See all sides, but don't fall for them

I believe I can see all sides of any issue. I could argue for or against anything. (Not that I would, except in my own mind, because why clutter an issue unnecessarily?)

Maybe it's a bad sample, but no one I know in person seems to be able to do this. Not even a little. No matter how I try to get them to even explain what "the other side" would argue, they can't seem to do it. Which I find interesting.

However, being able to argue (or articulate) the other side isn't the same as buying what they are selling. Once I've reached a conclusion I'm not going to change my mind until (or unless) some new data comes in (which has happened many times over the years). Rehashing the same points I've already incorporated into my decision isn't going to change anything. And irrelevant data doesn't count. If it's an ethical principle, showing me how "dangerous" it could be if misused is irrelevant to my decision. Danger only figures in if I'm trying to decide whether to jump off of something.

If there's nothing new to add, you're wasting your time discussing it.

Of course, that goes for me trying to convince the other side, too. 

So, trying to convince the other side out of something they've already decided is probably pointless. The best you can do is to show all the information to anyone watching (who hasn't already decided) so they might make a better-informed choice.

Unless, as has been postulated, we all believe first, and then look for data that supports what we already believe. If that's the case, why discuss anything important with anyone, ever? You may as well spend all your time gossiping about people, or talking about what "The News" wants you to talk about. That seems to be the popular choice anyway.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon
The help I've gotten so far has taken some of the pressure off.
Thanks to those of you who've helped!

Preparation can ease your anxiety

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 6, 2022)

If you are worried about the next few years, I can relate. Supply chain problems, inflation, the ongoing drought, and the possibility of political violence seem like they are closing in on us. An effective way to defeat the worry is to take charge of your life. Be responsible for your own well-being. Don't wait to be rescued.

You'll always feel worse about things you think you can't control. So, take control and do what you can, and you'll put your energy to better use than you would by worrying.

Stock up on things you'll need later, now, before the prices get higher. If they aren't available in stores at the moment, stay alert and buy them when you see them. Give local sellers a chance first, but if it doesn't look as though they'll be able to get what you need, try an online source.

Canned food is a good place to start. Dry rice and beans-- as long as you have the water to prepare them-- are items every house should store against hard times.

Please stock up on water, both to drink and cook with, and for cleaning and sanitation. You can never have enough.

Don't forget medical supplies, including medicines. Health-endangering prescription rules make it hard to stock up on essential medications, but this is something to take into consideration before it becomes an emergency.

If things improve on their own, having extra food, water, and health supplies isn't going to hurt you any. If things get worse, though, they'll be worth more than gold.

Political violence looks like it may soon become a bigger threat. Americans have irreconcilable differences, and it shows.

I would recommend you stay away from big cities to avoid the worst threat of political violence. Sometimes you can't avoid them, but get in, get done, and get out. The less time spent there, the better.

I have neighbors I know I can depend on, and I would do what I can to support them, too. I have neighbors I don't know well enough, and that's my fault. It's something I need to correct. You need to build community where you live. Community, as opposed to its opposite-- government, is essential for survival.

Doing useful things will help you feel better about the future. You'll feel more capable and competent. It's more than a feeling-- you'll be making it real.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Is this an "assault post"?

"Assault weapon" is a lie. Yes, there is such a thing as an assault rifle, but that's an entirely different thing with a real definition. An "assault weapon" doesn't have a set definition; it just "is" whatever the anti-gun bigots want it to be today. Usually whatever they feel like they can get away with banning right now. (They probably want to ban ALL guns, but will take what they can get now and try for more later.)

I guess in their eyes something is an "assault weapon" if it is more effective than the base model. Or scarier, for some subjective reason.

By that type of... "reasoning"... an "assault book" could be a computer or a religious book. Or a science book. Or something by Claire Wolfe or L. Neil Smith. Scary!
Motorcycles might be "assault bikes". Or maybe a regular bike --if it has cards in the spokes and flame decals-- would qualify.
"Assault baths"? Showers. "They didn't have showers in 1776, so you don't need them today!"

Idjits.

Those who use the term "assault weapons", other than when making fun of ignorant anti-gun bigots, are too dumb to have their opinions listened to. You can be warned by the lies they tell, though, so you know how they plan to enslave you. That way you can be ready to resist, not to comply.

-

Please support the Tobbles Project on Patreon

Respect the truth, not the speaker

It doesn't matter how horrible someone is, or how much I usually disagree with them: The truth is the truth no matter who says it.

This is something it seems most of the population simply can't comprehend. And they'll punish you for agreeing with truth uttered by someone they don't like.

It's best if you ignore "the masses" at that point. The truth doesn't turn into a lie just because you don't like the person who said it. Even if everything else they've ever said was a lie.

If Trump warned European politicians about becoming too dependent on Russian energy, or if Alex Jones answers an antagonistic question in court about elite pedophiles by mentioning Jeffrey Epstein, you don't have to like or agree with either of them to enjoy the truth of their statements. 

I've found myself agreeing with politicians and criminals (and just ordinary nasty people) of every sort over the years. Sometimes when people forward those emails full of quotes I can hardly believe the truthful things some monsters have said-- but if they actually said them (not to be assumed, for sure), the source doesn't affect the trueness.

There's a cost to ignoring the truth, no matter who it comes from.

-

Please support the Tobbles Rescue Project on Patreon

GVE warn of MVE

I can't help but be amused every time the FBI (or some other terrorist group associated with the US Feral Government) leaks another "domestic threat" page (page 1, page 2). I've seen several over the years, and they are all ridiculous.

 

Now their "concern" [sic] is "Militia Violent Extremism (MVE)". I wonder if that has anything to do with the recent SCROTUM... uh, SCOTUS opinion on the Second Amendment. Maybe the dipsticks of the Feral Baby Incinerators are laying some groundwork for future terror plots they have in the works.

If anyone is a problem, it's government. Many of those listed on the latest sheet as "MVE" are problems only when they act like government-- and precisely due to their fawning over statist ideology. They are really GVE (Government-Supremacist Violent Extremists).

The FBI is a laughingstock. It is still dangerous, of course, but it's not something to respect or fear. Just take reasonable precautions and don't do dumb things. Don't cooperate or associate with them and don't let yourself get pulled into any of their terrorist plots. You'll probably be fine.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

Needs should be met by the people

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for August 3, 2022)

People see me say I don't want government doing something and often jump to the conclusion I don't want that thing done at all. Sometimes they are right, as in the case of legislation enforcement. More often they are wrong, as in the case of environmental protection, security, or justice.

Government is more likely to make a mess of it...read the rest...

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

"I'd hate to live in fear like you do!"

Crime isn't much of a concern to me. I don't feel vulnerable. I don't live in fear of it. I never have.

Yes, I know crime exists. I know it can happen anywhere, at any time, to anyone. I've seen it happen. 

I think government employees are a much bigger danger than freelance crime. Plus, you aren't "allowed" to defend yourself from them-- because they run the courts. 

In both cases, there are things you can do to reduce the risk of being violated. Nothing is a guarantee. Life doesn't come with guarantees against bad things happening, and anyone who acts like it does is lying.

Anti-gun bigots would have you believe that gun owners are consumed with fear. Really? I've never seen it. Certainly never experienced it. The only things I'm afraid of are things a tool and preparation can't defend me from. But it fits their agenda of lies, so they are going to keep saying it.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

Cat'Rona

A (human) member of the household came down with a multiple-test-confirmed case of The 'Rona about a week ago. It's the government lab gift that keeps on giving.

By last Thursday I knew I was coming down with something. But, other than a mild fever, some vague aches, and some intestinal "events", I've not really felt bad. I don't feel well, but I don't feel sick-- if that's not too confusing.

Then, one of the cats, Ghost, got sick at nearly the same time I did, and he has not done as well. Did he catch Covid?

His symptoms seem to have mirrored mine-- as far as I can tell without him describing how he feels in English. Mainly he has stopped eating; no matter what I offer, he usually has no interest in even sniffing it. Which might indicate he has lost his sense of taste or smell. (I didn't.) Or, maybe he just feels too bad to eat. He has snacked here and there-- just a nibble. In most cases, he soon threw up anything he did eat. He has always wanted to eat the cheap food I give the porch cats, so I "accidentally" left it where he could get to it a couple of days ago, and I think he did eat a bit, and kept it down. But I tried that again the next day and he wasn't interested. I guess the novelty was gone.

He does seem to be slowly recovering now, but still isn't interested in food. He isn't hiding all day anymore, which is an improvement.

At least, with the humans, this virus (if that's what I have) keeps getting weaker. Who cares if every variant is more contagious as long as they keep getting weaker? I just hope Ghost recovers soon.

-

Please support the Tobbles Project on Patreon
Sunny is at the vet for tooth extraction surgery today.

Court taking small correct steps

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for June 29, 2022)

To those of you who are mad at the Supreme Court over two of its most recent rulings, let me agree with you. To a point.

I also agree-- to a point-- with those who celebrate those rulings.

I don't consider the Supreme Court to be credible, and haven't for years. Not since I recovered from the brainwashing I endured as an inmate in "public" schools.

The Supreme Court stole for themselves the power to be the final say on what the Constitution means back in 1803-- this power wasn't theirs to exercise, but belonged to the people. They didn't like this state of affairs so they changed things so they'd have more power. The public was fooled into going along.

Sometimes the Court gets things partly right, even under these conditions.

The Supreme Court was correct to strike down the illegal New York state regulations on concealed carry licensing, but then carved out too much breathing room for tyranny. The Constitution doesn't allow any restrictions, or even any government oversight, on gun ownership or possession. The Court wasn't honest on this point. They still support the imaginary political authority of politicians-- and their stormtroopers in legislation enforcement-- to do things they are clearly forbidden to do. The excuse that they've done similar things for a long time doesn't hold water. Historical rights violations are still rights violations and need to end immediately.

Political criminals screaming about "gun safety" and vulgar reasoning ("common sense") are lying for effect.

Then the Court's overturning of Roe v Wade doesn't mean what so many seem to believe. The government was, nowhere in the Constitution, directed to allow abortions, nor empowered to prohibit them. The document is silent on abortions, as it is on most things which don't (or shouldn't) involve government. An earlier court created that "discovery" out of thin air to please their side. Something which isn't addressed in the Constitution must be left up to the individual, but leaving it up to the states may be a small step in the right direction.

I still dislike both sides in the abortion wars more than I can express in polite company. I am not pro-life; I am pro-liberty. Without life, there is no liberty... but you won't miss it and won't care because you're dead. Without liberty, life is a hellscape.

As long as it stays out of your life, government is tolerable. When it meddles, it isn't.

-

Please support Kent's Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

A ray of happy sunshine, in video form

I tend to focus on whichever liberty concern seems to me to be most under attack at the moment. Right now, this is the natural human right to own and to carry weapons.

I hope it's something else next week, but I won't be surprised if it isn't. 

You've probably seen recent videos of BATFEces criminals flagrantly breaking the law. No, not the one who was illegally photographing every page of the sales records at a gun store, with her personal phone. I'm talking about those thugs going door-to-door demanding to see the resident's guns.

If that bothers you as much as it bothers me, you might enjoy this video as much as I did. Now, I don't support cops, but I do like seeing enforcers pitted against each other-- gang warfare. So, here's how to deal with BATFEces goons at your door. (Let me know if the video gets deleted and I'll try to describe what happened-- I sure hope it doesn't! I can't figure out how to download it from Twitter and can't find it at the original site.)

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

They are not your masters

I've seen several pro-gun people saying-- concerning the D.C. house of Reprehensibles' v*te to pass another "assault weapon" [sic] ban-- that they are "v*ting our rights away".

Not at all. 

They are v*ting, ganging up, to violate the natural human rights of the people. Your rights. But the rights won't go away. They won't even change.

Even if this counterfeit bill also passes the Sin-it and becomes legislation, it won't be legitimate. You'll have no obligation whatsoever to comply (liberty carries risk, so be smart).

Let's be honest about what happened. What these worthless skin-sacks actually did was v*te to enslave you to their gang. They v*ted themselves to be your owners and masters. They declared you to be their property to be used as suits them. 

Are you going to take it and let them believe you believe it's true? Or will you declare that you are no one's slave and reject them, their opinions, and their power grab?

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

The worst approach

I'm against pollution regardless of whether it changes the climate. 

I'm against murder regardless of the tools used. 

I'm against bigotry regardless of who it targets.

It seems statists aren't able (or willing) to understand any of that. If I don't want government to coercively tax, legislate, and enforce to "fight" things I'm against, I must not really care. If I don't want government to "do" something, they think this means I don't want anything done.

If it is important, a voluntary solution will be found. I'm for cooperation, not the state.

To me, "caring" means you don't destroy human liberty just because there's a problem. That's the worst possible way to "solve" anything.

I'm for liberty, regardless of whether it is safe.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

Rolling out the welcome mat

I saw a video from Austria where a news report from Germany was being read. It said that a German supermarket chain was announcing that it was advising its employees that if things get bad there, and there is looting and stealing, to do nothing. Nothing. Just stand aside and let it happen.

If the report is true-- and I have no insider information that it is-- isn't this just inviting bad people to go rob and loot those stores? Doesn't this place the employees and customers at greater risk? People who will loot and rob are going to be less likely to have any ethical compass-- will they draw the line at robbing and looting? Can you be sure?

I understand that a company might not want to suggest to its employees that they should fight back. Liability and all. But to tell them to just stand by and do nothing? It seems like that is just opening them up for a dangerous situation when looters and thieves hear they've been given permission.

I'd have to quit that job or shop elsewhere.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

It's that time again

 

I find myself needing to ask for donations. 

I understand if you can't, don't want to, or whatever. You owe me nothing. And those who regularly help out should ignore this, anyway.
Otherwise, if you want to, and can, consider subscribing or donating.

Thanks.

Hoping future has more liberty wins

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 27, 2022)

It feels like the future is being pulled in two directions at once. Things are getting better, while things also feel like they are getting worse. Both are probably true.

I'm not so naive as to believe this is something new. Looking back at history I see how every era of the past had opposing forces pulling in different directions, fighting to shape the future. Two steps forward and one step back, as one or the other got the upper hand for a time...read the rest...

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Responsibility keeps you moving

The past two days have been filled with the hot, dusty, and exhausting work of maintaining a couple of yards. My own and that of my parents. Yards that haven't really been enjoying the hot, dry summer (and dry year).

The weeds find a way to grow anyway, even without water, which is only an issue in my own yard, not my parents' yard. They water their (mostly weedless) yard, at least a little, so their grass still needs to be mowed. Except for all the dead spots.

I'll need to do their yard again in a week or so, but I may not need to do much to mine for a month or more. Unless it rains. So the additional work won't be an issue for a while.

I would like to catch my breath and rest, but since someone in the house has the newest version of Covid, I haven't really had a chance. Maybe if I catch The 'Rona I can use that as an excuse to take a day or two off. 

Who am I kidding? The cats will still need to be fed, litter boxes still need to be cleaned, and non-cat-related things still need to be done around the house, no matter how I feel or how tired I am. At least it keeps me from getting lazy or using sickness to justify sitting around. Responsibility keeps you going when you'd rather not. That's one reason having responsibility is better than having none.

Added: I had a dream last night about how much more yardwork I still had to do before I was done. I was very relieved when I woke up and didn't have that hanging over me!

-

Please support the Tobbles Project on Patreon

Poor choices can be entertaining

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for June 22, 2022)

Do you ever get to the point where you feel like sitting back and watching the show while people suffer the consequences of their bad choices? I do, and I remember the biblical story about Jonah having the same impulse. It's human nature.

There's one show I won't be watching, though. I can't think of a worse waste of time than watching the January 6th Congressional clown show. Congresscritters are wallowing in their self-importance while the disasters they've unleashed on us are making it hard to afford to fuel our cars; making it harder for us to afford food and everything else.

I'm not saying there's anything they could do about it at this point-- the damage has been done. Anything they did now would make it worse. But to try to distract the public with this theater and pretend it's important? Unconscionable politics.

Two years ago I warned of inflation on the horizon, due to the stimulus checks and wanton government spending. Some people took this as a cue to tell me how wrong I was instead of heeding the warning as an opportunity to do things to protect themselves. They decided a better use of their time was to attack the messenger.

I wonder if they've learned anything since.

Then, you have groups parroting the claim that guns are society's biggest problem. Some area teenagers emphatically demonstrated it's not the tool; it's the people who choose to violate another human so badly they end up dead.

I guess the anti-gun activists would say it's a good thing those teens didn't have guns because it would have been worse if they had.

As with any claim I make, you are free to listen, or not.

I'm not telling you what to think. Instead, I hope I set your brain gears in motion so you can think your own thoughts-- thoughts based in reality, not on wishful thinking and bad assumptions.

One bad assumption I see is the assumption that political government is the proper tool for solving problems. If you can get people to accept this groundless claim, you can keep them from even considering actual solutions. There's a problem? What legislation or rules can be imposed to fix it? You won't find a solution there. This assumption will keep people looking in the wrong place. This is choosing to fail even before you've begun. Poor choices have bad, but entertaining, consequences.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Another possible application of the Bubble

I think it's possible to use my Bubble Theory to resolve another thorny situation where rights seem to conflict.

It may be a way to better address, or view, abortion. 

My view is that at conception the zygote isn't yet an individual person, but at some point between conception and birth-- at least by the time the fetus could survive, with help, outside the uterus-- it becomes one. At that point in time, whenever that is, a "bubble" of bodily autonomy-- individual rights-- enclosing the fetus comes into being inside the pregnant woman's equal and identical "bubble" of bodily autonomy. Inside her body; engulfed in her property, but not her property.

She can no longer claim ownership of what's inside the fetus' "bubble", even though it lies within her own body. She is responsible-- a steward, but not an owner.

After that point, ethically, only if the fetus/baby becomes a credible threat to her life, liberty, or property can she forcibly end the threat.

There would still be plenty of room for those who simply want to fight over the topic to quibble over exactly when the fetus' bodily autonomy "bubble" appears, to complain that this involves "mental constructs" (as does everything above concrete physical objects), to argue over what constitutes a credible threat to the woman's life, liberty, and property (and whether it matters), to keep them entertained.

My view that political government and legislation have no place in our lives remains unchanged either way.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

The reason my traveling days are behind me

Other members of my family travel. Some of them just took an Alaska cruise and others are about to go to Europe. They frequently fly around the country, visiting places like New York City, Las Vegas, NV, and California.

I don't travel far. Not because I don't want to. I might not choose the same trips they take, but I would like to wander the Australian Outback.

It's not just the fact I couldn't afford the trip since I refused to take a government job like most (but not all) of my relatives did. I simply have no interest in going anywhere I can't be adequately armed. That includes the airplane flight to get there. Which, in this current backward era, is a problem.

Airport security is a tyrannical joke. And these days there are even more roadblocks, like mask and shot mandates, and all that goes with sickness psychosis.

No one's assurances of how safe I would be make any difference to me. I don't rely on legislation or policies (or other people) to keep me safe; I see them as an added danger. It feels like bungee jumping with obviously sun-rotted bungees because that's all that's available. You'll probably be safe, but why take the unnecessary risk?

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

One of these things is not like the other

When things are different, but someone claims they are the same by way of analogy:

"Me carrying a gun onto your property when you've said I can't is no different than me breaking into your house while you're gone and settling down on your couch to watch your DVDs on your big-screen TV. Even if I bring my own popcorn, and even if don't damage the lock on your door when I break in, and even if I leave a quarter on the dining room table on my way out to pay for the electricity I used, and even if you never know it happened, I'm still stealing from you. That house and that TV and those DVDs are yours, not mine." [link]

1- "breaking into your house". Not invited, even provisionally. Entering a private space, through a locked or closed door (or window) meant to keep out everyone but the property owners, without even the awareness of the owner. 

2- All the activities described involve wear and tear on the property. Damage; a reduction in the property's value/life span, even if minimal. Even if unnoticed.

3- Physical damage is theft; mere physical presence isn't theft.*

So, "no different"? Really?

If you don't want to respect people's bodily autonomy while they are on your property you have every right to close that property off to others-- as the homeowner in the analogy did. Slavery-- claiming property rights over the bodies of others-- isn't OK even if you "only" do it while they are on your property, or as a condition of them entering your property.  Yes, the best way to deal with such horribly untrustworthy people is to shun them.

If I am worried about what might be in your pants while you are on my property I will simply not open my property to you. I will not invite you onto my property at all, rather than claiming I have the right to dictate what's in your pants, unseen and not causing any physical damage to anything of mine. If I invite you onto my property, either my private property or my business property (which I presumably want "the public" to use), I will absolutely respect all your natural human rights, without exception. I struggle to imagine how someone could do otherwise and claim any sort of moral high ground.

*The claim that mere presence is theft is similar to the "Intellectual Property" claim that an idea can be stolen. In neither case is the thing itself damaged or harmed in any way. It is still there, unchanged, for the owner to use just as before.

-

Please support the Tobbles Project on Patreon

So you want to be a hero...

The guy who took down the evil loser in the Indiana mall is a hero. No doubt.

If the news is correct (never bet on it), the evil loser fired 24 rounds and hit 4 people, killing three. Supposedly he carried 100 rounds, so if his shooting had been consistent throughout you could expect at least a dozen victims killed. At least. Had he not been stopped. Which he was-- decisively.

Again, if the news is correct, the hero fired 10 rounds from a distance of 30 to 40 yards, hitting the loser with 8 of them, ending the shooting spree 15 seconds from the moment the evil loser came out of the restroom-- about the time the first shot was fired. Impressive!

Now he is being hailed-- rightfully so-- as a hero... other than by the mass-murder groupies who can always be discounted as evil idiots.

Lots of people would like to be seen as heroes. Being a hero requires a few things to align. You've got to be prepared and capable. You've got to be in the "right" place at the "right" time. You've also got to have a bit of luck. You can't plan to be a hero. Having a gun on you is not even close to being enough. 

I just hope people who want to be a hero don't skip a few steps in their quest, or it's not going to work out well for them or for bystanders. 

Just strive to do the right thing in all circumstances. If you manage that, you're a hero even if no one else notices.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

Libertarians aren't on right or left

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 20, 2022)

No one really understands anyone else, so it's no surprise that non-libertarians don't understand libertarians.

When I first started writing on the topic of libertarianism, I ran across a blog post written by a self-proclaimed "progressive" who explained why all libertarians were racists and should be hated and mocked. I commented, pointing out a host of reasons this wasn't true...read the rest...

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Stay mad, monsters

The unhinged reaction of the despicable anti-gun bigots to one of their boys being stopped before he could rack up a high enough body count shows why I can't take them seriously.

They are actually mad this time because a 22-year-old had a gun in the mall (oh the horror!) and shot the evil loser before he killed more people. Not mad at the evil loser, mad at the guy who saved lives with his gun.

This is how you know it's not about "gun safety". It never has been. It's about disarming you.

No one, Shannon. No one "needs" to hear your worthless opinion on this event. Or any other. He wasn't illegally carrying. His age isn't an issue. Killing a mass shooter and saving unknown numbers of others isn't something a good person would condemn. And prohibiting government from preventing this type of mass-saving event is exactly what the Second Amendment was written to do-- among other things you also wouldn't like. It's no wonder you soon deleted your ignorant, bigoted, and downright nasty words.

The anti-gun bigots are blood-dancing mass-murder groupies. Either stupid, evil, or both. They are not on your side. They are not on society's side. They've chosen instead to side with evil losers, both freelance, like mass-murderers-- and professional, like politicians.

-

Tobbles on Patreon

You can't aim a government

I saw a "progressive liberal" (his words) claim that government and guns are both just tools. If you can be anti-government, you can be anti-gun. This was in the context of claiming that libertarians could be anti-gun (by which he implied they could support anti-gun legislation, not just have a personal preference).

There are a couple of problems with this.

The government he described is not merely a government, but a state. A political government. States are not defensive. You can't use a state for defense without harming the innocent-- "collateral damage". I recently saw another statist-- a "conservative" one-- claim that this is just because states-- political governments-- are a "necessary evil".

He then posted a link to an essay describing how civilizations and societies form and grow, not realizing that society is the opposite of the state.

Bad guys will use a gun or a state to violate others. A good guy will only use a gun defensively and will accept responsibility if he inadvertently harms the innocent in the process. A good guy can't use a state without harming the innocent, and wouldn't be able to pay restitution to all those he harmed by doing so anyway. So, would he use a state at all? If he does, can he still be considered a good guy?

Trying to use a state defensively will fail because it can't be aimed, it doesn't hit what you're aiming at even if you try, people are forced to pay for this tool and ammunition against their will, and it is "illegal" to defend yourself from those using a state against you. It's like using a nuclear bomb to get rid of a smattering of Nazis in a city. It might work, but only an idiot would believe it's the right thing to do.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

Government crushes individuality

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for June 15, 2022)

Everyone has their own unique personal preferences. This is probably a good thing since it makes life interesting and keeps us from all fighting over the exact same stuff. Think how boring it would be if everyone preferred identical things. Variety is the spice of life.

As long as everyone remembers their preferences are only preferences, not a matter of one being right and the other being wrong, there's no problem. It's only when people try to impose their preferences on everyone that it becomes an issue.

It's the difference between preferring the color yellow and forbidding the color blue; making the demand that everyone else pretend to prefer yellow, too-- or else.

This is the difference between having your own individual preferences, without acting like a tyrant, or trying to control others. Guess which path politicians prefer.

I try not to mistake my personal preferences for an excuse to tell you what to do or not do.

It's why I can think abusing tobacco, alcohol, and other drugs is unhealthy, and prefer you not harm yourself with them, without believing it's ethical to allow government to have the illegitimate power to regulate any of it in any way.

Live how you want; be who you are. Give others the same respect and it's no one's business.

Forcing others to ignore their own preferences because they differ from yours is not right. It's the opposite of giving others the same respect you probably want from them. Stealing from others, attacking them, or forcing them to give you special treatment is the same. In such a case you need to meet a stone wall of resistance until you back down and become civil.

As long as you don't try to use violence-- neither individual nor the collective violence of government-- against those whose preferences simply disagree with yours, there's no reason to stand up to you. The moment you do, standing up against you is the right thing to do.

If you are encouraging tax-funded government schools to manipulate the preferences of a generation of impressionable little kids against the wishes of their parents, you are imposing your preferences coercively. You're on the wrong side even if you are certain your preferences are better. You are crushing their individuality and, in the long run, making the future less free and less colorful than it could be. You certainly aren't helping the kids.

-

Please support Kent's Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon (new post)

Not the same thing at all

I find it amazing how many people can't-- or won't-- see the difference between "Naturalization" (becoming a member of a club) and simply being physically present among members of the club. 

Yes, government ignores the differences too, when it suits government power (and this is what causes the problems), but there's still a difference. Especially for people who don't buy into the fable of government legitimacy.

-

Please support the Tobbles Rescue Project on Patreon

Gun safety

This is gun safety:

1. All guns are always loaded. Even if they are not, treat them as if they are.
2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. (For those who insist that this particular gun is unloaded, see Rule 1.)
3. Keep your finger off the trigger 'til your sights are on the target. This is the Golden Rule. Its violation is directly responsible for about 60 percent of inadvertent discharges.
4. Identify your target, and what is behind it. Never shoot at anything that you have not positively identified. (link)

This is the polar opposite of gun safety: Any and all anti-gun legislation, promoted by political criminals and their minions.

None of their policies do anything for safety-- it's not even the real goal. In fact, those rules will make you less safe. Unless you are a political criminal, then you are probably safer if your victims are disarmed. But that's not a benefit to society.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

Keepin' it clean

There are members of my family I can't introduce to some of the best liberty advocates' ideas because of the language used by so many of them. George Carlin for example. He had some great points that need to be heard. But some people simply wouldn't listen past his first "$%&#".

I think it's a shame that they won't hear him out because the ideas expressed are valuable.

So many times I've wanted to share a post with someone in my family, but didn't because I knew the language would be all they focused on.

On the other hand, they still resist those I can share. For a variety of reasons. 

Still, that's why I try to "keep it clean", even though I'm not bothered by words. Of course, I'm not really a cusser (OK, not externally) so it's easy for me.

Of course, others are probably turned off by something I do, or the way I say things, and would prefer someone else's approach. That's fine. There are enough options that there's someone for (almost) anyone.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon

Let go of what doesn't work

I accept when things I want to work, don't. 

Rechargeable batteries are great. I use them for lots of things, but I have stopped using them for certain things because they just don't work very well. In a SHTF situation, they'll get me through when the better options run out, but for now I'd rather stick with what works better.

My electric car was fun. It worked adequately for most things. It wouldn't work at all for other things. There wasn't any point in denying it. With recent gasoline prices, I have wished I still had that car for short trips, even with its shortcomings.

A few years ago I decided to try shampooing with baking soda and apple cider vinegar. It sounded like a good idea. I gave it a year, then went back to commercial shampoo because the baking soda and vinegar didn't actually work very well, even though I really wanted them to work. Maybe if you had nothing else, it would be an alternative.

I've given up on certain CC guns and holsters, I have given up on particular gardening strategies, I have given up on specific relationships, I have given up on so many projects that couldn't get any traction, and I have given up on many dreams. I'll give it my best try, but if something just isn't going to work, I can face the reality of the situation and move on.

I'm not so attached to things I want to work, that I can't face it when they don't. If liberty didn't work, I would ditch it and try something else. 

Statists don't seem capable of giving up on something that doesn't deliver what was promised. Maybe what they promise is not what they really want, and it delivers what they want. Maybe, it "works" for them even though it doesn't do what they claim it will do because that's not even their desire or goal. In that case, they could just be honest about it. But they won't because statism is based on lies.

-

Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon