Cali Activists – Protect Your Phones

[Admittedly there is a lot going on regarding the recent use of aggressive force by “public servants” in Keene — we’ll have more on that shortly. In the meantime, check out this post that was started last weekend — hopefully it causes you to think.]

If targeted by someone with a badge for engaging in peaceful, victimless actions, why assist in your arrest?

Admittedly, as individuals, we have different lines in the sand (what economists would refer to as subjective value), but if your aim is to point-out the failures of the State “protection” racket* do you have more of an impact by disclosing all information sought and walking to your cage or by staying silent and going limp (think Julian Heicklen)? By taking a deal or fighting the bogus charges?

Contemplating such scenarios can help prepare you should such an unfortunate situation arise, but could this mental preparation be negated by your cell phone?

From my bud and former colleague Ryan Radia:

Last week, [c]alifornia’s [s]upreme [c]ourt reached a controversial 5-2 decision in People v. Diaz (PDF), holding that police officers may lawfully search mobile phones found on arrested individuals’ persons without first obtaining a search warrant.

This ruling is opposite that of the ohio supreme court handed-down in State v. Smith (2009), which found that cops need a warrant to investigate the contents of your phone (evidence that the “rule of law” may not be so objective and codifiable after all…**).

Information is power. It’s why governments try to centralize and restrict its access. And it’s why today some state-based gangs*** say it’s illegal to film those who subsist on stolen money and claim to work for you.

Why are Wikileaks and Anonymous being targeted for their very significant and very positive contributions to the climate of liberty in this world? What do they have to hide? Why are they so scared of transparency?

Because by their very existence, they’re harming people. And the more this fact is disseminated through different mediums and voices the more individuals will realize that Bastiat was right when he called government “the great fiction.”

Place of employment does not grant extra rights. The concepts of “sovereign immunity” and a “legitimate” right to use force are antithetical to the idea of individual freedom and responsibility.

Regardless of if you plan to walk and talk or go limp and silent, check out Radia’s piece and do what you can to protect your information, because once accessed, it can’t be undone. Make sure your phone isn’t your weak link. A couple-minute download or a new app could mean the difference between your kidnappers (and their databases) having all your contacts, chats, emails and them having little or nothing. Especially if you choose not to talk.

As my friend Michele Seven says, freedom is the right to say no.

* For more on this, check out  “Justice Without the State” by Bruce Benson
** For more on this, check out The Myth of the Rule of Law by John Hasnas
*** Including MA (where Ademo and I are currently facing felony wiretapping charges), MD, and IL, about which a recent NYT article included this passage that underscores the difference in rights that supposedly exists between state agents and non-state agents:

Although law-enforcement officials can legally record civilians in private or public, audio-recording a law-enforcement officer, state’s attorney, assistant state’s attorney, attorney general, assistant attorney general or judge in the performance of his or her duties is a Class 1 felony, punishable by up to 15 years in prison.