Thursday, July 28, 2011

Dyno tune at Wheelers



Full results and review

Trackday results

Saturday, July 23, 2011

NC bans driver licenses for 45 mph on the Dragon



Smallest Offenses Can Pose Huge Problems

Most people think of a traffic citation as little more than an annoyance that can generally be taken care of through the expenditure of a little bit of time and a couple hundred dollars. For some individuals, a traffic citation can lead to a mandatory appearance at a location far from that person's home or potentially harsh penalties that can result in the loss of one's driving privileges if the ticket is not handled properly.

For example, the State of North Carolina is notorious for having strict driving laws, including the potential suspension of a resident's license if he or she is cited in any state for speeding in excess of fifteen miles per hour over the speed limit. Such citations are routinely written to North Carolina residents who are traveling in Tennessee counties such as Cocke County, Greene County, Sevier County, and other counties that sit along the North Carolina border. Given the strict driving laws that are in place in that state, many North Carolina residents simply cannot afford to have points placed on their license or risk pleading guilty to an excessive speeding charge.

It is also important to remember that many counties will look at a person's driving history in deciding whether to give an individual a break on a ticket. For this reason, it is important for drivers to maintain a clean record, as even one small violation in the past three or four years can spell doom for drivers hoping to catch a break in some Tennessee counties.

If you are facing potentially harsh consequences or a mandatory appearance far from home as a result of a traffic citation, contact an experienced East Tennessee Traffic Ticket Attorney who can assist you in getting the matter resolved.




North Carolina to Seize Speeding Cars [and Bikes] That Fail to Pull Over

Police to seize and sell motorcycles and cars accused of eluding arrest.

Beginning December 1, North Carolina will join Australia in having laws on the book mandating the seizure of vehicles for certain speeding offenses. On June 23, Governor Bev Perdue (D) signed the "Run and You're Done" bill into law which authorizes a county sheriff to take and hold the car of anyone accused -- not convicted -- of speeding away from a police officer. The state House and Senate passed the measure unanimously.

Under the new law, the confiscation becomes permanent if a judge believes the car or motorcycle was used to elude a police officer while speeding more than 15 MPH over the limit with at least one other aggravating factor, such as having someone under 12 years old in the vehicle or the vehicle was at some point in a highway work zone, regardless of whether any workers are present.

Such charges could apply to drivers who have done nothing seriously wrong. In 2009, a Minnesota State rammed the minivan of a man accused of not using his turn signal, then arrested him for "eluding police" because he took less than a minute to find a place to pull over that was not covered in snow. He had his three small children in the car at the time. In 2008, a woman drove less than 10 MPH over the limit followed the general advice of waiting to find a well-lit area before pulling over. She was arrested by Greene County, Missouri police and only escaped charges when the incident hit the news.

Conviction under "Run and You're Done" brings revenue to the police agency responsible for the seizure. The entity responsible for selling the vehicle will keep seizure fees, storage fees and sales fees. The remainder of the profit is distributed to the county government like a normal fine.

Under the new law, the vehicle can be seized and sold even if the actual owner of the vehicle is unaware of its use for speeding. Police only need to place a legal advertisement in a newspaper on two occasions and paste up three handbills near the place of seizure before selling the car. The process can be done in 24 days. A court clerk has the discretion to release a car to anyone he believes might be an "innocent owner."

A special provision forbids the sale of highly modified performance vehicles. These, instead, are to be "turned over to such governmental agency or public official within the territorial jurisdiction of the court as the court shall see fit, to be used in the performance of official duties only."

A copy of the legislation is available in a 70k PDF file at the source link below.

Source: House Bill 427 (North Carolina General Assembly, 6/23/2011)



NASCAR driver Kyle Busch loses driver's license


NASCAR points leader Kyle Busch has had his driver's license suspended in a case stemming from his high-speed joy ride in a luxury car.

Busch pleaded guilty to speeding and no contest to reckless and careless driving in North Carolina District Court in Iredell County on Tuesday. In addition to losing his license for 45 days, he also was fined $1,000, sentenced to 30 hours of community service and put on one year of unsupervised probation.

Busch, who doesn't need a license to compete in NASCAR, was stopped May 24 while driving 128 mph in a 45 mph zone in a bright yellow 2012 Lexus. The hand-built LFA sports car is valued at nearly $400,000 and was on loan to Busch from Lexus.

The Dragonater drives 130 mph for 3 hours nonstop in tight formation with commuter traffic, 100% legal, on public highways with a speed limit over 250 mph, as seen on History Channel.





"Mr. Speaker, my subject today is whether America is a police state. Terror and fear are used to achieve complacency and obedience, especially when citizens are deluded into believing they are still a free people. Most police states, surprisingly, come about through the democratic process with majority support. The masses are easily led to believe that security and liberty are mutually exclusive, and demand for security far exceeds that for liberty. Our government already keeps close tabs on just about everything we do and requires official permission for nearly all of our activities. One might take a look at our Capitol for any evidence of a police state. We see: barricades, metal detectors, police, military soldiers at times, dogs, ID badges required for every move, vehicles checked at airports and throughout the Capitol. The people are totally disarmed, except for the police and the criminals. But worse yet, surveillance cameras in Washington are everywhere to ensure our safety. The personal information of law-abiding citizens can be used for reasons other than safety- including political reasons. Like gun control, people control hurts law-abiding citizens much more than the law-breakers. Social Security numbers are used to monitor our daily activities. The numbers are given at birth, and then are needed when we die and for everything in between. Centralized control and regulations are required in a police state. Almost all of our economic activities depend upon receiving the proper permits from the federal government. Transactions involving guns, food, medicine, smoking, drinking, hiring, firing, wages, politically correct speech, land use, fishing, hunting, buying a house, business mergers and acquisitions, selling stocks and bonds, and farming all require approval and strict regulation from our federal government. If this is not done properly and in a timely fashion, economic penalties and even imprisonment are likely consequences. Because government pays for much of our health care, it's conveniently argued that any habits or risk-taking that could harm one's health are the prerogative of the federal government, and are to be regulated by explicit rules to keep medical-care costs down. This same argument is used to require helmets for riding motorcycles and bikes. Not only do we need a license to drive, but we also need special belts, bags, buzzers, seats and environmentally dictated speed limits- or a policemen will be pulling us over to levy a fine, and he will be toting a gun for sure. Over 80,000 federal bureaucrats now carry guns to make us toe the line and to enforce the thousands of laws and tens of thousands of regulations that no one can possibly understand. All 18-year-old males must register to be ready for the next undeclared war. If they don't, men with guns will appear and enforce this congressional mandate. "Involuntary servitude" was banned by the 13th Amendment, but courts don't apply this prohibition to the servitude of draftees or those citizens required to follow the dictates of the IRS- especially the employers of the country, who serve as the federal government's chief tax collectors and information gatherers. Fear is the tool used to intimidate most Americans to comply to the tax code by making examples of celebrities. When the government keeps detailed records on every move we make and we either need advance permission for everything we do or are penalized for not knowing what the rules are, America will be declared a police state. In a free society, the government's job is simply to protect liberty- the people do the rest. Let's not give up on a grand experiment that has provided so much for so many. Let's reject the police state."

—Congressman Ron Paul, candidate for president in 2008, U.S. House of Representatives, Is America a Police State? June 27, 2002

Friday, July 22, 2011

Psycho cop threatens murder for parking ticket



“I could blast you right in the mouth. I tell you what I should have done. As soon as I saw your gun, I should have taken two steps back, pulled my Glock 40, and just put 10 bullets in your ass and let you drop. And I wouldn’t have lost any sleep. I am so close to caving in your God damn head. It’s how fucking cops get killed.”
-Officer Daniel Harless, Canton Ohio Police Dept


Video Shows Psycho Cop Threaten Murder During Arrest

Fox News
21 July 2011

An Ohio police officer is being widely criticized for a threatening rant caught on his dashboard camera during a recent arrest.



The June 8, 2011 video, which was obtained by a gun rights group [OhioCCW.org], shows a Canton police officer grow irate after he indicates that the driver of a stopped vehicle waited too long to inform him of his concealed gun, even though he had a proper permit to carry it.

“I could blast you right in the mouth,” the officer said. “I am so close to caving in your God damn head.”

“It’s how fucking cops get killed.”

Once inside the police car, the officer continues the rant, saying, “I tell you what I should have done. As soon as I saw your gun, I should have taken two steps back, pulled my Glock 40, and just put 10 bullets in your ass and let you drop. And I wouldn’t have lost any sleep.”

The Canton Repository identified the police officer as Daniel Harless and reported that he was placed on administrative leave in June, and has most recently been on sick leave. The department is investigating the incident.

Approaching a car is one of the more stressful tasks a police officer can perform. Some states, like Ohio, have laws that mandate prompt notification of a concealed carry permit when stopped by police.

In this case, the driver William Bartlett, who had the permit for a month, appears to make attempts in the video at telling the police officer about his weapon, but is cut off by the arresting officer, his lawyer said.

He was arrested and charged with both a traffic violation and failure to notify a police officer about a concealed weapon, two misdemeanors, Timothy Bellew, his lawyer, said. He was released the same night.

Bellew provided Ohioans For Concealed Carry, a group in which he’s a member, with the video of the arrest because he said that it vindicates his client.

“You see on at least two occasions my client tries to inform the cops about his concealed weapon, but get’s cut off,” he said. “And then he goes off very unprofessionally.”

Chris Harben, the compliance coordinator for Ohioans For Concealed Carry, said the group has many members in law enforcement and none said the cop handled the situation correctly.

Canton Police Chief Dean McKimm was also critical of the actions seen in the video.

“I think it’s important for citizens to understand that the behavior demonstrated on the video is wholly unacceptable, and it violates many of our rules, our regulations and standards we demand of our officers,” McKimm said, according to The Repository.





Cops aren't driven insane by citizens with guns, cops are driven insane by making a career out of robbing people at gunpoint.

The cop heard round the world: Ohio incident puts law in crosshairs

Not only is a Canton, Ohio police officer under increasing fire this morning for his profanity-laden outburst at an armed citizen that now has gun rights activists from Toledo to Tacoma furious, the Buckeye State law that requires citizens to notify cops if they are armed is also being partly blamed for what happened during a video encounter that has streaked around the world over the past 24 hours.

The incident, discussed by this column yesterday, ignited a firestorm on the Northwest Firearms and WaGuns forums, plus Open Carry.org, GunRightsMedia and The High Road, with sentiment decidedly against the cop, and sympathetic toward the armed citizen, now identified as William Bartlett. This 17-minute video has set public relations back about 50 years between Canton police and the firearms community.

A prime example of this setback is a column by Robert Flynn appearing on Gather today. Flynn observes:

"While most police officers respect a person's right to carry a concealed weapon, there are some who just refuse to accept it. Concealed carry is the law in Ohio and police officers must come to accept it. Most seem to be able to face this situation without losing their composure, but officer Harless's reaction is indicative of a larger societal problem. Some in our society just refuse to accept that guns are legal and necessary…

Officer Harless's actions seem to show the dangers that can come about when police refuse to respect a citizen's right to carry a concealed weapon. The driver could have easily believed that officer Harless meant him harm, at which point violence could have ensued.

If someone is going to threaten to arbitrarily kill American citizens, is this not what the right to self-protection is all about? Many see the right to bear arms as the founding father's way to make sure that the ordinary citizen always had the ability to resist a tyrannical government. And is not a police officer arbitrarily threatening to kill ordinary citizens the ultimate example of tyranny?"


Bad enough for Canton Police Chief Dean McKimm and the now-off-the-streets cop, Daniel Harless that the video rant is big news on local Ohio television, here, here and here, but the story also made national news on Fox. So far, Harless appears to be remaining silent; something he probably should have done on the night of June 8 when he and a partner pulled up behind the parked car in which Bartlett was seated behind the wheel. It has not been clear exactly what Bartlett was doing that night, parked at the curb, with two other people, but on the video, while he is being threatened with felony arrest and summary execution, he displays a considerable amount of grace under fire.

But what about this Ohio requirement to immediately notify a police officer if you are legally armed? In Bartlett’s case, the video shows him apparently trying to do that at least twice, only to be ignored or told to “shut up” by Harless. Bartlett can be seen holding both his driver’s license and his concealed pistol permit, trying to inform Harless of his gun without opening his mouth.

Ohioans for a Concealed Carry say the officer was way out of line.

The advocacy group also says the state's law is a problem.

"The notification law fails everybody," says Philip Mulivor, a coordinator of the group.

Mulivor says Ohio should follow the lead of some other states and require officers to ask if there is a legal gun in the car, rather than requiring the driver to say it first.

Here in Washington State, there is no such requirement. Smart cops, state troopers and sheriff’s deputies approach everyone as if they are armed. That’s probably a good assumption, considering that there are more than 370,000 Evergreen State citizens who are licensed to carry, and in the case of Open Carry activists, lawmen can tell at a glance if they are packing.

And what if they are? As Open Carry activists have found in various jurisdictions, depending upon the individual policeman, encounters can range from good to not so good. It is all a matter of attitude, which, in the case of Canton cop Harless, seems to have started out bad and gone downhill from there.

Only a few states require armed citizens to notify an officer if they are armed.

Why should they? Gun rights activists believe that if an armed citizen is minding his own business and not creating a disturbance, what he’s carrying, concealed or openly, is nobody else’s business. There is a quirk in this state's law that has created problems:

(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.


However, that quirk is not insurmountable, and a state court of appeals ruling appears to narrow it considerably. The ruling, unfortunately, remains unpublished. The case is State v. Casad, and this is what the State Court of Appeals, Division II said:

We note that, in connection with this case, several individuals have commented that they would find it strange, maybe shocking, to see a man carrying a gun down the street in broad daylight. Casad’s appellate counsel conceded that she would personally react with shock, but she emphasized that an individual’s lack of comfort with firearms does not equate to reasonable alarm. We agree. It is not unlawful for a person to responsibly walk down the street with a visible firearm, even if this action would shock some people. (emphasis added)


Harless is now on “administrative leave” and he also reportedly went on sick leave earlier this week. Gun owners reacting to the video say he should be fired and prosecuted. Canton Chief McKimm has promised a full investigation, but many gun owners predict that he will get a “slap on the hand” followed by some additional training, and a return to duty. As retired Cincinnati Police Lt. Harry Thomas, who has offered to be an expert witness for the defense if Bartlett – now charged with a misdemeanor traffic infraction and failure to notify a police officer about his concealed handgun – is ultimately prosecuted, that video will follow Harless. It could run him right out of a job.

The question among angry gun rights activists today: How many more like Harless are still out there, not yet captured on video?

See also:

Concealed Carry Laws posted by Ohio Attorney General

Handgun Concealed Carry Laws in Tennessee

Handgun Open Carry Laws in Tennessee

Tennessee Attorney General Opinion on Handgun Open Carry

Handgun Concealed Carry Laws in North Carolina

Handgun Open Carry Laws in North Carolina






A Dallas police officer is on administrative leave after authorities said she fired off her gun while off-duty in a squad car with at least one on-duty officer.

The call came in at around 11:30 p.m. Wednesday night, which was when police rushed to the scene at Abrams Road and Gaston Avenue and found three officers at the scene.

Police said the incident happened after Kelly Beemer, an off-duty officer who police said had a few drinks, had gotten into a squad car of an on-duty police officer. Beemer allegedly pulled out her service weapon from her holster and fired the gun into the floorboard. Sources said she was belligerent at the time. Part of the incident was captured on audio tape from a dash cam camera.

"You need to stop this [expletive] now," Beemer can be heard saying on the tape before a gun fires.

"Oh [expletive], Kelly please drop the gun," an officer in the car said. "Kelly, drop the gun."

Prior to the incident, video from the dash cam showed two officers holding a stumbling Beemer up by her arms as they walked her towards the squad car. Throughout the drive, authorities said Beemer cried and acted belligerent, believing she was under arrest.

Sources said the on-duty officer driving the squad car was originally called to the bar where Beemer and other officers had been drinking. Prior to being picked up, Beemer was allegedly offered rides from other officers at the bar, and at one point ran and hid from officers, sources said.

Commanders were called to the scene, but did not arrest Beemer at the time, saying she was too drunk to be interviewed. It wasn't until they viewed the tape that they decided to arrest and charge Beemer.

"We are disappointed in her behavior there," said First Asst. Chief Charles Cato, Dallas Police Department. "I know I receive calls from friends, relatives who had a little too much to drink and needed a ride home, and all the people I've dealt with in that situation were just grateful that someone was willing to come out and pick them up. And so, in Officer Beemer's conduct, that was certainly a discredit to herself and to the people that were trying to help her. She put them in a really bad situation."

No officers were injured in the incident.

Beemer was arrested Thursday and charged with firing a weapon inside the city limits. If convicted, Beemer will lose her peace officer's license. Meanwhile, she has been stripped of her weapon and badge until the investigation is complete. Two other officers are on restrictive duty as police investigate their role in the incident.

COP.
2. to steal; filch. 3. to buy (narcotics). 4. cop out, a. to avoid one's responsibility, the fulfillment of a promise, etc.; renege; back out. 5. cop a plea, a. to plead guilty or confess in return for receiving a lighter sentence. b. to plead guilty to a lesser charge; plea-bargain."
-Random House Unabridged Dictionary

Friday, July 15, 2011

NC to seize bikes for traffic tickets, no conviction required


What do you expect in Blackwater NC, where you get the death penalty for drinking alcohol?

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
-Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution


Police to seize and sell motorcycles and cars accused of eluding arrest

14 Jul 2011

Beginning December 1, North Carolina will join Australia in having laws on the book mandating the seizure of vehicles for certain speeding offenses. On June 23, Governor Bev Perdue (D) signed the “Run and You’re Done” bill into law which authorizes a county sheriff to take and hold the car of anyone accused — not convicted — of speeding away from a police officer. The state House and Senate passed the measure unanimously.

Under the new law, the confiscation becomes permanent if a judge believes the car or motorcycle was used to elude a police officer while speeding more than 15 MPH over the limit with at least one other aggravating factor, such as having someone under 12 years old in the vehicle or the vehicle was at some point in a highway work zone, regardless of whether any workers are present.

Such charges could apply to drivers who have done nothing seriously wrong. In 2009, a Minnesota State trooper rammed the minivan of a man accused of not using his turn signal, then arrested him for “eluding police” because he took less than a minute to find a place to pull over that was not covered in snow. He had his three small children in the car at the time.

In 2008, a woman drove less than 10 MPH over the limit followed the general advice of waiting to find a well-lit area before pulling over. She was arrested by Greene County, Missouri police and only escaped charges when the incident hit the news.

Conviction under “Run and You’re Done” brings revenue to the police agency responsible for the seizure. The entity responsible for selling the vehicle will keep seizure fees, storage fees and sales fees. The remainder of the profit is distributed to the county government like a normal fine.

Under the new law, the vehicle can be seized and sold even if the actual owner of the vehicle is unaware of its use for speeding. Police only need to place a legal advertisement in a newspaper on two occasions and paste up three handbills near the place of seizure before selling the car. The process can be done in 24 days. A court clerk has the discretion to release a car to anyone he believes might be an “innocent owner.”

A special provision forbids the sale of highly modified performance vehicles. These, instead, are to be “turned over to such governmental agency or public official within the territorial jurisdiction of the court as the court shall see fit, to be used in the performance of official duties only.”




NC HB 427

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA
SESSION 2011
SESSION LAW 2011-271

HOUSE BILL 427

*H427-v-7*

AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR THE SEIZURE, FORFEITURE, AND SALE OF MOTOR VEHICLES USED BY DEFENDANTS IN FELONY CASES INVOLVING SPEEDING TO ELUDE ARREST.

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:
SECTION 1. G.S. 20-141.5 reads as rewritten:
"§ 20-141.5. Speeding to elude arrest.

(f) Each law enforcement agency shall adopt a policy applicable to the pursuit of fleeing or eluding motorists. Each policy adopted pursuant to this subsection shall specifically include factors to be considered by an officer in determining when it is advisable to break off a chase to stop and apprehend a suspect. to initiate or terminate a pursuit. The Attorney General shall develop a model policy or policies to be considered for use by law enforcement agencies.

(g) If a person is arrested for a felony violation under this section, then the law enforcement agency shall seize the motor vehicle and deliver the same to the sheriff of the county in which such offense is committed, or the same shall be placed under said sheriff's constructive possession if delivery of actual possession is impractical, and the vehicle shall be held by the sheriff pending the trial of the person or persons operating such motor vehicle and charged with a felony offense under this section.

(1) The sheriff shall restore the seized motor vehicle to the owner upon execution by the owner of a good and valid bond, with sufficient sureties, in an amount double the value of the property, which bond shall be approved by said sheriff and shall be conditioned on the return of the motor vehicle to the custody of the sheriff on the day of trial of the person or persons accused. Upon an acquittal or dismissal of any felony charge under this section, the sheriff shall return the motor vehicle to the owner thereof.

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions for sale set out in subsection (h) of this section, on petition by a lienholder, the court, in its discretion and upon such terms and conditions as it may prescribe, may allow reclamation of the vehicle by the lienholder. The lienholder shall file with the court an accounting of the proceeds of any subsequent sale of the vehicle and pay into the court any proceeds received in excess of the amount of the lien.

(h) Upon conviction of the operator of said motor vehicle of a felony offense under this section, the court shall order a sale at public auction of said motor vehicle.

(1) The officer making the sale shall make the following deductions from the sale proceeds:

a. The expenses of keeping the motor vehicle.
b. The fee for the seizure.
c. The costs of the sale.

The officer shall then pay, from the net proceeds, all liens, according to their priorities, which are established by intervention or otherwise at the hearing or in other proceeding brought for said purpose as being bona fide. The officer shall pay the balance of the proceeds to the proper officer of the county who receives fines and forfeitures to be used for the school fund of the county.

(2) All liens against a motor vehicle sold under the provisions of this section shall be transferred from the motor vehicle to the proceeds of its sale.

(3) If, at the time of hearing, or other proceeding in which the matter is considered, the owner of the vehicle can establish to the satisfaction of the court that the provisions of sub-subdivisions a. through c. of this subdivision apply, then the court shall not order a sale of the vehicle but shall restore it to the owner. The owner shall be entitled to a trial by jury upon the issues in this subdivision.
a. The defendant was an immediate member of the owner's family at the time of the offense.

b. The defendant had no previous felony or misdemeanor convictions at the time of the offense and had no previous or pending violations of any provision in Chapter 20 of the General Statutes for the three years previous to the time of the offense.
c. The defendant was under the age of 19 at the time of the offense.

(4) A nondefendant motor vehicle owner may file a petition with the clerk of court seeking a pretrial determination that the petitioner is an innocent owner. The clerk shall consider the petition and make a determination as soon as may be feasible. At any proceeding conducted pursuant to this subdivision, the clerk is not required to determine the issue of forfeiture, only the issue of whether the petitioner is an innocent owner. If the clerk determines that the petitioner is an innocent owner, the clerk shall release the motor vehicle to the petitioner. The clerk shall send a copy of the order authorizing or denying release of the vehicle to the district attorney and the sheriff. An order issued under this subdivision finding that the petitioner failed to establish that the petitioner is an innocent owner may be reconsidered by the court as part of the forfeiture hearing under this section.

(i) If the owner of a motor vehicle seized pursuant to this section cannot be found, the taking of the same, with a description thereof, shall be advertised in some newspaper published in the city or county where taken, or, if there be no newspaper published in such city or county, in a newspaper having circulation in the county, once a week for two weeks and by handbills posted in three public places near the place of seizure, and if said owner shall not appear within 10 days after the last publication of the advertisement, the property shall be sold, or otherwise disposed of in the manner set forth in this section.

(j) When any vehicle confiscated under the provisions of this section is found to be specially equipped or modified from its original manufactured condition so as to increase its speed, the court shall, prior to sale, order that the special equipment or modification be removed and destroyed and the vehicle restored to its original manufactured condition. However, if the court should find that such equipment and modifications are so extensive that it would be impractical to restore said vehicle to its original manufactured condition, then the court may order that the vehicle be turned over to such governmental agency or public official within the territorial jurisdiction of the court as the court shall see fit, to be used in the performance of official duties only, and not for resale, transfer, or disposition other than as junk: Provided, that nothing herein contained shall affect the rights of lienholders and other claimants to said vehicles as set out in this section."

SECTION 2. This act becomes effective December 1, 2011, and applies to offenses committed on or after that date.

In the General Assembly read three times and ratified this the 17th day of June, 2011.

s/ Walter H. Dalton
President of the Senate
s/ Thom Tillis
Speaker of the House of Representatives
s/ Beverly E. Perdue
Governor

Approved 5:06 p.m. this 23rd day of June, 2011

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

TN mom arrested for stopping rape of daughter



UPDATE: DC Court of Appeals Rules TSA Violated Law By Introducing Body Scanners - Judge Douglas Ginsburg found there was “no justification for having failed to conduct a notice-and-comment rulemaking,” and said, “few if any regulatory procedures impose directly and significantly upon so many members of the public.” The court said that the roll out of body scanners could not be “merely interpretive, procedural, or a general statement of policy.” The TSA, currently operating close to 500 scanners in 78 airports and planning to add 500 more scanners by the end of 2011, must now receive comment on it’s continued deployment of the technology and respond accordingly by law, finally giving critics an official voice on the issue. The case was brought by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), which argued in its brief that body scanners are “invasive, unlawful, and ineffective,” and that the TSA’s deployment of the devices violated the U.S. Constitution and several other federal statutes. The rights group is pursuing a case to completely suspend use of the scanners in airports.

UPDATE: Woman Arrested for Groping TSA Agent's Breast at Security Checkpoint - We hear a lot of complaints about security screeners groping airline passengers. But now, a Colorado woman is accused of putting her hands on a TSA agent at Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix. Court records show 61-year-old Yukari Mihamae grabbed the left breast of the female agent Thursday at the Terminal 4 checkpoint. Police say she squeezed and twisted the agent's breast with both hands. Officers say Mihamae admitted to the crime. There's no word why she touched the agent. Mihamae now faces a felony count of sexual abuse. According to court records, she lives in Longmont, Colorado and is self-employed. GOOGLE EQUAL PROTECTION DEFENSE




Mom Arrested After Refusing TSA Molestation of Daughter

Andrea Fornella Abbott of Clarksville, Tennessee, was arrested by Nashville airport authorities after she refused to let the TSA fondle her daughter.

Abbott said she did not want her daughter to be “touched inappropriately” or have her “crotch grabbed,” according to a police report.

Her outrage at the “security procedure” landed her in jail. She was charged with disorderly conduct and released on bond, according to The Tennessean.

“(She) told me in a very stern voice with quite a bit of attitude that they were not going through that X-ray,” Sabrina Birge, an airport security officer, told police.

Abbott was told by the woman that naked body porno scanners are “10,000 times safer than your cell phone and uses the same type of radio waves as a sonogram.”

Earlier this month, it was revealed that the TSA, under the guidance of the Department of Homeland Security Secretary, deliberately misled the public on the health risks associated with the naked body scanners.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center published documents released under a Freedom of Information Act request that show the TSA has been caught covering up a growing number of cases of cancer among TSA airport body scanner operators who conduct the screenings in close proximity to the radiation-emitting devices.

Despite the baseless assurance that the device is safe, Abbott told Birge she did not want her daughter’s naked body revealed by the scanner.

She attempted to take cell phone video of the incident but was prevented from doing so.

In April, the TSA defended its serial molestation procedures after a video surfaced showing agents fondling a six year old girl at the New Orleans airport.

The TSA has admitted that fondling children is government policy.

“Some folks are asking if the proper procedures were followed. Yes. TSA has reviewed the incident and the security officer in the video followed the current standard operating procedures,” a TSA spokesman explained on the agency’s official blog.

American Traveler Dignity Act of 2011 by Congressman Ron Paul MD for president