Tag Archive: Recreation


Posted on November 4, 2014

Legal -Update

Long-suffering California gun owners received some rare good news in February when a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recognized a right to bear arms outside the home. In its decision in the NRA-backed case of Peruta v. County of San Diego, the panel struck down San Diego County’s “good cause” requirement for a concealed carry license, as county policy failed to recognize general self-defense as sufficient good cause. The ruling, however, has been stayed as parties seek to intervene and petition for a rehearing of the case by a larger contingent of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In the meantime, droves of Californians intent on exercising their right to self-defense have already made their opinions known by applying for concealed carry licenses.

Like some other jurisdictions in California, San Diego County had operated under a strict may-issue carry policy that left the decision of who may or may not receive a license up to the discretion of the issuing law enforcement official. In San Diego, this discretion led to a policy by the Sheriff’s Office that an applicant had to show “good cause” for obtaining a license. As outlined in the Ninth Circuit’s opinion, this required all applicants to provide “supporting documentation” of their need.  The court went on to explain, “If the applicant [could not] demonstrate ‘circumstances that distinguish [him] from the mainstream,’ then he [would] not qualify for a concealed-carry permit.”

9thcircuit-peruta

The case originated in 2009, when resident Edward Peruta filed a complaint against San Diego County and Sheriff William D. Gore in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California after being denied a concealed carry license. Peruta argued that San Diego’s “good cause” policy violated his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. According to Peruta’s attorney, “It was deemed the Plaintiff did not have good cause, because Plaintiff could not document any specific threat of harm, and primary reasons for desiring a license to carry a concealed weapon were due to the fact that he often carried large amounts of cash, valuables and equipment in his motor home, and also because his duties as a news investigator placed him in high crime areas.” Later on, several other plaintiffs joined the case, along with NRA’s California state affiliate, the California Rifle and Pistol Association.

In December 2010, the district court ruled in favor of San Diego. At the time, persons in California could lawfully carry an unloaded handgun with ammunition at the ready. The trial court opined, “to the extent … Defendant’s policy burden[s] conduct falling within the scope of the Second Amendment, if at all, the burden is mitigated by the provisions of [the law] that expressly permit unloaded open carry for immediate self-defense.” The opinion went on to reject the plaintiffs’ call for the use of strict scrutiny in determining whether San Diego was violating the Second Amendment right, opting instead to examine the policy under “intermediate scrutiny.” The court determined that “under intermediate scrutiny, Defendant’s policy need not be perfect, only reasonably related to a ‘significant,’ ‘substantial,’ or ‘important’ governmental interest,” and that the “Defendant’s policy satisfies that standard.”

On October 9, 2011, however, California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law AB 144, which outlawed the open carry of unloaded handguns (the open carry of loaded handguns had been banned years earlier). The legislation left those lacking a concealed carry license without even the prior, largely symbolic option of carrying an unloaded handgun outside the home for self-defense. Thus, enactment of this legislation ironically diminished one of the arguments used by the district court in rejecting the challenge to San Diego’s licensing policy.

The case was then appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, where it was assigned to a three-judge panel consisting of Judges Diarmuid O’Scannlain, Sidney Thomas, and Consuelo Callahan. Oral argumentswere heard on December 6, 2012.

NRA filed a friend of the court brief outlining its position. The brief argued that the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right that is substantially burdened by San Diego’s “good cause” policy, and therefore the policy must be examined under a “strict scrutiny” test. In making this argument, the brief relied heavily on the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Nordyke v. King, and the Supreme Court’s decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller, and McDonald v. City of Chicago. The brief concluded its argument by stating: “The County interprets ‘good cause’ as meaning a particularly good cause that distinguishes an applicant from the average citizen. The fundamental problem with that interpretation is that every individual has a Second Amendment right and corresponding right to self-defense. There is no need for an individual to demonstrate an especially good reason that he should enjoy a constitutional right guaranteed by our founding document.”

On February 13, 2014, the Ninth Circuit issued its decision in a 77-page opinion written by Judge O’Scannlain. First, O’Scannlain examined the question of whether the behavior restricted by San Diego’s policy falls within the scope of the right protected by the Second Amendment. The Judge pointed out that the Second Amendment protects a “right not only to ‘keep’ arms but also to ‘bear’ them.” After examining several sources, along with the Heller and McDonalddecisions, O’Scannlain concluded that the evidence “suggest[s] that the Second Amendment secures a right to carry a firearm in some fashion outside the home.”

Next the opinion delved into the matter of what the term “bear arms” encompassed in the founding era. On this point, O’Scannlain cited founding-era scholar St. George Tucker: “The right to armed self-defense, Tucker insisted, is the ‘first law of nature,’ and any law ‘prohibiting any person from bearing arms’ crossed the constitutional line.”

The opinion then went on to explore legal precedent for the correct interpretation of the right to “bear arms.” O’Scannlain cited the 1822 Kentucky case Bliss v. Commonwealth, in which the Kentucky Supreme Court held that the state’s right to bear arms amendment invalidated a ban on “wearing concealed arms.” The opinion then cited similar cases, including the 1833 Tennessee case of Simpson v. State, the 1840 Alabama case of State v. Reid,and the 1846 Georgia case of Nunn v. State, all of which offer evidence that the right to “bear arms” was understood to extend beyond the home.

O’Scannlain’s analysis then moved to the post-civil war period. Here the judge examined Stephen P. Halbrook’s scholarship on the Fourteenth Amendment and the post-slavery experience as it pertains to the right to keep and bear arms. Using a passage from the Heller decision, O’Scannlain determined that “[j]ust as it was ‘plainly the understanding in the post-Civil War Congress that the Second Amendment protected an individual right to use arms for self-defense,’… it appears that the right was also understood to encompass carrying weapons in public in case of confrontation.” After marshalling all of his historic evidence, O’Scannlain concluded that “the carrying of an operable handgun outside the home for the lawful purpose of self-defense, though subject to traditional restrictions, constitutes ‘bear[ing] Arms’ within the meaning of the Second Amendment.”

The opinion then analyzed whether San Diego’s policy is an infringement of the right to bear arms. O’Scannlain notably rejected the method of applying a certain level of scrutiny to an infringement on the Second Amendment right that other courts have used in similar circumstances. Instead, he noted that since there is no option in California for unlicensed open carry, the right to carry outside the home is effectively eliminated by San Diego’s policy, under which licenses are routinely denied. Thus, O’Scannlain found that a scrutiny test would be inappropriate, in that “the Second Amendment does require that the states permit some form of carry for self-defense outside the home.”  In summary, “San Diego’s ‘good cause’ permitting requirement impermissibly infringes on the Second Amendment right to bear arms for lawful self-defense.”

Despite O’Scannlain’s strong articulation of the right to carry outside the home, California gun owners and others under the Ninth Circuit’s jurisdiction are not out of the woods yet. Following the ruling, gun control proponents petitioned to have the case reheard by a “limited en banc” panel of 11 judges. The Ninth Circuit has yet to determine whether or not it will grant this request.  In the meantime, the panel’s February 13 ruling has been stayed until a final disposition of the case has been made. This means jurisdictions that were operating under a “may issue” license framework may continue to do so in the interim. Nevertheless, a number of counties – including Orange, Ventura, and San Joaquin – have already changed their polices to recognize a desire for self-defense as a sufficient cause for the issuance of a concealed carry license to an otherwise qualified applicant.

In addition to being an important milestone for Golden State residents, the ruling could affect policy in other states. Another Ninth Circuit ruling in the case of Baker v. Kealoha held that a district court in Hawaii erred when it held that the state’s restrictions on carrying firearms outside the home did not implicate protected Second Amendment activity.  Further proceedings on that case, however, have been deferred pending resolution of the post-opinion matters in Peruta. Meanwhile, the U.S. territory of Guam passed legislation in response to Peruta that changed its concealed carry licensing regime from “may-issue” to “shall-issue.”

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

 

Slide1

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

Slide1

 

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

Published October 23, 2014

blu-eye-876.jpg

Now it’s law enforcement that has nowhere to hide, and that may or may not be a good thing.

A Dutch company has introduced a detection system that can alert drivers if a police officer or other emergency services official is using a two-way radio nearby.

Blu Eye monitors frequencies used by the encrypted TETRA encrypted communications networks used by government agencies in Europe. It doesn’t allow the user to listen in to transmissions, which is illegal and would require advanced decryption capabilities, but can detect a radio in operation up to one kilometer away.

Even if a message isn’t being sent, these radios send pulses out to the network every four seconds and Blu Eye can also pick these up, according to The Sunday Times. A dashboard-mounted monitor uses lights and sounds to alert the driver to the proximity of the source, similar to a radar detector interface.

The company behind it, Target Automotive, says it’s meant to be used as safety device, giving early warning that an emergency vehicle is approaching so drivers can move out of the way, while reminding them to monitor their behavior behind the wheel. But critics see it as a likely tool for intentional scofflaws.

“As it does not distinguish between a police car, ambulance or fire engine responding to an emergency or one that is simply driving under non-blue-light conditions, this particular device is sadly just as likely to be bought by a minority of motorists who wish to evade being caught behaving illegally,” David Bizley, the Royal Automobile Club’s chief engineer, told The Sunday Times.

Blu Eye sells for $1,600 in the U.K., and is not yet available in the United States. However, Target Managing Director Jan Rijks tells FoxNews.com that a version is in the works that is compatible with the P25 protocol used by U.S. emergency services and could be on sale as early as next year.

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

 

$10G to watch grass grow: Coburn report details worst examples of gov’t waste

cordgrass.jpg

The government spent $10,000 to watch this type of grass grow. (USDA.GOV)

As American taxpayers worried about the terror threat from the Islamic State, the crisis at the border and the economy, the U.S. government spent their money to give rabbits massages, to teach sea monkeys to synchronize swim and to literally watch grass grow.

These and other examples of wasteful government spending were detailed by Republican Sen. Tom Coburn in his annual “Wastebook,” his final edition since he is retiring early next year.

“I have learned from these experiences that Washington will never change itself,” Coburn, R-Okla., said in a statement. “But even if the politicians won’t stop stupid spending, taxpayers always have the last word.”

The first example cited in the report is the millions spent on what one attorney called the government’s “dirty little secret”: paid administrative leave for troublesome employees. Workers who were placed on leave for disciplinary reasons, such as misconduct, security concerns or criminal issues, received $20 million while on leave this year.

These workers, according to Coburn, were essentially on a paid vacation that can last for months or years. The GAO also detailed this phenomenon in a report Monday. According to the GAO, during a three-year period more than 57,000 employees were placed on leave for 30 days or more, costing taxpayers $775 million in salary alone.

Another wasteful project with a big price tag is the Pentagon’s plan to destroy $16 billion in military-grade ammunition that it deems no longer useful. Sounds pricey, right? Well add in the fact that on top of that, the feds plan to spend $1 billion just to destroy the ammo.

“The amount of surplus ammunition is now so large that the cost of destroying it will equal the full years’ salary for over 54,000 Army privates,” the report notes.

Other examples vary from the serious, to the aggravating, to just plain bizarre. One that takes the cake is the $10,000 the government spent to watch grass grow — seriously.

That project is the brainchild of the Department of Interior’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which is paying for the growth of the smooth cordgrass to be observed on a Florida reserve. The money covers “the cost to monitor grasses, restore two acres as a demonstration and publish a guide on best practices for cultivating the cordgrass, known formally as Spartina alterniflora.”

Still more examples show that while some Americans are struggling to make ends meet in a rough economy, there is a group in the U.S. getting major perks: animals.

In one instance, the government shelled out $387,000 to provide rabbits with a relaxing daily massage. The critters were treated to a “mechanical device that simulates the long, flowing strokes used in Swedish massages” to study the effect of massages on exercise recovery, according to the report.

Another animal getting a fun extracurricular activity courtesy of the U.S. taxpayers are sea monkeys. The government dropped $50,000 on a project to study the swirl of sea monkeys’ collective movements. The researchers did so by choreographing a synchronized swimming routine for the tiny shrimp.

The government also spent $856,000 to throw mountain lions on a treadmill and $171,000 to watch monkeys gamble. They also spent $331,000 on a study that led to a mind-blowing discovery, that “hungry people get cranky and aggressive.”

“With no one watching over the vast bureaucracy, the problem is not just what Washington isn’t doing, but what it is doing.” Coburn said in the statement. “Only someone with too much of someone else’s money and not enough accountability for how it was being spent could come up some of these projects.”

Other notable examples include $90 million spent to promote U.S. culture around the world, $414,000 spent on a U.S. Army video game that some in the intelligence community have worried could inadvertently train terrorists and $4.6 million spent on “lavish” homes to house Border Patrol agents in areas temporarily.

Coburn, known as “Dr. No” for his strong stance against excess spending in Washington, announced in January he is retiring from the Senate early due to ongoing health issues. The Republican had already announced he would not seek reelection but decided to leave his term two years early, in January 2014.

A Coburn spokesperson told FoxNews.com that the senator has said that answers about if and how the “Wastebook” will continue will have to wait until next year. The spokesperson said Coburn hopes every lawmaker will make monitoring government waste a priority, but that one does not have to be a current lawmaker to do so.’

Click to read the “Wastebook.”

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | EMC2 Tactical

 

By Jennifer Abel

Photo

A Wisconsin woman who fell for the “Microsoft scam” last month found a relatively happy ending to her story: the scammer hasn’t been identified or caught, but a police officer with good computer skills was able to undo most of the damage he caused.

The Microsoft scam is simply a brand-specific version of the “tech support scam,” which usually works like this: the scammers contact the victim over the phone, pretending to be tech-support personnel from Microsoft or any other tech company big enough to have a customer-support staff. (If they try using email to reach you, then technically they’re attempting a “phishing” scam rather than a “tech-support” scam. Regardless of the label, the scammers have the same basic goals, and you need to be wary of them all.)

The faux-Microsoft scammers will tell you they’ve discovered a security flaw in your computer’s Microsoft operating system, but they can fix it for you, right now, provided you give them remote access to your computer.

Of course, if you go along with their suggestion, it will end badly for you. The single most important rule to protect yourself from phishing, tech-support and similar scams, is “Don’t call me; I’ll call you.”

Calls from the blue

In other words: if you personally notice a problem with, say, your Microsoft system or Netflix account, and want to contact Microsoft or Netflix to complain about the problem, that’s fine. But if someone claiming to represent Microsoft, Netflix or any other company calls you, out of the blue, offering to fix some problem you never even knew you had — don’t believe it. That’s not a Microsoft staffer or Netflix security expert on the phone; that’s a scammer trying to ensnare you.

Sometimes the scammers are trying to plant various forms of malware on your computer — anything from spy software that monitors your personal computer activity, to zombie software that takes over your computer and uses it to send phishing spam or malware viruses to still more people, usually without you even realizing it.

But last month, an unnamed woman in Madison, Wisconsin fell for a Microsoft scammer who essentially tried holding some of her key files for ransom.

News source Channel3000.com reported this week that a man claiming to be from Microsoft called her and asked for remote access to her laptop. Once he got it, he deleted certain files and demanded she use her credit card to pay him $200 if she wanted them back.

She did not give him her credit card information, and did call Madison police; an officer was eventually able to restore her deleted files.

But the scammer is still out there, and probably still calling potential victims. If anyone claiming to be from Microsoft calls you about a supposed problem, hang up at once, the same way you’d hang up on any so-called tech-support person who expects you to ignore the anti-scam security rule “Don’t call me; I’ll call you.”

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

 

Friday October 3rd, 2014 :: 12:54 p.m. PDT

Public Service Announcement – We would like to warn the public of Fraudulent Scam Phone Calls.

Public Service Announcement – Fraudulent Scam Phone Calls

The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department would like to warn the public of Fraudulent Scam Phone Calls. Recently, various frauds have occurred in the Riverside County area where criminals contact victims by telephone to impersonate law enforcement officials or utility company officials.

In the first type of scheme, the caller claims to be a member of law enforcement, or the court system. The victim is told he or she has a warrant for failing to appear for jury duty. The caller demands payment for the warrant via credit card information, or a Green Dot card. The suspect typically remains on the phone with the victim while he or she travels to the store to obtain the Green Dot card. The suspect further instructs the victim not to tell anyone who they are talking with. After obtaining the serial numbers to the Green Dot cards, the money deposited to the card is immediately removed by the suspect.

The caller is not connected with the Riverside Superior Court or the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department. No Riverside County Court or Sheriff’s Department employee will ever contact the public and ask for financial information or payment in lieu of attending court proceedings, or to make up for failure to appear for jury duty.

In the second scheme, the caller claims to be from a utility, or service provider-type company. The victim is told their bill is overdue, or a meter needs to be replaced at the victim’s expense. The caller demands immediate payment for the overdue bill, or installation of a new meter. If payment is not received, the victim’s service will be shut off. The caller demands credit card information or a Green Dot card as described in the first scheme.

The caller is not connected with any utility or service providers. Victims are encouraged to advise the caller they will call the utility company directly, and discontinue the call. The victim should then contact the utility company themselves through legitimate and verified numbers.

It should be noted there are several technologies and methods that allow callers to conceal what number they are calling from, or to give the appearance they are calling from the Sheriff’s Department, court, service provider or utility company.

Anyone receiving a telephone call from a person claiming to be a Riverside County Court or Sheriff’s Department employee or other law enforcement official seeking money should refuse the demand and report the incident to your local Sheriff or Police Station.

Citizens may also submit an anonymous tip using the Sheriff’s CrimeTips online form.

Address/Location
Riverside County Sheriff’s Department – Headquarters
4095 Lemon St
Riverside, CA 92501

Contact
Emergency: 9-1-1
Non-emergencies: 951-955-2400

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

 

AREK SARKISSIAN – OCT 1, 2014

waldopolice.542c4d6fc30cb.png

Within 15 minutes on Tuesday afternoon, Waldo Police Officer Tim Logan spotted three drivers moving well over the speed limit on U.S. 301.

Indeed, there is a speed problem in Waldo, but the city cannot afford its police department.

On Tuesday night, the Waldo City Council voted in favor of disbanding its department, effective at midnight.

“We’re all going to be unemployed,” Logan said as a silver Mercedes sedan whizzed by his black and white police sport utility vehicle. The equipment in the cruiser showed the luxury car was traveling at 60 mph in a 45-mph zone.

“I don’t like the idea of letting my wife know when I wake up in the morning that I will be out of a job,” Logan said.

The City Council voted 4-1 to disband the department and to allow Waldo’s officers to collect pay until Oct. 31 as city officials determine how to tie up loose ends. There are still plenty of cases — primarily traffic citations — awaiting court dates, and equipment that needs to be inventoried or sold.

Waldo has long carried the notoriety as a speed trap with black-and-white patrol cars working busy stretches of U.S. 301 and State Road 24, but that began to change last month when its last police chief, Mike Szabo, was suspended pending the results of a Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigation.

On Aug. 26, five Waldo officers revolted against Szabo and Cpl. Kenneth Smith with a presentation before the City Council that was rife with allegations that included an unlawful ticket quota, deceptive court appearances and unethical evidence storage.

Shortly after the presentation, Waldo City Manager Kim Worley also suspended Smith, with the launch of a second FDLE investigation. Both Szabo and Smith later resigned.

In the absence of a chief, Worley signed a month-long contract with Alachua County Sheriff Sadie Darnell on Sept. 3 to receive the temporary services of her training lieutenant, Steve Maynard, who she temporarily promoted to captain for the assignment.

Last week, Darnell told Worley she would not extend the contract, which apparently left Waldo with little option but to close its police department.

During the Tuesday night meeting, Worley said an audit of the department conducted by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement determined that the city would need to drastically update its storage facilities and computer systems to keep up with standards required for criminal investigations.

“The cost is just too high,” Worley said.

Waldo City Councilwoman Carolyn Wade was reluctant to vote in favor of the police department closure, but said she understood it was inevitable. Conversations with State Attorney Bill Cervone led her to believe it was the only decision to save the city from more bad publicity, she said. Wade said Cervone told her that if the city chose to keep the department open, he would bring a case before the Alachua County grand jury, and it would return with a humiliating presentment.

“Too much has gone too far and I don’t think we can recover,” Wade said.

Plenty of residents opposed disbanding the police department and many said they were confused and angry. Kim Andrews, owner of Andrews Knife and Muzzleloading, even offered to chip in a few hundred dollars.

“These guys keep us safe,” Andrews said. “People will die if this department goes away, and the blood will be on all of your hands.”

After the meeting, Waldo Police Officer Brandon Roberts — who led the Aug. 26 presentation that unveiled the unlawful ticket quota — unpinned his badge and smiled. He said he found it funny that the actions of Szabo and Smith led to the loss of his job, but he said what he and four officers did was in the fabric of the oath they swore to as officers.

“It’s what was right,” Roberts said. “A lot of people complain about cops not stepping across the blue line, and this is a prime example, because you have to worry about this kind of stuff.”

Roberts added that the resignations of Szabo and Smith were worth the loss of his own job.

“If I took down two bad ones, it was worth it,” Roberts said.

Police coverage for the City of Waldo now will fall under the supervision of the Alachua County Sheriff’s Office. Sgt. Becky Butscher, a sheriff’s spokeswoman, said her department is working to allocate more deputies to the area.

State Attorney Cervone said Waldo police are not out of the woods in regards to the two FDLE investigations. Both remain active, and Cervone plans to meet with agents later this week.

2014 – Ocala Star-Banner, Fla.

 

Slide1

 

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

Slide1

 

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

SEPTEMBER 17, 2014

NORBORNE, Mo. — Sherry Falke  said her seven-year-old son came home from school Tuesday crying hysterically. She thinks the school went overboard with a punishment her son received at s bringing in a souvenir shell casing.

“He felt it in his pocket, and he took it out and was showing some of his friends at school,” Falke explained.

She says her son Zane forgot he left the shell casing in his pocket, a souvenir he received at the 9/11 ceremony from the VFW in Carrollton, given to him and his Cub Scout group.

shell and mom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“The principal proceeded to reprimand him as though he were bringing live ammunition to school. I understand that’s in the policy, in the handbook, that they can’t bring guns to school, I fully support that, but it’s an empty blank casing,” Falke added.

Zane’s teacher took the shell casing, and took him to the principal’s office. Falke says they told Zane he could be suspended from school for 10 days, but instead gave him a silent lunch where he sat by himself, and missed two recesses.

“In today’s society, unfortunately, we do have to be concerned with those types of things in schools,” said Dr. Roger Feagan, the superintendent of the Norborne R-VIII School District.

He says while the shell casing is not a huge deal, the safety and security of students is their number one priority.

“Though this seems minor, if we don’t handle the minor things, they can unfortunately escalate into major things down the road,” added Dr. Feagan.

Falke said she called the school and explained the significance of the casing, and asked if they would reduce the punishment knowing now what it was.

“Had he brought a war medal to school, would he have been punished?” Falke asked. “They also passed out American flags to all the kids, if he brought that to school would he have been punished?”

The school said no, the punishment stands.

“We didn’t want anything to lead to anything further with that student or think that was OK to bring to school,” said Dr. Feagan.

The school handbook specifically says weapons, firearms, knives, and the like, are not allowed. While the shell casing doesn’t exactly fall into that category, the school feels the punishment was appropriate, and a common consequence for minor offenses.

The school says it stands behind the punishment, and the superintendent adds that hopefully this is a learning experience for everyone. He says had the school been informed ahead of time about the souvenir, and where it came from, it could have been a great discussion topic in the classroom.

 

Slide1

 

Go to Desert Eagle Technologies now!

Sorry, offer is not valid for firearms.

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

Slide1

 

Click here to go directly to magazines

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

September 17, 2014

Traditional Ammunition Ban to Cause Shortages, Price Spikes 

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) today released a new report demonstrating the negative effects that the State of California’s ban on the use of traditional lead ammunition in hunting will have on hunters, the state’s economy and wildlife conservation. That report, commissioned by NSSF on behalf of the firearms and ammunition industry, was presented today at a public hearing of the Wildlife Resource Committee of the California Fish and Game Commission.

The survey-based report by Southwick Associates quantifies the problems that this ban will cause. Non-lead ammunition is not available for about half of hunting calibers, and the report found the California ban will cause severe shortages nationwide.

Due to technical and market-based constraints on manufacturers, the implementation of AB711 will at least triple the price of ammunition, driving more than one-third of the state’s hunters to hunt less or stop hunting completely. With the loss of more than 50,000 hunters in the state, California’s economy will see a loss of millions of dollars in salaries and in tax revenue.

In addition, as hunters are the primary source of conservation funding in the state, a dramatic decline in hunters means fewer dollars for wildlife conservation.

Access the full report here.

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

 

Slide1

 

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactcal | E=MC2 Tactical

September 13, 2014

Overall, 82% of California voters agreed that local police have a tough job and for the most part do it well

By Michael Finnegan

Los Angeles Times

A solid majority of California voters believes local police have a tough job and do it well, but nearly a third say law enforcement targets minorities unfairly, according to a new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll.

The survey found attitudes toward police split along racial and ethnic lines: Blacks, Latinos and Asians were substantially more likely than whites to say that police are too aggressive or treat whites better than others.

The contrasting views reflect persistent tension between law enforcement and minority communities in California — even decades after police clashes with African Americans sparked the 1965 and 1992 riots in Los Angeles.

Black voters, the poll found, were consistently most critical of police, followed by Latinos and Asians, while whites had the most favorable views of law enforcement. Two-thirds of blacks said it was true that police target minorities unfairly; less than a quarter of whites agreed.

Poll respondent Ralph Berry, an African American who lives in Bellflower, said in a follow-up interview that young black men were especially susceptible to unwarranted scrutiny by police. Typical, he said, was the time years ago when an officer followed him around the block and checked his plates as he searched for a parking spot in downtown Long Beach.

“You’re looked at as suspect, regardless of where you’re at or what you’re doing,” said Berry, now 55. “It’s automatically assumed the worst.”

John Bridges, a 22-year-old white Marine who grew up outside Modesto and now lives at Camp Pendleton, said he believes police treat every group the same.

“I’ve never had a bad experience with cops,” Bridges said.

The survey came weeks after the fatal police shooting of black teenager Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., triggered protests and civil rights investigations by the U.S. Justice Department. The use of heavy military equipment by the mostly white police force in confronting protesters in the predominantly black suburb of St. Louis has drawn widespread condemnation.

In South Los Angeles, the fatal police shooting last month of Ezell Ford Jr., a 25-year-old black man, has threatened to erode the credibility and goodwill that the LAPD has worked hard to build over the last decade. On Friday, the shooting of Ford was a key focus of an NAACP conference on police brutality in Exposition Park.

Despite its evidence of lingering concerns, the poll showed that police overall are popular in an era marked by steadily declining crime and efforts by police agencies to engage with communities disproportionately affected by crime.

Overall, 82% of California voters agreed that local police have a tough job and for the most part do it well. Yet even on that question, there was at least some racial divide: 88% of whites thought it was true, while 74% of blacks, 71% of Latinos and 73% of Asians agreed.

There also was a divergence of views on the question of engagement, a major focus for police in Los Angeles and other cities. Among whites, 81% agreed that police were willing to engage, but only 55% of blacks, 68% of Latinos and 69% of Asians agreed.

A bigger split emerged over the statement that local police were ineffective, too slow to respond to calls and nowhere to be found in an emergency. Nearly half of African Americans agreed, while 40% of Latinos, 24% of Asians and 18% of whites thought it was true.

Historian Josh Sides, author of “L.A. City Limits: African American Los Angeles from the Great Depression to the Present,” said the fact that even more blacks didn’t see police as ineffective showed progress in easing friction between police and that community.

“I can say unequivocally there’s been a significant improvement in police relations with African Americans,” he said.

Nonetheless, 42% of black voters said that local police were too aggressive and more of a threat to people than anything else; 28% of Latinos, 21% of Asians and 11% of whites agreed.

Most of the time, however, Californians were describing aggression that occurred at some remove.

Overall, the poll found 14% of California voters recalled an occasion in the last year when they felt police treated them unfairly; for blacks, it was 26%; Latinos, 20%; whites, 12%; and Asians, 11%. But nearly two-thirds of Californians knew of a case somewhere in the United States of police treating people unfairly.

California voters also were divided on whether police were tougher on blacks, Latinos, Asians or whites, or treated all groups equally. Overall, 40% said police treated everyone the same, 33% said they were tougher on blacks, and 10% said they were tougher on Latinos. (Almost no one felt police were tougher on whites or Asians.)

But substantial shares of whites, blacks and Asians agreed that if any group was unfairly targeted, it was blacks: 33% of whites thought so, as did 61% of blacks and 51% of Asians.

Latinos were divided, with 28% saying police were tougher on them, 24% saying they were tougher on blacks, and 34% saying they treat all groups the same. Just 19% of blacks believed police treated everyone the same, with 31% of Asians and 44% of whites agreeing.

Poll respondent Antonio Sosa of Mar Vista, a 48-year-old digital marketing executive, said his interactions with police on the Westside were all positive, but that racial profiling was clearly a nationwide problem.

“There’s an assumption of guilt or nefarious intention simply by the color of their skin, or the address where people live,” he said.

But Jennifer Valladao of Union City in the Bay Area, a white 30-year-old research associate for a pharmaceutical company, said racial profiling was limited to “a few bad apples,” and was not a systemic problem that police need to fix.

“A lot of it comes down to how you carry yourself,” she said. “If you treat them with respect, they’ll treat you with respect. If you start acting shifty around a police officer, they’re going to take notice.”

The survey of 1,507 registered California voters on behalf of USC’s Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences and The Times was conducted by telephone from Sept. 2 through 8. The margin of error for the poll — conducted by the Democratic group Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and American Viewpoint, a Republican firm — is plus or minus 2.9 percentage points overall and larger for all subgroups.

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

 

Slide1

Initiative-594, the universal background check initiative being bankrolled by millionaires and billionaires in Washington state, will lead to “universal handgun registration” if passed.

Page 2 of the 18-page initiative opens the door to such registration by “extending the requirement for a background check to apply to all gun sales and transfers within the state.” This means record keeping, and record keeping means the formation of a database to compile the location of all known guns and the names of all known gun owners.

The NRA reports: “Every time a handgun is transferred, the person receiving the handgun will have their name added to the government database being maintained by the state Department of Licensing.”

The text of I-594 lists slight exceptions to the background check requirements, but they are often tedious. For example, “the temporary transfer of possession of a firearm if such transfer is necessary to prevent imminent death” is allowable without a check. But the transfer can only be done without paperwork granting that “it only lasts as long as immediately necessary to prevent immanent death or great bodily harm.”

If the friend to whom the gun was loaned wishes to hold on to it beyond the immediate threat period then he or she, as well as the gun owner, will have to find a Federal Firearms License (FFL) holder and undergo a background check to transfer the gun. This, in turn, will add a new name to the gun owner database.

When Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) tried unsuccessfully to push universal background checks at the federal level in 2013, Breitbart News argued then that such checks were unenforceable without the creation of a gun registry. What was true for such legislation in Washington, D.C. is also true for I-594 in Washington state.

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

 

Happy Birthday California!

Today America’s most populous state and third largest by geographic area is 159 years young. California became the 31st American state on September 9, 1850.MMonroe GoldRush

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

 

Police One

It’s become abundantly clear in the past few weeks that the press and the public have very little real understanding of police work. And something we’ve learned over the years is that during times of stress and tension, a good chuckle is extremely effective medicine.

So, here are some things most people don’t know but cops do.

1. Most cops understand why tickets are necessary, but don’t particularly like writing them. Well, unless they happen to stop “the guy who pays their wages” and then writing a ticket isn’t so bad.

2. The vast majority cops have never shot anyone, but most cops can recite a detailed list of people who are/were deserving of being shot because they posed a deadly threat. This means that most cops have successfully defused a potentially deadly confrontation using only words and less-lethal weapons.

3. Most cops wonder if they have something better to do until the person asks in that whiny voice, “Don’t you have anything better to do?” It is then — and only then — the cop knows the answer to that question is, “No. This is good as it gets.”

4. Most cops know the driver they just stopped had more that “two beers” and can estimate with reasonable accuracy how many beers a driver did, in fact, have.

5. Most cops like donuts, but so does everybody. They are deliberately made to taste really, really good so people will want to eat them. Please pass me another donut.

6. Most cops wonder why so many members of the community choose to pick up a mobile phone and record them while the officers are rolling in the dirt with an assailant rather than offering to help the officer.

7. Most cops don’t know the color of the people they stop before the traffic stop takes place. This is especially true when those people are driving cars with tinted windows at night.

8. Most cops know that if you fix that muffler / tail light / other mechanical issue for which they’ve stopped you, the cops will stop stopping you.

9. Most cops know it is impossible stop a squad car fast enough when the drunk in the back seat says, “Stop! I think I’ve got to puke.”

10. Most cops know that the national media do not pursue the truth, they pursue a story. Their story and the truth are too often a little like fraternal twins. They are related, but cops can’t explain why they don’t look anything alike.

Desert Eagle Technologies | Desert Eagle Tactical | E=MC2 Tactical

 

%d bloggers like this: