Dedicated to helping people make themselves safe and their Homes harder targets,...or when James Bond meets Soccer Mom

Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Imposters Top The List Of Fraud Complaints

A short time ago, ID theft was the biggest scam out there. No longer.

According to experts, the newest and biggest form of fraud are impostors.

People claiming to be IRS agents or tech support agents or with the billing department of your power company. They’re trying to soak you for cash and sometimes, it works.

The Federal Trade Commission tallies up the frequency and type of consumer complaints received each year and in 2016, there were more then 3 million complaints of impostors. The top gripe is still debt collection at 28 percent of all complaints, CBS News reports, but most of those complaints involve aggressive collection practices and not fraud.

In the fraud department, impostors lead the list for the first time since the feds started keeping records in 1997. Not all consumers report all their losses – understandable embarrassment – but of those who do, they total $744.5 million or a whipping $1,124 per person.

“We are very troubled by the impostor scams both because of the growth and because the many involve [crooks] using the names of government agencies to get money out of people,” said Monica Vaca, acting associate director in the Division of Consumer Response and Operations at the Federal Trade Commission.

The FTC said it’s trying to hunt down these criminals through law enforcement and to educate consumers about the warning signs to prevent victims from losing more money.

So here are some of the biggest scams and how to spot them:

IRS Scams:

Agents call you or email you or even text message you and tell you that you owe money. They threaten legal action and tell you to send payment by money order or cashier’s check or prepaid debit card. This is a scam for one reason: The IRS will always first contact you by mail and they never insist on payments by cashiers checks or credit card payments. They also never threaten you with arrest or jail time if you don’t pay immediately.

Tech Support Scams:

This is where you receive a call from someone who claims to be a Microsoft or Apple tech support agent who has detected a problem with your computer. They urge you to visit a site or do something with your computer to give them control over your computer and “fix” whatever is wrong.

Or you get a popup window on your screen telling you your computer isn’t secure and you must download software immediately off of the internet.

These are total scams. Real tech support departments don’t call you out of the blue, nor can they detect problems you haven’t reported. And while you may need security software, you don’t get it from a popup ad. Most computers less than five years old have security software that just needs to be regularly updated.

Grand-kid Scams:

With 37 percent of fraud victims 60 or older, senior citizens are a ripe target for fraudsters. One common tactic is the phone call from someone who claims to be a grandchild and that they’re in trouble and need cash wired to them or someone ASAP. Never take this at face value unless you’re 100 percent sure it’s a relative. A quick call back to the grandchild or another family member could clear this up.

Online Romance Scams:

If you’ve ever signed up for a dating site, you’re a prime target for this scam. The other person claims to be the person of your dreams and tries to strike up a romance. They tell you they would love to meet you in person, but are stuck somewhere for some reason that can only be solved with some quick cash. Of course, when they get the cash, they’ll always want more.

You can tell this is a scam when someone you’ve never met claims to fall madly in love with you.

Outside of romance scams, which are initiated and often pursued completely online, some 77 percent of impostors approach their victims via phone, federal officials say. One way to thwart these attempts is to let unknown callers go to your answering machine. Con artists rarely leave a message. You can also use services like Nomorobo or Hiya to block so-called robo-calls — machine-dialed calls that crooks typically use.

Additionally, the type of payment you’re asked to provide can also serve as a warning. Government officials said 58 percent of victims said they paid via wire transfer in 2016. Prepaid debit cards are also popular with scammers because these payments are untraceable and impossible to reverse. If you paid a crook by credit card, on the other hand, you can dispute the charge and likely get your money back.

[source:  By 

Thursday, November 24, 2016

Trapped In A Demonstrations?

[by Michael Wisdom, Senior Contributing Editor, Texas & U.S. Law Shield]

We’ve all seen the news reports of the mob scenes and riots across the country following recent police shootings and now the election. We feel that it is important that you understand your rights should you find yourself unintentionally caught up in such a situation where an angry mob blocks the roadway.

As a real-life example, we received a call to the emergency hotline from a member who was traveling and found himself and his family confronted by angry rioters in a major city out west. With the threatening mob descending upon his vehicle, the member turned around to make a hasty exit. However, as he was trying to get his family out of harm’s way, one screaming rioter charged toward the member’s car and was struck, landing on the hood before rolling off. Fortunately, the member and his family safely escaped the melee.

To figure out if the member’s act of running into a rioter was legal, we turned to Texas & U.S. Law Shield Independent Program Attorney Michele Byington with the question: Are you justified in hitting or “running over” someone in this scenario?

“The answer? It depends!” Byington said. “Don’t you hate that answer?”

Let’s look at whether an act of running down a rioter would be lawful as a justified act of self-defense.

To begin the analysis, she said we treat this situation just as we would any other use of deadly force in self-defense. Let’s start with some general concepts, and then analyze how the specifics of the law will apply in these scenarios. The concepts to focus on are imminence, reasonableness, and not being the aggressor.

Imminence. Prosecutors love to attack the imminence prong. Does a group of people blocking a roadway pose an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to you inside of the vehicle? Blocking a roadway, normally, cannot cause death or serious bodily injury to those inside the vehicle, much less pose an imminent or immediate threat. As a result, using a vehicle to “run them down,” or even to physically push them aside, is unlikely to be justified. However, if there is additional threatening conduct such as the protestors attempting to enter the vehicle, or say, charging toward you with a baseball bat, that is a completely different scenario. If you are placed in reasonable fear of imminent deadly force, you would be legally entitled to use deadly force in self-defense, including the use of your vehicle to neutralize the unlawful deadly force threat.

Reasonableness. What would be required to generate a reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily injury? The key here is that it doesn’t matter what your personal beliefs are if a jury would not believe that your fear was reasonable under the circumstances. There are extremes where your conduct will almost always be viewed as reasonable, such as attempts to set your car on fire or flip it over. On the other hand, under many circumstances, it will be extremely difficult to convince a jury that you acted reasonably if you use deadly force against protestors. One example would be injuring or attempting to injure a group of peaceful protestors who are merely blocking a roadway. If the protestors attempt, or reasonably appear to attempt, to forcibly enter blockaded vehicles, you will gain a presumption of reasonableness under the laws of many, but not all, states. You will also have a much better argument that you had reasonable grounds to fear an imminent attack with deadly force. Such conduct could include the smashing of windows or attempts to open doors. Also, you do not necessarily need to wait until the protestors have turned violent against your vehicle if you see it happening to someone else. Remember, you must have a reasonable belief from what you are seeing and hearing around you and not merely speculating about what might occur.”

Byington also noted, “Keep in mind, here in Texas, you may also use deadly force to protect a third party as long as you would be justified in using deadly force to protect yourself in that same situation.

If you intend to use your vehicle against a rioter, it will almost always constitute the use of deadly force – that is, force capable of causing death or serious bodily injury. Deadly force can be used in self-defense to the extent the force with which you are threatened also constitutes deadly force. In other words, deadly force can be met with deadly force, she said. If you are faced with anything less than deadly force, you will face an uphill battle in arguing that your actions were reasonable. To make matters worse, if you respond to a threat that is non-deadly in nature with unlawful deadly force, it would allow the other person to lawfully respond in kind with deadly force against you.

Not the Aggressor. Is the person seeking justification for the use of deadly force in self-defense a victim, or is he the aggressor? State laws may vary, but generally, the defense of justification is not available to the individual who starts the fight and does not stop to convey to the other person their intention to stop the aggression.

So, how might this apply in a protest or riot situation? Byington noted, “Say you are stuck for an hour in the middle of a protest and decide to ‘nudge’ one of these folks with your vehicle so that you can get out of the traffic snarl. If the otherwise peaceful protestor then becomes violent, and you use deadly force to protect yourself, a prosecutor, judge, or jury could easily argue that you were the initial aggressor. You may lose a number of legal protections, and on top of that, appear like the aggressor during the investigation or trial.

Suppose you yell out “Sorry! Didn’t mean to bump you, it won’t happen again!” If the other person continues the assault after having been informed of your intention to stop, at that point you may regain the right of self-defense, although the protestor will almost certainly argue that he/she could not hear you due to the noise of the protest.

A Few Practical Tips:

So, what should you do if you come across such a mob?

STOP. Don’t go any farther. Do whatever is necessary to change direction and get out of the area. If you are alert, hopefully you will see these masses of people far enough in advance so that you can completely avoid the situation, long before being surrounded.

Remember, you can’t legally run people over just because they are in the road. You may think the safest action to take in a situation like this is to keep moving, which may result in hitting people with your car to get them out of the way. That isn’t legal! It could easily be considered an aggravated assault, or worse! Even if people are illegally blocking the road, you will go to jail. It is that simple. Avoidance is key.

However, once the rioters attack you or attempt to enter the vehicle, the game changes, and your legal justification kicks in. With your vehicle surrounded so that you can’t escape and attackers trying to burn your car, flip it over, or attempt to drag you out of it, it is reasonable to assume that you will suffer imminent serious bodily injury or death. It is at this point you may use deadly force. In this moment of adrenaline and pure fear, you must keep your common sense. Do not get out and try to shoot your way out of the mob! You will quickly be overtaken and perhaps have your gun stripped from you. Instead, use your vehicle to get out of that situation by driving away from the surrounding rioters.

An additional point to remember is, should your vehicle come under attack, roll your windows down about half an inch. Experts say it is harder to break a window that is partly down than one that is fully closed. Turn off your ventilation system so you do not draw in any outside air in the event there is tear gas or smoke present. Further, if surrounded and moving slowly, you may want to take off your seat belt to allow a quick exit from the vehicle should it be overturned or set on fire.

“Once again, it is evident that your best course of action is to avoid these, often, pre-planned demonstrations altogether and drive away quickly should you come upon one,” she said.

The law is different in every state. For example, Texas has the “Castle Doctrine,” which gives a person the presumption of reasonableness if he or she uses deadly force against a person attempting to enter or entering their vehicle. Byington said, “It is a HUGE legal tool. Unfortunately, other states may not expand their Castle Doctrine to the vehicle [New Jersey]. With that in mind, I hope everyone can stay safe – and also stay legal! – if you find yourself in any protest or riot situation.”

To help Members in other states, we contacted U.S. Law Shield Independent Program Attorneys to get additional insights. Their comments appear below.


Independent Program Attorney Doug Richards offered this explanation on Colorado’s the law on self-defense. In the book Colorado Gun Law: Armed And Educated, co-authored by Richards, Stanley Marks, and Christopher Ferrero, Richards points out that “a person is justified in using physical force upon another person in order to defend himself from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he may use a degree of force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for that purpose.

“Importantly,” Richards adds, “a person is not justified in using any degree of physical force if he provokes the other person into the use of unlawful force with the intent of using that as a justification to cause the other person bodily injury or death.

Richards also points out that “[D]eadly physical force may be used only if a person reasonably believes that a lesser degree of force is inadequate, and he has reasonable grounds to believe, and does believe, that he or another person is in imminent danger of being killed or of receiving great bodily injury.”

For more specific information on this and other Colorado gun laws, click the Colorado Gun Law: Armed And Educated book link at the bottom of this post to order your copy.


For the law on self-defense in Virginia, we turned to U.S. Law Shield of Virginia Independent Program Attorneys Mitchell Wells and W. Edward Riley of Riley & Wells. In the upcoming book, Virginia Gun Law: Armed And Educated, co-authored by Riley and Wells, they point out that a person caught in a demonstration that’s turning violent must reasonably fear that they are in imminent danger of suffering serious bodily injury or death to be justified in the use of deadly force. For more specific information on this and other Virginia gun laws, look for the upcoming announcement as to when Virginia Gun Law: Armed And Educated will be published and available.


Independent Program Attorney Robert Robles added “[T]hat the laws in Oklahoma regarding the use of deadly force in a self-defense situation are pretty well in line with the laws in the neighboring state to the south [Texas] and can be found in the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act, Title 21, Oklahoma Statutes, Section 1290.1, et seq.”

“In Oklahoma, the law gives the presumption that a person held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm and therefore deadly force was necessary, if it is used against an individual who was unlawfully or forcibly in the process of entering or entered into an occupied vehicle; or is attempting to forcibly remove another against his or her will from an occupied vehicle. Deadly force is also presumed to be justified to prevent the commission or attempted commission of forcible felonies including murder, burglary, carjacking, and home invasion robberies,” he said.

“Furthermore,” Robles added, “if people are present in any place where they have a right to be, they have no duty to retreat and have the right to meet force with force, including deadly force, if they reasonably believe that it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to themselves or another, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”

For more specific information on this and other Oklahoma gun laws, click the Oklahoma Gun Law: Armed And Educated book link at the bottom of this post to order your copy.


Independent Program Attorney Deborah Alessi summarized Missouri’s law as, “A person cannot use deadly force upon another person unless he or she reasonably believes that such deadly force is necessary to protect himself, or another against death, serious physical injury, or any forcible felony, and is used against a person who unlawfully enters, remains after unlawfully entering, or attempts to unlawfully enter a vehicle lawfully occupied by such person.”

Alessi added that “a person does not have the duty to retreat from their occupied vehicle before using deadly force under the circumstances described, and these laws can be found in RSMo Chapter 563 Defense of Justification, Section 563.0031.1.”


Independent Program Attorney Matt Kilgo expands upon the Texas law to explain how the law of self-defense would apply in Georgia under these circumstances.

1. Innocence. Is the person seeking justification for the use of deadly force in self-defense an innocent victim, or is he or she the instigator of the confrontation? In Georgia an individual may not claim as justified a use of force against another when he or she initially provokes the initial force as an excuse to commit an act of force; at any time when committing (or attempting to commit) or fleeing the commission of a felony; or anytime he or she was the initial aggressor in a situation or was engaged in mutual “combat by agreement”, unless or until withdrawing from combat and making that decision known to the other individual. See O.C.G.A. §16-13-21(b). If the other party continues an assault after having been informed of your intention to stop, then you may “reacquire” the right of self-defense.

2. Imminence. Does a group of people blocking the roadway pose an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm to you inside your vehicle? Simply blocking a roadway cannot normally cause death or serious bodily harm to those inside a vehicle. As a result, using one’s vehicle to “run them down,” or even to physically push them aside, is unlikely to be legally justified unless there is some additional threatening conduct. But suppose the mob begins more direct threats or the use of actual force against you? If you are now placed in reasonable fear of an imminent deadly force attack, then you could be legally entitled to use deadly force in self-defense, including the use of your vehicle to neutralize the unlawful deadly force threat. Remember, the use of force is justified in Georgia when a party “reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other’s imminent use of unlawful force. . . .” Imminence is vitally important, especially when using a weapon as deadly as a car: the threat must be real and immediate.

3. Proportionality. Keep in mind, however— should you intend to use your vehicle against anyone— this will almost certainly constitute deadly force, that force “which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm.” Deadly force may only be used to protect yourself or another person when “necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury. . . or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” O.C.G.A. §16-3-21(a). Should you respond to a threat that is non-deadly in nature with deadly force (or one that does not constitute a forcible felony, such as murder, rape, armed robbery, or aggravated assault; any felony that contains an element of force), it would allow the other person to respond in kind with deadly force against you. Additionally, you may be the one charged.

4. Reasonableness. What action would be required of a mob or any of its members to generate a fear of death or great bodily injury that justifies the use of a weapon like a car in the eyes of police, prosecutors, judges, and juries? If the protestors attempt (or reasonably appear to attempt) to forcibly enter your vehicle or the vehicle of others, this could certainly constitute reasonable grounds to fear an imminent deadly force attack. Such conduct would include the smashing of windows or attempts to force open doors. The same applies to attempts to set vehicles on fire, or to flip vehicles over. Generally, a defender need not necessarily wait until the protestors have turned violent against his particular vehicle: If members of a mob have begun threatening or using deadly force against other blockaded vehicles, it could be considered reasonable to believe your own vehicle is likely to be next — you are, after all, legally entitled to defend yourself not just against the danger already occurring to you but also against the danger that is about to occur, that is imminent. But you must draw a reasonable belief from actual evidence around you, not merely speculate what might happen.

Kilgo went on to add, “If you find yourself in a mob situation, remember, you can’t just run anyone over with your car. It’s best to just keep moving, which may result in your bumping people out of the way with your car. However, this may be considered battery on your part, which is a crime. You may be arrested if you strike someone with your car, absent a legitimate threat to your life or the life of others. So it’s best to avoid those situations.”

“Perhaps most importantly,” Kilgo went on to say, “familiarize yourself with Georgia’s laws on the use of force, as well as such important legal concepts as the ‘Castle Doctrine’ and Georgia’s stand your ground law. The law can and does protect you in situations such as this, but you must be aware of what your rights are. While your best course of action is to avoid these often pre-planned demonstrations altogether and drive away quickly should you come upon one, knowing what you may legally do to protect yourself and your family in such a situation is your best protection.”


Independent Program Attorneys David Katz and James Phillips offered this summary of the law regarding the use of deadly force in Florida.

“Under Florida Statute Chapter 776, Section 776.012(2),” says Katz, “A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.”

Phillips added, “If you use or threaten to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection, you do not have a duty to retreat and have the right to stand your ground, so long as you are not engaged in a criminal activity and are in a place where you have a right to be.”

“You are presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm if the other person was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered your occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove you against your will from your occupied vehicle,” Katz pointed out.

For more specific information on this and other Florida gun laws, click the Florida Gun Law: Armed And Educated book link at the bottom of this post to order your copy.


According to Independent Program Attorney Justine McShane, the law of self-defense in the Keystone State is similar to the law in Texas, but different in significant ways.

“The Pennsylvania self-defense statute provides that use of force is ‘justifiable when the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion.’ 18 Pa.C.S. § 505.”

Wednesday, October 26, 2016

Defending Your Home

This article is from a piece titled "Developing a Layered Defense" written by Dave Steen and posted on the International Forecaster. [http://theinternationalforecaster.com/ Developing a Layered Defense, By Dave Steen]

Defending your home in a time of crisis is much different than defending it against common criminals. The conventional wisdom of home security is basically worthless in a survival situation, as people aren’t going to be acting like normal criminals. Anyone who tries attacking your home during a crisis situation is probably going to be more desperate than normal criminals are, causing them to be less circumspect and do things that normal criminals wouldn’t do.

There’s also a good chance that anyone attacking your home in the midst of a crisis will do so in a group. That increases the danger to you and your family considerably, even if they aren’t trained warriors. Just dealing with sheer numbers makes home defense much harder than dealing with one or two criminals. If ten people are shooting at you, even ineffectively, the chances of getting hit are much greater.

Legal Statement on Defense.

The law allows for the use of deadly force in self defense. The specific term that’s used in the legal world is that your life is in “imminent danger.” In other words, someone has to be facing you, pointing a weapon at you, be in range of that weapon and have made it clear that they intend to use the weapon.

All of that can happen at once and none of it requires any words. Generally speaking, unless it’s a friend joking around with a squirt gun, pointing any gun at you is considered imminent danger, unless they are out of range. So, a guy a football field away from you with a pistol isn’t really an imminent danger, but one who is 50 feet or less away is.

Some states add to your right to self defense, the rights to defend others, your home and your property. Before anything happens, you need to be sure of what the law is in your area. Even if there is a breakdown in society, you can be sure that when things are restored the hanky wringers will be looking to prosecute anyone who had to defend themselves; so, you want to be in the right.

Where’s the Fight?

In normal times, a criminal has to be in your home, or trying to get into your home, to be considered an imminent threat. However, I think that could be challenged in a situation where you have multiple attackers. Say there’s a breakdown in society where food is scarce and ten hunger-crazed people attack your home to get your food. In such a case, I’m pretty sure you’d be justified shooting as soon as you are sure that it is your house that they intend to attack.

You can’t really be sure of that until they cross your property line and are actually on your property. As long as they’re in the street, there’s an equally good chance that they will go to someone else’s house or just walk on by. Even standing there looking at your house isn’t a sure indication they are going to attack; they could be talking about your ugly paint job.

But once they cross your property line, with weapons in their hands, it’s reasonable to assume that they are attacking you. That’s when you shift from watching mode to fighting mode. In such a case, where you are outnumbered, it’s better to have the fight outside of your home, than inside. If they manage to breach your home and get inside, your chances of survival are drastically reduced. By fighting while they are outside and you are inside, you have the advantage of cover and concealment.

Building Your Layered Defense

A classic layered defense consists of three layers. Many old castles and forts were designed in this manner. The outer defense is to slow down the attackers and give you a first counterattack. The second layer of defense is the main defense used for holding off the enemy. Finally, there’s a third layer which is used as a last stand, if the perimeter is breached.

You can and should do the same thing with your home. That way, when that hungry gang shows up at your door, you’re ready to deal with them. Your three layers are:

Your property’s perimeter

Your home’s perimeter

Your safe room

Each of these is created differently and actually has a different purpose. We need to understand that purpose, in order to create those defenses correctly.

The property perimeter

Since you can’t definitely state that they are an imminent threat until they step onto your property, you can’t use your perimeter as it would normally be used in warfare. However, you still need that perimeter, as it can do a lot for you.

When we talk about perimeter defenses, we’re talking about everything from your property line to the walls of your home. You aren’t limited to just the line that is the outer perimeter of your property. Every foot of that space can be useful.

Some would want to build a ten foot tall cement wall around their property as their perimeter defense. While I can definitely sympathize with that desire, I can’t agree with it. Doing so would simply make your home obvious as someplace with something worth protecting. In other words, it would increase the chances of attack. Your perimeter defenses much be something less obvious.

The biggest thing your perimeter can do for you, without appearing obvious is to shape the battle to come. You can use it to steer the attackers to where you want them to be, so that they are under your guns. To do this, simply make it difficult to enter your property by any other means than the one which will direct them to your ambush. As most people will naturally take the easiest route, you make sure that you have one obvious easy route that they can take.

Don’t let them cross that line without providing you with some sort of warning though. You need some sort of perimeter alarm which lets you know that your perimeter has been breached. That way, you can react to the fact that you have intruders on the property.

Finally, fill the space between the perimeter and your home with traps. You don’t need anything big or fancy here, caltrops and broken glass will do just fine. The idea is to reduce their enthusiasm and get them to say in the killing zone that you’ve identified.

The home’s perimeter

Your home’s perimeter needs to be hardened. That means making it harder to break through the perimeter. A dead-bolted door can be busted open with one swift kick, so you need more than that. Windows can be broken open with the butt of a rifle, so you need to do more there as well.

The obvious purpose of hardening your home is to make it so that the attackers can’t easily break in. That way, they’re stuck outside, between your perimeter and your home, right where you want them. This isn’t all that hard and you can do the whole thing yourself.

The safe room

I don’t agree with the common idea of a safe room for a crisis situation. Normal safe rooms are intended to be a place where you can hide when a criminal breaks into your home, while you’re waiting for the cavalry to arrive and rescue you. The problem is, in a crisis situation, there won’t be any cavalry coming to rescue you.

What I mean by a safe room is a room that everyone in the family can get to easily, where you can make your last stand before escaping. If you can, make it a room where they have to come down a long hallway to attack you. That way, you can shoot at them as they come down the hallway. If you can fortify the room against bullets, do so. But make sure that you have a good escape route to use, once you manage to beat off the attack. You don’t want to fight off a second attack from that place.

This is what they used to do in the old castles. The keep (main building) would be the “safe room” to make the last stand. There would always be a secret escape route to use, so that the lord and lady could escape while their knights fought a defensive action. The same idea will work for you, with the exception that you don’t want to sacrifice any knights to make your escape.