Tag Archives: United Nations

Examiner.com: No Guns for Anyone – Sheriff Whetsel and Gun Control

Kaye Beach

Oct. 26, 2012, updated Oct. 29, 2012

I hate to be an absolutist but after years of studying the International Association of Chiefs of Police, it is my firm opinion that any Sheriff candidate associated with the organization is pretty much a no go.  There are a number of police associations to choose from and a choice to band together with this one is out of them all has to be the product of a pronounced ideology that for many Americans, especially pro Second Amendment Americans, is repulsive.

Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, was also critical of the IACP, which he told Cybercast News Service “represents a lot of appointed police chiefs from a lot of totalitarian and dictatorship countries where human rights are constantly violated and freedom of the press doesn’t even exist.”

“There isn’t a gun-control proposal that this organization hasn’t supported. . .” 


I think that any officer of the law that does not trust law abiding citizens with a gun, doesn’t deserve our trust.

This excellent article posted today at the Examiner.com takes a look at the latest IACP anti-gun Resolutions and points out the fact that Sheriff John Whetsel was a past President of the International Association of Chiefs of Police.  Whetsel, as IACP President, in 1995,  actively worked to suppress right to carry legislation in the states including Oklahoma.

No Guns for Anyone – Sheriff Whetsel and Gun Control

Here is  1995 internal IACP strategic plan document to undermine or eliminate right to carry legislation.

The plan was to kill the bills if possible and if not to encumber the legislation with a number of burdensome requirements to deter lawful citizens from obtaining a permit.
For example, Item 5 on page 6 of the document suggests making it a criminal offense, a felony rather than a misdemeanor,  to carry with an expired permit.
Another example is item #14 on pg 7. Require a separate CCW permit for each individual weapon and limit permit holders to one gun purchase per month.

President Clinton thanked John Whetsel personally in 1994 for his help in passing the Brady and Crime Bills.  The “Crime Bill” that Clinton makes reference to is actually ‘The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act’  This was the Act that established a ban on “Assault Weapons” which lasted from 1994 to 2004.  Clinton Whetsel 1994

The Examiner.com looks into this a little deeper here

I have been barking about the International Association of Chiefs of Police for years.

The IACP is an international, non governmental organization accredited by the United Nations and is a ‘Member of the UN POLICE COMMUNITY’ http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/sites/police/community.shtml

This organization has been instrumental in bringing about profound changes to our nation politically, technologically and culturally and not necessarily for the better.  They are the thought leaders, the change agents in American law enforcement.

You would be hard pressed to find even one of the Ten Amendments to the  US Constitution that the policies pushed by the IACP has not insulted but one of the most telling positions taken by the organization is their stance on the Second Amendment.

Steven Spingola, a well respected former homicide detective sums the IACP up very well as;

“a global organization that views the American Constitution as an obstructionist document.”

The IACP has a long history of anti-Second Amendment stances.

They have actively supported every piece of gun control legislation since the 1960’s. The organization is long time, bitter enemies with the NRA and other pro-Second Amendment groups.

IACP President, Quinn Tamm,  in 1971 actually said that a brick was a safer weapon for self defense that a handgun.

Nothing has changed since then. (See the 2012 Resolutions issued by the IACP)

For a litany of anti-gun antics from the IACP in recent times, read this.

The IACP opposes;

•expansion of concealed carry
•50-caliber rifles
•private sales of gun
•gun shows
•so-called “assault” weapons

The IACP Supports;

•Limiting the number of handguns law abiding citizens can purchase
•five-day “cooling off” or waiting periods
•Legislation to allow federal health and safety oversight of the firearms industry.
•State, local, and tribal governments mandating specific storage methods of guns
•Repealing  the Tiahrt Amendment, a federal law that protects sensitive federal gun trace data from general access.
•Gun surrender programs

This international organization is highly political.  Some of the activities of the IACP include lobbying and testifying before Congress, doing research and policy development, setting professional standards and providing accreditation for US police departments.  The IACP promotes and writes guidelines for police technology, trains and educates law enforcement as well as managing and administering numerous programs for the federal government.

But Whetsel asserts that law enforcement is not about politics.

If that is so, why choose to forge ties with an incredibly political organization like the IACP?

John Whetsel at the 2011 IACP Conference

Sheriff Whetsel has a deep and longstanding and continuing relationship with the IACP. He attends IACP yearly conferences and is a member of the IACP Executive Committee and an active member of at least one IACP subcommittee.

And it is all very convenient to say it is not about politics when he is under pressure to defend his ideology that as the Sheriff absolutely does matter!  I have spent many hours at the state capitol and have witnessed the Sheriff’s armed lobbyists working diligently on highly political matters and the Sheriff.  As you can imagine the Sheriff has quite a lot of pull up there, you know, where they make laws that impact the free exercise of your rights.  And Whetsel, like the IACP,  does not have a reputation of  being very concerned with protecting any of those Ten Amendments.


Could UN arms treaty infringe on US Constitution?

Kaye Beach

This is something to watch.


See Fox News’ video with Larry Prat


From Gun Owners of America  

UN Gun Grabbers Hard at Work Against Your Gun Rights
Even as Americans prepare to celebrate Independence Day, UN bureaucrats are hard at work plotting to take away your gun rights.
The UN Arms Trade Treaty, which is in the final stages of being drafted, is a backdoor attempt by the Obama administration to impose radical gun control on America citizens.
What can U.S. gun owners expect from the treaty? For starters, the treaty could:
* Require the registration and licensure of American firearms;
* Ban large categories of firearms;
* Require the mandatory destruction of surplus ammo and confiscated firearms;
* Define manufacturing so broadly that any gun owner who adds an accessory such as a scope or changes a stock on a firearm would be required to obtain a manufacturing license, and;
* Require “microstamping” of ammunition.
What’s more, the treaty could also be self-executing, meaning it would achieve its anti-gun objectives whether or not implementing legislation was passed by Congress.
The battle is heating up, and the media are starting to take notice. Just today, GOA ’s Larry Pratt appeared on Fox News with Megyn Kelly to discuss the UN treaty. You can view the video here.
Gun Owners of America has rallied the Senate opposition to this global gun grab. GOA worked with Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS) to get other Senators on record opposing the treaty. We are also pushing legislation to defund the Obama administration’s role in pushing the UN gun control agenda.
Negotiations on the treaty will continue through the summer, a time when many Americans are not necessarily focused on politics. But we can’t let up the pressure fighting this backdoor gun ban attempt by Obama, Hillary Clinton, and international gun grabbers.
Thanks to your support, GOA will continue to lead the fight against the Arms Trade Treaty. Click here to help GOA defeat the UN gun control agenda.
And as we celebrate liberty and the birth of our nation, please have a safe and happy Independence Day.

Oklahoma Action Alert! HJR 1072 Support for the American Sovereignty Restoration Act to be heard in Rule Committee

Kaye Beach
Feb 28, 2012

HJR 1072, Support for the American Sovereignty Restoration Act by Rep. Charles Key will be heard in the Rules committee tomorrow morning at 10:30 am.
This measure reiterates the intent of the American Sovereignty Restoration Act  which would end membership of the US to the United Nations.
HJR 1072 urges Congress and the President of the United States pass legislation and take steps to end membership of the United States in the United Nations. Read HJR 1072
A committee amendment has been included in HJR 1072 that addresses UN Agenda 21 as well. (Read the amendment)
Please contact the members of the House Rules Committee right away and ask that they vote YES on HJR 1072!

405 area code for all or call the switchboard at Phone: (405) 521-2711 or  (800) 522-8502 and ask to be connected to the office of the representative you wish to speak with.

House Rules Committee members
•    Rep. Banz (R) District 101 garybanz@okhouse.gov   557-7395
V. Chairman
•     Rep. Weldon (R)District 79 weldon.watson@okhouse.gov  557-7330
•    Rep. Armes (R) District 63         donarmes@okhouse.gov       557-7307
•    Rep. Glenn (D) District 7            larryglenn@okhouse.gov       557-7399
•    Rep. Liebmann (R)  District 82   guyliebmann@okhouse.gov    557-7357
•    Rep. Quinn (R) District 9            marty.quinn@okhouse.gov    557-7380
•    Rep. Williams (D) District 34     cory.williams@okhouse.gov      557-7411
•    Rep. Dank (R)  District 85      david.dank@okhouse.gov          557-7392
•    Rep. Hamilton (D) District 89  rebeccahamilton@okhouse.gov   557-7397
•    Rep. McDaniel (R) District 83   randy.mcdaniel@okhouse.gov    557-7409
•    Rep. Scott (D) District                seneca.scott@okhouse.gov          557-7391
•    Rep, Dorman ((D) District 55     joedorman@okhouse.gov        557-7305
•    Rep. Johnson (R) District 50      dennis.johnson@okhouse.gov   557-7327
•    Rep. Mulready (R) District 68      glen.mulready@okhouse.gov     557-7340
•    Rep. Trebilcock (R)District 98   johntrebilcock@okhouse.gov     557-7362

Oklahoma Action Alert! Pushing Back against the UN and Sustainable Subversion

Kaye Beach

Feb. 14. 2012

The problem with UN Agenda 21 is not that it came from the United Nations but that our government leaders have embraced the plan and have worked diligently to naturalize the policy into US law and national, state and local policies. The principles of government promoted by the UN and it’s Agenda 21 are antithetical to our form of government that has traditionally put great emphasis on private property rights.   This emphasis on individual liberty and property rights is largely responsible for the historic success of United States as a nation.

The implementation of the tenets of Agenda 21 is nothing short of subversion.  This has nothing to do with environmental stewardship.  It is about control!

There are battles being waged all over the United States as citizens and legislators struggle to protect fundamental property rights against multitudes of non-government organizations and agencies carry out the goals of Agenda 21.

Below is information on two efforts taking place in Oklahoma to defend against the implementation of contrary UN goals, a little history on how the UN policy came to America, one example of how damaging it is to industry and innovation in America and a new agreement (signed Feb 11, 2012) between the EPA and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP).


Two efforts to push back  taking place in Oklahoma right now. Your support is crucial.

On the county level;

Cleveland County Commissioner Offers Resolution Opposing Agenda 21

On a state level; HJR 1072, Support for the American Sovereignty Restoration Act by Rep. Charles Key.  This measure reiterates the intent of the American Sovereignty Restoration Act  which would end membership of the US to the United Nations. 

HJR 1072 urges Congress and the President of the United States pass legislation and take steps to end membership of the United States in the United Nations. Read HJR 1072

This measure was  referred to the House Rules Committee on Feb. 7, 2012 but it needs to be scheduled for a hearing in the Rules Committee.

Let the Rules Committee leaders know that it is very important that HJR 1072 gets scheduled and heard! 

Call or email;

Some background;

Land Use Control

Since the mid 1970s, both the United Nations and the United States have been moving toward ever-tightening “public” control of land use.

By: Henry Lamb – Sovereignty.net

Ownership of land is the foundation of freedom in America.  The hope of owning even a small plot of ground compelled our forefathers to brave incalculable risks crossing the ocean and challenging the wilderness.  Land ownership was so cherished by our nation’s founders that they guaranteed that government could not take private property without just compensation paid to the land owner.  This founding principle has eroded dramatically over time, especially since 1976.
The United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (HABITAT I) met in Vancouver, British Columbia in 1976.  Agenda Item 10 of the conference report was entitled simply “Land.”

Here is an excerpt from the Preamble to that item:
“Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market.  Private land ownership  is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes.  Public control of land use is therefore indispensable….”
This policy document was agreed to by the United States.  Among the U.S. delegates were William K. Reilly, former EPA Administrator, and Carla Hill, former Trade Negotiator in the Bush Administration.

Read more

Here is one example of how the principles of UN Agenda 21 looks on the ground as it is being carried out in the USA.

Signed on Feb 11, 2012-New Agreement between EPA and United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). 


Administrator Jackson signed the first Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between EPA and United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) during the 26th Session of the UNEP Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environment Forum, held in Nairobi, Kenya in February 2011. The MOU identifies areas for strategic cooperation, including strengthening environmental governance and regulatory capacity in developing countries; creating healthy urban communities; facilitating the transition to a green economy; responding to global challenges such as climate change; and providing scientific leadership.


WHEREAS the United Nations Environment Programme (hereinafter referred to as UNEP) is the leading organization within the United Nations system in the field of environment;
WHEREAS the mission of the Environmental Protection Agency of the United States of America (hereinafter referred to as EPA) is to protect human health and the environment within the United States and EPA may, consistent with applicable law, cooperate with other nations and organizations to protect the environment globally;

Full text of the MOU

Private Property Ownership in Oklahoma Barrier to Sustainable Development

Kaye Beach

May 9, 2011

If you are looking for some clarity regarding the confusing cacophony surrounding “Sustainability” efforts in Oklahoma, you should read this.

In 2004 The Oklahoma Academy set their sights on Oklahoma’s Environment: Pursuing A Responsible Balance, a 208 page compilation of essays, opinions and ideas given by experts covering sustainability issues mostly in the context of gaining acceptance for Sustainable Development practices.

The Oklahoma Academy report addresses the definition of sustainability in the second essay, Moving Toward Sustainable Progress by Will Focht

The most commonly cited definition of sustainability was offered in 1987 by the Brundtland Commission: “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

The Brundtland Commission is the unofficial name of the World Commission on Environment and Development, which was chaired by Gro Harlem Brundtland , a former prime minister of Norway. Created as an independent commission in response to a United Nations General Assembly resolution of 1983, the body was given the general mandate of proposing ways in which the international community could achieve sustainable development that would both protect the environment and fulfill the aspirations of the poorer countries for economic development.   From Answers.com

For the truth about Sustainable Development, I recommend Understanding Sustainable Development For the People and their Public Officials by Freedoms Advocates


Sustainable Development has become a “buzz” term that refers to a political agenda, rather than an objectively sustainable form of development. Specifically, it refers to an initiative of the United Nations (U.N.) called Sustainable Development Agenda 21. Sustainable Development Agenda 21 is a comprehensive statement of a political ideology that is being progressively infused into every level of government in America.

Taken from Understanding Sustainable Development For the People and their Public Officials

Further into the Oklahoma Academy report, the problem of private land ownership is addressed.  The problem is, according to this report, is that too much of it is privately owned in Oklahoma.

“Oklahoma, which ranked number forty-two in 1995 among the fifty states in percentage of land owned by Federal and State governments (National Wilderness Institute 1995). Only eight states had more land under private ownership than Oklahoma. “

Beth Schaefer Caniglia, Assistant Professor of Environmental Sociology at Oklahoma State University and member of the Board for the Oklahoma Sustainability Network gives her advice to overcoming  the  “long-standing sentiments regarding private property rights as symbols for democracy and freedom” held by Oklahomans.

“Many landowners resist the perceived slippery slope of conservation mandates and retreat behind constitutional takings provisions, . . .”


The Constitution protects property rights mainly through the Fifth Amendment’s Takings or Just Compensation Clause: ‘‘nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.’’


Drawing upon her experience as a “consultant for the NGO Steering Committee to the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development”, Ms. Caniglia offers some suggestions to overcome the problems that arise from the friction between sustainable development goals and the rights of property owners.


“These recommendations flow from my scholarly and professional experience as an environmental sociologist studying sustainable development policy making at the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development and in various sectors of society.  They are also informed by my involvement in Oklahoma sustainability-related organizations and initiatives”

Oklahoma, according to Ms. Caniglia, need some work on its “cultural framework”, noting that

“Recent decades have witnessed increasingly heated debate over efforts designed to harmonize environmental protection mandates with private property rights.”

Ms. Caniglia comforts sustainable development enthusiast by pointing out that,

“Oklahoma is not unique in its need to reconcile sustainable ecological management with private property rights, since Texas, Nebraska and Indiana, among others have even higher percentages of land under private ownership.”

Specifically she recommends work in three areas to aid in adjusting Oklahoma’s faulty cultural framework.

Recommendation #1:Facilitate Place-based Environmental Education for All Citizens in Oklahoma

Recommendation #2: Increase the Scope and Authority of Citizen Engagement in the Creation of Oklahoma Sustainable Land Management Policies

Recommendation #3: Calibrate the Creation of Collaborative Comprehensive Plans and Implementation of Land Use Standards

But education alone is not enough…

“Unfortunately, education alone is not enough to overcome the adversarial character that often pervades discussions of private property rights and sustainable ecosystem management trade-offs, . . .”  (See some of Ms. Caniglia’s other work below)

Understand that “citizen engagement” is not for the purpose of giving you a voice-you already have one.  It’s called the US Constitution which guarantees your natural right to own your property.  This is the law (bastardized though it has been)

Citizen engagement is to give them the chance to change your mind.

“There is an oft-heard adage that planning is neither a highly respected nor a politically powerful field in our state. Such an argument deserves consideration, since comprehensive planning is cited by the World Health Organization, the UN Commission on Sustainable Development and Agenda 21 as central to the achievement of sustainable development, including public health, profitable industrial growth, and ecosystem integrity.”

Ms. Caniglia correctly recognizes that due to the high percentage of private property ownership in the great State of Oklahoma, there is no way around the citizens.

“With the ownership of our lands predominately private, we can best foster sustainable ecosystem management by engaging our landowners in the process.”

Ms. Caniglia proposes to “surmount the radical flanks of private property rights” by  educating,  visioning, dialoging,  and facilitating  the people of Oklahoma into  a more “balanced” perspective of their natural and legal right to ownership of property which really means behaviorally engineering you into fatally compromising an essential human right that undergirds all others-the right to work, acquire and own and use and enjoy the fruits of your labor.

“Given that citizen landowners continue to be engaged in the comprehensive planning process more than many other citizen engagement opportunities, they should be a focus of our efforts to harmonize private property interests with sustainable land management.”

Here is what the proponents of sustainable development always seem to miss;

“One of the most fundamental requirements of a capitalist economic system—and one of the most misunderstood concepts—is a strong system of property rights. For decades social critics in the United States and throughout the Western world have complained that “property” rights too often take precedence over “human” rights, with the result that people are treated unequally and have unequal opportunities. Inequality exists in any society. But the purported conflict between property rights and human rights is a mirage. Property rights are human rights.”


I encourage everyone to read Ms. Caniglia’s short article.  It begins on page 74 of the Oklahoma Academy’s Town Hall publication of 2004.


You may also want to become familiar with the Oklahoma Academy as they are involved in many interesting projects aimed at policy development and have been since the 1980’s.


The Oklahoma Academy’s paper came out in 2004.  Overall, I would bet that they are pleased with the progress on “sustainability” since then.  The federal government is working hand in glove with non-government organizations all over the state giving the whole movement in Oklahoma a real boost.

Here is just one example;

ACOG Association of Central Oklahoma Governments

ACOG is one of 11 Councils of Governments in the State of Oklahoma, and one of several hundred planning organizations across the country.


Board of Directors


“. . .regional sustainability planning is ACOG’s latest project!”

Grassroots to massroots

OKC Downtown Monthly – October 2010

. . It takes brave, fearless leaders to tread into the collaborative world of sustainability planning. One such remarkable group is the Association of Central Oklahoma Governments (ACOG). ACOG is a voluntary association of city, town and county governments within the central Oklahoma area, including Oklahoma, Cleveland, Canadian and Logan Counties

. . .This kind of coordination among so many member municipalities is really very cool. Also, ACOG’s structure, functions and level of partner participation make it the perfect mechanism for coordinating regional sustainability efforts. And regional sustainability planning is ACOG’s latest project!

. . .In the 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Congress provided a total of $150 million to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for a Sustainable Communities Initiative.

. . .But how do we get some of that $100 million, you might ask? Well, ACOG is writing a grant application, of course! ACOG’s regional sustainability planning will mean that citizens from ACOG member cities such as Luther, Jones, Nichols Hills, Oklahoma City, Moore, Slaughterville and Newcastle will leave their comfortable city “bubble” to meet and greet citizens from other municipalities to collaborate in developing sustainable plans to benefit us all.

. . .ACOG’s work on these planning efforts folds perfectly into the ongoing efforts of the Oklahoma Sustainability Network and our municipal sustainability commissions.

Read more

ACOG is a member of the National Association of Regional Councils (NARC)

“The National Association of Regional Councils (NARC) serves as the national voice for regionalism.”

National Associations Congratulate HUD Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant Awardees

WASHINGTON, DC (October 14, 2010) – The National League of Cities (NLC), National Association of Regional Councils (NARC), Smart Growth America (SGA), the National Association of Area Agencies on Aging (n4a) and ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA (ICLEI) congratulate the cities, towns, communities and regions which today were awarded Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grants from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

One last thought.

“The true foundation of republican government is the equal right of every citizen in his person and property and in their management.” –Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816.

Other works of Ms Caniglia;

Informal Alliances vs. Institutional Ties: The Effect of Elite Alliances on Environmental TSMO Networks  http://www.mobilization.sdsu.edu/articleabstracts/061caniglia.html

“Caniglia  found that transnational environmental organizations with informal ties to international agencies played more central roles in transnational social movement networks by helping channel information and pressure among disconnected social actors.”

Handbook of Social Movements Across Disciplines pg 47

Globalization and Resistance: Transnational Dimensions of Social Movements

(As a contributor)


Getting the Gist of GIS-Geographic Information Systems

Kaye Beach

April 18, 2011

“The real danger is the gradual erosion of individual liberties through automation, integration, and interconnection of many small, separate record-keeping systems, each of which alone may seem innocuous, even benevolent, and wholly justifiable.”    U. S. Privacy Study Commission

GIS- Geographic Information System

“GIS is a computer system for capturing, storing, checking, integrating, manipulating, analyzing and displaying data related to location. What separates GIS from other types of information/databases is that everything is based on location (georeference).” Link

“GIS organizes geographic data so that a person reading a map can select data necessary for a specific project or task. A thematic map has a table of contents that allows the reader to add layers of information to a basemap of real-world locations. For example, a social analyst might use the basemap of Eugene, Oregon, and select datasets from the U.S. Census Bureau to add data layers to a map that shows residents’ education levels, ages, and employment status.” Link

GIS is promoted as a valuable management tool for almost every imaginable aspect of society worldwide.

“Understanding the Earth as a system requires that our scientific information systems be conceptualized in such a way that they are capable of interfacing with one another and ultimately able to function as a single unified system” link

GIS is a powerful integrator of information and technology-

“As we learn to link biometrics to biographic, geospatial, social networks and other forms of data, we can develop patterns of activities for both individuals and organizations, resulting in tactical and strategic situational awareness and intelligence advantage.”   LINK

There is one thing you should keep in mind while reading this article; that information about you is valuable and powerful.

Whoever keeps and controls your information has the power to keep and control you.  Our wealth, reputations and perceived worth is bundled into something we call data and this data is, in reality, what we are assessed on in just about every aspect of our lives. From legal or financial decisions to political and personal opportunities-it is the information, the data about us that usually matters most.

Some definitions:

The word enterprise is used often to describe information systems in both business and government so it’s a good idea to understand what the term means.

Enterprise Information Systems– Enterprise Information Systems provide a technology platform that enables organizations to integrate and coordinate their business processes. They provide a single system that is central to the organization and ensure that information can be shared across all functional levels and management hierarchies. (Emphasis mine)  LINK

Geodata- isanyinformation with a geographic component.

GIS Enables Mass Surveillance

Mass Surveillance is the pervasive surveillance of an entire population, or a substantial fraction thereof.

Mass surveillance enables social control

Social control refers generally to societal and political mechanisms or processes that regulate individual and group behavior, leading to conformity and compliance to the rules of a given society, state, or social group

GIS-What’s it good for?

“Geographic information system (GIS) technology leverages this geographic insight to address social, economic, business, and environmental concerns at local, regional, national, and global scales.”link

This article, The Evolution of Geospatial Technology Calls for Changes in Geospatial Research, Education and Government Management, written in 2009,  provides some useful insight about the potential for GIS technology to help create “more useful results” The authors, Jackson, Schell and Taylor explain that geospatial technologies have evolved and converged with a wide variety of other information technologies over the last fifteen years.

“Now they are of a piece, they “talk to one another” and interact freely in a fertile communications environment of wireless broadband, portable cell phone/computers, sensor-webs and, of course, the dynamically evolving environment of the World Wide Web.”

Jackson, Schell and Taylor explain the value of GIS tech for “industry stakeholders”, who are apparently on a mission to save us all.

“. . .expansion of human population and industry has brought humanity to a point of converging crises, and diverse industry stakeholders see geospatial technology in this context as a critical factor in enabling humanity to avoid disaster”

These GIS experts believe that  enlightened leaders must exert control over people and markets in order to bring about what they believe to be “more useful results” than would occur if people and markets were permitted to self-arrange.  In other words GIS is a tool for the managers and planners of society to control populations and the economy to produce the outcome that they know is best.

Jackson, Schell and Taylor write;

“. . . the market forces that drive the evolution of technology do not meaningfully, or in any disciplined way, take into full account the needs of science and social processes.”

I am no economist but the market forces or the law of supply and demand just observes that if there is a need for something the profit seeking market will oblige and at a price that reflects the real value of the service or good. What do the “needs of science” or “social processes” have to do with it?   Seems like if the market forces are not providing,   then there must not be a demand or the need is not one that can be met through the market.  Maybe they want “market forces” to address something that is beyond its scope and if that is true does this mean they want to bend those forces to serve a purpose it is not capable of?

Jackson, Schell and Taylor have an answer for those like me who might be hopelessly outdated in their ways of thinking;

“Public servants are warned away from the old fashioned approach should leading thinkers and policy planners persist in defending traditional institutional and economic intellectual practices.”

The “old fashioned approach” is the one that still dominates the thinking of many Americans.   I believe that Jackson, Schell and Taylor’s “traditional institutional practices” includes thepersistent idea that every individual has certain unalienable rights not grated them (and therefore not to be taken away from us) by government, as one that leading thinkers and policy planners need to be warned away from.  What should these thinkers and policy planners be focusing on instead?

“The point is, that governments should be thinking strategically about how geospatial technology should be positioned, through policy and law, to contribute as fully as possible to the social welfare and international cooperation. . .” 

Read More about The Evolution of Geospatial Technology

Here are just a few of the sectors of government, society actively utilizing GIS technology;


Regulatory Compliance

“Government agencies use GIS to create and enforce environmental legislation. Services and businesses use GIS to comply with environmental regulations and mandates.

In addition, cooperation between agencies is simplified by the use of a central database that can be leveraged for cross purposes such as financial information, ownership, improvements, and plans.”(Emphasis mine) Link

Health and Human Services

GIS as a tool for the health industry entails leveraging a variety of personal and spatial data for the purpose of “creating a state of health

Location, location, location

Spatial data is is information related to place.

“The old real estate addage that “location is everything” holds a new meaning in today’s world. Not only can location tell us about where we are, it can also tell us about who we are and what we do. The spatial data systems that store and integrate facts about us are becoming just as, if not more, important than the maps that they produce. Location is the unique characteristic that can join disparate data sets and uncover a variety of information about our daily lives.”  Spy in the Sky: Spatial Data Privacy Issues in Geographic Information Systems

The touted benefits of GIS for health are many but the catch is too much to swallow.

You first have to accept the idea that information is equivalent to knowledge or wisdom and then you have to have utter faith that the government health managers will be eternally generous and utterly benevolent to all individuals-always. Personally, I say no thanks…but really, they aren’t asking us to agree.  They are simply doing it.  And they are doing it globally I might add.

The UN’s Millennium Development Goals

Harmonizing health information systems with information systems in other social and economic sectors.

The Millennium Declaration of eight development goals (MDGs) has intensified international pressure to strengthen information systems to monitor 48 target indicators–18 of which are health-related
. . .Geographical information systems provide coherent demonstrations of geographical disparities in poverty, social determinants and service delivery. Several systems are in use, for example, DevInfo has a mapping facility within it, and HealthMapper (42) is a WHO system for mapping public health data. The UN has set up a working group to agree standards and achieve some compatibility in core data and geographical boundaries.”

Barack Obama, September 22, 2010   ” And today, I’m announcing our new U.S. Global Development Policy — the first of its kind by an American administration. [. . .] it outlines our new approach and the new thinking that will guide our overall development efforts, including the plan that I promised last year and that my administration has delivered to pursue the Millennium Development Goals.  Put simply, the United States is changing the way we do business

Remarks by the President at the Millennium Development Goals Summit in New York, New York

By 2020, public health information systems in the United States, such as disease registries, will be integrated into grids linked by the National Health Information Network (NHIN) that will utilize the Next Generation Internet (NGI) or Internet2.

The following is from a GIS project report, Reflection and Comment Health GIS in the mid-west: Unexpected developments and directions, by Frank Houghton, Ireland.  The paper mostly focuses on the success of the project but it also includes some of Mr. Houghten’s concerns about the technology and how it is being utilized.

As noted in this report, GIS is being used as a powerful tool for central planning.  Under the heading of central planning falls the correcting the unequal distribution of resourceswhich, of course, is another way of saying “redistribution of wealth

A major focus of GIS should be in using it as a tool to help explore and highlight and fight inequality and poverty” 

Writing about the data being collected and geo-referenced on population health in Ireland, Frank Houghton notes;

“This report included not only ‘standard’ information, such as Census small area population     statistics and deprivation data, but also information from a host of previously unmapped and inaccessible computerised health information systems.”


Mr. Houghton also refers to a “disquieting” aspect of the approach to GIS that emerged during this project.

“. . .the way in which it was discussed was very clearly connected with the issue of control. These overtones bring to mind sociological discussions around the issue of technology as a tool of oppression”

Houghton concludes;

. . .It is apparent that GIS has the potential to not merely maintain the status quo, but to be used actively as a means of management command and control.”

Frank Houghton Irish Centre for Research on Applied Social Studies, Limerick Institute of Technology and National Institute for Regional and Spatial Analysis

GIS is the Great Integrator

“Today’s GIS is foundational—it is based on open technologies and industry standards, meaning that it integrates fully with existing information systems. . . Geographic information systems bring together data from any source.” (Emphasis Mine)  IACP

“Geographic Information System (GIS) technology can help establish cross-sectoral communication – by providing not only very powerful tools for storage and analysis of multisectoral spatial and statistical data, but also by integrating databases of different sectors in the same format, structure and map projection in the GIS system.”


“As we learn to link biometrics to biographic, geospatial, social networks and other forms of data, we can develop patterns of activities for both individuals and organizations, resulting in tactical and strategic situational awareness and intelligence advantage.”   LINK

Are we starting to get the gist of all of this?

GIS for Global Health

Global Public Health Grid (GPHG)



 The World Health Organization (WHO) and National Center of Public Health Informatics (NCPHI) have forged collaboration on a Global Public Health Grid (GPHG) initiative to enable global data exchange and collaborative development of globally shareable and interoperable systems, tools and services.  GPHG aims to improve global public health by providing a standards-based informatics platform, and collaboratively developing and implementing a wide range of public health informatics applications and services leveraging widely distributed global expertise, thus enabling dissemination and exchange of information across different jurisdictional levels.


Public Health Mapping and GIS

International Health Regulations Coordination

“There is an urgent need to invest in the development and roll-out of a public health mapping and monitoring system at the subnational level in all countries as the basis for global, regional and national responses to the main health threats of the 21st century” Link



2007 A global partnership

“Since its establishment in the 1990s, the Programme has built a global partnership involving WHO Member States, WHO Regional Offices and Country Offices, other UN agencies and bilateral partners, universities and research institutions, collaborating centres, the private sector and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

[. . .]” Public health mapping and GIS enable the standardization of surveillance data from village level to global level and across diseases, as well as the analysis of health-related data from other sectors such as education, environment or official development assistance. In addition, target populations can be precisely located and profiled without time-consuming and costly field research” LINK


Oklahoma Health and GIS

Oklahoma State Department of Health Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Needs Assessment and Requirements Analysis Report of Findings and Recommendations 2008


Historically, the model of GIS coordination at OSDH has been decentralized.


OSDH can better focus mapping activities by continuing with and expanding upon the centralization efforts that were initiated in 2006 with the hiring of the GIS Coordinator and strengthened by the creation of the GIS Advisory Committee. Carefully guided centralization efforts will provide for efficient and effective application of GIS technology. Pg 1

There is a need to normalize datasets and to create agency-wide identifiers for people and facilities to enable higher quality analysis and program evaluation.

The Health Informatics Council and its subcommittees are addressing people identifiers.

Pg 3


In 1994 the Oklahoma Legislature passed and the Governor signed a bill that authorized the Oklahoma Conservation Commission to prepare a “Strategy for Developing a GIS for the State of Oklahoma” and created the State GIS Council to assist the Conservation Commission in this project. The Conservation Commission serves as the chair of the State GIS Council. For more information on the State GIS Council, visit their web site at http://www.okmaps.onenet.net.

In 2007, the Council expanded on the initial goals set forth in the legislation, identifying eight primary issues in the development of the strategy http://www.okmaps.onenet.net/mission.htm

More information about GIS development in Oklahoma

Oklahoma Office of Geographic Information

Strategic & Business Plan for Fiscal Years 2008 – 2010

Oklahoma GIS “Next Steps” 

“Expand the GeoCIP® GIS to include social and economic assets,(Emphasis mine) such as demographics, schools, social or cultural groups, business establishments, land parcels, sales or tax records, workforce, etc. for comprehensive asset mapping and economic development planning”

Source-Oklahoma GI Council presentation dated 6 November 2009

Data Fusion Centers

More uses for GIS

Public Safety

Natural Resources

Even more uses for GIS


GIS for Law Enforcement and Homeland Security

Under Public Safety falls Fire and Emergency, Homeland Security, Law Enforcement.  Here are some excerpts from a paper entitled“Breaking Down Barrierswritten in 2009by Paul Christin.   I think gives a good picture of the function of GIS in this area.

Policing, Intelligence, Fusion

How Can This Be Done?

“Geographic information systems (GIS) have long been used by government agencies to build and maintain data and provide numerous services. Local, state and federal agencies have built large spatial databases over many years of GIS use. GIS mapping technology has become more prevalent in law enforcement and homeland security agencies in recent years. Indeed, geospatial capabilities within data fusion and intelligence centers — for both law enforcement and homeland security — are essential for collecting diverse data from multiple sources.              

A GIS-enabled platform integrates existing tools (such as link analysis, remote sensing and computer modeling) and emerging technologies (such as video surveillance, hazardous material detectors, license plate readers and biometric sensors). GIS links information systems with data capture devices and uses geography or the geographic component of data to link these independent pieces into a single, comprehensive whole.

GIS works within IT as the framework to capture, model, identify and manipulate data about behavior. . .To prevent crime or terrorist acts, you need something that can help track and model behavior to understand where problems are emerging. GIS technology can quickly access and integrate relevant variables (the location of incidents, common elements, time sequence, geographic features common to incident types, demographics and other variables) that establish patterns and trends. These results can then be fused with dynamic data feeds (traffic patterns, camera surveillance, 9-1-1 calls, weather, etc.) to develop comprehensive situational awareness.

Information, once captured, can be integrated with other data, analyzed and disseminated to anyone who needs it, no matter the location or agency for which the requester works. It’s a new law enforcement and homeland security IT approach thats changing the way agencies operate in the new millennium.” (Emphasis mine)

Breaking Down Barriers, Paul Christin, Homeland Security Specialist for ESRI  2009

Take a look at the data used with GIS to create “situational awareness” for Homeland Security purposes;

ESRI White Paper: Public Safety and Homeland Security Situational AwarenessGIS Situational Awareness Taxonomy  LINK

Common Data
Sources for Public
Safety Situational

GIS is a core technology in the situational awareness landscape

Data Mining and Predictive Analytics

To address these issues, Information Builders has introduced Law Enforcement Analytics (LEA) to make all these data sources available for officers across the enterprise – providing a solution for intelligence-led and predictive policing. LEA combines many technologies – including traditional business intelligence (BI) concepts such as dashboards and scorecards, powerful ad hoc and predictive analytics, interactive mapping capabilities, data mining, and enterprise search.  LINK

Beverly Eakman on predictive analytics (Yes. She is talking about its use in schools)

“Today, hundreds of seemingly unrelated pieces of data that reveal political leanings and parental views are fed into a “predictive” computer algorithm. What’s a predictive computer algorithm? Well, it’s a mathematical formula that sifts masses of information, then predicts what a person will probably do, given various hypothetical scenarios. “

More on Predictive Analytics

The potential for good that could come from such a massive amount and variety of information that can be collected, analyzed, shared and integrated and referenced by physical location by GIS is fast overshadowed by the realization of the potential for abuse this technology enables.  And that is no idle concern.  It has transformed what was once one of GIS technologies greatest champions into an outspoken critic who hopes to be able to reverse the course of the technology that he once worked so hard to advance.

KU professor helps create emergency response database 2001

LAWRENCE — If there is such a thing as a weapon against weapons of mass destruction, Jerry Dobson is helping to perfect it. .

The database is supported by a geographical information system (GIS) that combines data from a variety of sources, including best-available census counts of every country in the world, terrain and nighttime lights interpreted from satellite images, road networks and elevations. The LandScan Global Population Database provides the distribution of people in sections even more precise than one square kilometer per cell

. . . The database is already popular among several organizations involved in the war on terrorism, including the United Nations, the World Health Organization and the U.S. State and Defense departments, he said.

. . .While much has been said about this war being unlike any previous one, that point perhaps is best illustrated in the growing importance of the LandScan database. By providing crucial information on population distribution, it is helping authorities balance the need to keep an eye on global developments that affect specific communities.

“I’ve used the expression ‘Global threats to local places,’ and that’s what we are facing now,” Dobson said.


Between 2001 and 2003 Dobson did an about face.

KU researcher warns against potential threat of ‘geoslavery’

March 5, 2003

LAWRENCE — Jerome Dobson wants to make sure his field of research doesn’t aid the greatest threat to personal freedom.

As a pioneer of geographic information systems (GIS), Dobson, a researcher at the Kansas Applied Remote Sensing Program at the University of Kansas, helped develop the technology that now is commonplace in government, business and practically every aspect of modern life.

Since 1975, Dobson has used GIS for a number of applications — from conducting environmental analyses to identifying populations at risk of terrorism and natural disasters — by combining data sets such as detailed population counts of every country in the world, terrain and nighttime lights interpreted from satellite images, road networks and elevations. Dobson, who is a professor of geography at KU, also is president of the American Geographical Society.

Unfortunately, the same technology that has so many beneficial uses also has the potential to create a highly sophisticated form of slavery, or “geoslavery,” as Dobson calls it. What worries Dobson is that GIS technology easily could be used not only to spy on people but to control them as well.

“It concerns me that something I thought was wonderful has a downside that may lead to geoslavery — the greatest threat to freedom we’ve ever experienced in human history,” he said.

Read More

Here’s one more qualified expert whose words should carry some weight.  GIS is just one more technology that appears to be elemental in what Brzezinski calls the “technotronic era

“The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society.   Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. […] The capacity to assert social and political control over the individual will vastly increase.  It will soon be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and to maintain up-to-date, complete files, containing even most personal information about the health or personal behavior of the citizen in addition to more customary data.   These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.”

-Zbigniew Brzezinski


Obama Nominates Rabid Anti-gunner to Head the ATF


Gun Owners of America as well as other respected Second Amendment organizations oppose Andrew Traver as the new head of the ATF for good reason.

The Truth about Guns writes on Aug 5, 2010:

Traver’s work with the IACP included signing off on a 2008 report prepared by the pro-gun control group The Joyce Foundation: Taking a Stand: Reducing Gun Violence in Our Communities. Click here for the press release.

The IACP and Joyce are old pals. In 2006, the Foundation wrote a check to the police org for $174,788 to fund a regional summit. For the ’08 report, Traver’s name is in the sidebar on the right, as one of the members of the “advisory group.” Apparently, “the advisory group . . . made critical decisions throughout [the] summit and final report efforts.”

My article about the IACP and the Great Lakes Gun Summit;

The Joyce Foundation, the IACP and the UN Disarming the World . . .

Please read and take action on this one!

Gun Owners of America writes today;

Obama Nominates Rabid Anti-gunner to Head the ATF

— Ask your Senators to Support a Filibuster

Monday, November 29, 2010

It was not a good sign that Barack Obama kept his nominee to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives a secret until after the midterm election –- and then quickly announced that anti-gun zealot Andrew F. Traver would be named to fill the slot.

After being blasted before November 2’s election by the liberal New York Times for failing to beef up the ATF by appointing a director –- for fear of the wrath of the “gun lobby” -– Obama gets right past the election and, presto chango, a nominee appears.  How ’bout that?

And not just any nominee.

As special agent in charge of Chicago’s ATF field division, Traver had taken the lead in calling for a ban on semiautomatic firearms.

And Chicago, of course, has been the epicenter of anti-gun government activism.  It is not surprising that Traver has also been active in the virulently anti-gun International Association of Chiefs of Police, which has worked to empower Handgun Control-type activists and has commissioned panels to:

* support one-gun-a-month and lock-up-your-safety laws, as well as “ballistic fingerprinting” files on all firearms;

* espouse an “effective” ban on .50-caliber firearms, and a redefinition of “armor-piercing” ammunition that could effectively ban handgun use;

* mandate gun-destruction policies for law enforcement and enhanced funding to go after guns;

* prohibit all private gun sales and make “prohibited persons” out of a much wider variety of persons committing simple misdemeanors;

* back a repeal of the Tiahrt amendment; and,

* allow federal health and safety oversight of the firearms industry (through agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control, the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Food and Drug Administration).

It is disconcerting that ANY organization espousing these views would be taken seriously.  That an activist in such an organization would be put in charge of the ATF is truly troubling.

ACTION: Contact your Senators.  Urge them to support a filibuster of the Traver nomination to head the ATF.  You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center to send your Senators the pre-written e-mail message below.

Go to GOA for mORE

Obama Administration Caves to Brady Campaign on Traver ATF Nomination

Aug 5, 2010

Buzz is the leading contender is Andrew Traver, who now heads the agency’s Chicago office.” Hang on; what’s with the “just 18 months” routine? Is mainjustice.com making excuses for President Obama? Meanwhile, here’s something you may not know about Traver or the ATF . . .

The ATF has been busy computerizing the records of ALL U.S. gun purchases—even though federal law specifically prohibits the creation of a national gun registry. And who do you think’s gung-ho on this effort? Barack’s man Traver.

. . .Oh wait! There’s Andy again, as a member of the anti-gun International Association of Chiefs of Police.

Oh look! The above picture shows Mr. Traver palling up with Palatine Mayor Rita Mullins (a member of Mayors Against Illegal Guns) and Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence Executive Director Thomas Mannard.

Read More


hursday, November 18th, 2010

BELLEVUE, WA – The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms today is announcing its opposition to the nomination, by President Obama, of Andrew Traver as director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Traver is currently special agent in charge of Chicago’s BATFE field division, where he has a history of working with gun prohibitionists. He served as an advisor to the International Association for Chiefs of Police on that group’s 2007 “Gun Violence Reduction Project,” in cooperation with the anti-gun-rights Joyce Foundation. This project involved several high profile anti-gun-rights advocates, but there was not a single representative from the firearms community on the advisory panel.

“The nomination of Andrew Traver is more proof that Barack Obama has complete disregard for the Second Amendment and the rights of firearms owners,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “We have serious concerns that the agency, under his leadership, will maintain any semblance of cooperation with the firearms industry, over which BATFE exercises considerable control.”

Traver helped develop the IACP/Joyce Foundation report, which recommended banning an array of modern sport-utility rifles and .50-caliber rifles used in long-range competition. The report also encouraged Congress to repeal the Tiahrt Amendment that protects sensitive trace data used by law enforcement in criminal investigations from being misued in frivolous municipal lawsuits that have consistently lost in court, and urged the adoption of restrictive gun show regulations that would effectively force them to close.

Read More

Sunday, November 21st, 2010

Charlotte, NC –-(Ammoland.com)- Statement From NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox

The NRA strongly opposes President Obama’s nomination of Andrew Traver as director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE).

Traver has been deeply aligned with gun control advocates and anti-gun activities.

This makes him the wrong choice to lead an enforcement agency that has almost exclusive oversight and control over the firearms industry, its retailers and consumers.

Further, an important nomination such as BATFE director should not be made as a “recess appointment,” in order to circumvent consent by the American people through their duly elected U.S. Senators.

Traver served as an advisor to the International Association for Chiefs of Police’s (IACP) “Gun Violence Reduction Project,” a “partnership” with the Joyce Foundation.

NRA Opposes The Nomination Of Andrew Traver to Head BATFE

Both IACP and the Joyce Foundation are names synonymous with promoting a variety of gun control schemes at the federal and state levels. Most of the individuals involved in this project were prominent gun control activists and lobbyists.

Fusion Centers, the IACP, Gun Control and HUBZones A4L Show Notes


Sign up for OK-Safe’s Action Alert Newsletter

Listen to the show


Governor Jesse Ventura Talks About The Police State. 3 Videos

OKOHS (Oklahoma Office of Homeland Security) is directed to continue their efforts in combating terrorism, and shall continue to oversee the implementation of any and all initiatives or efforts mandated by the United States Department of Homeland Security, including the development of a state information fusion center.

In August 2002, the International Association of Chiefs of Police released the recommendations of its Criminal Intelligence Summit held March 7-8, 2002, with the final document coming from the DOJ’s office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS). The report acknowledged that the problems identified following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were found to be with “intelligence exchange between national agencies…” Then the report quickly endorsed the creation of a Criminal Intelligence Coordinating Council to implement the National Intelligence Plan that would engage local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies in a database sharing environment. The plan addressed the legal impediments to the effective transfer of criminal intelligence between authorized local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies. This plan became the superstructure for the next domestic Fusion Center effort by advocating for the creation of the Criminal Intelligence Coordinating Council and charged it with accomplishing a number of goals:

Read More

The Rise of the Fusion-Intelligence Complex: A critique of political surveillance after 9/11

Where did Fusion Centers Come From???

Immediately following the tragic events of 9/11, the IACP moved quickly to hold a national policy summit on terrorism and intelligence. The summit, sponsored by the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Office and the IACP, was held in March of 2002. More than 120 law enforcement, justice, terrorism, and intelligence experts gathered in Alexandria, Virginia to create a national strategy to improve American law enforcement’s capacity to recognize, gather, analyze, share, and utilize criminal intelligence. Read More

Recent story on the IACP;

Obama Nominates Rabid Anti-gunner to Head the ATF

In March 2002, a year before DHS’ creation, the International Association of Chiefs of Police called for a national plan for sharing intelligence.

That recommendation led Justice’s Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative (Global) consortium to draft a National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan in October 2003.

The IACP also recommended against limiting intelligence sharing to terrorism-related data, suggesting instead that all “criminal intelligence” data be shared.  SOURCE EPIC

The IACP set 2 goals

#1 the establishment of “a coordinating council comprised of local, state, Tribal and Federal law enforcement executives … to oversee and implement the National Intelligence Plan.”

#2 is to “Address the legal impediments to the effective transfer of criminal intelligence between enforcement agencies.”

Those  “legal impediments” are the Bill of Rights and specifically the laws that were implemented in order to protect us from government spying as in COINTELPRO

The IACP and Intelligence Led Policing Post 911 Big Brother Gets Bigger

In the fall of 2001, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) held its annual conference in Toronto. Considering the events of September 11th, it was decided to organize an International Criminal Intelligence Sharing Summit in Alexandria, VA, March 7-8, 2002; the topic was Criminal Intelligence Sharing: Overcoming Barriers to Enhance Domestic Security.


“. . .unprecedented initiatives have been undertaken to reengineer the law enforcement intelligence function.”

The Criminal Intelligence Systems Operating Policies, 28 CFR 23  mandates that

“criminal intelligence systems … are utilized in conformance with the privacy and constitutional rights of individuals.”

The IACP National Law Enforcement Policy Center’s “Criminal Intelligence Model Policy,” in an appendix to the GIWG (Global Intelligence Working Group) Report, was revised in 2003 to incorporate the anticipated change to 28 CFR 23.

The anticipated change?  Replace “reasonable suspicion” with “reasonable indication” (From Big Brother Gets Bigger)

R.I.P.  28 C.F.R. part 23

2008. . .the Department of Justice has relaxed restrictions on when the Federal Bureau of Investigation can begin investigations, and worked to increase intelligence-sharing among local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies as well as with federal (intelligence) agencies in ways that will compromise civil liberties (through a change in federal regulation 28 C.F.R. part 23).

Read more FBI Guidelines 28 C.F.R. part 23

Fusion Center Document Collection

The IACP- Gun Grabbers

The Constitution preserves “the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation. . . (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” — James Madison, The Federalist, No. 46

the Joyce Foundation, UN and the IACP disarming the world…

Brady President Praises Police Chiefs After Release of New Report

Sep 19, 2007

Washington, D.C. – Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, called today’s report by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Taking a Stand: Reducing Gun Violence in Our Communities, a “clear road map from the nation’s police chiefs of steps we can take now to combat gun violence.”

“Our nation’s police are on the front lines in the fight for public safety. In this landmark report, police leaders are saying they are tired of the nation’s gun policies being held hostage by the special interest gun lobby,” Helmke said.


International Association of Chiefs of Police and The Joyce Foundation Great Lakes Gun Summit 2007

America has accepted the communitarian premise of the “good of the community” over individual rights as evidenced throughout law and policy, especially since 9 11.  This is where that line of thinking leads us and it is antithetical to the philosophy of individual rights that this nation was founded upon.  If we do not insist on upholding this revolutionary precept of our nation, then we ought to not be surprised when we begin to resemble every other milksop so-called Democracy in the world.

**Special note to 2A people in Oklahoma.** Read “Janet Reno addresses the IACP”

1995-This is a internal International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) document that obtained by NRA.  It discusses in detail IACP plans to weaken or eliminate right-to-carry legislation in state legislatures.

Do Gun Shows Have Loopholes?

“The public has a right to know the contents of this report, which was revealed to the International Association of Chiefs of Police last year,” said CCRKBA Executive Director Joe Waldron. “According to the Force Science News, research focused on 40 incidents involving assaults or deadly attacks on police officers, in which all but one of the guns involved had been obtained illegally, and none were obtained from gun shows.”

The study is called “Violent Encounters: A Study of Felonious Assaults on Our Nation’s Law Enforcement Officers.” Waldron called it a “smoking gun” in terms of revelations about the sources of crime guns. Anti-gun politicians and police chiefs do not want the public to know as they campaign against the so-called “gun show loophole,” he said.

Read more

Gun Violence Reduction

I’m going to describe a group that recently demanded enactment of a sweeping federal gun control agenda.

Let’s see if you can guess who it is.

The group has 22,000 members in more than 100 countries. Membership categories include “city managers, highway safety specialists, psychologists, attorneys, coroners and management analysts,” among others. The group has offices in Europe and the Caribbean, and the group’s website describes its governing board in your choice of English, Spanish, Portuguese and French.

Is it a new United Nations disarmament agency? No, the group is the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), headquartered in the nation’s capital.

Chris Cox “Follow The Money”

WyGO says

IACP Document Collection


•Questions to Ask about Fusion Centers

The IACP, the UN and the Joyce Foundation Disarming the World

. . .One nation at a time.

If you are worried about gun control right now you should be. This push to limit gun rights is not a spontaneous occurrence. It is the result of a carefully crafted campaign courtesy of the United Nations with some very stalwart support coming from our friends at the Joyce Foundation and all of their gun-grabbing partners in crime.

From the Joyce Foundation website


The Foundation believes that better public policies can help reduce gun violence. It supports the efforts of law enforcement officials, legislators, municipal leaders, the medical and public health communities, advocacy, municipal leaders, the medical and public health communities, advocacy groups, and others in pushing for measures to stop gun trafficking, keep guns out of the hands of criminals, prevent children from getting access to firearms, and other measures that offer promise of combating gun violence.

*Emphasis added

Consider this promotion of the IACP (International Association of Chief’s of Police) by the Joyce Foundation. Together the IACP and the Joyce Foundation held “The Great Lakes Summit on Gun Violence” on 2007

Call for New Approach to Reducing Gun Violence

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

For Immediate Release

The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), the world’s largest association of law enforcement executives, today called on Congress and the Administration, as well as state and local governments, to support strong and effective gun violence prevention policies, No matter what you call it means infringing upon your 2nd Amendment Rights!)

And to provide law enforcement with the resources necessary to reverse a two-year rise in violent crime.

The IACP unveiled a set of nearly 40 recommendations for policymakers, police, and community and philanthropic leaders which are the result of theGreat Lakes Summit on Gun Violence.” The summit, held in Chicago earlier this year, was a groundbreaking
collaboration of 200 law enforcement and elected officials and public health experts
to develop a cooperative approach to reduce gun related crime and violence.

“It is simply unacceptable that in communities across America more than 80 people a day are dying from gun violence”

said Russell Laine, Chief of the Algonquin, Illinois Police Department and IACP 2nd Vice President. “Every day, dedicated police officers put their lives on the line to protect their communities from criminals who often outgun them, but we can’t do it alone. This is why we are calling on policymakers and the public to help us combat gun violence.”

The recommendations in the report –
Taking a Stand: Reducing Gun Violence in Our Communities
– are divided into three areas: keeping communities safe, preventing and solving gun crime, and keeping police officers safe.

Specific proposals include:

  • requiring that all gun sales take place through federally licensed dealers;
  • enhancing the ability of law enforcement to use federal gun trace data to deter illegal trafficking;
  • removing all firearms and ammunition from batterers when law enforcement responds to domestic violence calls; restoring funding to the COPS program, an extremely effective crime fighting program that has broad support within the law enforcement community; and, mandating safe storage of firearms by private citizens.

“Much more effective responses to escalating gun violence are urgently needed,”

Senator Edward M. Kennedy said. “The IACP’s compelling report and specific recommendations are a clear call to action. Without further delay, Congress and the Administration need to do our part by enacting concrete reforms that will reduce crime and protect the safety of police officers and all Americans.”

“In the northern part of my congressional district, there are more than 3,000 gang members, and all have relatively easy access to weapons,” Congressman Kirk said. “Besides the tragic loss of life and injuries associated with gun violence, we are creating environments that breed more crime. We need to implement common-sense policies that will curb gun violence and reduce gang activity – making our communities safer and stronger.”

According to Federal Bureau of Justice Statistics lethal violence – the majority of which is firearm related – across the nation increased in both 2005 and 2006.


Again they repeat this. How convenient to make this claim. Violent crime rates have been trending downward for some time.

1992 Violent Crime Total=1,932,270

2007 Violent Crime total= 1,408,337


1992 Homicide= 23,760

2007 Homicide= 16,929


There are 2 major methods of measuring crime rates in the USA. There is the National Crime Victimization Survey and the F.B.I. Uniform Crime Reports. These two methods yield different results. See the Bureau of Justice Statistics for more on data collection:


“Too many Americans are victims of gun violence, including many police officers wounded or killed in the line of duty,”

said Mayor Tom Barrett of Milwaukee, who served in Congress for a decade. “That’s not going to change until elected officials, including our federal partners, stand with law enforcement and give them the tools and the policies they need to serve and protect our communities safely.”

The Great Lakes Summit on Gun Violence was sponsored, in part, by the Joyce Foundation in Chicago.

Taking a Stand: Reducing Gun Violence in Our Communities.

In any event, it is apparent that by whatever measure, any blip in violent crime in 2005 and 2006 does not indicate any sort of frightening crime wave as the Joyce Foundation or the IACP would have you believe. They are implementing the same program used to disarm Great Britain and Australia. We would be wise to study these two successful campaigns that have left the citizens of those nations with no means to protect themselves.


read this gentleman’s account of how Australia was duped into losing their right to protect themselves.

He has a message for us;

“It is important for Americans to realize not only how the current gun control happened in Australia, but also that the gun control organizations in Australia aren’t satisfied even with the extreme “control” they’ve obtained.  They’re pushing hard for even more.”

This is one man from Australia who knows what it is that this country has lost. He begins his story with this quote;

Most of the major ills of the world have been caused by well-meaning people who ignored the principle of individual freedom, except as applied to themselves, and who were obsessed with fanatical zeal to improve the lot of mankind-in-the-mass through some pet formula of their own. The harm done by ordinary criminals, murderers, gangsters, and thieves is negligible in comparison with the agony inflicted upon human beings by the professional do-gooders, who attempt to set themselves up as gods on earth and who would ruthlessly force their views on all others- with the abiding assurance that the end justifies the means.”

–Henry Grady Weaver




Big Win for the International Association of Chiefs of Police

Big Win for the International Association of Chiefs of Police

From Police Chief Magazine

July 23, 2009

IACP Opposed Concealed Carry Legislation Fails in Senate

On July 22 the Senate rejected an amendment that would allow an individual to carry concealed firearms when visiting another state as long as the individual was entitled to carry concealed firearms pursuant to the laws of his or her home state. The measure (Respecting States’ Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009) failed to receive the 60 votes needed for passage.

The IACP is strongly opposed to this legislation. It is the IACP’s belief that states and localities should have the right to determine who is eligible to carry firearms in their communities. It is essential that state and local governments maintain the ability to legislate concealed carry laws that best fit the needs of their communities.

The IACP applauds the Senate for defeating this dangerous and unacceptable legislation.


In early 2007, the IACP began a series of discussions with the leadership of the Joyce Foundation of Chicago to gain its perspective on firearm violence issues. The Joyce Foundation is a not-for-profit organization with a mission to improve the quality of life in communities within the Great Lakes region of the United States. The foundation’s view was complementary to that of the IACP—focusing on the impact of firearm violence on communities, the health-care system, and public policy decisions throughout the nation.

From those meetings, a plan emerged to hold a national summit on firearm violence, sponsored by both the IACP and the Joyce Foundation



Is Your County Sheriff UN-knighted for Gun Contol?

International Association of Chiefs of Police Proud Consultants of the UN and paid for by the Joyce Foundation.

Why don’t they don’t understand that “criminals” don’t care if a particular gun is illegal?  This argument that disarming ordinary people in any ways effects criminals is not worth having anymore….Except that they are using it to rob you of the ability to defend yourself and family with it.

And why is the term “criminal” and “citizen” synonymous to these people?

Here is a quote from page 7 of Taking a Stand: Reducing Gun Violence in Our Communities A report from the International Association of Chiefs of Police 2007 Great Lakes Summit on Gun Violence (see right sidebar at the bottom for the PDF file)

“Enacting an effective ban on military-style assault weapons, armor-piercing handgun ammunition, .50 caliber sniper rifles and other weapons that enable criminals to outgun law enforcement

#1. Disturbing Fact you should know about the IACP.  They accept funding from and openly work with anti-Second Amendment institutions like The Joyce Foundation.  The IACP are proud consultants to the United Nations since the 70’s.

Presenting; the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

The IACP UN-ited for Gun Control


To convene the Great Lakes States Summit on Gun Violence in April 2007
(Be sure to visit their section on “gun violence”)

Excellent book on the UN’s policies and practices of citizen disarmament-Globa Gun Grab by William Norman Grigg.

In Global Gun Grab, Grigg reveals the real intent behind the UN’s call for “general and complete disarmament” That intent, he convincingly demonstrates, has much more to do with acquiring a monopoly of power than with eliminating all armaments. Whether the armament in question is a weapon of mass destruction or a Colt Python revolver, the UN seeks a globalized police apparatus that will enable it to impose its will on all the nations and peoples of the Earth. That apparatus will control the world’s armaments. And those armaments, Grigg persuasively argues, will be used, not to enforce world peace, but to impose world tyranny.

In a chapter devoted to the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, Grigg details the role played by Kofi Annan, who was then chief of UN peacekeeping operations. At least 800,000 Tutsis were slaughtered by the Hutu-dominated government and its killing squads. On one occasion, Canadian Lt. General Romeo Dallaire, commander of UN military forces deployed to Rwanda in 1993 to administer a cease-fire, sought permission to raid a government weapons cache. He had been briefed by a defector from the Hutu regime, who also warned that the government planned to register all Tutsis in the capital of Kigali, possibly to pave the way for their extermination   Incredibly, Grigg writes, General Dallaire was not only forbidden “to disarm the government killing squads,” but ordered “to share his information with the Hutu government.” The fax order, it was determined later, was authored by Annan.

RecommendedHotel Rwanda

The Rwandan genocide occurred in large part because the “civilian population was disarmed, except for militia units under central government control.” The UN peace accord had “called for efforts to confiscate ‘all weapons distributed to or illegally acquired by civilians,”‘ but before the killing began “the Hutu-dominated government had distributed automatic rifles and hand grenades to official militias and paramilitary gangs. It was this firepower that made the genocide possible.”

Grigg contends that those Americans “who expect an apocalyptic invasion by blue-helmeted UN troops are fixating on the wrong threat. A much more plausible scenario is that UN civilian disarmament policies would be enforced by Americans against Amen cans.” The main threat posed by the UN “is not invasion, but subversion,” and in the foreseeable future “the chief impact that the UN will have upon American institutions and policies will come in the form of ‘harmonization’ — meaning that our laws and governmental policies will be adjusted to conform with our nation’s supposed ‘international obligation’ as defined in UN treaties and conventions.” The most serious threat we face “comes not from the UN itself but from American institutions that are being corrupted and placed at the service of the UN’s agenda — particularly the U.S. military and our law enforcement agencies.

Read more


Global Gun Grab by William Norman Grigg and check out his excellent blog site Pro Libertate

Here is a report written by Chris Cox, the Executive Director of the NRA-ILA entitled Follow the Money. It was written 2007 in order to answer this burning question;

Why does a new report from the International Association of Chiefs of Police read like every gun-ban strategy we’ve heard for the last 10 years?

Chris Cox

I’m going to describe a group that recently demanded enactment of a sweeping federal gun control agenda.

Let’s see if you can guess who it is.

The group has 22,000 members in more than 100 countries. Membership categories include “city managers, highway safety specialists, psychologists, attorneys, coroners and management analysts,” among others. The group has offices in Europe and the Caribbean, and the group’s website describes its governing board in your choice of English, Spanish, Portuguese and French.

Why does a new report from the International Association of Chiefs of Police read like every gun-ban strategy we’ve heard for the last 10 years? To find out, all one has to do is follow the money.

Is it a new United Nations disarmament agency? No, the group is the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), headquartered in the nation’s capital. And the story behind the report is a shadowy web of huge donations, made by an activist foundation in the Midwest, leading straight to puppet strings that control the agenda of gun ban groups, the IACP and even New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg.

The IACP report, called “Taking a Stand: Reducing Gun Violence in Our Communities,” is nothing more than a rubber stamp, bought and paid for, of the pre-existing agenda for gun ban groups. It is a blueprint the enemies of freedom plan to pursue after the 2008 elections–if they win total control of the White House and Congress.

What compelled the IACP to issue this sweeping report? Follow the money. A note on the cover proudly declares that the report was issued “with support from the Joyce Foundation.”

That’s a familiar name to longtime readers. The Joyce Foundation has pumped tens of millions of dollars into the coffers of gun ban groups over the years. The Violence Policy Center (VPC), an unashamed promoter of a total ban on handguns, collected more than $1 million of Joyce money just in 2005 and 2006. In 2000, the Joyce Foundation paid a VPC advisor and former Handgun Control, Inc. board member to edit a “Second Amendment Symposium” issue of the Chicago-Kent Law Review. That slim volume contains nearly half the anti-individual rights articles ever published on the Second Amendment.

The IACP newsletter proudly notes that the Joyce Foundation has “made more than $30 million in grants to groups seeking public health solutions that offer the promise of reducing gun deaths and injuries in America.”

This year, the Joyce Foundation invested heavily in IACP. They paid IACP over $500,000 to host “The Great Lakes States Summit on Gun Violence,” and then to issue the report from the conference. That comes out to nearly $11,000 per page, but the Joyce Foundation got what it paid for–no surprise given the report’s thank you to Joyce Foundation Communications Director Mary O’Connell for “her editing, writing and consistent work to produce this report.”

Of course, she had a lot of help. The list of “Report Contributors” includes Kristen Rand and Tom Diaz of the VPC, as well as David Mitchell, a former staff member of Handgun Control, Inc. The list of “Summit Advisors” is even more swollen with luminaries of the gun ban faction, including the heads of three anti-gun groups that operate at the state and local level–all of which also receive direct funding from Joyce.

The list also includes Fred Grebauer, who happens to be the top gun control advisor to none other than New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg. Joyce has been generous with Bloomberg as well, paying out $175,000 to the “Mayor’s Fund to Advance New York City,” a contribution intended to help “organize a coalition of mayors from around the country to promote national, state and local policies, litigation and law enforcement strategies aimed at reducing the flow of illegal guns into cities.” So now we know who’s paying the tab for Bloomberg’s obsessive gun control campaign as well.

Now that we’ve identified the Joyce Foundation as the wizard behind the curtain, what’s at the end of its yellow brick road? Most of the report’s recommendations are old, tired and shopworn. There’s the standard rhetoric urging Congress to “enact an effective ban on military-style assault weapons.” There’s a call for banning “.50 caliber sniper rifles,” and a demand to ban “armor-piercing” ammunition. The report suggests that Congress should regulate gun shows out of existence, and–of course–there’s a tip of the hat to Bloomberg’s obsessions, in the recommendation to repeal the privacy protections of the Tiahrt Amendment. Nothing new, there.

But the report goes much further, and reveals some of the more bizarre long-term goals of the Joyce anti-gun axis. One section contains suggestions to “Reduce the availability and lethality of firearms to criminals.” Are they suggesting that guns should be less lethal when used against criminals? No. Poor grammar aside, they are actually suggesting that Congress should “enact legislation to allow federal health and safety oversight of the firearms industry.” We know where that will lead; the Joyce-funded VPC has long advocated federal “health and safety” regulation that includes “pre-market approval power” over “firearm products that might pose a threat to public safety,” and total bans on guns that “present an unreasonable risk of injury and death.” In VPC’s world, that means handguns–for starters.

If any gun manufacturers or stores managed to survive the onslaught of such “safety” regulations, the report wants to subject them to a whole new layer of bureaucracy and red tape by demanding that “state and/or local governments should license all gun dealers.” Countless local governments have long abused zoning ordinances to shut down gun shops in places where they don’t want them, but under this proposal, discrimination against gun retailers would be a simple and routine matter of just denying a license.

IACP didn’t forget the customer, either. The report wants states to limit handgun purchases to guarantee that “certain precautions, including the notification of state and local law enforcement agencies, are in place.” Notification of what? That someone is legally buying a handgun? Stop the presses!

And the report wants law enforcement to get to know your firearms as well, demanding that “state and local governments should mandate that a ballistic fingerprint is recorded for every gun sold.” Of course, “ballistic fingerprint” is just a high-tech term for gun registration. But this recommendation goes well beyond even the gun ban groups, who have limited their demands for ballistic registration to apply only to new handguns. I wonder what IACP plans to do with a couple-million envelopes full of spent lead shot from all the 12-gauge shotguns sold every year. Are you starting to get the feeling that the authors of the report wouldn’t know a 12-gauge shotgun if they found one in a labeled box? The report only notes that this mandate “could enhance public safety and curtail gun violence.” We have to wonder if IACP bigwigs envy their overseas colleagues who have no obstacles like the Second Amendment in their way.

The most chilling recommendation is positively Orwellian, calling for “law enforcement agencies and their partners to develop and implement education campaigns targeted at gun owners.” What do they plan to “educate” us about? They cite bogus research that, they say, has “demonstrated that gun owners are disproportionately at risk for gun injuries and gun suicide” and “effectively disputes the argument that gun ownership deters crime.”

So the goal is to convince us to dispose of our firearms, which explains why another report recommendation calls for the implementation of “gun surrender programs.” Once the guns have been surrendered, the report demands that “law enforcement agencies should mandate destruction of all firearms that come into their possession.” This suggestion sounds like it came from a U.N. disarmament agency after all.

There’s more, but you get the idea. Don’t be personally offended, though, at the group’s attitude. After all, they don’t trust rank-and-file law enforcement with firearms, either. The IACP fought against the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act, legislation to authorize law enforcement officers to carry firearms outside of their jurisdiction. Congress passed the bill anyway, giving the group what they said was “a lot of heartburn.”

That was then, and this is now. There’s a load of heartburn for gun owners in the IACP report, and the anti-gun axis is already planning to move forward. No matter how many times we close our eyes and click our shoes together, the new offensive from the Joyce Foundation and its puppet groups is not going away. As gun owners, we must be vigilant–and prepare for a long, tough election year to prevent these groups’ political allies from gaining power in Washington.

That axis–in addition to creating a new call for confiscatory bans on a wide range of individually owned, now-legal firearms–also demands mandatory gun destruction on a massive scale.

But don’t take my word for it. Believe what they say.

It’s all spelled out in a new gun control manifesto called Taking A Stand. This Joyce-funded IACP report was largely written by the likes of Tom Diaz and Kristen Rand of the Violence Policy Center (VPC) and David Mitchell, the newly appointed head of the Department of Safety and Homeland Security in my own state of Delaware. As NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox points out in his in-depth special report, Mitchell’s gun-ban credentials include a stint as a major player “for law enforcement” at the Brady Campaign.

Among the IACP/VPC/Brady Campaign/Joyce Foundation recommendations is this anti-gun, anti-freedom directive:

“Law enforcement agencies should mandate destruction of all firearms that come into their possession once any law enforcement use for them is completed.

“Law enforcement is in the unique position of acquiring tens of thousands of firearms a year either through confiscation, recovery or surrender. These weapons should be destroyed … .”

Recovered? That clearly includes stolen guns. They want to destroy my property simply because it was stolen from me?

But seizure and confiscation of guns from individual citizens would also be covered by the IACP’s section making improper storage of firearms in the home a serious crime.

Key among their “recommendations” is this: “State, local and tribal governments should mandate safe storage of guns, provide voluntary off-site storage facilities and prosecute those who fail to comply with safe storage laws.”

You can presume–no, you can bet on it–that prosecution under the IACP/Joyce Foundation vision of “safe storage” would include individuals having their firearms forfeited. And of course, once in the custody of police, those guns would fall under IACP’s rule to “mandate destruction of all firearms that come into their (police) possession.” And how would they know how the guns were stored, anyway? Surprise inspections and no-knock searches?

Read the Full Article here;


Here are some specific recommendations made by the IACP from their 2007 Great Lakes Summit on Gun Violence report entitled;

Taking a Stand: Reducing Gun Violence in Our Communities

Specific recommendations include:

  • Requiring judges and law enforcement to remove guns from situations of domestic violence, as well as from people whose adjudicated mental illness, drug use, or previous criminal record suggests the possibility of violence
  • Requiring that all gun sales take place through Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders with mandatory background checks
  • Enacting an effective ban on military-style assault weapons, armor-piercing handgun ammunition, .50 caliber sniper rifles and other weapons that enable criminals to outgun law enforcement
  • Restoring COPS funding to provide vital resources to state, local and tribal law enforcement
  • Repealing the Tiahrt Amendment, which hinders investigation of illegal gun trafficking

Relevant Post


If you would like to keep abreast of what the IACP is up toFollow them on Twitter!


Become an IACP “fan” on Facebook