreme Court case arguing that the 2nd amendment was NOT an individual right. That’s deeply disturbing.”
– U.S. Sen. David Vitter (R-LA)

Attorney General Nominee is an anti-gun activist

With the selection of Eric Holder, President Barack Obama could not have picked a more anti-Second Amendment nominee for U.S. Attorney General.

Eric Holder has a long history of anti-Second Amendment activism, going back to the days when he was the go-to guy for gun control in the Clinton administration.

Holder’s record includes his support of a three day waiting period for handgun purchases, handgun rationing of one gun per month, renewing the semi-automatic gun ban, gun owner registration and licensing, and much more.

Perhaps most egregiously, in 2008, Mr. Holder signed on to a brief before the Supreme Court that argued that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual’s right to own a firearm. This is not the type of person who should be confirmed to a position that carries the responsibility of enforcing most of the gun control laws in this country.

Wyoming Senator John Barrasso also expressed concerns about Eric Holder. In a recently published letter, Sen. Barrasso told constituents in the Equality State:

Given Holder’s career of attacks on the Second Amendment, his nomination continues to be of great concern to me. I am not convinced his philosophy on the Second Amendment is acceptable to the people of Wyoming and gun owners across the United States.

Agendas and intentions can change quickly. Our nation’s highest law enforcement officer must be committed to protecting and defending our individual rights to keep and bear arms. I intend to vote no on the nomination of Eric Holder.
GOA agrees with Senator Barrasso, and urges the U.S. Senate to reject this Second Amendment activist.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on Holder on Wednesday, January 28. The full Senate will take up the nomination shortly thereafter.
With the selection of Eric Holder, President Barack Obama could not have picked a more anti-Second Amendment nominee for U.S. Attorney General.

Eric Holder has a long history of anti-Second Amendment activism, going back to the days when he was the go-to guy for gun control in the Clinton administration.

Holder’s record includes his support of a three day waiting period for handgun purchases, handgun rationing of one gun per month, renewing the semi-automatic gun ban, gun owner registration and licensing, and much more.

http://gunowners.org/a01272009.htm

© 2008 by Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 – Phone: 703-321-8585 – Fax: 703-321-8408
The information contained herein may be disseminated for non-commercial purposes as long as credit is given to GOA.

Operation “Melt the Phones in DC”

Operation “Melt the Phones in DC” January 27, 2009 

 Hat Tip Sandra Crosnoe at “Finding Gems and Sharing Them”

http://scrosnoe.wordpress.com/

URGENT Action Alert: Tell your reps to vote NO to bailout (less than 24 hrs til vote) From http://topconservativesontwitter.org: We have less than 24 hours to complete this operation. The $2 trillion dollar bailout package will be voted on tomorrow. Please contact your local reps in Washington, REGARDLESS OF PARTY AFFILIATION, and tell them to vote NO on this bill. *SAMPLE SCRIPT* “Please inform (Senator/Congressman_______) that I do not support the $2 trillion bailout and the way it is being hurried to a vote. I expect (him/her) to remember to vote “no” for this piece of legislation.”

Member phone numbers can be found here:

 ALL AREA CODES ARE (202) Senate Main Number: 202-224-3121 House of Representative Numbers are listed below in alphabetical order:

entire article here;

http://scrosnoe.wordpress.com/2009/01/28/operation-melt-the-phones-in-dc/