e all right looks like I'm live if you're here already thanks for joining me I'll give it a few minutes here to give a few more people a chance to get on I wasn't actually planning to do a live video tonight though usually I do them on Mondays but I've just been uh so busy lately but everything coming out this weekend and today regarding some of this ATF tyranny that's going on I I feel the so many questions floating around not that I have all the answers but I do have some of the answers uh if you're worried about what's going to happen in this situation um and I think a lot of it goes back to basic constitutional law but again while I'm waiting for some people to to show up here who might be interested in this issue and and what this is is although I can't really say the try not to use you can't use ction or the word gun in anything on YouTube now because you get censored or the video gets outright removed but what this is is a gun rights issue the ATF has now raided this Firearms business in Nevada called polymer 80 and what that they did is they sell they sold a so-called buy build shoot kit which is a you know a kit that's 80% there as far as being able to make your own pistol make your own firearm and you could buy the kit from them and it's not a firearm yet it's separate pieces all of which are legal to own and then you have the option once you have them of building your own firearm which according to our history here in America we have a long history of building our own firearms and a lot of people I know build their own firearms constantly now a lot a lot of the uh the flint lock world the muzzle loading world I mean these people are constantly building their own guns and I have a few kit guns muzzle loading guns but you know why not build your own uh you know semi-automatic pistol as well and this is building for your own personal use not building to sell in which case you could do that but you need to have the proper Federal licenses all right so this is this is the website of the company that got rated and it's the company is called polymer80 p80 and this is the actual product on their website that the ATF rated them about and as you can see it's called the buyu shoot kit and this is exactly what you get in the kit right here so it still takes about 20% of of uh 20% more work to turn this thing into a fun functioning pistol but this is the product description contains all the necessary components to build a complete pf940c or PF 94 V2 pistol includes the 80% pistol frame kit 9 mimer complete slide assembly and these other parts 15 or 17 round magazine black carrying case so that's the actual kit now for for years the ATF let's see where am I um you know this is a this is a departure and I think we're going to see more of this now that it looks like there's going to be a Biden Administration that the ATF has really gotten emboldened and they've started to come after a few different things that they weren't traditionally um coming after and that's these parts parts kits apparently and also pistol braces on AR-15 style rifles but it's a departure from their old regulation because they used to be that as long as the frame was no more than 80% complete the ATF wouldn't consider it a firearm and it would not need a serial number so now they've apparently changed their position to where they are taking the position that p80 is selling Firearms which should be serial serialized over the internet to people possibly prohibited persons so that is sort of the reason that they used to go in and raid this place and it comes upon the heels of allegations that allegedly some of these so-called ghost guns and that's what the the anti-gunners and the government calls them so-called ghost guns because they don't have serial numbers they've alleged they've been used in several crimes around the country by people who who aren't allowed to possess firearms legally anyways so here here in lies the problem that I'm talking about is that they they have apparently obtained the the purchase or sale records of these kits to to see who they were sold to around the country and now apparently according to to eyewitnesses they're actually contacting people or showing up at the door of customers who have bought these kits and saying you know do you have it you know can we see it um you know if you don't allow us we'll come back with a warrant and so now people are scared you know what do they do is it illegal to to have these kits and if the ATF shows up at their door should they talk to them or um can if they don't talk to them can the ATF get a warrant and raid their house and destroy their house knock down their door and those are perfectly legitimate questions that that people have at this point and hopefully the audio and the video is holding up one of the reasons I wasn't going to do a video is because I'm in West Virginia and we have internet and it's raining today and it seems like when it's snowing or it's raining my connection is awful all right so here's the big danger and I'm not going to go into the details of of whether polymer 80 violated any of the ATF rules as far as what Firearms manufacturers or or sellers are allowed to do or not allowed to do and what I'm really concentrating on is for the people that have purchased these kits believing that they were legal and with the ATF taking the position that they were legal when they bought them that now the ATF has apparently switched positions on that what potential liabilities do they have and what should they do and while I don't and and I don't have the the answers to any specific um fact scenario I do have the answers as far as what constitutional rights are at play here and what people need to know about so it it all is going to come down to just basic fourth amendment constitutional law um if you don't know better it's always better to keep your mouth shut it always is it's always best to have a lawyer to ask a lawyer to speak to that's in your state that is knowledgeable on criminal defense issues and in particular Fourth Amendment searches and seizures and preferably gun rights and some sort of knowledge regarding these things so for any specific um situa whatever the specific situation that you're in you don't want to rely on any YouTube video or what anybody says over the internet you want to get a lawyer and talk to that lawyer about your actual um fact scenario but you don't always uh you don't always have access to a lawyer um when you need it it's kind of like lawyers are kind of like the police you know when seconds count they're only minutes away well lawyers except they're probably hours away so you always need to know anyways what your basic rights are so just because it's the federal government involved it doesn't mean that they don't need a warrant or that Fourth Amendment rights don't apply so make sure that you understand what your Fourth Amendment rights are so if the presumption is at this point that they have these these customer records and they could go just door Todo for anyone that they can identify as as as ever having been in possession of one of these kits how would they know where to go well if you paid online you presumably used a credit card and if you don't think that the federal government can go to the credit card companies and get the your address your real information whether or not you gave it to to uh polymer 8 or whether or not they were retaining that information certainly the credit card companies have retained that information so it's not a it's not a big stretch to see that they're going to be able to figure out who owned these things not that there anything wrong with it but now the the reports are that they're going to the customers going to the purchasers and and there's a number of problems there because say the ATF or the FBI whatever they show up on your door they knock on your door you know they ask you do you have this item you know what do you say what do you say if you don't have it what do you say if you do have it and here's the problem with that is because when you're dealing with the federal government there is a federal statute that says you can't lie to an FBI agent or to a an ATF agent in fact um and I it's hard to believe that there's still people that really don't know this but what is it uh section 1001 of Title 18 of the US code makes it a federal crime to knowingly and willfully make a materially false fictitious or fraudulent statement in any manner within the jurisdiction of the executive legislative or judicial branch of the United States so you must the the basic requirements are and think General Flynn think Martha Stewart that's exactly what happened to these people is they were they were uh prosecuted and convicted under section one 101 not for the underlying crime which was being investigated or alleged crime but for allegedly lying to federal agents and it doesn't even have to necessarily be a lie so when when the government gets to decide what's the truth and what's not the truth then it's on you to to defend yourself so there's a big difference in answering questions when there's a state or local police officer asking you something and the federal government now sometimes it is a a criminal violation to to lie to a state or local cop depending on what state you're in in West Virginia it's generally not illegal to lie to a police officer but it can be under certain circumstances it can be if they're you know investigating a felony crime and they tell you why they need to know something and you then lie to them could be obstruction um sometimes can be you know if you lie about your name under certain circumstances it can be for instance obstruction but again those are generally misdemeanors in Federal in federal law when when the FBI is interviewing somebody or the ATF is interviewing somebody we have this section 101 of Title 18 that makes it a federal felony and again that's what they sent Martha Stewart to the federal prison not far away from where I'm sitting right now for for lying and look at General Flynn he didn't even lie according to the FBI's own notes and they still got them because they wanted to so generally with the federal U Federal Criminal statute you must know that what you're saying is a lie to make you guilty of this crime but you know how is that determined you don't want to find out so you do not need to know that you're lying um you do not need to know that lying to the government is a crime and you're not entitled to a warning that you could be charged with a crime for lying now under the federal law the LIE must be material which means it has to be about something P important something that's not immaterial again what is that well you don't really want to want to find out or or be a test case for that so as long as a lie is related to a matter within the jurisdiction of a federal government agency which what doesn't that apply to the statement doesn't even need to be made directly to a federal employee so there's 5,000 Plus Federal Criminal statutes Federal felonies and no one person can even know them all so it's always better to be safe than sorry so if you if there's ever a question in your mind you should always politely ask to speak to a lawyer or have a lawyer with you before any questioning which of course is the same thing as saying you know you know slamming the door in their face um so it's that's that's the real concern here is if the feds come to your door to ask about this thing well is just possessing at this point is that a crime well we don't even really know yet I didn't see where the ATF has even issued a press release yet on this and they love to issue press releases as did as does every Federal agency and I didn't see where they they' issued one yet so it's still in an investigation stage so is it a crime to possess it I don't know but it doesn't matter it doesn't matter the bigger question comes first and that's well whether you talk to him or not because then you don't even get to to uh you know whether the item itself is is uh is is a crime to possess and that's where it becomes important because what happens if say the feds come to somebody's door and this person according to the financial records according to the credit card company and the the records on on with polymer 80 this person had bought one of these kits and that's all they know that's all they know they don't know what happened to it after it was shipped to this this address so they come to the door and the person answers the door they say we're here from the ATF and the FBI and we just want to ask you a few questions you know did you order one of these poly or 80 kits from their website and at that point say the person Cuts cuts off the contact and says well you know I think I'd rather have a lawyer with me before I answer any of these questions with all due respect or something like that or they cut off the conversation they shut the door at that point the worry is and I believe that these threats have been made well if you don't talk to us if you don't answer our questions if you don't let us in we're just going to go get a warrant and then we can knock down your door and uh you know look through all your stuff and it's going to go worse for you if that happens whe whether those threats were made or not I don't know but according to some witnesses um things like that have been said so far already in this case so here's the question is that true because the cops are allowed to lie to you you know that right there are there are Court decisions out there um actually um holding that the police are allowed to lie to you so they can say they can say um yeah your buddy down the street he we just had a long conversation with him and he said that you still have it and he said that you did all these illegal things with it and that that might not be true at all they didn't even talk to the buddy but it's being used as a psychological tool to scare you into talking to them I mean police are allowed to do things like that they're allowed to lie to you but so even if they lie to you or they don't lie to you if all they know is that you had purchased this item which undisputedly was according to the ATF opinions or regulations or interpretations at the time was absolutely IL legal Lega illegal um that's Undisputed it's Undisputed that they've they've uh you know they've taken a different policy here so that's Undisputed all they know is that you bought something that was legal to buy so if you won't talk to them what are they going to do are they going to go get a warrant that's the question now what's required to get a warrant why do they need a warrant well Fourth Amendment says that there will be no police going into your house without a warrant that's actually what the Fourth Amendment says so what is required to get a warrant well probable cost so a man's a man's home is his castle that's the maxim under our law and the English common law that we inherited and there's no more protected place in our law than than your home so there's no doubt about it that that they can't enter your house without a a warrant or without an applicable exception so sometimes the exceptions can swallow the rule so that's why they tried first consent for you to invite them into your house your house then they don't need a warrant they just need your your consent another one that I've seen people worried about here is maybe Plain View so so can they come up and even look in your windows things like that um no there's there's a a fairly recent case I think is uh Florida versus jardines yeah that says 2013 well not fairly recent 2013 case says that even you know around your house the area immediately around your house that's basically like being in your house so they can't take a drug dog on your front porch and that was that case and then use that as as a way around the warrant requirement same thing with coming up looking in your windows so they'd have to have a warrant to come up and do that first but any search of a home any entry into the home without a warrant is by law presumptively illegal um the way around that is they have to get a warrant if you don't allow them in and that requires probable cost so what is probable cost let see looking for the actual language I have here all right probable cause is determined by the totality of the circumstances and a magistrate is to make practical Common Sense decision whether given all the circumstances set forth in the affidavit that there's a fair probability that Contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place that's from Illinois versus Gates US Supreme Court back from 1983 so what does that mean and that's going to be the law pretty much anywhere in the United States there has to be reason to believe that there's going to be what what does it say Contraband or evidence of a crime found ins ins your house so evidence of a crime if they just have the sale record what is evidence is there any evidence of a crime you just buying it well I don't think there could be any evidence of a crime just for that so what about Contraband Contraband just means something that's illegal generally they're talking about drugs but it could be guns and the possession of guns say if that's the change in the ATF regulation is just well before yeah the the 80% kits all those things were all legal until you complete the Milling to make it a firearm but since you put all those things in one kit it just sort of crosses into that crosses that line and we believe now that you're selling somebody a firearm all right so let's let's let's say let's say they're they're correct about that and the courts will agree with that that this kit this 80% kit this bub build kit is a firearm now under federal law so there's a firearm in that house even assuming all that's true and is that Contraband there's a firearm in the house well without more I still don't think that they have enough for probable cause for a warrant because in Nevada and and in West Virginia it's absolutely legal for without without more information to have a firearm inside a home uh now if you take somebody who is a prohibited person and maybe that's what they're doing say you take the list of customers that bought the p80 kits and you've identified everybody on that list who is a prohibited person so all the convicted felons on that list or could be all the people who have a domestic violence protective order against them or have had a conviction for demestic assault or domestic battery you take all the people on that list and then we're going to go to their doors and then they might be able to get a warrant against those individuals because they have the purchase record and the financial information tying the purchase to this person to this address and then they have the the triple I background report that shows that this person is a convicted felon then they show all that to the judge and the judge finds that there's probable cause or a judge could find that there's probable cause that there's Contraband inside inside the house so they get a warrant now that is that's changing the facts because if you're just a regular customer that bought the 80% kit that was legal to buy that were all legal items to possess they they don't necessarily have any evidence of Contraband because even if it is under ATF regulations a firearm now it's not illegal to have a firearm now there could be some gray areas and and you know purchasing without you know going through an nffl and shipping it through the mail but those you know that's getting into the weeds a little bit because the and and most of the Court Holdings are are that you know if if Firearms are legal to possess you can't impute some sort of other criminal conduct on that person just for having a firearm for instance in the area of law of no knock no knock warrants no knock entries the federal courts have found that you can't just you can't just authorize a no knock entry based on somebody being armed and dangerous just because they have a concealed weapon permit because it it's legal for this person to have a concealed weapon permit it's legal for this person to have a firearm and we can't as a matter of law impute dangerousness just by virtue of having a firearm or at least that's the law in the in in the in the fourth circuit I want to I don't recall if if there was a Supreme Court case on that or not and then you have the the US versus black case here in the fourth circuit that says just you know in an open carry state um unless you have information that this individual open caring is a prohibited person that's not even Reasonable Suspicion to stop and ID the person so there would have to be something more so if they're coming to your door and they're threatening to get a warrant the likelihood is is that they don't have probable calls for a warrant or else when they came to the door they would have already been executing the search warrant for your house so it's always the safest route if you're dealing with federal agents and federal law to go through a lawyer go through your lawyer you know if General Flynn had just gone through his lawyer and he was dealing with a complex area of the law we're talking about National Security and you know conversations with with foreign governments as part of of a presidential transition team here we're talking about a complicated area of the law with ATF regulations and you don't need to try to have a debate with the ATF on your doorstep where anything that you say that is incorrect can land you in federal prison it'd be better to do that let your lawyer do that for you so even if they have information that one would is a customer of p80 and bought one of these kits that now they're deeming to be illegal to sell in this way without serial numbers and without going through the the the usual process you still have your fourth amendment rights so you can choose not to answer the door you can you can choose not to let them in your house you can choose not to answer questions you can remain silent you have the right to have a lawyer before you answer any questions or I mean you that that's another way of saying I'm not GNA answer questions so I would just point out that I don't know that anyone knows exactly where this is going because you have an ATF that is going to is going to see how much it can get away with if if the Biden Administration is going to be in there they're going to be embolden they're going to see they're going to try to do more and more and more so who knows where that's going or who they'll try to come after maybe they're not coming after customers they're just they're just looking for information to to help them investigate p80 or they're just looking to see who's a prohibited person and who's not a prohibited person and they're not going to mess with the non-prohibited persons but if you play it safe and and you you you ask for a lawyer or you talk to your lawyer first then you know you're you won't be any worse for where but if they are coming after you and you wouldn't necessarily know that then you could be screwed already if you try to talk your own way out of it another thing I wanted to bring up is that you know the the Gun Owners of America have really taken up where the NRA left off years ago and have been fighting a lot of these fights that the NRA should be fighting and they have already taken up this issue and I have their website around here somewhere let's see because they they've they already have they already have a uh a page up on this let me try to pull it up here all right this is the Gun Owners of America website and this is the actual page they have on this issue is ATF goes Rogue Goa calls on Trump the fire agency head so they sort of give a rundown and this is just G gunowners.org and you can find the link to this on their website but they talk about the issue and why it's BS why it's unfair they sort of break it down and they have a potential solution here and it has to do with the Biden transition team so the acting director of the ATF right now is a lady named Regina Lombardo and she has they said must feel emboldened by the apparent Victory by presidential candidate Joe Biden and in November she even began working with the Biden transition team these were her priorities pistol braces and 80% receivers um so even more than cooperating with the transition team Lombardo has begun advancing the Biden Harris gun control agenda during the Trump Administration so here's their first suggestion is take action and tell president Trump to fire acting director of the at ATF Regina Lombardo and her anti-gun subordinates responsible for this anti-second amendment attack on homemade Firearms these anti-gun Gunners have got to go and you can also call the White House and they have the number right here 2024561414 so while Trump is still in there he can get rid of this lady or at least transfer her to some other place where she can't wreak the sort of H Havoc what's happening right now so that's one thing you can do here is also on this website here is the form that you can fill out to remove the anti-gun ATF directors you put it put in your name of course maybe you put that in and they end up showing up at your house so if you didn't buy one of these kits then go ahead and put your name in here and and encourage the Trump administ ation to do something really great on the way out and get rid of this lady so that's one thing you can do and Goa also they've been very active in in putting lawyers on a lot of these issues so I suspect that they might play a part in putting together some sort of legal action against the ATF to try to to try to resolve this tricky situation that many Now find themselves in you know because what do you do I mean you can always contact a lawyer and I think it's always best to work through a lawyer um but it's not going to be enough to just have you know separate lawyers representing all of these people and not all of them are going to be able to afford lawyers so there's there's going to have to be some industrywide effort by the Goa or by the NRA or by other groups to file something to get some sort of of resolution here whether by uh a class action lawsuit or or um you know getting the Trump Administration to help you know there's going to have to be a broader effort broader defense to this thing but this I mean this is absolutely I mean this is a precursor to what they could be doing with a lot of other things really this is a preview of coming attractions of the ATF creating new regulations new restrictions out of thin air just by saying oh yeah we were wrong back then but we take a different position now and then going to these companies and getting the sale records and then going to anyone on that list that they want to go to and that's a scary proposition given the fact that it's a federal felony to give any sort of false information to these people when they question you so always remember the fourth amendment protects you in your home your home is your Castle you don't have to let anybody in you don't have to consent to any searches you don't have to answer any questions especially when you don't know whether even possessing this item is a crime and and you don't and nobody does I mean you your lawyer doesn't know just yet now it shouldn't be it can't be but it also could be and do you have a whole lot of faith and allowing a court to decide your fate on that issue no play it safe and and go to a lawyer always always always speak to the feds through your lawyer let your lawyer do it you don't have to let anybody in your house and if you were a customer of one of these of of one of these the these kits you might want to be proactive and reach out to to your lawyer and have somebody on standby to begin with because maybe they're going down these lists and they're showing up at people's houses or or maybe they're not but in the end it's all going to come down to to basic constitutional law basic Fourth Amendment stuff you know come back with a warrant a warrant requires probable costs and at least in West in West Virginia I suspect in other states because this is probably this is going to be based on doj policy it's actually more difficult for federal agents to get search warrants in West Virginia than it is for local cops um see the DEA had done a lot of this stuff even here in West Virginia where they when they were going after all the the overprescribing doctors they were they were raiding a doctor's office or a dentist office in broad daylight during business hours and then they were getting all of the records then they'd use that and go from there and or they'd go to the next doctor's office now the doj regulations were requiring that they get a warrant from an actual circuit court judge now in West Virginia usually it's the magistrates who issue warrants and under state law the magistrates are are qualified to issue the warrants the problem is is that most of the magistrates in West Virginia like some other rural states are not actually lawyers they have no law degree they're just somebody who ran for it and they may have some training after they got elected or they may be in many cases former cops so the the doj and this is this is telling because there's people sitting in jail across the state on warrants issued by magistrates but the Department of Justice will not allow allow their federal agents to obtain a warrant from a magistrate they have to contact they make law enforcement contact the circuit court judge far far as I know last I've heard the circuit court judge to to actually sign the search warrant when they're when they're getting their Federal not their Federal because it's a state but but when they're executing State warrants for investigations of violation of federal law so you know that might be make it even more difficult for them to to obtain a warrant so there still have you know probable cause is always going to require evidence that there was some illegal conduct and you know when it comes to to Firearms if firearms possession itself is legal and you're not a prohibited person that's going to be difficult to do so it's going to it it's going to be a high standard for the for them to to make to to come raid somebody's home just based on the purchase record and that's probably why you see them knocking on the doors and asking questions and remember they're taught that in all these police acmis that consensual contact is always allowed so the so-called knock and talk where they knock on the door and they ask you questions there there the case law the federal case law holds that just like anybody can do that they can do that if you're dumb enough to answer the door and sit there and answer all their questions they don't have to have a warrant they don't even have to have an exception to the warrant because that's consensual supposedly that's consensual contact that's a knock and talk when they're doing these things they're trying to build up evidence for probable cause to get a search warrant if they already had probable cause they'd already be searching your house you'd already be in handcuffs generally and they they'd already have a search War that's what they need is evidence to substantiate problem calls for a search warrant and that could that's going to be your answers your responses to their questions you know do you have this item inside your house right now you know did you did you finish that kit or what did you do with it did you so they're always going to use your answers to these things or you know have you ever been convicted of a a uh a felony or a a domestic assault or battery charge you know it it could always be of course you know any conviction that you know they'd be able to look up they'd already know but there could be other things that could make you a a prohibited person and you know there's no point in giving them that evidence you know from your own mouth okay Bill Montana puts a high value on privacy it's a high standard to establish probable cause and execute warrants well states are always free to Grant higher well strike that states can always protect their citizens under state law greater than federal law they just can't they can't lower the standards so yeah State could make a problem CA standard higher but they could never make it lower than as established by the federal case law and that's a good thing um Montana is a beautiful state that's where my family's actually from I converted my ghost gun into a squirt gun thank you and have a nice day Mr agent well simpi they they already got you right there because then all they have to say is that is that you didn't convert it into a squirt gun and boom they got you in federal prison right there that's a lie to to a federal agent about a material item regarding their investigation of of these federal crimes suspicion is not probable cost that's right there are two things which are often confused and that's reasonable suspicion and probable cost now Reasonable Suspicion is what police need to to uh you know detain you to make a traffic stop to ask you know you know ask for your ID and that's an investigatory detention so Reasonable Suspicion is much a much lower standard than probable costs um but reasonable suspicion still requires suspicion of criminal conduct and if it's just possessing something that was legal to possess or is legal to possess that can't even be reasonable suspicion much less probable cause so probable cause is supposed to be a much higher standard and also while we're talking about warrants you know somebody had asked me well what if they you know if I don't cooperate then they go get warrant then they come knocked down my door and they trash my house so best case scenario they've they've completely trashed my house can I sue them well if they're federal agents there's a problem anyways but even putting that aside once a once a search warrant has been obtained or could be an arrest warrant it's very difficult to file a lawsuit at that point because there's a presumption in the law that that uh you know the warrant is is valid therefore to to sue for civil rights violations after the execution of a warrant you have to go inside that warrant and and and make you can make what's called a Frank's claim you have to prove that the officer lied to get that warrant or or uh you know gave just really materially false information that they should have known what was false and that information persuaded the judge to issue the warrant and it would what wouldn't have otherwise been issued so those are very difficult cases to make and usually you know for instance with an arrest warrant if a police officer arrests somebody pursuing to an arrest warrant then you can't just say well that's a wrongful arrest there was no probable cause you know I here's here's how I can prove there's no problem cause I was absolutely innocent the the actual law on that is is is like no that's that's irrelevant because there was an arrest warrant the police officers who arrested you were reasonable in relying on that arrest warrant as a matter of law the only way that you can attack that arrest is to to prove that it was an illegal warrant that was obtained by by fraud by lying and that it wouldn't have been granted otherwise it can be done but it's not easy but instead of just showing there's no probable cause and if you have a warrantless arrest that's much more simple you just you know you have to have probable cause to arrest somebody without a warrant and if you can prove that there was not probable cause then it's it's an unlawful arrest that's a that's a much easier case than trying to prove that there was a a lie used to obtain the warrant and that the warrant never should have been issued but for that lie and it's very difficult and I've done it but it's very very difficult so once they have a warrant it's very difficult to sue is the point now if you talk about Federal officers federal agents getting a warrant then it's very difficult because you can't sue federal employees under section 1983 like you would file a regular regular civil rights lawsuit you have to sue them under what's called a Biven claim and that's says US Supreme Court case that outlines the process of yeah you can sue federal police officers but you have to do it under this bibon thing and it's no real different as far as proving the case but in practicality here's the difference instead of having an insurance policy and an insurance company defending and being able to settle a good case you and when you're suing a ATF agent or a FBI agent or a EA agent or a US Marshal it's instead of the insurance defense lawyer you're dealing with it's being defended by assistant United States Attorney basically a federal prosecutor just in a civil case and guess what they don't settle the cases they don't settle them they just take them to trial or they don't take them to trial and if you win they they throw the they throw the officer under the bus it it's his it's his or her uh debt you know too bad you know the government's not paying for it so they defend them but they don't indemnify them from from Awards so while that might be the more just way of doing it you're not it's going to be harder to find a lawyer to finance that case for you because there's not going to be there's no insurance policy on the hook and you're not going to want to depend on anybody's personal assets because they could file for bankruptcy or they they could have gotten a rid of them or they may not have had them so it's it's a much more difficult task of going after or holding accountable the federal um police officers who violate civil rights now the the one good thing there is is is there's a huge and and multiple mechanisms for internal review in the Department of Justice that you don't have in state agencies so if you make a complaint for instance to the Civil Rights division of the doj you make it complaint to them and there's a Criminal Division and then there's the the Civil Right excuse me the special litigation section where I worked at one time they handle the pattern or practice allegations and then the Criminal Division handles the actual you know specific instances of criminal conduct and that could be by a state or local police officer it could be by n FBI agents so they will investigate their own the no doubt about it they places you can make a complaint where there will be in most cases an unbiased and thorough review of allegations of misconduct but the route of being able to get Justice through money damages through filing of a civil lawsuit it's very very difficult and there are other ways of attacking warrants you know um even if there is a warrant you even if you can't challenge the warrant you could challenge the execution of the warrant so if the warrant said that they could look for if the warrant said that they could look for computer files for instance then then uh well that's a bad example because it could go the other way all right so if the warrant says that they're looking for a car all right yeah they're looking for a car so the car could be in the ground garage they can look in the garage but if you can't fit a Car anywhere else in the house then arguably depending on how the warrants written that could be a civil rights violation a Fourth Amendment violation of exceeding the warrant by going through the bedroom drawers and looking in the closet and looking under the bathroom sink because the search warrant said they could look for the stolen car and really it could only be in the garage or or uh in the workshop behind the house so if you can prove that they they went beyond the warrant or they exceeded the warrant in the throughout the performance of the warrant in some way or the execution of the warrant then you could have a claim for instance I've used this before with with with entry cases with with uh knock an announce with no knock entries if the warrant doesn't say that you can you can dispense with a knock an announce requirement and they perform a no- knock entry and bust down the door before they even announce their presence and they can't substantiate that with some sufficient reason of why why they didn't knock an announce then maybe they exceeded the scope of the warrant that they were authorized to execute and that's just a a knock and announce requirement violation and those can be done as well but the point is is there's not a whole lot of there's not not a whole lot of good op options if they do get a warrant to try to seek Justice the best thing always to do is to know your rights before it even gets to that point so they can always knock on your door and ask you questions so long as you want to answer them but you have a right not to do so you have to you have a right to have a lawyer and I think the facts of the situation are at this point with allegations that they have approach people at their house and threaten to come toss their house with a search warrant I think the the allegations are s are sufficient enough to make it very reasonable to say look I I you know I'm happy to talk I want my lawyer first though excuse me losing my voice here just look at some of the some of the questions here GOI separate warrants for Home and Car well you know a search warrant a search warrant is is a search warrant and you could have separate warrants for a house and a car but you could have a warrant for a house that also includes a car and that's a good question that'd be a good question for the lawyer that you contact because that there could be cases that are different depending on what state you're in or what what circuit you're in but the one the one common thing you'll see when you look through all of these Fourth Amendment cases is that the phrase totality of the circumstances so they're all highly fact dependent so whether or not there needs to be a separate warrant for the house or the car it it it's for sure is going to depend on the facts of the case of exactly what what the warrant said what they were looking for where the car was I'm pretty sure I I just answered that question assuming a valid warrant can you sue for damages caused by executing the arrest so so yes you can sue but you're forced to go through this at least with federal civil rights law you're forced to go through this quote Franks claim and that's what Franks versus Delware or Delaware versus Franks US Supreme Court case and there might be there might be a mechanism for reimbursement for actual physical damages um during some of those situations as well but that that wouldn't be a a uh that wouldn't be a uh you know Fourth Amendment claim Ed of itself all right they get someone else to give them your information without your consent so generally generally you you know there there are a there are legal mechanisms out there where you can lose your civil rights thanks to a third party that can happen all the time for instance the cops come to the door and say can we come in and the guy answers the door they don't know who it is and the the person is acting consistent with being somebody who lives in the house and then the question you know it turns out that it was just some some dude who was visiting you know is that sufficient consent to enter the the premises and it's usually an objective reasonable reasonableness standard and yeah it happens all the time so third parties third party you know whether or not you can sent it or not that's between you and that company or you and that third party the federal government doesn't have to get your consent to have gotten your customer information for instance from poly morady I mean according to federal constitutional law there there might be some state law in Nevada or some other state that that has some sort of privacy protections and there is actually a claim called violation of privacy under federal law and I tried to make that claim and and it's it's a very weak claim it's very difficult to make it might work for Medical Records probably mental health records is really where I think a lot of the case law comes from but gun buying records uh gun parts buying records I don't think they're going to apply that unfortunately all right Matt look at Joseph Row versus ATF ATF had to drop case because atf's definition of a firearm does not accurately describe lower upper receiver and that's why I'm saying that it's a you know do you want to try to debate these issues on on the site with with the ATF no I mean there's leave it up to your lawyer to do that in court or or outside your presence really because some of those issues could be difficult or the the the laws can change and look at Joseph you know Joseph row I mean what happened to him that his name is now on this case Okay can comps Force the occum of a house to leave if they're not subject so the arrest warrant uh yeah sure sure they could I mean usually usually the question is is can they put the occum of the house even if they're not suspected of having committed any crime and handcuffs and un unfortunately yes according to the US Supreme Court and a lot of Lower Court decisions law enforcement can handcuff the occupants of of a house whether or not they've done anything wrong they could just be visitors for the duration of of the search and there could be a violation if they keep him handcuffed for too long but some of the terrorism cases is where a lot of this case law came from and I mean they've the courts have upheld hours before my ghost gun only fires Bible B Bible verses prohibited persons is an oxymoron yeah it it is that's the actual legal term that they use though but it's it is a ridiculous is a ridiculous term would it not be nice if West Virginia law required a warrant to issue a lawful warrant required a warrant to issue a lawful warrant like regular States I I take it you're referring to the warrants issued by by magistrates yeah I think it's interesting that the the federal government will not allow law enforcement even state and local law enforcement to get a magistrate warrant yet the state prisons are populated with people who wouldn't be there but for a magistrate warrant I mean either it's either it's legal or it's not legal all right Fred Johnson no warrant can tell them they're trespassing if they don't leave there's no doubt that if law enforcement comes to your door that you can ask them to leave and you know you can hell you can turn on your GoPro first and film the whole thing then put it on YouTube and there are people who who have done that and that's not a bad idea I mean if you know that they're going to be coming to your door is you know film the whole thing film the whole thing because then that will that will you mean you can't argue with the video evidence I mean they can always say that you said something that you didn't but if there's a video of it yeah there's always some risk and even talking at all just to say um no thanks I I don't I wouldn't like to talk and close the door so it's a it's it could be a scary situation to be in so if you're one of these customers to point is is be proactive about it you need to you need to find legal counsel that you're going to rely on if you can afford it if you can find somebody that that you you uh you at least you at least feel comfortable with their criminal defense um credentials and whether or not they're going to be educated on this issue or not they can always educate themselves on this issue and it remains to be seen what they where this is going to go what the atf's going to do but it all comes down to a basic Fourth Amendment law and that is that they're not entering your house without a warrant and they're not arresting you at your house without a warrant they're not searching your house without a warrant and you always have a right to keep your mouth shut and you can do so politely or impolitely but I would recommend politely and and put your lawyer on it and you know it I think there it would be it would it would be a a huge shock if one were to do that and they still found some some way to to charge people criminally just for having purchased you know these items I I think that that they're they're looking for the lwh hanging fruit they're looking for the the the so-called prohibited persons or they're looking for people that will just run their mouth and answer all their questions and then they can I mean even if it's not illegal what they've done they can just get them on a processed crime just like they did General Flynn so I'm just catching up on this issue as as I have time to just like everybody else but it's it's just kind of shocking news that the that the ATF is first they're coming after pistol braces but now they're they're coming after these these part kits so if you know anybody that that has purchased these kits or you've purchased them yourself just make sure you know what your rights are and you you probably and you want to want to communicate with the I think the gun owners of America or the NRA whoever is going to be taking on this issue and you know there's going to need to be some sort of collective fight against this so that's about all the time I have hopefully the the video held up even though it's raining outside and you I might do another video on this after I see you know where this is going and if you need to get a hold of me you can find me at the Civil Rights lawyer.com and until then um I appreciate thanks for watching make sure to subscribe on YouTube also on on Facebook uh the blog website where I do all my writing is that the Silver Rights lawyer.com we also have a lot of other uh interesting cases going on right now now and and some more coming up uh really soon so until then um you know I'll talk to you next time [Music]