I should be able to resume posting shortly.

Video: Three Natural Laws of Security is currently unavailable. Seeking new hosting site.

2009-07-31


Invincibility + INVISIBILITY = Security

It's cheaper to be invisible than it is to be invincible.
In that ones liberty is always in direct proportion to ones security, she must be referring to people giving up THEIR liberty to improve SOMEONE ELSE'S security.
Interesting ...

2009-07-29

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is not saying which train will include the cameras, or what line it will be on. But the agency wants to see whether the cameras can help deter crime and aid officials in emergencies.

I think they already know that they won't deter crime and that they will only aid officials to the detriment of the rest of us, so maybe they're just seeing if they can get away with it...
During an intelligence briefing Monday at the U.S. Coast Guard's Puget Sound Joint Harbor Operations Center, which is in Seattle, Ms. Napolitano pressed officials from participating agencies to name a tangible benefit from the fusion centers in terms of disrupting a specific plot, which they were unable to do. But in an interview later, she said she believes the centers are valuable and will push plans to get intelligence professionals from Washington working at all the sites.

We need to get all this out of the news and establish a normalcy that will still be effective 5-10-15 years from now, because they're not going to go for it when we are obviously ready for them (or at least still have them in mind). One approach might be to fill line-level DHS jobs with high-school graduates that do some intense training for a few months, serve for four years while getting DHS-paid college tuition, and then resume their normal lives. Over time, we get security service from young, motivated people who then go out into the normal world, which results in a higher level of security-awareness in the general citizenry.

2009-07-27

While victims face multiple offenders in only about 24% of all violent crimes, [93] the victims in our sample who used guns faced multiple offenders in 53% of the incidents. [94] This mirrors the observation that criminals who use guns are also more likely than unarmed criminals to face multiple victims. [95] A gun allows either criminals or victims to handle a larger number of adversaries. Many victims facing multiple offenders probably would not resist at all if they were without a gun or some other weapon. Another possible interpretation is that some victims will resort to a defensive measure as serious as wielding a gun only if they face the most desperate circumstances. Again, this finding contradicts a view that gun defenders face easier circumstances than other crime victims.
Lots of interesting, peer-reviewed facts ...

(via Examiner.com)



Hmmm ...

2009-07-26

Alarm tech



I'm not familiar with the REFLEX band but the unit looks like simplicity itself ...

I love it when they fight back ...


My suspicion is that we're buying friends amongst the harder classes, because using military personnel will typically result in much better security ...
This new report today from The New York Times' Mark Mazzetti and David Johnston reveals an entirely unsurprising though still important event: in 2002, Dick Cheney and David Addington urged that U.S. military troops be used to arrest and detain American citizens, inside the U.S., who were suspected of involvement with Al Qaeda. That was done pursuant to a previously released DOJ memo (.pdf) authored by John Yoo and Robert Delahunty, addressed to Alberto Gonzales, dated October 23, 2001, and chillingly entitled "Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities Within the U.S." That Memo had concluded that the President had authority to deploy the U.S. military against American citizens on U.S. soil. Far worse, it asserted that in exercising that power, the President could not be bound either by Congressional statutes prohibiting such use (such as the Posse Comitatus Act) or even by the Constitution's Fourth Amendment, which -- the Memo concluded -- was "inapplicable" to what it called "domestic military operations."

2009-07-24

Hmmm, no mention of the protesters firing back ... must not be citizens ...

Gatesgate ...

I do love it when they fight back ...

Interesting thoughts on CCW reciprocity

Imagine you're visiting Idaho or Arizona. A cop pulls you over and asks to see your driver's license. Then, even though your license is current, he draws his sidearm, cuffs you, and hauls you off to the calaboose. Your crime? You were driving on a Nevada license; you neglected to get a new and separate driver's license, in advance, for each state you're planning to pass through. Ridiculous? Of course it is. Article IV of the Constitution stipulates, "Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state," and Congress is empowered to make laws describing how "such acts, records and proceedings shall be proved." So if you're married (or divorced) in Nevada, your status remains unchanged when you visit Arizona. The other 49 states also have to honor your license. But in fact, the situation described above is precisely what confronts a law-abiding gun owner who wants to carry his weapon on an interstate trip. Some states honor the "concealed carry permits" of some other states, but not of others. Get out a map, take a few months and a few thousand dollars, send away for the varying requirement to obtain "permits" from seven or eight states -- some of which you may have no intention of visiting -- in order to have a fair chance of being legal wherever you travel (though you can forget New York, California, Washington or Chicago).

2009-07-23

His rehabilitation will sicken families whose loved ones were killed at Lockerbie and in Northern Ireland by bombs supplied by Libyan agents. Muammar Gaddafi is today, though, a close ally in the fight against international terrorism. As one observer told me on a recent visit to Libya: “If there is one thing that keeps Gaddafi up at night, it is probably the threat of Islamic fundamentalism.” The eyes and ears of his pervasive police state work closely with Western agencies in the fight against global jihad. His return to the top table of international politics began in 2003 when he surrendered his weapons of mass destruction programmes. He delivered the Lockerbie bombing suspects for trial. And in November 2008 he agreed to a $1.8 billion compensation package for bomb victims. His relationship with the West was revived at a stroke and the pariah state opened its doors to foreign trade.

2009-07-20

It's hard to watch this video and not want to convert a lot of Talibani M to E via C-squared multiplication ...
Always remember, today's the day - everyday!
Lots of interesting stuff here ...

2009-07-19

Filthy lucre ...

Every time I write something about the incredible feat of putting someone on the Moon, as happened almost exactly 40 years ago, there is an inevitable chorus of criticism - much of it justified - about how the huge sums of taxpayers' money involved rendered the project beyond the pale, even if the critics grudgingly accept what a great adventure the whole thing was. It has to be accepted that by "crowding out" private space initiatives in the way they did, government agencies both in the US, former USSR and elsewhere have arguably retarded more promising, long-term space ventures that might have got off the ground. The existence of large, politically directed agencies like Nasa do not help innovation, either. Consider how quickly the aircraft design process occured from the Wright Brothers and through to the jet age, and then compare the rate of progress of space flight over the past 40 years. It is not a flattering comparison. So this is precisely why Dale Amon is so right to comment on stuff like this.
I really like that I was able to use 'lucre' in a title ... thanks to Samizdata.net ...
The rules of these battles are simple and sparse. Eye-gouging, groin shots, biting, head-to-head contact, and other primitive techniques are disallowed. Common offensive maneuvres are kicks, punches, knees, elbows, takedowns, and throws. Through these techniques, fighters often shift from standing and trading strikes to grappling on the ground.
I've been meaning to mention this for awhile, now. This particular practice of MA is supposed to be the most realistic, but keep in mind that when a competitor 'shoots in' all of his opponents buddies don't rush in and start stomping on the back of his neck and kicking his kidneys the way they do in real life! Know what to do on the ground, but don't ever go there voluntarily unless your own associates are more numerous and of superior quality to those of your opponent ...
A whole slew of cool HDR ...


You don't hear a great deal about 'light contact' and demo events anymore ... their vibe is a cross between a gun show and a church picnic, only with simulated beatings ... what a great time ...

This is the real difficulty in commercial security operations. If the operation is very pro-active at all, the guest will only put up with it for a very short while, and having a reactive operation in a bombing situation is like having no security at all ...

2009-07-16

Damn convenient having a chain-saw running when the lion attacks. If I were him I'd head for Vegas ...
That seems to be over ...
The power to protect the nation, said Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist, "ought to exist without limitation," because "it is impossible to foresee or define the extent and variety of national exigencies, or the correspondent extent & variety of the means which may be necessary to satisfy them." To limit the president's constitutional power to protect the nation from foreign threats is simply foolhardy. Hamilton observed that "decision, activity, secrecy, and dispatch will generally characterize the proceedings of one man, in a much more eminent degree, than the proceedings of any greater number." "Energy in the executive," he reiterated, "is essential to the protection of the community against foreign attacks."
My suspicion is that if they had said "Hey, we were looking everywhere but if it didn't lead to actual terror cells we simply forgot it" instead of "Oh, were only doing it for national security but if we find evidence of people doing other crimes we're referring it to the regular prosecutors" it probably would have been OK. Also, it strikes me as valid as an exception for about six months until you can get up to speed. After five or six years, your just taking advantage ...

2009-07-15

2009-07-14


Really crunchy, and really interesting ...
Arizonans with concealed weapons permits will be allowed to take a handgun into bars and restaurants that serve alcohol under a bill signed Monday by Gov. Jan Brewer.

I think the Alaska/Vermont model is the only way to go, but congrats to our AZ brethren (and sistren) anyway ...

Rather, my point is how the ordinance seems to deliberately marginalize defensive purposes for gun ownership. Sporting purposes are labeled legitimate, and other purposes, including defensive ones, are labeled illegitimate. And of course if that is broadly done and broadly accepted -- once people buy into the notion that the legitimacy of gun use rests on its "sporting" applications -- further steps towards broader gun and ammunition bans become much easier. After all, the only thing that would be at stake in such bans would be "sport"; how can that measure up against the supposed crime-fighting (or even accident-fighting) benefits of gun control? Why not require that all guns and ammunition be stored at the range or at the hunting lodge, and never at home? Why not even ban the sport altogether, in the interests of saving lives?


Volokh is always interesting ...
And just so you can look it up yourself, we're going to cite the study like all the ... what's that ... erm ... ahhh ... never mind.

2009-07-13

“A Muslim cannot be a terrorist and a terrorist cannot be a Muslim, because the inhuman methods used by terrorist are not in accord with what Islam teaches,” Jilani said.
There isn't a great deal of info in this post, but I think that if there is Islamic canon that refutes terrorism, getting it widely disseminated is probably the most effective long term solution to the Islamic terrorism problem. Drive it home that Muslims DO NOT serve Allah by blowing up babies ...


And then? "In the first quarter of 2016, we'll prep and de-orbit the spacecraft," says NASA's space station program manager, Michael T. Suffredini. That's a polite way of saying that NASA will make the space station fall back into the atmosphere, where it will turn into a fireball and then crash into the Pacific Ocean. It'll be a controlled reentry, to ensure that it doesn't take out a major city. But it'll be destroyed as surely as a Lego palace obliterated by the sweeping arm of a suddenly bored kid.

I would think that there should be some group of businesses that could afford to keep it in orbit. I would think that materials and pharma could do a very profitable business having access to zero-G development labs ...
Oklahoma's self-defense law states that you can shoot if you perceive your life is being threatened, but once the threat is neutralized, you have to stop shooting. If you don't, you've committed a crime, and it doesn't matter if you're fed up, if you think criminals deserve it, or if you've been the victim of violent crime. That is, if you really do believe that you have to follow the strict construction of the law and you believe that empathy shouldn't play a part in adjudicating a case like this. If you are a strict constructionist, that means you support Mr. Ersland being punished if found guilty of breaking the law, yet I'm wondering how many who consider themselves "strict constructionists" and who rail against "activists judges," would take an activist view and say to hell with the law? Imagine he's found guilty and the judge, rather than following the letter of the law, suspends any jail sentence and let's Mr. Ersland go free? That would be applauded by the many conservatives in the Oklahoma newspaper threat who think Ersland did the right thing. Why? Because we're empathetic.
Very interesting ...

2009-07-12

I'm not sure whose security these are supposed to improve but I think it's clear that it isn't the people being required to have the embedded documents ...

Scientists have devised a hair test that the government hopes will help check the alibis of terrorist suspects and asylum seekers. They believe new laser scans of individual hair strands can reveal where a person has been living for the previous two months. Researchers at the National Metrology Institute in Teddington, Middlesex, have developed the laser to measure tiny changes in hair that are caused by diet or the immediate environment.

I hope they prove this before they start acting on the results ...

2009-07-10

More really cool HDR ...

It is probably worth considering the possibility that these parents behave irresponsibly specifically because they go through life not having to worry about catching an incoming round as a result of their irresponsible behavior. It has long been known that an armed society is a polite society. Anyone that grew up in places where every pickup had a loaded rifle rack in the back window will confirm that.

2009-07-08

Some very cool HDR collections here and here.
Investigators carried liquid explosives and low-yield detonators -- materials investigators note are not normally carried into federal buildings. The GAO said security concerns prevent it from revealing the exact locations or cities of the affected facilities, but that eight of them were government owned, while two were leased. They included offices of a U.S. senator and House member, as well as offices for the departments of Homeland Security, Justice and State, the GAO reported. In one instance, the GAO obtained a building security tape showing an investigator walking through a security checkpoint with bomb making materials.

Usually, this is a result of having exceptions to policies. Once there is an exception, exceptions become perks; and, at that point, you might as well toss the security policies all together because every time a policy enforcer challenges someone's right to an exception the enforcer will inevitably be challenging someone well up in the pecking order and will be penalized accordingly. Why risk enforcing the policy at the risk of losing your job? If you want effective security, don't allow exceptions.

Interesting ...

It's worth noting that the NRA is strong because it represents a large number of citizens that will absolutely VOTE YOU OUT for coming down wrong on this one issue.
Luke Sanchez, a 38 year old man from Belen, New Mexico and a former US Marine, was driving near his home when he saw a business bing burglarized. As someone who had been the victim of repeated crimes over the last few months, he felt a civic duty to help the business owner. He called 911, and followed the criminal’s van, trying to the their license plate number. The criminals realized they were being followed, stopped their van, and then and approached Sanchez’s truck. One of the criminals, who had a lengthy criminal record that included attacking a police officer, broke Sanchez’s truck’s window, hit Sanchez in the face, and tried to pull him from the vehicle. Fearing for his life, Sanchez fired one shot, which killed the violent criminal. The criminal’s accomplice then fled, and remains at large. Sanchez has been charged with murder for defending himself against the violent criminal, and remains in custody in lieu of a $100,000 bond.

2009-07-07

Yesterday's Minneapolis Star Tribune had the front-page headline: "Co-sleeping kills about 20 infants each year." (The headline in the web article is different.) The only problem is, in either case, there's no additional information with which to make sense of the statistic. How many infants don't die each year? How many infants die each year in separate beds? Is the death rate for co-sleepers greater or less than the death rate for separate-bed sleepers? Without this information, it's impossible to know whether this statistic is good or bad.


Some Bruce ...
Interesting description ...

Oops ... must have forgotten that EVERYONE has video capability these days IN THEIR PHONES ...

Hmmm ...

It's odd that she would find the citizen's use of tech to counteract her use of tech to be offensive. It has that 'It all started when he hit me back' quality ...

2009-07-06

Some interesting thought on reciprocity ...

He added: "It did mean that we actually had to skew the conduct of operations to take account of the sorts of criticisms that we'd been subject to but been unable to counter because of what we couldn't say about forthcoming cases." But in remarks going beyond the world of policing, he appeared to question the wider basis for the contempt laws themselves. "There seems to be a presumption that juries are not capable with dealing with the information that's put before them, incapable of deciding whether something is probative or prejudicial to a defendant," he said.


It's good to know that it's not just here ...

That's nice ...

Hmmm ... look up slippery slope and it's a picture of England ...

2009-07-03

Chief Superintendent Isagani Cuevas, Western Visayas police director, said in a statement that his office was finalizing plans for the implementation of the ban on the 1,032-hectare island-resort. He said the measure was included in a comprehensive plan to improve peace and order and to avert terrorist attacks on tourist destinations. Similar steps will be undertaken on Guimaras Island, another tourist destination in the Visayas. The ban will cover all persons entering the island and off-duty security guards and law enforcers. Off-duty security guards, especially those outside the areas of their assignment, will be prohibited from carrying firearms. The ban will also cover policemen and members of the Armed Forces who are not in uniform, as well as the security aides of politicians and officials.

Another model of effectiveness, no doubt ...

In March 1982, 25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw – responding to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill. – unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of “Wild West” showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender. The crime rate initially plummeted for several years after the passage of the ordinance, with the 2005 per capita crime rate actually significantly lower than it was in 1981, the year before passage of the law.

Kinda hard to argue with ...