Does the right to bear arms and the inherent right to defend yourself extend to the cyber domain?

2016-07-19T08:07:14-04:00

Response by SFC Jerry Humphries made Jul 19 at 2016 8:08 AM

2016-07-19T08:08:43-04:00

Interesting Question, can you please explain furthermore. Thanks

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 19 at 2016 8:38 AM

2016-07-19T08:38:36-04:00

Let's expand this scenario to help.
A person has stolen property and is fleeing the area in their car. You use a weapon that disables the car and cause crash into a tree, killing the thief. Is that weapon illegal to own? Was the weapon used illegally? What if they were firing a gun, when you employed that weapon?

Response by SFC Matthew Mason made Jul 19 at 2016 9:21 AM

2016-07-19T09:21:31-04:00

No. Cyber domain is unfortunately controlled by major corporations and they can and will deny or alloy anything they see fit for their own agenda. Take FaceBook for a prime example of a denier of free speech. You can say pretty much anything you want unless they don't like it. Which at that point the FB police will take down said post and either give you a warning or give you a temporary vacation.

Same goes for the talk about firearms on many sites. Many fools actually believe that you can have a firearm shipped to your house that you buy online. This is far from the truth. Yes, you can order the firearm online but, it MUST be shipped to an FFL dealer where you will have to go in person, fill out the background check paperwork and show proper identification. Only if you pass the check may purchase the firearm and pay all taxes and shipping fees. Fun huh?! Oh, if you fail, you will still be charged for shipping fees, etc!

Your only defense online is quality antivirus and malware, etc software. As well as reporting cyber bullying.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Jul 19 at 2016 9:35 AM

2016-07-19T09:35:17-04:00

How bad do you want to find out? Cyber stuff comes under some criminal codes, but are limited in scope. Most stuff that you'd run into has to do with civil complaints in which force is always improper. So there's no "property" in the cloud that's being robbed. There's no imminent physical danger. So the compensation for wrongdoing that can be proved really relates to money and other decrees. Bottom line, you take a look at your state laws on the permissible use of force and you'll see an absence of correlation to the cyber world. Just remember that "silence" means you can't do it.

Response by Col Jim Harmon made Jul 19 at 2016 11:43 AM

2016-07-19T11:43:05-04:00

Unlike the real world, where your use of a firearm to defend yourself may be justified by the imminent threat to your life, the threat posed by a cyber-attack is blunted by distance, and does not justify a lethal response.

Just as you cannot legally shoot someone in the back as they are fleeing your home (even if they have your complete Barry Manilow CD collection), you likewise could not engage in lethal actions against someone who was stealing your car, your ID, or your banking information.

Without the initial threat of lethal action against your person, you cannot apply lethal threat in return (in either the real world or the cyber world.).

Response by SPC David Hannaman made Jul 19 at 2016 12:30 PM

2016-07-19T12:30:26-04:00

Laws vary from state to state. In Texas (where I hold a CHL) if I walk out of a store and find someone breaking into my car I can legally shoot him... same if he's stealing the lawn gnome from my yard.

That same CHL allows me to leagally carry in quite a few other states through an agreement called "Reciprocity". However, the laws aren't the same in every state though, and it is MY responsibility to familiarize myself and abide by with the laws in any state that I want to carry.

To the point of the original question: I'm not aware of any law that allows me to go hunt down someone who stole my identity, or even if they stole "Movable property" and I found out who did it after the fact.

https://lawofselfdefense.com/statute/texas-sec-9-42-deadly-force-to-protect-property/

TX Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.

Texas Penal Code (2011) Chapter 9. Justifications Excluding Criminal Responsibility SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY Sec.9.42.DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property: (1)if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and (2)when and to the degree he reasonably believes

Response by SSG Carlos Madden made Jul 19 at 2016 1:12 PM

2016-07-19T13:12:08-04:00

This is a great question. Is the intent of the right to bare arms in order to physically protect you from harm? Defend yourself against the government? Does "arms" only apply to physical firearms? Are we allowed arms because the government has them? And if so, does that mean citizens should be allowed the same access to digital information? We could take a number of different approaches here and each one may provide a different answer.

Response by SSgt Ryan Sylvester made Jul 19 at 2016 1:16 PM

2016-07-19T13:16:49-04:00

Well, the right to bear arms doesn't apply at all. The right to defend yourself comes in many different flavors. As someone mentioned, anti-virus and anti-malware programs. Firewalls, layered infrastructure, and general system hardening are the best you can do in regards to perimeter defense. VPN, proxy servers and anonymizers, SSL and encryption for defensive surfing and internet transactions. All of this is perfectly legal (for the time being). Unfortunately, there are problems with some protocols used for secure transfer of data, files in particular. Comhacks will give you grief if you try to use peer-to-peer services to transfer files, especially large ones, which is the most secure method over the wire (data is packet-by-packet, so even if intercepted is practically useless).

As for protecting your little area of cyberspace, there isn't much to do. You have to be constantly monitoring, you have to catch in the act, and once you do, the attacker is typically defeated by switch their access point off. But cyber security is almost purely reactive. There are proactive steps you can take (hardening), but by and far, you are not going to catch someone on your system as they are doing nefarious things. You are going to react to things that have happened, that you identify in logs, and take action when and if you can by contacting that IP's governing network security office (to let them know that hey, you have a hacker or compromised system on your network). Obviously, this doesn't work well for something in the .cn or .ru domains. But someone in, say, .uk might be interested to know that.

In terms of third-party areas of the network (ie Facebook, Twitter), it entirely depends on the Terms of Service. You can make a report to the third party if there's someone doing shady stuff with your IP or information and let them make a determination. You can issue a takedown notice for your own copyrighted material (eg pictures, videos, etc) and failing a response to that notice, take them to court. Other than that, there isn't much more recourse.

What you don't have a right to do is launch an attack on someone in retaliation. Believe me, I would love to be able to do that, I certainly have the skills to do that, but it's hacking. It's illegal, no matter the provocation. This isn't defending your home from an intruder. It's attacking their area of cyberspace. And that is not allowed.

Response by CPT Pedro Meza made Jul 19 at 2016 1:20 PM

2016-07-19T13:20:30-04:00

The Right to Bear Arms applies only to persons or property, the cyber domain is a community that extends outside once property, the computer..

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 19 at 2016 2:03 PM

2016-07-19T14:03:26-04:00

I assume that you are referring to more than just buying Spybot Search and Destroy and McAfee to protect your stuff.
Go ahead and try fighting back. The laws are not in your favor as within the US it is illegal to access systems and networks that you have no permission to access. If you use your neighbor's unprotected WiFi, that is in violation of the law.
The problem is exacerbated by the fact that many of those that compromise systems are out of the country. A person hacking another country can be considered an act of aggression and may be subject to that country's law provided we have an extradition agreement with said country.

My advice? Use a VPN when connecting to the internet at Starbucks and turn off your WiFi/modem/router when you leave the house and when going to bed.

Response by Capt Michael Greene made Jul 19 at 2016 2:24 PM

2016-07-19T14:24:47-04:00

Defend yourself, yes. It's a human right, the right to defend yourself.
Bear arms in cyberspace? Does that mean you should keep viruses on hand to attack your enemies? No. The nature of cyberspace is inherently different than real life, and different rules apply.

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Jul 19 at 2016 6:51 PM

2016-07-19T18:51:31-04:00

Only if you use a light saber. It's cyber space for crying out loud.

Response by Cpl Justin Goolsby made Jul 20 at 2016 12:37 PM

2016-07-20T12:37:46-04:00

Honestly, I'm a little confused by the question. Are you asking us if we have the right to use internet security protection against viruses/malware or are you asking if we have the right to hack the computer of someone who tried to hack us? Or are you asking if we have the right to physically harm someone over virtual threats and then claim self defense?