Turns out all you needed to do to get people to voluntarily wear a GPS tracker is tell them it makes talking to their friends easier.
Not me.
The only cellphone I own is a "dumb" phone that I never use except to carry it with me when I'm out with the battery removed and taped to the back for use in an emergency. I also don't use any social media. I have plenty of friends and acquaintances that I have no trouble communicating with in the manner I wish.
I have skills and talents that people want, so they make the effort to contact me if they wish to benefit from them. It also helps screen those wishing to engage my time down to those who are worth my time.
Pretty much the same with credit/debit cards. I pay cash and plastic is for emergencies. I get next to zero spam email or USPS junk-mail as a result which also reduces my wasted time.
Are they setting the stage to go before Congress and ask permission to impose the death penalty on license scofflaws?
More like setting the stage for politicians already taking their bribes...err, "contributions"...to take stands to restrict free and open software.
Senator Spittoon: "Waaarghargle!!..Those damned free-software hippies want to destroy the US economy and our jerbs! Something must be done! This is something, so it must be done!"
Thus, our freedom to determine what runs on (supposedly) our hardware takes another hit.
Thank you for letting us know you have trouble understanding this, or that you'd rather let someone with vested interests at odds with your own to speak for you. Wonderful stuff. You are a real treasure. Such an intellect, such a waste.
Yup, just the kind of reply I expected.
Content-free ad hominem.
Slashdot never fails to disappoint in that regard.
I see no reason why polluting industries like (oil/gas companies) should be subsidized at all. Frankly, we should be taxing them based on how much pollution they emit and how damaging it is. We are eventually going to have to remove CO2 from the air and it's going to be a pricey project. We might as well start saving money for it now.
Well if we really intend to freeze the global climate at this present state we will also need to adjust the 'wobble' of the planet's axis and put regulators on the sun's output to halt the natural processes which cause ice-ages and tropical cycles as well as prevent extinctions and the rise of any new species of life, and freeze the populations of all current species of animal and plant life.
If mankind dedicates all effort and energy exclusively to these ends, there is a very slight chance we may succeed (or alternatively destroy the global climate cycle balance), and an even greater chance that we will make life not worth living.
Or, we could do what mankind has always done better than any other species...adapt and prosper while using the technology we develop in common sense ways to not kill ourselves with our own poisons and waste while advancing civilization & technology to where the most damaging activities can take place off-planet.
But what's in that for people who want ultimate power, unlimited wealth, and total control over everyone?
I, for one, welcome our rolling-blackout, mass-starvation, declining-living-standard, and death-from-exposure for the poor and brown people, energy overlords.
Re a passport or photo ID... Its getting hard or more expensive to pay out per month for the ability of not having photo ID at some point in getting work or needed account creation at a city and state level. To cash a low wage from a job with no photo ID takes a percentage of a lower wage every month. Needing a real bank account to pay wages in is getting more accepted or needed under state of federal regulations, new applications might need a photo ID, getting past an interview might need more photo ID. That basic on site work photo database ID gets shared with federal gov, more security or background information required for an offer of advancement or just keeping an entry level job due to new state or federal regulations. What was once sighted photo ID is now getting to be scanned ID shared with state and federal databases. Random requests for chat downs on public transport with a camera pointed at every passenger, chat downs near public transport hubs, sharing of public and private CCTV networks covering all faces walking past 24/7 in many city areas or in smaller towns. The federal facial databases of every driver and passenger near international boarder crossing areas along all main roads in that state.
Facial recognition could be requested by local on site private sector security contractors or police via fusion centre support after an event or chat down. Its now just more easy and simple to collect all faces as images in a security network package as sold for any and all later sorting of people passing a building, location, mil or gov sensitive area or city location. Why wait for a security contractor to notice something when its cheaper for every face can be kept and shared with the federal gov?
The other aspect is that of the "first amendment audit" with people staying on public land with a video camera and been approached by local police, federal officials or private sector security on public land for a "chat down" after been seen with a "camera". The resulting fun conversation about been confronted on public land is then posted on social media. Mil, gov, federal sites, local gov officials are building shared databases to track such people and give them no new funny chat down comments or to track back their vehicle or any local supporters with a second camera, secondary zoom or video in the area.
What is needed is to turn it back on those in power.
Create smart-phone apps that can be used to snap photos, along with time/location data, of LEOs/TLA agents/politicians/bureaucrats/officials and other assorted government lackeys to multiple cross-checked databases in foreign nations not part of the "5 Eyes" and who are not given to kow-towing to the "5 Eyes" nations or their allies.
Use data analysis tools including facial recognition to plot out all their associations, travel patterns, spouses/partners/family relationships, financial/banking/investment data, medical/psychological profiles, who pays them off, who they pay off, etc etc and make it available to anyone (because any foreign State-sponsored hackers will surely access data held by the US government on its' citizens as has already been proven by recent breaches regarding the governments' own members that were made public).
It may even be possible to match government super-computer analysis with a type of "folding@home" style shared data analysis tool.
We have the numbers. Crowd-source as much as possible. We can collect more complete data on them in less time than they can us. Together we can create tools to utilize that data better and faster than they can.
Turn the Panopticon back on them. Make the information-analysis playing field level once more. Create a MAD-style "Mexican standoff" scenario in which the government dare not try to go all "1984" on citizens because citizens can do the same and better to those in power.
Hence my words "that looks more like civil disobedience" above.
Yet you conveniently ignore the BS part about you claiming that Uber/Lyft are successful because they are part of "organized crime" (the Mob) in the US and that is why they have not been immediately "taken down" by the corrupt (Mob-influenced) authorities.
Don't attempt to try to deflect here with a deliberately obtuse and dishonest misinterpretation of my reply followed by a snarky comment on my level of reading comprehension.
The thing that confuses so many and another reason they have been able to work their way in is that it's organised crime that looks more like civil disobedience than what governments are used to with co-ordinated rulebreaking.
I call bullshit.
The reason why Uber/Lyft and other services using a similar structure are popping up is simply that the status quo system is not meeting the demand to such a deplorable extent that demand has become so strong for change that upstarts attempt to buck the corrupt system.
It's the same thing with the so-called 'War On (some) Drugs' or the failed Prohibition days of the 1920s. People as a population will not obey laws/regulations/policies when the majority oppose them and also (usually due in large part directly to those very laws/regulations/policies) perceive them to be vastly unjust/unfair/unwarranted/undesired/etc etc. All such laws do is turn otherwise law-abiding people into criminals and also stifle innovation and societal progress across multiple areas of civilization.
It's really quite simple. The current system is obsolete and new systems are attempting to fill the gap while the existing corrupt & obsolete system tries desperately to slow if not prevent it's own extinction. Change is coming despite anything the established players do. They can either embrace it and help make it the best it can be or waste resources on a futile effort to fight the inevitable while depriving everyone the benefits of a better, more efficient system that better meets their needs.
Putting a stop to "lawbreaking" in such situations, short of enacting martial law and/or a totalitarian police/prison state, is not an option.
Seriously, though, when are we going to start stringing these people up at the edge of town? Mob justice isn't really great, but at present it is the best we have. How sad.
Whoa there, let's not jump off the deep end just yet. We're talking about a "yuge" change in the law enforcement/police/court culture that has been allowed through apathy and poor/near-nonexistent oversight, over the course of more than a half-century at least, to fester into its' current poor state.
That kind of change takes time. It took many decades to fester, so it may take a decade or two to correct. The other way is only a very, VERY last resort, as there will be inconceivable suffering and innocent loss of life and freedom going all "1776" on their asses.
The relatively new ability for citizens to be able to record and distribute high quality video and audio recordings of misconduct and criminal acts is already making huge advances in accountability. More members of law enforcement who violate their oaths, break the law, abuse/assault/kill people, etc etc both in numbers and by percentile, are being caught, convicted, and serve prison time now than ever before.
As this trend grows and the reality for police having to factor-in that they are likely being recorded at any time embeds into the psyche of police from Chiefs/Sheriffs to the patrol cop/Deputies and from the courts/judges to the DAs and prosecutors and also to juries, the inertia will slowly reverse and is now, and it will keep doing so at an ever-increasing rate.
Hey, no bad time to stock some extra ammo and another weapon or three, but don't get salty yet.
Remember, we're the ones who just want to be left alone to raise families and make a living by working a job or owning a business without undue interference or burden from the people we employ at our pleasure to keep order. If the killing starts, let it be by *their* hands, not ours.
It's like the Force. Don't let it come from hatred, anger, or the lust for revenge, for that way lays the Dark Side and it only brings suffering and ultimately ruin for all. Let it only come as the last resort in the protection of life and freedom from tyranny, and never abandon the ability and willingness to offer mercy and aid where it is needed and deserved.
Sortof. The "switch in time that saved nine" decision was written before FDR proposed his bill, though announced after its proposal and the President's fireside chat. FDR attempted to pack the court by proposing a bill that said the President could appoint a justice for every existing justice over the age of 70 -- so there would be 9 fixed seats, with an additional seat for every one of the nine which were currently over 70. So essentially as justices retired, the court would shrink back to 9, and as they got older, it would increase in size again. This bill was, technically legal because the US Constitution doesn't set a number of justices on the Courts. Was FDR successful? Yes and no. The specific legislation he proposed was roundly criticized by both parties and was obstructed (by a Democrat) in a Senate committee, and ultimately was defeated. The court packing failed, but Roosevelt ultimately achieved his aims, as one of the justices started voting to uphold some of the New Deal legislation ("The switch in time that saved nine" mentioned above), and within a few years enough justices had retired or died that Roosevelt was able to get his majority anyway.
Yes, quite right. I'm pleasantly surprised to see a knowledgeable, cogent, and civil reply that adds depth to the topic, as opposed to the type of posts seen too often here that either add nothing or are just flinging poo.
I know I wasn't going into any detail as it *was* a/. post after all (heheh!). Just trying for a short "sort of" that conveyed approximately what happened.
I appreciate the skill you've shown in being able to explain it so succinctly. I'm not a bad writer myself and still, I wasn't sure I'd avoid a wall-o-text in providing the amount of detail and context to the breadth & extent you've demonstrated here in as few words.
No. There is no "exact dividing line" between an employee and a contractor. Rather, there is a 20 factor test [angelo.edu].
Unless it's possible to be 37.2% contractor and 62.8% employee then there totally is an exact dividing line; you're either on one side or the other.
Now it might not be easy to determine where the line is, but that's not the same thing as it not existing.
Exactly.
The problem here is that it is in the interests of the corrupt government and the established players to keep the determination criteria murky so as to be able to do just as they are doing now. Use it as a weapon to prevent competition by innovative upstarts.
Can't let competitive capitalism rock the corrupt crony-capitalist boat. Too much corrupt money, power, and control at stake. It means nothing to them that it also locks the people into shitty products and services with little in the way of pressures to improve.
Uber/Lyft/etc made the mistake of not making sure they paid off the right "good old boy network" people and arranged the appropriate bribes/kickbacks to the right politicians and bureaucrats first before launching their business.
In a crony-capitalist system, you don't challenge the established cronies without having the government come down hard on you. It's all about setting up the means to prevent competition from new players. It's the established players "pulling the ladder up behind them" so to speak, to prevent anyone from "rocking the (corrupt) boat".
The US Government has been in a constant state of treason for since JFK was assassinated.
Arguably, ever since Lincoln, or at least since FDR and his (successful) threat to pack the SCOTUS with extra Justices in order to pass portions of his Great Society plan that were blatantly unconstitutional and over which the then-current SCOTUS/Justices in the majority were not willing to allow to pass judicial muster. The SCOTUS caved to FDR, or we might have 14 or more SCOTUS Justices today rather than 9.
Then there was Wilson who racially segregated the US armed forces when they were not racially segregated at the time.
It seems that the farther away from the US Constitution that the US government gets, the worse things get for US citizens and arguably for the rest of the world.
"Prove it in court" is the most likely response, with the court date likely many months/years away. Meanwhile, you sit in jail unable to bond out because your cash/assets have been seized, that is if a bond is even allowed/set by a judge, which is unlikely for out-of-State travelers and probably especially not for "a smart guy, eh? roadside lawyer, huh? we'll fix you!" and you wait even longer and likely with 'resisting arrest/obstruction' charges added and serious injuries sustained as a bonus.
Remember, the people you're dealing with here are the type who have been known to shoot an unarmed subject in the back multiple times and kill him while the subject is running away, forget the xkcd $5 wrench.
Is there any way to load a pre-paid card with a huge negative balance? Such that when somebody moves the negative quantity to their account, it actually cleans them out?
No, that's known as "hanging paper" (like writing and passing bad checks...'fraud by conversion' I believe is the term) in criminal parlance, and that will get you more hard time than committing murder in most jurisdictions.
Kill someone (besides a cop or other member of the privileged/elite/ruling class), and meh. You'd likely receive a few years jail time and some parole, and maybe some victim restitution at the most.
If your crime costs banks/businesses/other financial institutions money, you get thrown under the prison.
Seems you think you know more about the climate than actual climate scientists.
News flash, Cupcake!
Nearly all "climate scientists" are self-selected pro-AGW propagandists.
If a scientist doesn't accept AGW fully then they aren't considered qualified to become "climate scientists". So of course most "climate scientists" agree that AGW is all that is hyped. If they didn't they would not be considered a "climate scientist" but a "science denier" and would also never receive any government grants even if they did make it past the university systems' self-selection filter.
It's a kind of "no true Scotsman" fallacious logic that easily deceives the low-info, emotionally-driven types that have never been taught critical-thinking skills...the same types that are or become SJW special snowflakes. It also functions to maintain a pool of "authorities" to which the pro-AGW wingnuts can use for their "appeal to authority" demagoguery.
It ain't liberalism that set up the TSA, the surveillance state...
You're partly right, it is Progressives who co-opted the "liberal" moniker after they were thoroughly discredited in the early part of the 20th century. Another news flash, Progressives are in both major political parties, the (D)s having been fully co-opted and the (R)s nearly so.
That is why no matter which party is in power, very little changes and why both parties agree on 90+% of policies.
...nor are they the ones policing the bathrooms...
Wait...so issuing directives and passing laws to eliminate bathrooms divided by sex and instead divided by whatever "gender" one feels like at the moment is not "policing bathrooms", but a State passing a law to simply restore the status quo, is? Do you even dictionary, bro?
policing the...uteruses of the nation.
So being opposed to a mass eugenics program that kills millions of unborn babies who are overwhelmingly African-American by number and percentage (precisely as Sanger and the KKK wanted) and then sells the murdered babies' parts like an auto salvage yard is "policing uteruses (sic)"? Wow. Just. Wow.
Never go full retard, son.
Don't worry your blatant example of what happens to the brain is enough to scare anyone, boy.
This is just a propaganda piece pushing AGW hysteria.
"OMG! AGW (the alien form of it, anyways) killed all intelligent life in the universe and deniers want us all dead like all life in the universe! They want us all dead!"
I guess what the Church of Anthropomorphic Global Warming cannot reasonably prove with actual science they attempt to propagandize with science fiction straight out of '60s sci-fi TV series plots.
It would be laughable if it weren't simultaneously both dangerous to free and open societies and a sad example of the mass idiocy of a large portion of humanity.
If the global climate changes mankind will do what mankind does best. Adapt and flourish as it has always done. And at the rate of climate change at the global scale, mankind will have more than ample time to do so.
But that doesn't accomplish the real goals of global wealth and political power redistribution, so anyone who dares point out such facts are painted as modern day heretics and calls are made to lock them away in the modern equivalents of church towers like Copernicus and Galileo.
And they dare call people who question any of it "anti-science deniers" when it is they who are actually anti-science, much like the old Roman Catholic Church in Copernicus' and Galileo's day.
Maybe they are testing a way to jam gps for everyone else and it doesn't affect their receivers?
That's OK by me.
My weapons systems have triple-plus fallback redundancy and can easily maintain locks on Washington, D.C. and Alexandria, VA without fail even with all external navigational/positional systems offline.
You can't enforce a law that no-one is allowed to know about - that's batshit bonkers.
If there's a secret list somewhere noting all the things I'm not allowed to know "but I can't know about it" then how can I be expected to follow the law?
"Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." -Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand
Boy, for all the Slashdotters that froth at the mouth whenever Atlas Shrugged is even mentioned, it sure seems to be prophetic regarding what is occurring in the US. At this rate I wonder how long it will be before a "Directive 10-289" is enacted? My guess is it will be right after the start of the impending collapse of the US economy and currency that is, at this point, pretty much inevitable.
I'd also be willing to bet that even after it all plays out pretty much as AS predicts, the same people will still froth at the mouth and maintain that the principles illustrated in AS are tinfoil-hat fantasies and lies despite any and all proof to the contrary.
I'm sure this will be met with attacks on the messenger, both myself and Ayn Rand. Good old "kill the messenger" which is ridiculed when politicians/government or corporations do it will be accepted without the batting of an eyelash.
Or a single critical thought.
Which is a large part of the reasons why the US and the citizens are in the position they're in.
So no guns for women, the handicapped, nor men over 45?
Already addressed by equal rights and non-discrimination laws, Acts, Amendments, etc and the SCOTUS which ruled that owning firearms is the right of all citizens with very limited exceptions for felons, the dangerously mentally ill, etc.
Why don't you address the issue of weakening all Constitutional Amendments by solipsistic redefining of the plain meaning of the 2nd Amendment instead of passing another Amendment, which I pointed out in the post you're replying to? Stop dancing around it and attempting to distract. You can't reasonably and logically defend it that's why, and that's one of the dirty little secrets that those who wish to weaken/destroy the 2nd Amendment will never bring up or address.
Do you truly value all the other Amendments so little you'd be willing to see them abridged and/or rendered meaningless to satisfy some peoples' hoplophobia (and the nearly universal desire of those in power everywhere to make those over whom they rule more helpless to resist anything the powerful decide)?
Again, if an overwhelming majority agreed then amending the Constitution would be no problem. Why do you wish to abrogate and disenfranchise the voices and civil rights (of which the individual right to own and bear arms is one) of the majority of citizens? What gives anyone the right to do that?
The second amendment specifically states the right to bear arms is for use in a militia.
And who is defined by the Constitution and Acts of Congress to be in the militia?
"The organized militia defined by the Militia Act of 1903, which repealed section two hundred thirty-two and sections 1625 - 1660 of title sixteen of the Revised Statutes, consists of State militia forces, notably the National Guard and the Naval Militia.[2] The National Guard, however, is not to be confused with the National Guard of the United States, which is a federally recognized reserve military force of the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force, although the two are linked.
The reserve militia[3] are part of the unorganized militia defined by the Militia Act of 1903 as consisting of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who is not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia.
Former members of the armed forces are also considered part of the "unorganized militia" per Sec 313 Title 32 of the US Code.[2]"
And "well regulated" in the form of writing and language used at the time meant "in good working order, ready, prepared, fit for purpose".
Look, if you believe so strongly that firearms should not be generally available to private citizens then make that case and amend the Constitution. It's been done many times, it's not impossible. It simply requires that a majority of citizens agree.
But you would rather not go that route as you know most people disagree and you would not have enough votes.
So you attempt to negate and disenfranchise the will of the majority of people by solipsistic reinterpretation of the words, definitions, meanings, and language to completely pervert the meaning and intent of the 2nd Amendment.
Be VERY careful what you wish for, you might just get it!
If subverting the 2nd Amendment in this manner becomes legitimate, how long do you think other amendments that you DO value will survive corrupt, power-seeking politicians, their cronies, and their political fellow-travelers and financial contributors?
By weakening any *one* Constitutional Amendment in this manner, you weaken *all the others* in equal measure.
Why would you want to hand over even more of your rights, privacy, security, and freedoms to the same people that created the NSA, FBI, FISA courts, NDAA, PATRIOT Act, civil forfeiture, War on (some) Drugs, etc etc, ad nauseam?
Do you have a masochistic preference for the taste of jackboot leather, or what?
AES (http://www.tubesandmore.com/ [tubesandmore.com]) is an excellent resource; one of my favorite parts vendors for tube amp builds/mods. No relationship, just a happy customer.
Thank you kindly, Sir!
Other great resources for tube amplifier parts, supplies, kits, pre-built and fully populated "drop-in" turret boards.
Ted Weber Speakers (and tons of amp parts, kits, etc) in Kokomo, IN. Weber speakers are legendary and Fender uses Weber speakers in their "signature model" line of "tweed" '50s-style amplifiers..
Watts Tube Audio in Saint Petersburg, FL.They offer loaded drop-in turret boards for many classic amp designs/brands as well as tons and tons of other tube amp goodies. Very high quality boards using top-shelf quality components.
Oh, forgot to mention that when placing two capacitors in series the capacitance value divides, so select a capacitance value for each of the two series caps that is twice the required capacitance value. Example; Two 50uF caps in series results in an effective capacitance value of 25uF.
----
To HornWumpus:
Standing on one foot while testing a live circuit is not necessary or advisable as one is far more likely to lose one's balance and fall into the circuit under test.
It *is* advisable to wear reasonable footwear, ie with synthetic soles and/or place non-conductive floor mats down in front of the workstation where one will stand while working if the floor is concrete like a residential basement, as concrete can retain moisture and become conductive enough at high voltages to conduct enough current to cause injury.
Likely so.. Getting a good filter cap that's gong to work at 800 Volts is going to be fun though. Electrolytic's don't like over voltage about as much as reverse voltage... KAPOW...
Vacuum tube amplifier tech here with 40+ years experience.
Here's a 25uF @ 800V/900V-surge "firecracker" style.
Another option is to series-connect two 450V or 500V capacitors to meet the 800V minimum rating requirement. I recommend placing a 100K Ohm 1-watt metal-film resistor across each of the two series-connected capacitors to make sure the voltage across each capacitor divides equally, as the ESR (effective resistance) of individual capacitors varies slightly from unit to unit and causes the voltage to divide unequally without the resistors which could possibly result in one of the capacitors "seeing" excess voltage. Usually not a problem, but why take a chance with a shortcut?.
The resistors also act as a safety feature as "bleeder" resistors to prevent accidental shock from a stored charge long after power has been removed by slowly discharging ("bleeding") the capacitors after power is removed.
As a safety tip, *always* keep one hand in your pants-pocket when performing tests/adjustments on live circuits to prevent completing a path to ground through one's chest. Human hearts don't take kindly to high voltage passing through them.
OK I can see that you've clearly not thought this one through.
Might want to give it another good think. Just saying.
Strat
You had to reach back 50 years to a civil rights issue (as if that's some kind of parallel here) to provide an example, and I'm the one who hasn't thought this through...riiiiight.
I chose Rosa Parks as pretty much everyone, young or old, even non-Americans, are familiar with Rosa Park's famous act of civil disobedience.
How about Mr. Edward Snowden and his whistle-blowing on the unConstitutional spying on innocent US citizens by the NSA?
There is such a thing as right & wrong, and in many cases what's "right" in most peoples' view is often illegal and what may be legal is wrong.
Legal/illegal =/= right/wrong.
It's perfectly legal for a cop to confiscate money from a citizen during the course of a traffic stop if the cop considers it to be a "suspicious" amount, with no other indication that any laws at all were broken. This is legal under current laws, but it is far, far from right.
Do not conflate moral right and wrong with legality. As often as not the two conflict.
I'm amazed that anyone needs this explained. Well, I could see someone in law enforcement or a politician/government bureaucrat being quite confused on the subject.
There's also "an unconstitutional law is no law at all", meaning that no citizen or court of law is obligated to obey an unconstitutional law, even if that law has not at the time already been found to be officially unconstitutional by the courts/SCOTUS.
The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:
The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.
Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.....
A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.
No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.
Slashdot Mirror
Turns out all you needed to do to get people to voluntarily wear a GPS tracker is tell them it makes talking to their friends easier.
Not me.
The only cellphone I own is a "dumb" phone that I never use except to carry it with me when I'm out with the battery removed and taped to the back for use in an emergency. I also don't use any social media. I have plenty of friends and acquaintances that I have no trouble communicating with in the manner I wish.
I have skills and talents that people want, so they make the effort to contact me if they wish to benefit from them. It also helps screen those wishing to engage my time down to those who are worth my time.
Pretty much the same with credit/debit cards. I pay cash and plastic is for emergencies. I get next to zero spam email or USPS junk-mail as a result which also reduces my wasted time.
Strat
Are they setting the stage to go before Congress and ask permission to impose the death penalty on license scofflaws?
More like setting the stage for politicians already taking their bribes...err, "contributions"...to take stands to restrict free and open software.
Senator Spittoon: "Waaarghargle!!..Those damned free-software hippies want to destroy the US economy and our jerbs! Something must be done! This is something, so it must be done!"
Thus, our freedom to determine what runs on (supposedly) our hardware takes another hit.
Strat
Thank you for letting us know you have trouble understanding this, or that you'd rather let someone with vested interests at odds with your own to speak for you. Wonderful stuff. You are a real treasure. Such an intellect, such a waste.
Yup, just the kind of reply I expected.
Content-free ad hominem.
Slashdot never fails to disappoint in that regard.
Stay classy!
Strat
I see no reason why polluting industries like (oil/gas companies) should be subsidized at all. Frankly, we should be taxing them based on how much pollution they emit and how damaging it is. We are eventually going to have to remove CO2 from the air and it's going to be a pricey project. We might as well start saving money for it now.
Well if we really intend to freeze the global climate at this present state we will also need to adjust the 'wobble' of the planet's axis and put regulators on the sun's output to halt the natural processes which cause ice-ages and tropical cycles as well as prevent extinctions and the rise of any new species of life, and freeze the populations of all current species of animal and plant life.
If mankind dedicates all effort and energy exclusively to these ends, there is a very slight chance we may succeed (or alternatively destroy the global climate cycle balance), and an even greater chance that we will make life not worth living.
Or, we could do what mankind has always done better than any other species...adapt and prosper while using the technology we develop in common sense ways to not kill ourselves with our own poisons and waste while advancing civilization & technology to where the most damaging activities can take place off-planet.
But what's in that for people who want ultimate power, unlimited wealth, and total control over everyone?
I, for one, welcome our rolling-blackout, mass-starvation, declining-living-standard, and death-from-exposure for the poor and brown people, energy overlords.
Strat
Re a passport or photo ID... Its getting hard or more expensive to pay out per month for the ability of not having photo ID at some point in getting work or needed account creation at a city and state level.
To cash a low wage from a job with no photo ID takes a percentage of a lower wage every month.
Needing a real bank account to pay wages in is getting more accepted or needed under state of federal regulations, new applications might need a photo ID, getting past an interview might need more photo ID. That basic on site work photo database ID gets shared with federal gov, more security or background information required for an offer of advancement or just keeping an entry level job due to new state or federal regulations.
What was once sighted photo ID is now getting to be scanned ID shared with state and federal databases.
Random requests for chat downs on public transport with a camera pointed at every passenger, chat downs near public transport hubs, sharing of public and private CCTV networks covering all faces walking past 24/7 in many city areas or in smaller towns. The federal facial databases of every driver and passenger near international boarder crossing areas along all main roads in that state.
Facial recognition could be requested by local on site private sector security contractors or police via fusion centre support after an event or chat down.
Its now just more easy and simple to collect all faces as images in a security network package as sold for any and all later sorting of people passing a building, location, mil or gov sensitive area or city location. Why wait for a security contractor to notice something when its cheaper for every face can be kept and shared with the federal gov?
The other aspect is that of the "first amendment audit" with people staying on public land with a video camera and been approached by local police, federal officials or private sector security on public land for a "chat down" after been seen with a "camera". The resulting fun conversation about been confronted on public land is then posted on social media.
Mil, gov, federal sites, local gov officials are building shared databases to track such people and give them no new funny chat down comments or to track back their vehicle or any local supporters with a second camera, secondary zoom or video in the area.
What is needed is to turn it back on those in power.
Create smart-phone apps that can be used to snap photos, along with time/location data, of LEOs/TLA agents/politicians/bureaucrats/officials and other assorted government lackeys to multiple cross-checked databases in foreign nations not part of the "5 Eyes" and who are not given to kow-towing to the "5 Eyes" nations or their allies.
Use data analysis tools including facial recognition to plot out all their associations, travel patterns, spouses/partners/family relationships, financial/banking/investment data, medical/psychological profiles, who pays them off, who they pay off, etc etc and make it available to anyone (because any foreign State-sponsored hackers will surely access data held by the US government on its' citizens as has already been proven by recent breaches regarding the governments' own members that were made public).
It may even be possible to match government super-computer analysis with a type of "folding@home" style shared data analysis tool.
We have the numbers. Crowd-source as much as possible. We can collect more complete data on them in less time than they can us. Together we can create tools to utilize that data better and faster than they can.
Turn the Panopticon back on them. Make the information-analysis playing field level once more. Create a MAD-style "Mexican standoff" scenario in which the government dare not try to go all "1984" on citizens because citizens can do the same and better to those in power.
Strat
Paint balls.
Or alternatively, if paint balls prove ineffective, 4 digits.
30.06
Of course, depending on the degree of hardening of the cameras' enclosures, it's possible that two digits and two letters may suffice.
12GA
Strat
Hence my words "that looks more like civil disobedience" above.
Yet you conveniently ignore the BS part about you claiming that Uber/Lyft are successful because they are part of "organized crime" (the Mob) in the US and that is why they have not been immediately "taken down" by the corrupt (Mob-influenced) authorities.
Don't attempt to try to deflect here with a deliberately obtuse and dishonest misinterpretation of my reply followed by a snarky comment on my level of reading comprehension.
Yup. More bullshit.
You must hold a PhD (Piled higher and Deeper).
Strat
The thing that confuses so many and another reason they have been able to work their way in is that it's organised crime that looks more like civil disobedience than what governments are used to with co-ordinated rulebreaking.
I call bullshit.
The reason why Uber/Lyft and other services using a similar structure are popping up is simply that the status quo system is not meeting the demand to such a deplorable extent that demand has become so strong for change that upstarts attempt to buck the corrupt system.
It's the same thing with the so-called 'War On (some) Drugs' or the failed Prohibition days of the 1920s. People as a population will not obey laws/regulations/policies when the majority oppose them and also (usually due in large part directly to those very laws/regulations/policies) perceive them to be vastly unjust/unfair/unwarranted/undesired/etc etc. All such laws do is turn otherwise law-abiding people into criminals and also stifle innovation and societal progress across multiple areas of civilization.
It's really quite simple. The current system is obsolete and new systems are attempting to fill the gap while the existing corrupt & obsolete system tries desperately to slow if not prevent it's own extinction. Change is coming despite anything the established players do. They can either embrace it and help make it the best it can be or waste resources on a futile effort to fight the inevitable while depriving everyone the benefits of a better, more efficient system that better meets their needs.
Putting a stop to "lawbreaking" in such situations, short of enacting martial law and/or a totalitarian police/prison state, is not an option.
Strat
Seriously, though, when are we going to start stringing these people up at the edge of town? Mob justice isn't really great, but at present it is the best we have. How sad.
Whoa there, let's not jump off the deep end just yet. We're talking about a "yuge" change in the law enforcement/police/court culture that has been allowed through apathy and poor/near-nonexistent oversight, over the course of more than a half-century at least, to fester into its' current poor state.
That kind of change takes time. It took many decades to fester, so it may take a decade or two to correct. The other way is only a very, VERY last resort, as there will be inconceivable suffering and innocent loss of life and freedom going all "1776" on their asses.
The relatively new ability for citizens to be able to record and distribute high quality video and audio recordings of misconduct and criminal acts is already making huge advances in accountability. More members of law enforcement who violate their oaths, break the law, abuse/assault/kill people, etc etc both in numbers and by percentile, are being caught, convicted, and serve prison time now than ever before.
As this trend grows and the reality for police having to factor-in that they are likely being recorded at any time embeds into the psyche of police from Chiefs/Sheriffs to the patrol cop/Deputies and from the courts/judges to the DAs and prosecutors and also to juries, the inertia will slowly reverse and is now, and it will keep doing so at an ever-increasing rate.
Hey, no bad time to stock some extra ammo and another weapon or three, but don't get salty yet.
Remember, we're the ones who just want to be left alone to raise families and make a living by working a job or owning a business without undue interference or burden from the people we employ at our pleasure to keep order. If the killing starts, let it be by *their* hands, not ours.
It's like the Force. Don't let it come from hatred, anger, or the lust for revenge, for that way lays the Dark Side and it only brings suffering and ultimately ruin for all. Let it only come as the last resort in the protection of life and freedom from tyranny, and never abandon the ability and willingness to offer mercy and aid where it is needed and deserved.
Strat
Sortof. The "switch in time that saved nine" decision was written before FDR proposed his bill, though announced after its proposal and the President's fireside chat. FDR attempted to pack the court by proposing a bill that said the President could appoint a justice for every existing justice over the age of 70 -- so there would be 9 fixed seats, with an additional seat for every one of the nine which were currently over 70. So essentially as justices retired, the court would shrink back to 9, and as they got older, it would increase in size again. This bill was, technically legal because the US Constitution doesn't set a number of justices on the Courts. Was FDR successful? Yes and no. The specific legislation he proposed was roundly criticized by both parties and was obstructed (by a Democrat) in a Senate committee, and ultimately was defeated. The court packing failed, but Roosevelt ultimately achieved his aims, as one of the justices started voting to uphold some of the New Deal legislation ("The switch in time that saved nine" mentioned above), and within a few years enough justices had retired or died that Roosevelt was able to get his majority anyway.
Yes, quite right. I'm pleasantly surprised to see a knowledgeable, cogent, and civil reply that adds depth to the topic, as opposed to the type of posts seen too often here that either add nothing or are just flinging poo.
I know I wasn't going into any detail as it *was* a /. post after all (heheh!). Just trying for a short "sort of" that conveyed approximately what happened.
I appreciate the skill you've shown in being able to explain it so succinctly. I'm not a bad writer myself and still, I wasn't sure I'd avoid a wall-o-text in providing the amount of detail and context to the breadth & extent you've demonstrated here in as few words.
Bravo Sir (or Madam), bravo!
Strat
Exactly.
The problem here is that it is in the interests of the corrupt government and the established players to keep the determination criteria murky so as to be able to do just as they are doing now. Use it as a weapon to prevent competition by innovative upstarts.
Can't let competitive capitalism rock the corrupt crony-capitalist boat. Too much corrupt money, power, and control at stake. It means nothing to them that it also locks the people into shitty products and services with little in the way of pressures to improve.
Uber/Lyft/etc made the mistake of not making sure they paid off the right "good old boy network" people and arranged the appropriate bribes/kickbacks to the right politicians and bureaucrats first before launching their business.
In a crony-capitalist system, you don't challenge the established cronies without having the government come down hard on you. It's all about setting up the means to prevent competition from new players. It's the established players "pulling the ladder up behind them" so to speak, to prevent anyone from "rocking the (corrupt) boat".
Strat
The US Government has been in a constant state of treason for since JFK was assassinated.
Arguably, ever since Lincoln, or at least since FDR and his (successful) threat to pack the SCOTUS with extra Justices in order to pass portions of his Great Society plan that were blatantly unconstitutional and over which the then-current SCOTUS/Justices in the majority were not willing to allow to pass judicial muster. The SCOTUS caved to FDR, or we might have 14 or more SCOTUS Justices today rather than 9.
Then there was Wilson who racially segregated the US armed forces when they were not racially segregated at the time.
It seems that the farther away from the US Constitution that the US government gets, the worse things get for US citizens and arguably for the rest of the world.
Strat
But there is no intent to steal/defraud.
"Prove it in court" is the most likely response, with the court date likely many months/years away. Meanwhile, you sit in jail unable to bond out because your cash/assets have been seized, that is if a bond is even allowed/set by a judge, which is unlikely for out-of-State travelers and probably especially not for "a smart guy, eh? roadside lawyer, huh? we'll fix you!" and you wait even longer and likely with 'resisting arrest/obstruction' charges added and serious injuries sustained as a bonus.
Remember, the people you're dealing with here are the type who have been known to shoot an unarmed subject in the back multiple times and kill him while the subject is running away, forget the xkcd $5 wrench.
Strat
....'fraud by conversion' I believe is the term...
Oops, it may more correctly be 'theft by conversion'.
Obviously, IANAL YMMV etc etc as well as never having been personally involved with such activities/behaviors.
Strat
Is there any way to load a pre-paid card with a huge negative balance? Such that when somebody moves the negative quantity to their account, it actually cleans them out?
No, that's known as "hanging paper" (like writing and passing bad checks...'fraud by conversion' I believe is the term) in criminal parlance, and that will get you more hard time than committing murder in most jurisdictions.
Kill someone (besides a cop or other member of the privileged/elite/ruling class), and meh. You'd likely receive a few years jail time and some parole, and maybe some victim restitution at the most.
If your crime costs banks/businesses/other financial institutions money, you get thrown under the prison.
There seems to be a pattern here...
Strat
Seems you think you know more about the climate than actual climate scientists.
News flash, Cupcake!
Nearly all "climate scientists" are self-selected pro-AGW propagandists.
If a scientist doesn't accept AGW fully then they aren't considered qualified to become "climate scientists". So of course most "climate scientists" agree that AGW is all that is hyped. If they didn't they would not be considered a "climate scientist" but a "science denier" and would also never receive any government grants even if they did make it past the university systems' self-selection filter.
It's a kind of "no true Scotsman" fallacious logic that easily deceives the low-info, emotionally-driven types that have never been taught critical-thinking skills...the same types that are or become SJW special snowflakes. It also functions to maintain a pool of "authorities" to which the pro-AGW wingnuts can use for their "appeal to authority" demagoguery.
It ain't liberalism that set up the TSA, the surveillance state...
You're partly right, it is Progressives who co-opted the "liberal" moniker after they were thoroughly discredited in the early part of the 20th century. Another news flash, Progressives are in both major political parties, the (D)s having been fully co-opted and the (R)s nearly so.
That is why no matter which party is in power, very little changes and why both parties agree on 90+% of policies.
...nor are they the ones policing the bathrooms...
Wait...so issuing directives and passing laws to eliminate bathrooms divided by sex and instead divided by whatever "gender" one feels like at the moment is not "policing bathrooms", but a State passing a law to simply restore the status quo, is? Do you even dictionary, bro?
policing the...uteruses of the nation.
So being opposed to a mass eugenics program that kills millions of unborn babies who are overwhelmingly African-American by number and percentage (precisely as Sanger and the KKK wanted) and then sells the murdered babies' parts like an auto salvage yard is "policing uteruses (sic)"? Wow. Just. Wow.
Never go full retard, son.
Don't worry your blatant example of what happens to the brain is enough to scare anyone, boy.
Strat
Global Warming (TM) killed the aliens!
Exactly.
This is just a propaganda piece pushing AGW hysteria.
"OMG! AGW (the alien form of it, anyways) killed all intelligent life in the universe and deniers want us all dead like all life in the universe! They want us all dead!"
I guess what the Church of Anthropomorphic Global Warming cannot reasonably prove with actual science they attempt to propagandize with science fiction straight out of '60s sci-fi TV series plots.
It would be laughable if it weren't simultaneously both dangerous to free and open societies and a sad example of the mass idiocy of a large portion of humanity.
If the global climate changes mankind will do what mankind does best. Adapt and flourish as it has always done. And at the rate of climate change at the global scale, mankind will have more than ample time to do so.
But that doesn't accomplish the real goals of global wealth and political power redistribution, so anyone who dares point out such facts are painted as modern day heretics and calls are made to lock them away in the modern equivalents of church towers like Copernicus and Galileo.
And they dare call people who question any of it "anti-science deniers" when it is they who are actually anti-science, much like the old Roman Catholic Church in Copernicus' and Galileo's day.
Strat
Maybe they are testing a way to jam gps for everyone else and it doesn't affect their receivers?
That's OK by me.
My weapons systems have triple-plus fallback redundancy and can easily maintain locks on Washington, D.C. and Alexandria, VA without fail even with all external navigational/positional systems offline.
Strat
You can't enforce a law that no-one is allowed to know about - that's batshit bonkers.
If there's a secret list somewhere noting all the things I'm not allowed to know "but I can't know about it" then how can I be expected to follow the law?
"Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." -Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand
Boy, for all the Slashdotters that froth at the mouth whenever Atlas Shrugged is even mentioned, it sure seems to be prophetic regarding what is occurring in the US. At this rate I wonder how long it will be before a "Directive 10-289" is enacted? My guess is it will be right after the start of the impending collapse of the US economy and currency that is, at this point, pretty much inevitable.
I'd also be willing to bet that even after it all plays out pretty much as AS predicts, the same people will still froth at the mouth and maintain that the principles illustrated in AS are tinfoil-hat fantasies and lies despite any and all proof to the contrary.
I'm sure this will be met with attacks on the messenger, both myself and Ayn Rand. Good old "kill the messenger" which is ridiculed when politicians/government or corporations do it will be accepted without the batting of an eyelash.
Or a single critical thought.
Which is a large part of the reasons why the US and the citizens are in the position they're in.
Strat
So no guns for women, the handicapped, nor men over 45?
Already addressed by equal rights and non-discrimination laws, Acts, Amendments, etc and the SCOTUS which ruled that owning firearms is the right of all citizens with very limited exceptions for felons, the dangerously mentally ill, etc.
Why don't you address the issue of weakening all Constitutional Amendments by solipsistic redefining of the plain meaning of the 2nd Amendment instead of passing another Amendment, which I pointed out in the post you're replying to? Stop dancing around it and attempting to distract. You can't reasonably and logically defend it that's why, and that's one of the dirty little secrets that those who wish to weaken/destroy the 2nd Amendment will never bring up or address.
Do you truly value all the other Amendments so little you'd be willing to see them abridged and/or rendered meaningless to satisfy some peoples' hoplophobia (and the nearly universal desire of those in power everywhere to make those over whom they rule more helpless to resist anything the powerful decide)?
Again, if an overwhelming majority agreed then amending the Constitution would be no problem. Why do you wish to abrogate and disenfranchise the voices and civil rights (of which the individual right to own and bear arms is one) of the majority of citizens? What gives anyone the right to do that?
Strat
The second amendment specifically states the right to bear arms is for use in a militia.
And who is defined by the Constitution and Acts of Congress to be in the militia?
"The organized militia defined by the Militia Act of 1903, which repealed section two hundred thirty-two and sections 1625 - 1660 of title sixteen of the Revised Statutes, consists of State militia forces, notably the National Guard and the Naval Militia.[2] The National Guard, however, is not to be confused with the National Guard of the United States, which is a federally recognized reserve military force of the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force, although the two are linked.
The reserve militia[3] are part of the unorganized militia defined by the Militia Act of 1903 as consisting of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who is not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia.
Former members of the armed forces are also considered part of the "unorganized militia" per Sec 313 Title 32 of the US Code.[2]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
And "well regulated" in the form of writing and language used at the time meant "in good working order, ready, prepared, fit for purpose".
Look, if you believe so strongly that firearms should not be generally available to private citizens then make that case and amend the Constitution. It's been done many times, it's not impossible. It simply requires that a majority of citizens agree.
But you would rather not go that route as you know most people disagree and you would not have enough votes.
So you attempt to negate and disenfranchise the will of the majority of people by solipsistic reinterpretation of the words, definitions, meanings, and language to completely pervert the meaning and intent of the 2nd Amendment.
Be VERY careful what you wish for, you might just get it!
If subverting the 2nd Amendment in this manner becomes legitimate, how long do you think other amendments that you DO value will survive corrupt, power-seeking politicians, their cronies, and their political fellow-travelers and financial contributors?
By weakening any *one* Constitutional Amendment in this manner, you weaken *all the others* in equal measure.
Why would you want to hand over even more of your rights, privacy, security, and freedoms to the same people that created the NSA, FBI, FISA courts, NDAA, PATRIOT Act, civil forfeiture, War on (some) Drugs, etc etc, ad nauseam?
Do you have a masochistic preference for the taste of jackboot leather, or what?
Strat
Mod parent up 'Informative'. Great stuff.
AES (http://www.tubesandmore.com/ [tubesandmore.com]) is an excellent resource; one of my favorite parts vendors for tube amp builds/mods. No relationship, just a happy customer.
Thank you kindly, Sir!
Other great resources for tube amplifier parts, supplies, kits, pre-built and fully populated "drop-in" turret boards.
Ted Weber Speakers (and tons of amp parts, kits, etc) in Kokomo, IN. Weber speakers are legendary and Fender uses Weber speakers in their "signature model" line of "tweed" '50s-style amplifiers..
http://www.tedweber.com/
Watts Tube Audio in Saint Petersburg, FL.They offer loaded drop-in turret boards for many classic amp designs/brands as well as tons and tons of other tube amp goodies. Very high quality boards using top-shelf quality components.
http://tubeamplifierparts.com/
I have no direct association with any of the companies I've mentioned, I'm just a satisfied customer.
Strat
Oh, forgot to mention that when placing two capacitors in series the capacitance value divides, so select a capacitance value for each of the two series caps that is twice the required capacitance value. Example; Two 50uF caps in series results in an effective capacitance value of 25uF.
----
To HornWumpus:
Standing on one foot while testing a live circuit is not necessary or advisable as one is far more likely to lose one's balance and fall into the circuit under test.
It *is* advisable to wear reasonable footwear, ie with synthetic soles and/or place non-conductive floor mats down in front of the workstation where one will stand while working if the floor is concrete like a residential basement, as concrete can retain moisture and become conductive enough at high voltages to conduct enough current to cause injury.
Strat
Vacuum tube amplifier tech here with 40+ years experience.
Here's a 25uF @ 800V/900V-surge "firecracker" style.
https://www.tubesandmore.com/p...
More stuff here.
https://www.tubesandmore.com/
Even more here.
http://www.fliptops.net/
Another option is to series-connect two 450V or 500V capacitors to meet the 800V minimum rating requirement. I recommend placing a 100K Ohm 1-watt metal-film resistor across each of the two series-connected capacitors to make sure the voltage across each capacitor divides equally, as the ESR (effective resistance) of individual capacitors varies slightly from unit to unit and causes the voltage to divide unequally without the resistors which could possibly result in one of the capacitors "seeing" excess voltage. Usually not a problem, but why take a chance with a shortcut?.
The resistors also act as a safety feature as "bleeder" resistors to prevent accidental shock from a stored charge long after power has been removed by slowly discharging ("bleeding") the capacitors after power is removed.
As a safety tip, *always* keep one hand in your pants-pocket when performing tests/adjustments on live circuits to prevent completing a path to ground through one's chest. Human hearts don't take kindly to high voltage passing through them.
Be careful and good luck!
Strat
I chose Rosa Parks as pretty much everyone, young or old, even non-Americans, are familiar with Rosa Park's famous act of civil disobedience.
How about Mr. Edward Snowden and his whistle-blowing on the unConstitutional spying on innocent US citizens by the NSA?
There is such a thing as right & wrong, and in many cases what's "right" in most peoples' view is often illegal and what may be legal is wrong.
Legal/illegal =/= right/wrong.
It's perfectly legal for a cop to confiscate money from a citizen during the course of a traffic stop if the cop considers it to be a "suspicious" amount, with no other indication that any laws at all were broken. This is legal under current laws, but it is far, far from right.
Do not conflate moral right and wrong with legality. As often as not the two conflict.
I'm amazed that anyone needs this explained. Well, I could see someone in law enforcement or a politician/government bureaucrat being quite confused on the subject.
There's also "an unconstitutional law is no law at all", meaning that no citizen or court of law is obligated to obey an unconstitutional law, even if that law has not at the time already been found to be officially unconstitutional by the courts/SCOTUS.
http://www.constitution.org/us...
"16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256:
The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:
The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.
Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.....
A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.
No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.
Strat