Tag Archives: New York

SCOTUS Needs To Get Its Priorities In Order

No doubt regular TZP readers heard about the recent Supreme Court lack of a decision in ANTONYUK v. STEVEN NIGRELLI. For those who haven’t: Plaintiffs filed suit challenging New York’s recent, post-Bruen, weapons carry law, notably declaring a wide assortment of sensitive places where the state claims it can ban firearms.

The district court issed an injunction against enforcement of the ban pending full trial on the matter. The state appealed to the Second Circuit, which — for no particular reason — stayed the injunction.

Plaintiffs appealed to SCOTUS asking the Court to lift the stay. SCOTUS declined to do so.

When I heard about the SCOTUS lack of action, it was reported merely as an unexplained denial; that’s fairly normal, so I didn’t think too much about it.

Until Monday, when I finally saw an article that mentioned that Justice Alito, with Thomas concurring, had actually issued a statement in conjunction with the denial. The meat of the matter is this:

The District Court found, in a thorough opinion, that the applicants were likely to succeed on a number of their claims, and it issued a preliminary injunction as to twelve provisions of the challenged law. With one exception, the Second Circuit issued a stay of the in- junction in full, and in doing so did not provide any explanation for its ruling.
[…]
I understand the Court’s denial today to reflect respect for the Second Circuit’s procedures in managing its own docket, rather than expressing any view on the merits of the case.

If those few lines are TL;DR you, it amounts to, Rather than prioritizing the protection of constitutionally-protected First and Second Amendment rights of the people, SCOTUS thinks the Second Circuit’s procedures are far more important.

Even when the Second doesn’t seem to be following its own usual procedure.

Bureaucratic process — or the lack thereof — over human/civil rights.

I’ve have some confidence in some Justices, but even post-Bruen, this illustrates why I have near-zero confidence in the overall Supreme Court.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Gab Pay link

(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Undetectable Guns: Extra More Illegaller in New York

NY State Senate Democratic Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins is going to save New Yorkers from the scourge of undetectable guns. Again.

Gun control in New York: Here’s what Democrats plan to pass next
Supporters said the ban on firearms that are undetectable by X-ray machines will save lives and bolster New York’s gun laws, which are among the strongest in the nation.

Apparently she never heard of the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988. Yes, 1988; undetectable guns have been unlawful for 31 years. That’s puts her down in the same low IQ bracket as Pennsylvania’s Madeleine Dean who entered a bill to specifically make it illegal to violate the UFA.

Lest you think I’m misinterpreting Stewart-Cousin’s effort here’s the pertinent part of the bill:

26. “UNDETECTABLE” MEANS NOT DETECTABLE BY AN X-RAY MACHINE, PORTABLE PULSED X-RAY GENERATOR, METAL DETECTOR OR MAGNETOMETER WHEN SET AT A STANDARD CALIBRATION, OR ANY OTHER MACHINE USED TO SCREEN OR INSPECT A PERSON AND AN OBJECT FOR A FIREARM, RIFLE, OR SHOTGUN.

The required (by the UFA, and generally if you don’t want your gun to explode) metal will show up on an X-ray.

And should someone 3-D print a plastic item sans metal…

Yes, plastic does show up in X-rays.

At least the NY Dims are wasting their time on this instead of more real infringements.

[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP and web host bills. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

NY SPY Act: S. 9191

While people are starting to take notice of the New York bill that would include social media in licensing background checks, most seem to missing an important point or two.

When I first heard about this being draft, I asked, “Realizing you’re politicians, & thus insane, I ask: HOW are you going to see a 1YR Internet search history?”

The bill has been filed, and my question semi-answered.

NY: S09191 Summary: Relates to requiring social media and search engine reviews prior to the approval of an application or renewal of a license to carry or possess a pistol or revolver

Here is the most relevant part:

54 deem appropriate. In order to ascertain whether any social media
55 account or search engine history of an applicant presents any good cause
56 for the denial of a license, the investigating officer shall, after

S. 9191 3

1 obtaining the applicant’s consent pursuant to subdivision three of this
2 section, and obtaining any log-in name, password or other means for
3 accessing a personal account, service, or electronic communications
4 device necessary to review such applicant’s social media accounts and
5 search engine history, review an applicant’s social media accounts for
6 the previous three years and search engine history for the previous year
7 and investigate an applicant’s posts or searches related to (i) commonly
8 known profane slurs or biased language used to describe the race, color,
9 national origin, ancestry, gender, religion, religious practice, age,
10 disability or sexual orientation of a person; (ii) threatening the
11 health or safety of another person; (iii) an act of terrorism; or (iv)
12 any other issue deemed necessary by the investigating officer. For the
13 purposes of this subdivision, “social media accounts” shall only include
14 Facebook, Snapchat, Twitter and Instagram, and “search engine” shall
15 only include Google, Yahoo and Bing.

I’ll just get this part out of the way, so I can move on to the real problems (not that this isn’t pretty bad): “[K]nown profane slurs or biased language;” also known as protected speech, unless it involves a direct threat, or actual slander/libel. I see 1st Amendment issues if they deny a licensed based on protected speech they don’t like. Especially if they don’t know what “niggardly” means.

It’s almost as if Sen. Parker set out to shred the 1st Amendment, as well as the 2nd.

Now, as to how they would check for bad-think… We don’t know. This bill says what, but doesn’t specify the process, the how.

obtaining the applicant’s consent pursuant to subdivision three of this section, and obtaining any log-in name, password or other means for accessing a personal account, service, or electronic communications device necessary to review such applicant’s social media accounts and search engine history…

You have to give them your usernames and passwords. Not just for your social media accounts, but to your phone and/or computer. That’s how they’ll be able to see your browser search history. When you hand over your phone and computer; as that’s the only reason they would need the computer logon for themselves.

When you surrender your device, make them sign a receipt with the date and time. Send the state a bill for the time. It may be useful in other ways, too, as you’ll see.

Or your boss’s computer. I can tell from web site logs (I’m an admin for several sites) that a lot of people appear to be using company computers, which matches personal in-office observations over the years. If you’ve been surfing at work, you’ll need to let them search that computer, too. I wonder how companies are going to react to that, what with proprietary files and all.

I see no mention of controls to prevent them playfully scanning through all your directories in search of… oh, financial data, HIPAA-protected medical information, your porn stash, whatever.

But let’s say the thugs are just looking at your iPhone. Is the plan to check search engine history, then hand it back to you? When do they check years of multiple social media posts? Will they use your passwords to login from your phone, or from their own computers?

If they use yours… well, that puts you out-of-pocket for a phone for quite some time. And speaking of time…. air time. Are they going to burn your air time, or provide WiFi at their expense?

I also wonder about “search engine history.” Do they differentiate between that and browser history? When checking referral search terms, I see a lot of people entering URLs (“http://www.whatever.com/index2.html”) into the search engine instead of the browser address bar. Do these politicians know the difference, or are they like people I’ve met who said their browser is “Google”?

But either way, will they follow a URL entered into the search engine to see if it really is “profane” or “biased”? What if it turns out to be a URL for a medical appointment schedule, or your online banking account? I think they’ll run afoul of HIPAA again, or federal banking laws.

And if your browser cache is part of the “history” they think is from search engines…

On the other hand, if their techno-probing is that comprehensive, there would be some wonderful opportunities for malicious compliance. If they follow URLs…

One might prepare for the probing by loading up on every Russian malware site on the Internet. If the authorities use your computer/phone for the search, have your java/ad/malware blockers turned off, then sue the hell out of them for rendering your device useless. If they download the history files to their own computer and start browsing, they’ll infect themselves.

Or My Little Pony and brony sites; that might be worse.

All in all, it would safer — for the goons — to use your device. In which case, if your computer skills are up to hacking file properties, and you’re willing to take a chance…

Install an incriminating file — child porn is extremely risky, so you might want to use ISIS videos and bomb-making instructions — with creation/access properties showing it appeared on your device while it was in the goons’ custody (you got that receipt, right?). When you get your device back, “find” it and report that someone was being very naughty with your stuff. Child porn and terrorism can fall within the feds’ purview, so report this unlawful activity by NY cops to the FBI.

And watch the great state of New York try to explain it.

Depending on how they pull the history data from your device, other options might be available. It would be a darned shame if they plugged into a USB port and sucked everything out of your browser profile folder.

Including all the trojans and worms you thoughtlessly left there.

I could probably monkeywrench without doing anything special. I don’t use Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram, Google, Yahoo or Bing. I can imagine a brain-dead bureaucrat going nuts trying to find them on my device. I don’t like being tracked, so I routinely delete my entire browser history. If they stick to only what’s listed in this bill, all they would see from me is a series of Twitter posts making fun of idiots, including state Senator Parker himself.

No doubt that will be “biased language used to describe his mental disability.” There’s a reason I refuse to live in New York.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)


Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

ERPOs: Everyone is STASI now

Sane people already know that so-called “extreme risk protective rights violating orders” are… insane.

  • Not a single bill I’ve read actually requires taking into the custody the allegedly “dangerous” person. Just one type of weapon. Just make him angry, and leaves him free to act on it, with something else.
  • None include — by deliberate design — anything approaching due process meeting federal legal standards. The accused is specifically excluded from any chance of defending or explaining himself before his property is stolen. Which, of course, is why he’ll be angry.
  • Few, if any bills, include penalties for someone filing a false report. At least one state specifically legislature voted down an amendment to add penalties for false reporting. A no-cost way to screw with one’s enemies.
  • By design, these bills allow petitions from people with minimal contact with the accused.
  • ERPOs require a standard of “evidence” for depriving someone of rights far below that of even a misdemeanor conviction. The standards are well below that of ordinary civil lawsuits. No evidence; just an unsubstantiated claim good enough for a judge who hates guns.

So how can they possibly get any worse?

What? You never heard of New York, or Gov. Cuomo?

Cuomo: Allow teachers to petition judges to seize guns
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo wants to allow teachers to ask a judge to remove guns from the homes of troubled students.

The Democrat said on Tuesday that he will introduce the idea as legislation. He acknowledged it will face criticism from Republicans.

Under the measure, teachers and school administrators would have legal standing to petition a court to remove any firearms from the homes of students considered a threat to themselves or others.

This would allow teachers to obtain rights-violating orders against not the student, but anyone and everyone in the student’s home. Whom the teacher may have never met. Whom — supposedly — isn’t even the alleged “dangerous” person.

Don’t like guns? Start reporting students and get entire families of innocent people disarmed, without any pesky need for evidence. This being New York, I’ll guarantee they’ll find oath-breaking judges who’ll sign victim disarmament orders. I can see NYS school districts sending out memos to teachers to start collating lists of students/families to target, based on known/suspect gun wnership by a family member. Probably starting with those whose parents demand parent-teacher conferences; the damned uppity troublemakers who dare question the faculty’s authority.

I don’t live in New York (and you would have enjoyed the discussion the time a boss tried to talk me into relocating to New York City), so this wouldn’t affect me.

Yet.

The problem is that, like “standard” extreme rights violating order legislation, the gun people controllers will take any legislation Cuomo comes up with and use it as a model in other states. I can make some good guesses as to which legislators in Atlanta would leap at the chance to sponsor it here.

I have a disturbed niece who has publicly stated that she hates guns, and wants everyone over the age of 55 eliminated. What happens when she realizes she can start filing no-evidence ERPOs to fulfill her genocidal dream?

What happens when anyone having a lawncare dispute with a neighbor can send the confiscation cops out to screw him over?

What happens when ERPO legislation makes everyone a STASI informer?


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG


Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Morons Will be Morons

I’m beginning to think the residents of New York deserve every bit of stupid heaped on them by their drooling nimrod politicians. After all, they do keep electing these monkeys into office!

The latest bit of stupid comes from New York state senator Tony Avella, who has decided that New York needs to ban machetes.

No, I’m not kidding. Get a load at this tool.

tool

He’s perfectly serious. Apparently machete crimes are now a problem in the Empire State. And under the proposed legislation, one could get a year in the pokey for merely possessing this gardening tool.

Smaller knives such as switchblades and gravity knives are already banned and listed as deadly weapons under state law, but machetes are considered the same as butcher knives.

New Yorkers carrying those knives can be ticketed for a blade longer than 4 inches, an administrative code violation. They face up to 15 days in jail and a $300 fine.

“They’re DAAAAAAAAAAAAANGEEEEEEEEROOOOOUUUUUUSSS,” he simpers!

“The fact that anyone can easily purchase this potentially lethal tool is just crazy,” he said.

And anything dangerous is bad for you, and therefore must be banned.

For real.

So, let’s ban hammers, household chemicals, and of course automobiles!

Why stop at machetes? Ban teeth and fists while you’re at it. Those kill as well.

And maybe we should mandate that every citizen leave the house only when wrapped in a copious amount of styrofoam. And maybe bubble wrap.

Tyranny starts with stupid. I’m convinced of it.

So until New Yorkers get educated and start exhibiting some independent thought and intestinal fortitude when dealing with their own lives, perhaps they deserve these types of lunatics as legislators.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

A Video to Make You Tear Up

It’s Tuesday morning, and I ran across this video that I felt I needed to share with you. There’s not much left to say that Aaron Weiss didn’t say in this flawless 3-minute speech.

It’s eloquent and true. Those of us who volunteered to serve in the Armed Forces know why we did so – and it’s not for that generous $1800 per month you receive as a PFC.

I graduated Johns Hopkins with a degree in International Relations, and there was little doubt in my mind about what I wanted to do. I gave it some thought for a few months, but in the end I joined the Army.

I joined, because I understood what it’s like to live in a tyrannical state where rights matter about as little as human beings do.

I joined, because I wanted to defend the freedoms and opportunities this nation afforded me – freedoms the former USSR, Nazi Germany, and every other statist hellhole has destroyed.

I joined, because when I came to this country as a kid, I realized that I had opportunities here to live, achieve, and succeed that I would have never had as a Jew in the USSR.

And I was grateful. I was grateful enough to put on that uniform and swear an oath to defend our Constitution and those freedoms with my blood and my life.

Regardless of who resides in that White House at 20220, that oath and that promise remains the same. Politicians come and go. We may agree with them, nor not. But our oath and our promise remains: should any enemy threaten our country, our Constitution, or our people we will be there.

The young man in this video understands this. He served to protect those rights we hold dear. He continues to do so on a local level as a law enforcement officer. And he let those statist swine in New York know that he – as a veteran and law enforcement officer – will actively oppose their efforts to destroy everything he swore to protect…

…and do so by hypocritically using the deaths of children at Newtown to do it.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail