It seems like every day we learn of another company caving to the government and their insane overreach, and here is another that will blow your mind.
It was recently revealed that Liberty Safe granted the FBI backdoor access to one of its customers’ gun safes because the federal law enforcement agency demanded it.
Does that not just blow your mind?
Apparently, the company miscomprehends what the word “safe” means.
That means they don’t get to give access to personal property or to give anyone else access to that property.
In a post on X on Monday, conservative YouTubers the Hodge Twins stated that “The feds called the manufacturer of his Liberty Gun Safe and got the passcode to get into it too. All for protesting at the Capitol over 2 1/2 years ago,”
Last week, a friend of ours was raided by the feds over J6, his name is Nathan Hughes and he’s from Fayetteville, Arkansas. Nate was raided by the FBI and arrested at gun point. His girlfriend (who just had a miscarriage) was held at gun point and put in handcuffs. The FBI… pic.twitter.com/LOpMQ28eUJ
— Hodgetwins (@hodgetwins) September 5, 2023
Nathan Hughes, the 34-year-old owner of the tainted Liberty gun safe, was arrested at gunpoint last week and charged with one felony and three misdemeanors in connection with his presence at the United States Capitol building on January 6, 2021. During the raid, the FBI ransacked his residence and sought to seize firearms from his safe.
On Tuesday, Liberty admitted that it provided the disgraced federal law enforcement agency with a combination to hack into Hughes’ gun safe solely because the FBI supplied a warrant to search Hughes’ residence.
Liberty Safe claims that its company protocol is to give law enforcement entry and access to its products as long as those agencies possess a warrant.
However, other Safe companies similar to Liberty Safe are not necessarily required to comply with law enforcement requests for combos to break into one of their purchased products unless a court orders them to do so.
The manufacturer’s admission that the security of its products is compromised due to the existence of a master code, as well as its willingness to work with law enforcement even without a court order, did not sit well with several loyal Liberty customers, who threatened to cancel their orders and switch safe companies on social media.
Others chastised Liberty for using a double standard to secure security. If a customer misplaces his safe keys or forgets his safe combination, Liberty forces him to “hire a certified locksmith” to re-enter the safe. If the FBI wants to break into a Liberty customer’s safe, all agents need to do is call the company and present a warrant bearing the customer’s name.
Liberty tried to reassure customers that it is still “devoted to protecting the personal property and 2nd Amendment rights of our customers” and “has repeatedly denied requests for access codes without a warrant in the past.”
“We regularly update our policies to ensure both compliance with federal and state law and reasonable customer privacy protections within the law,” the social media statement reads. “First and foremost, Liberty Safe is committed to preserving our customers’ rights, and we will remain unwavering in those values.”
There are a FEW major issues here.
On the comment thread, I can see that customers were not told that there was backdoor access to their safe.
Customers were under the impression that their code was theirs and that it would not be given to anyone, hence the reason they bought the safe.
The next part is what exactly is the FBI doing here with the so-called January 6 “insurrection?”
They are all bent on getting every single person who was at the Capitol on January 6, but they have not put in nearly the time, money, or resources into any BLM protest that destroyed cities in the past.
The problem that people are having with this is not that they followed a lawful order but.
The safe owner should be the only person able to open the safe and that is it.
Instead, the company offered a way to disable the safe as a back door around the 5th Amendment.
Secondly, this was not a lawful order; it was merely a request. No warrant was issued to search the property which would have required a safe manufacturer to help law enforcement execute that warrant.
All in all, this sounds like a HUGE lawsuit to me.
