America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 10 years ago by Bur. 48 replies replies.
are you a terrorist?
ZRX1200 Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,613
Feds Say Possession of “Large Amounts” of Weapons May Indicate Terrorist Activity

October 16, 2013 in Featured

An example photo of a “weapons cache” included in a Department of Homeland Security and FBI bulletin to law enforcement. Photo via Maine State Police.

Public Intelligence

A joint bulletin issued in early August by the Department of Homeland Security and FBI warns state and local law enforcement agencies to look out for people in possession of “large amounts” of weapons and ammunition, describing the discovery of “unusual amounts” of weapons as a potential indicator of criminal or terrorist activity.

Citing the example of Norwegian mass-murderer Anders Behring Breivik, who reportedly “stockpiled approximately 12,000 pounds of precursors, weapons, and armor and hid them underground in remote, wooded locations,” the bulletin instructs law enforcement to look for “large amounts of weapons, ammunition, explosives, accelerants, or explosive precursor chemicals” that “could indicate pre-operational terrorist attack planning or criminal activity.” Weapons do not have to be “cached” in remote locations to meet the standard for suspicious activity. According to the bulletin, weapons could be stored in an “individual’s home, storage facility, or vehicle” and may include common firearms such as “rifles, shotguns, pistols” as well as “military grade weapons.” The illegal possession of large amounts of ammunition is also listed as a potential indicator of “criminal weapons possession related to terrorism.” While the bulletin never clarifies what constitutes a “large” or “unusual” quantity of weapons or ammunition, it does say that such a quantity would “arouse suspicion in a reasonable person.”

The joint DHS-FBI Roll Call Release distributed to police, first responders and private security throughout the U.S. is part of a series of bulletins describing activities “reasonably indicative of criminal activity associated with terrorism.” The suspicious activities described in the bulletins are derived from criteria in the Information Sharing Environment (ISE) Functional Standard for Suspicious Activity Reporting signed in 2009. The ISE Functional Standard governs the collection of information for the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative (NSI), an interagency program to collect suspicious activity reports from law enforcement agencies around the country. Other bulletins in the series focus on everything from surveillance and theft to photography and even “eliciting information,” an activity described as “questioning individuals at a level beyond mere curiosity.”

Like other bulletins in the DHS-FBI series on suspicious activity reporting, the document notes that “constitutional activities should not be reported” unless the circumstances “support the source agency’s suspicion that the behavior observed is not innocent, but rather reasonably indicative of criminal activity associated with terrorism, including evidence of pre-operational planning related to terrorism.” However, no guidance is provided on potential legal issues related to the reporting of constitutionally-protected activities.
dharbolt Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 08-03-2013
Posts: 6,931
Oh crap...
wheelrite Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 11-01-2006
Posts: 50,119
oh my
itsawaldo Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 09-10-2006
Posts: 4,221
Oh my crap!

I don't think the 100 rounds of 30.06 and .44 for my deer rifles qualifies.

I always miss the boat!
edin508 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 06-19-2012
Posts: 4,647
My C&R FFL prolly qualifies me for a spot on their list. Brick wall
8trackdisco Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 11-06-2004
Posts: 60,078
It all starts with a trial balloon.
rfenst Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
Seems like a guideline of sorts for information gathering. Stop stop and talk is legal.

Merely having a large cache of weapons- in and of itself- does not make one a terrorist in any way at all. On the other hand, some terrorists do have large caches of weapons.

The real issue is information gathering to determine whether there is reasonable suspicion of illegal activity sufficient to rise to the level of probable cause.

Scary for gun owners who do not intend to break the law and for Preppers. They need to keep their caches secret and keep there mouths shut or they may attract attention.
Bur Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 07-31-2012
Posts: 5,638
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Yasser Arafat

He was a very smart man.
rfenst Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
Bur wrote:
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Yasser Arafat

He was a very smart man.



And now the discussion will take off on a tangent far from the intent of the O.P.

Paging HD. HD are you out there?

ZRX1200 Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,613
Our gov't likes precedent instead of established law these days
HockeyDad Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,134
rfenst wrote:
And now the discussion will take off on a tangent far from the intent of the O.P.

Paging HD. HD are you out there?



Nope. The French killed Arafat.
rfenst Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
ZRX1200 wrote:
Our gov't likes precedent instead of established law these days


What do you mean?
ZRX1200 Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,613
Stretch what you can get away with. No push back?

We're good.
rfenst Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
ZRX1200 wrote:
Stretch what you can get away with. No push back?

We're good.


Consequence of the stretch is either new law approving the conduct or suppression of the evidence disapproving the conduct and carving out more clarification of citizen rights. All of it is after the fact, which has been the legal precedent. Judges, ideally, are the initial gatekeepers based on whether they issue warrants and dismiss for improperly obtained evidence. Best we got to offer in our ever changing society.
Brewha Online
#15 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,182
Oh, Shiite - I'll tell people to stop calling me "the gangster of love". . .
wheelrite Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 11-01-2006
Posts: 50,119
rfenst wrote:
What do you mean?


He means,

Law schools don't teach Constitutional Law, just Case Law, flawed as it may be,,



wheel,
rfenst Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
wheelrite wrote:
He means,

Law schools don't teach Constitutional Law, just Case Law, flawed as it may be,,



wheel,


False.
Got to know were you originally come from to realy understand where you are at...
jackconrad Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 06-09-2003
Posts: 67,461
Does this mean

I am in Heaven ??
victor809 Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Not to point out the obvious hypocrisy, but isn't this the same group saying we should profile Muslims because being Muslim may indicate someone's a terrorist?

rfenst Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
victor809 wrote:
Not to point out the obvious hypocrisy, but isn't this the same group saying we should profile Muslims because being Muslim may indicate someone's a terrorist?



Always got to ruin things, huh?
LOL
ZRX1200 Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,613
Who's the same group?

Racial profiling works btw. Though I don't agree with it.
Bur Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 07-31-2012
Posts: 5,638
Profiling works. Racial group is just one component of it and a very generic one. It's not foolproof, as there are currently Thai and Indian (both perceived as peaceful) Buddhist (same, perceived peaceful) terrorists/violent extremist, and also an effective terrorist/insurgent/violent extremist organization (VEO) recruits non-racially profilable individuals to counter purely reactionary racial profiling.

Jeez, this is too much like work (well, exactly like work-I teach this stuff) and I come on here to relax, talk smack and learn about cee-gars.

And those three wise men with the exploding cigars we sing about, were they terrorists?
Gene363 Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,819
The Founding Fathers were terrorists according to the British.
rfenst Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
Gene363 wrote:
The Founding Fathers were terrorists according to the British.


I don't think terrorists in the beginning although they did use some non-traditional warefare. But, they certainly wereey were radical liberals in their time.

Everything is relevant to its own time...
cacman Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 07-03-2010
Posts: 12,216
Gene363 wrote:
The Founding Fathers were terrorists according to the British.

Yes. The original American militia!

The current Administration obviously does agree with this part of American history.
DadZilla3 Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 01-17-2009
Posts: 4,633
victor809 wrote:
Not to point out the obvious hypocrisy, but isn't this the same group saying we should profile Muslims because being Muslim may indicate someone's a terrorist?

...because when it comes to suspected international terrorist activities, everybody knows the Swedes are the group that should be profiled.
rfenst Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
DadZilla3 wrote:
...because when it comes to suspected international terrorist activities, everybody knows the Swedes are the group that should be profiled.


Yeah, like the white guy... Timothy McVay? Extremism and associated violence cut across all racial and ethnic lines.
dstieger Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
Glock is a gateway gun.
DadZilla3 Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 01-17-2009
Posts: 4,633
rfenst wrote:
Yeah, like the white guy... Timothy McVay? Extremism and associated violence cut across all racial and ethnic lines.

True...on a ratio of about 100,000 to 1.
victor809 Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
That ratio becomes a lot closer if you're profiling white guys stockpiling guns/ammo like you profile Muslims.

I'm not a fan of profiling at all, creates a sense of complacency, clearly outlines all your blind spots for the enemies, etc etc.... But I think it's funny how a group that wants to profile one set of extremists doesn't want another set of extremists profiled, since they may get caught up in that net.

And BTW, I don't believe swedes would get caught by the arms profile... the swedes are Limited to 6 rifles, or 10 handguns or a mix of 8....
HockeyDad Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,134
Everyone is a suspect. No reason to profile.
teedubbya Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
HockeyDad wrote:
Everyone is a suspect. No reason to profile.


maybe we could charge folks for a full background check including prints and a check of all aquantences in order to get off the suspect list and be pre approved. Once every 3-5 years should suffice. We can outsource it.
Buckwheat Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 04-15-2004
Posts: 12,251
I'm not but my dog is. She had a very large stash of stuffed toys. I think that it indicates that she is seriously disturbed the way she tore them apart. Most were in really bad shape. I turned her in the other day.
DrafterX Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,552
You Bassard..!! Mad
teedubbya Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
When Louie tried that crap I didn't turn him in I just punched him in the mouf
DrafterX Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,552
poor Louie-dog... Sad
tailgater Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
Not to point out the obvious hypocrisy, but isn't this the same group saying we should profile Muslims because being Muslim may indicate someone's a terrorist?



I know what you're getting at, but it's inaccurate.

We know of many muslim extremist groups that are terrorists or support terrorism.

How many American Citizens with an "unusual" quantity of firearms have committed acts of terror?
DadZilla3 Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 01-17-2009
Posts: 4,633
victor809 wrote:
That ratio becomes a lot closer if you're profiling white guys stockpiling guns/ammo like you profile Muslims.

I'm not a fan of profiling at all, creates a sense of complacency, clearly outlines all your blind spots for the enemies, etc etc.... But I think it's funny how a group that wants to profile one set of extremists doesn't want another set of extremists profiled, since they may get caught up in that net.

Not profiling creates a false security blanket of political correctness and clearly creates one enormous, well-publicized blind spot for your enemies. Muslims being profiled is a direct result of the past actions of a sizable number their fundamentalist, extremist members...not on account of some imaginary future threat as in the case of middle class white guys who accumulate guns and ammo, and like to run around in the woods wearing the latest in tree bark camo fashions from Cabelas.

You know the old saying...extremist Muslims try to kill you, while moderate Muslims just wait for the extremist Muslims to kill you.
victor809 Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
.... You do realize that middle class white guys accumulating guns actually do perform terrorist acts, right? Wiki terrorism in the US... There's extensive lists for each type of group, from right wing to militant black to Muslim. To say we should just profile one of these groups but it's unfair to profile another is hypocritical.

Again... I don't want to profile dumb ass white guys, nor do I want to profile Muslims. I think it's funny and hypocritical that you feel one is justified over the other.
Bur Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 07-31-2012
Posts: 5,638
Victor, are you counting school shootings as "white middle class terrorism"? In most cases those don't fit the DoJ or DoD definitions of terrorism as they are not trying to accomplish political or ideological change. Violent? yes. Criminal? yes. But that doesn't make it terrorism although there are many looser definitions that others lump events into to draw conclusions and associations that don't truly fit.

Of course, the two brothers in Boston weren't part of Al Qaida either. Inspired by "Inspire" magazine-which is an AQ-Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) publication for sure but not "card carrying" members of AQ or any of its franchises.

Profiling works, but simply saying "racial profiling" makes the conversation take an emotional turn. Ask any effective investigator or intelligence analyst and at some point they will admit they profile-as do each of us. When we ask what cigars a BOTL likes we are basically creating a profile.
ZRX1200 Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,613
Weren't thoae white Russian Muslims?

WINNING!
Bur Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 07-31-2012
Posts: 5,638
Chechen Muslims-the whole problem they have is with the Russians. Google "Chechen Black Widows" if you care.

But yes, Muslim terrorists but pointing out they were self-radicalized via the internet and a few relatives.
teedubbya Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Funny thing about this country, if it happened (or peaked) more than 5-10 years ago it didn't happen. Apparently white supremacist (not just the KKK) just decided to give up and become peaceful. Either that or some of their messaging has become acceptable or mainstream.
DrafterX Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,552
What about the Illinois Nazis..?? Huh
teedubbya Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
DrafterX wrote:
What about the Illinois Nazis..?? Huh


I hate Illinois Nazis
DrafterX Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,552
White men! White women! The swastika is calling you. The sacred and ancient symbol of your race, since the beginning of time. The Jew is using The Black as muscle against you. And you are left there helpless. Well, what are you going to do about it, Whitey? Just sit there? Of course not! You are going to join with us. The members of the American Socialist White Peoples' Party. An organization of decent, law abiding white folk. Just like you!

Mellow
DadZilla3 Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 01-17-2009
Posts: 4,633
Where da white wimmin at?
Bur Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 07-31-2012
Posts: 5,638
Would it be racist to say, "I'll throw the black keys in for free?"
Users browsing this topic
Guest