There may be a customer base satisfied we’re not thinking of.Just more stupidity from businesses not knowing their customer base.
There may be a customer base satisfied we’re not thinking of.Just more stupidity from businesses not knowing their customer base.
The comments on their FB page are not kind lol. Hopefully they have the number of a good PR fixer.
Are you saying that a code that ONLY the company knows, is actually the property of the customer, even when the customer doesn't know what it is, or that it even existed in the first place?Is it their information?
I'm saying there is, at the very least, an obligation/contract/an interest between the customer and the manufacturer that you, as an agent of the state, should have to go through due process to access. Unless they made it clear that in the sale that any such information that could be used to circumvent the security of the safe would be made available at the drop of a hat to any badge that asks for it, they should have made them get a court order.Are you saying that a code that ONLY the company knows, is actually the property of the customer, even when the customer doesn't know what it is, or that it even existed in the first place?
EST.For the sake of discussion: what is the difference between a court order and a search warrant in this situation? This going with the "specific safe and contents" were on the lawful search warrant.
Tell that to the people who operated the Woolworth lunch counter in Greensboro, NC in 1960. :-)The Constitution applies to public entities and not private businesses. The private business can do what they want with their information.
Giving up rights for so little…While IMO it still didn't matter at all (it saved the FBI at most 10 minutes of cutting), the Facebook comments are hilarious. Sounds like Liberty certainly misjudged their customer base.
I had an epiphany.... "liberty" (name must forever be in quotes) hopes that by helping the feebs they'll be on the preferred safe list when mandatory safes are required for any lawful gun ownership.Giving up rights for so little…
There may be a customer base satisfied we’re not thinking of.
I think that was what GFGT was referring to as well…I had an epiphany.... "liberty" (name must forever be in quotes) hopes that by helping the feebs they'll be on the preferred safe list when mandatory safes are required for any lawful gun ownership.
well he was too vague and slow. I win.I think that was what GFGT was referring to as well…
I had an epiphany.... "liberty" (name must forever be in quotes) hopes that by helping the feebs they'll be on the preferred safe list when mandatory safes are required for any lawful gun ownership.
Your reward is a box of INGO cookies. Send me your credit card number to cover the cost of shipping and I’ll get you fixed up right away.well he was too vague and slow. I win.
BTW, further google fu shows they raided this guys house on a search warrant for his suspected role in Jan 6, and also turned off his security cams.
Got a link to this ordeal? Thanks….They would have just cut it open. We just had an incident where our former Sheriff was served a search warrant which included his safe(s). Didn't voluntarily open them and the Fire Department was requested to the scene and opened them.
Here is one of many.Got a link to this ordeal? Thanks….
I get a laugh that a lot of the same folks that are mad at Liberty for cooperating with LE that had a valid warrant were mad at Apple for not cooperating with LE on the phone for the SB shooters..Apple said it would destroy their customers' confidence in the security of their phones if they gave up the code, even for a dead terrorist's phone.
I guess Apple had more to lose than Liberty.