KentForLiberty pages

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Free parking? At what cost?

Free parking?  At what cost?

There ain't no such thing as a free (parking) space. The city of Albuquerque has "graciously" made parking free in some parts of the city. While it may seem nice, it is a trick.

The city is only doing this because the politicians believe they can get more money from you in the long run if you feel good about the free parking and buy things they can tax.

If the city really owns the streets (a debate I've covered before), then they would have the authority to charge for parking along those streets. However, the city never has any legitimate authority to tax your purchases and force the stores to be their "Sheriff of Nottingham" for them.

Don't be fooled, and adjust your behavior accordingly.
*
Donate?

Sunday, November 28, 2010

APD's 'tactical plan' for the holidays

APD's 'tactical plan' for the holidays


The Albuquerque Police Department is using a variety of scams to catch thieves this holiday season. This is probably one of the least offensive things the APD does with its time, other than eating donuts.

Yet, the reliance on cops causes crime. It is your duty to protect your own life and property. You can not delegate that responsibility to anyone else, no matter who they are, what they promise, or what they threaten you with if you refuse.

I am reminded of the "abandoned backpack" scam the APD was pulling recently. A scam that could have easily netted innocent people who sensibly didn't trust cops to return lost items to the rightful owners. The scams the cops are pulling this time do seem less likely to entrap innocents.

However, never forget that they are paying for this "tactical plan" with stolen money that could be put to better defensive uses by individuals- had they been allowed to keep it. It is not "better" for The State and its agents to be stealing your money to "protect" you from freelance thieves. This substitution sleight-of-hand gains you nothing. Socialism always fails, no matter what you call it or how you dress it up.
*
Donate?

Friday, November 26, 2010

A tale of two scam artists

A tale of two scam artists

There is a scam artist at work in Albuquerque who is targeting small businesses; talking people out of money for fake advertising for nonexistent events.

Yet, there is a much more serious scam artist targeting those same small businesses, and the larger ones as well, in addition to every resident. And this scam doesn't rely on smooth talk, but on the threat of violence to those who don't fork it over. The police will never look for this particular scam artist, since he collects the money that they get to take home.

The freelance scam artist is being sought, though. The State just doesn't like the competition.
*
Donate?

Trailer park to kids: 'Go play in the ditch."

Trailer park to kids: 'Go play in the ditch."


Property rights collide in Albuquerque again. A dad is upset that the trailer park manager suggests that resident kids cross a street and play beside a ditch rather than on the trailer park's streets or around other people's trailers.

I can see both sides. If kids are trespassing on the other resident's properties, or blocking traffic by playing in the streets, I can see that the other residents would get upset and demand that the manager "do something". On the other hand, to suggest that the kids cross a busier street to play in a ditch is just absurd. I wonder if he got permission from the ditch-property owner before making that suggestion.

The trailer park owner has a right to restrict use of the property that is not rented to a specific individual, and has an obligation to defend the property rights of those who rent from him. The renters have a right to defend their own rented property from trespassers of any age. Not every right you possess should necessarily be exercised in every situation. Probably this wouldn't have become an issue had the kids respected property rights to begin with, so the parents should emphasize that lesson, too. Of course, that means teaching the parents about property rights first.

I suggest a solution: Let the parents of the kids make an agreement among themselves as to letting the kids play in their respective yards and any other yards that might be offered for the purpose. Maybe there are some adjacent yards that could be used, with the owners' permission, for team sports. Then try to get the kids to agree to stay off other property and off the streets as much as possible, and inform them of the consequences if they don't.
*
Donate?

Libertarianism true love of freedom

Libertarianism true love of freedom

(My first column in the Clovis News Journal)

How does a kid grow up in a deeply conservative background, and become libertarian? Probably by taking those teachings to heart and realizing there can be no double standards without compromising the principles he was taught.

By internalizing the lesson that if someone is doing something you believe they shouldn't be doing- unless they are attacking, stealing, defrauding, or possibly trespassing- you have no right to do more than point out that you think they are doing wrong, ask them to reconsider their actions, and then let them make their own mistakes. You can't fix a minor wrong by committing a major wrong.

By realizing that there is no one else to blame when you choose to do the wrong thing and it goes badly.

By coming to the knowledge that if it is wrong to attack, kidnap, steal, and murder, it changes nothing if the acts are committed by people who work for The State and who call the acts "airport security", "arrest", "taxation", and "war".

By realizing you can't protect individual rights and property rights, the only legitimate justifications for any government, by violating those same rights in any way.

I was libertarian, with conservative tendencies, long before I knew what the word "libertarian" meant. I was called an "individualist". Once I began to really consider my beliefs, I began to eliminate the "conservative" inconsistencies that I had held on to. Like dominoes, they fell and toppled others as they went. Down went the racism; the nationalism; the hunger for punitive, false justice. Down went the support for The War on Drugs. I'm not saying that every non-libertarian has these same flaws, but these were mine. Other people have their own.

I came to see that you can't love liberty if you allow these things to persist in your life. Liberty is not a buffet where you can pick the parts you like for yourself, but toss away the rest to deny others their choice. That was a hard thing to learn.

So, when a jail inmate is said to be accidentally released from the county jail (or maybe not), or when the military wants to buzz regional private property, I try to dig below the emotion and rhetoric to get to the foundation. Such as, why was the shoplifter in jail rather than working to pay restitution? And, why does the military need even more land over which to train for a military occupation (or two, or ...?) which should never have begun? See, getting to the root clears up a lot of things.

Thursday, November 25, 2010

Be thankful and back it with action!

(This is my latest State Line Tribune column)

That time of the year is upon us where we are reminded to be thankful for the good things in our lives. Along with those things we normally think of, like family, friends, and health, do you think of the liberty that permits you to more fully enjoy those meaningful things?

Liberty is simply the freedom to exercise your rights. Without that freedom your rights would be meaningless. The State, at all levels, seeks to destroy your liberty, but it can not do so without your help, or at least without you doing it a favor by excusing or turning a blind eye toward its abuses. The only credible threat to liberty for the past couple hundred years has been, and still is, externally-imposed government- The State- no matter what phantom menace The State tries to promote for its own purposes and as a distraction.

It is hard, but not impossible, to fully enjoy family and friends, and to hold onto good health, when liberty is violated beyond a certain level. You'll probably never know where that line lies until it has been crossed. Don't permit even one more infringement on liberty for any reason or under any excuse. No justification is "good enough".

Thankfulness without action is empty. If you are truly thankful for liberty do something to prove it and don't assist its enemies, wherever they may dwell.

So be thankful for the liberty you have, grab onto even more, and be vigilant against its enemies so that next year at this special time you will still have liberty, and maybe even more liberty, to be thankful for.
*
Happy Communism-Repudiation Day!  Enjoy your harvest feast!

*
Donate?

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Opt-out for decency and liberty

Opt-out for decency and liberty


The Albuquerque Sunport is trying to hint that National Opt-Out Day will be a failure. Prove the Sunport managers, and their filthy co-conspirators of the Terrorist Support Agency (TSA), wrong. Better yet, boycott flying until security theater is scrapped and ONLY real security, armed passengers and crew, becomes the norm. Of course, this means kicking The State out of the airports completely, which sooner or later will be done anyway.

The Sunport claims to have "contingency plans" to deal with people standing up against tyranny. Well, I personally hope their "contingency plans" turn out to be as successful as a decision to use a six-foot step ladder to reach the moon after the only rocket on earth rusts away and is forgotten, due to "public education".

The TSA, and the very idea of security, is completely evil and wrong. They need to fail and be crushed, along with any business which supports them. Use the freedom you have left to choose to boycott flying. Bankrupt the airlines. Put the airports out of business. Use your right of association and shun anyone who has anything to do with the TSA or "airport security".

It is time to stand up. Will you be counted with the sniveling collectivists, or will you make the mature, self-responsible choice and defend this clearly visible line in the sand? Your liberty and the very lives of your kids is at stake. Don't blow it this time; you may never get another chance in your lifetime if you comply now.
*
Donate?

When is a gift not a gift?

When is a gift not a gift?
 
How can it be a gift if your money is stolen to pay for it, and a molester (or his familiar) gives it to you after violating you? Yet, this is just a part of what the state police and the Albuquerque badge-vermin are doing during their new checkpoint [sic] blitzkrieg.


The gift bags were actually handed out by those harpies of "Mothers" Morons Against Drunk Driving. (They are not just against "drunk driving" but any driving freedom at all, and against all alcohol consumption, or they wouldn't condone and advocate these "checkpoints" and wouldn't have advocated lowering the blood-alcohol levels to the point of meaninglessness.) The MADD cows may have handed out the bags, but DOT "bought" the bags with money taken from you.

Don't believe the lie: these "checkpoints" are not about "drunk driving" at all, and if alcohol (and every other intoxicant or relaxant) were to vanish overnight, The State would still find some bogus excuse to violate your right to travel without being robbed and molested. This is about asserting control over your life; nothing else.

These "gift" bags make me wonder- What's next? Wine and roses after a TSA "security" rape?


*
Donate?

Monday, November 22, 2010

TSA scanners: helping kill the Empire with idiocy and evil

TSA scanners: helping kill the Empire with idiocy and evil

It seems as though the TSA may just be a tipping point in bringing tyranny to the attention of some of the less-aware among us. Whether that awareness will last more than a week or two, or bring any return to sanity is anyone's guess.

The TSA's new invasive and dangerous scanners have become widely known as "porno-scanners" which indicates some people are waking up (although I still prefer my own terms of "pedophile-o-vision" and "molest-o-vision" since "porn" is consensual, but molestation isn't). And, if you choose to "opt out" of being photographed naked (a choice that may be denied to you soon), and not in a flattering pose to be sent to your sexting friends, you will be subject to a groping that would be illegal in any other non-consensual situation. Make no mistake, there is nothing consensual about the TSA's procedures.

Of course, some people claim that they "must" fly due to their job or situation. That's ridiculous. Would you claim you "must" allow yourself to be raped "for your job" in any other circumstance? If you value yourself and your family so little that you'll not stand up for yourself I pity you.

I suggest you Boycott Flying, and proclaim "We Won't Fly!". If you aren't willing to make a real stand, at least muck up the plans of those in TSA "authority" by participating in Opt Out Day. Or if that isn't your style and you had no plans to be flying anytime soon anyway, let a major business know why you can't take your children to their theme parks anymore, if that means subjecting them to the hands and eyes of the federal perverts, by writing a letter to just one targeted company.

I don't know, nor do I care, if Albuquerque's airport has the molest-o-vision machines. If not now; soon. (If you do know, feel free to leave a comment with the information in case someone does care.) Either way, I WILL NOT FLY until the idiots in government (redundancy alert) stop meddling with air transportation so that REAL security and safety can be implemented by everyone being able to carry the gun of their choice on board with no obstacles at all, other than (perhaps) type of ammo.  Anything less is "security theater".

*
Donate?

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Swastika branding not a good idea

Swastika branding not a good idea

Aggression is aggression, and whether it fits The State's definition of "hate" or not is irrelevant.

The Albuquerque news brings word of three "men" in Farmington who are charged with a "hate crime" for burning a swastika into the flesh of a supposedly "mentally disabled" victim.

It wouldn't make any difference if they had branded him with a happy face rather than with the pattern commonly known as a "swastika". That symbol has a very long history before the German "progressives" known as Nazis adopted it as their own. Nazis are a temporary cancer on the history of the world and you shouldn't let them define anything for the rest of us. The swastika is a sacred symbol to many Native Americans and others around the globe. If you automatically despise that symbol, you should also automatically hate the US flag since it has been adopted by the world's largest terrorist group and is flown over all occupied territories world-wide.

Anyone with any decency isn't going to brand another human being with anything, especially if there is any question as to whether the person understands the implications. If he wants to be branded, let him do it himself or ask to have it done. In that case, you'd better have a lot of witnesses around who can see for themselves that the man actually, really wants the brand and understands the pain it will cause, and the social implications of having it burned into his flesh for all to see from now on. If there is any question as to the person's ability to consent, then you had better be doubly sure before you agree to perform the procedure.

In any case, I sense coercion and I don't care whether "hatred" (as defined by The State) was a part of it or not. It seems obvious to me that hatred is at the core of all acts of coercion, whether committed by The State or by freelance individuals. Even if I am wrong there, hatred doesn't make any harm worse, nor would doing it in "love" make it any better.

The fact that the branders also shaved the symbol into the back of his hair and used a marker to write on his body shows me that their intent was to make the man an object of ridicule. This shows me that they are acting out of evil intent. But it is the reality of their actions, not their intentions, that form the basis of the harm they committed.  They owe restitution on a grand scale.
*
Donate?

Thursday, November 18, 2010

The tragedy of pumpkin vigilantism

The tragedy of pumpkin vigilantism

OK, so there is really no tragedy here. Unless you are the humiliated and sore burglar in question.

An Albuquerque man used an "assault pumpkin" to defeat a burglar. He is being called a "vigilante" and the LEOs (that perpetual burglar support crew) are busy saying people should just "give 'em what they want" rather than standing up for yourself when robbed. These cops say you should never take "the law" into your own hands. I agree in a way since "the law" is nothing but putrid fecal matter and it is shameful to be associated with it in any way, but that's the fault of "the law", not the fault of those who refuse to be victimized.

I do have one small suggestion for the "Punkin Chunker": He should probably offer to pay for the pumpkin he used, since he apparently trespassed and then took and used the pumpkin without permission. If it had been my pumpkin, however, I'd refuse payment; feeling the result was well worth the loss.


*
Donate?

Robber-officer suicide

Robber-officer suicide

Albuquerque's most recent bank robber killed himself when it became obvious he was caught. It would have been slightly more satisfying had an armed bank customer or employee fired the fatal shot. However, justice sometimes comes from strange directions.

The revelation that the dead robber had been working for The State as a prison guard at Los Lunas until his death shouldn't surprise anyone who recognizes the flawed personality traits that lead a person to seek unlimited power and control over others, a sense of entitlement, and a lack of empathy or ethics that are essential in either "career choice".

There's also a disturbing admission from the cops who surrounded the robber: "According to police, the suspect was driving out of control which justified the shooting of the truck's tires." Because we all know the solution to out-of-control driving is to have a sudden, violent blow-out. Right? Well, according to "cop-think" it is.
 
(I can't help but wonder, since the robber turned out to be an "Only One", what would have been the penalty for shooting him during his robbery?)

*
Donate?

New Writing Gig!

I just got a new writing gig with the Clovis News Journal (and the Portales News-Tribune), which are both Freedom Communications papers. 

Once a week, to be published in both papers simultaneously each Friday, and it doesn't pay much at all, but it still pays better than Examiner (so guess which will get priority).  They also want more length than Examiner does, and more depth.  Plus I still get paid even if I don't specifically mention the names of the towns.

I'm not allowed to post the content anywhere else for 30 days, but I will be posting the link to the column here as soon as it is online.

The Portales News-Tribune has been using some of my material recently, anyway.  This just makes it official.

Look for the first column next Friday.

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Drive-up robber service: I'm lovin' it?

Drive-up robber service: I'm lovin' it?

A disgusting parasite robbed an Albuquerque McDonald's drive up window Sunday evening. Follow the link and look at the guy. It's obvious he is scared senseless. As well he should be. (In addition to being dumb as dirt to let the camera get such a clear look at his face.) Someone out there knows him, and can make sure he'll never be able to do such a thing again and that the stolen property is returned to the rightful owner.

Speaking of justice- he is lucky there were no self-owning, responsible customers or staff present during his cowardly act of freelance taxation. Of course, since he robbed the drive up window, I suppose it would have been hard for customers inside to have seen what was going on. That's if anyone was even paying attention to their surroundings.

I can't help but think that anyone who complies with demands of a robber at a drive up window might be too compliant for their own good. Where's a big vat of extremely hot oil when you need one?
*
Donate?

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Questions arise in detective's crash

Questions arise in detective's crash


An Albuquerque police detective crashed his unmarked, stealth copmobile into a stop sign and through a bush before it came to rest near a home's garage. It is only fitting that this happened on Halloween weekend since he claims the cause was a phantom car that caused him to swerve before it disappeared. OK, so he claims the car was real and that it drove away, but there seems to be no sign of this car except in his report.

The LEOs who investigated the crash said they saw no signs that the detective had been drinking, but we all know cops see what they've been trained to see. And one thing they are definitely not trained to see (or perhaps, trained to not see) is another cop doing something wrong.

It seems suspicious to me that the news took over a week to surface. What does APD have to hide? That's not the only oddity, either. The wreck happened at 6AM, but the investigation seeks to discover "what actually took place that evening". I guess the mysterious Halloween spirit is real, and haunting the Albuquerque Police Department. Boo!

*
Donate?

Control-freaks to 'discuss' the future of the internet

Control-freaks to 'discuss' the future of the internet

The future of the internet will be debated, and no doubt endangered, on November 16 in Albuquerque at a public hearing with Federal (Prevention of Free) Communications Commissioner, Michael Copps.

Rest assured, as if you had any doubt, that when anyone in government discusses "the future" of the internet or anything else, they are not speaking of leaving it alone to thrive or wither on its own. They are talking about taking control so that they can meddle or ration the resource in whatever way they feel is best for "the common good". And planning on making you pay for the privilege of having your liberty violated. This is always bad for for individuals.

It is also illegal according to the First Amendment, as if that would ever stop them. You are the enforcement clause of your rights. Don't look to a piece of old, faded paper to do your job for you.
*
Donate?

Monday, November 15, 2010

Results of elections

Results of elections

With every election I have ever heard of, the results are always the same: Liberty loses and The State wins. If you are even the slightest bit aware, you already know that will happen since the system is rigged.

I have zero faith that the "Tea Party-backed" politicians who won their elections will do anything but increase the breadth and depth of government. They may focus their efforts in different areas than the Democrats have been- I expect more religious justifications for violating liberties of Americans, more "patriotic" justifications for the cult of border-worship and the related demonization of hispanic immigrants in particular, and a mix of the two excuses for the endless parade of US-sponsored terrorism Orwellishly called "The War on Terror". All, historically proven Big Government favorites.

Believe it or not, this never-changing course makes me smile to myself. It isn't as hopeless as you might think if you were counting on liberty to be saved by an election (which is a ridiculous notion). The reason is that these election results are only the "official, government sanctioned results". The reality is that The State, with the help of its supporters, is killing itself bit by bit with each election. It loses more true-believers every day, and I don't think they are being replaced as fast as they are leaving. Even I used to vote.

I believe voting for a candidate is wrong, but that running for office, if you are a hard-core libertarian or anarchist, is a very good thing. I know, it sounds contradictory. But it isn't.

First of all, hard-core libertarians and anarchists aren't going to vote. Not for you or for anyone else. But, lots of very good, "almost there" folk will. And it is better to give those people a real alternative rather than allowing them to waste their vote on a statist shill. Also it is good to remember that there are a lot of really stupid voters out there who haven't got a clue who any candidate is or what they stand for and can't think deeply enough to even question the legitimacy of the system. It is good to funnel off some of those votes into a harmless candidate.

So, if you are a radical, hard-core libertarian or an anarchist who has the inclination, and you feel like dealing with the violations and scrutiny, go ahead and run for office under whichever party's banner you want. Just don't expect your own guys to vote for you.

In Albuquerque news: ABQ LEOs have shot 13 people so far this year; killing nine of them. At least the dead avoided being charged with the counterfeit "crime" of "aggravated assault against an officer" after being shot, because, you know, it's so violent to make a poor innocent LEO shoot you. They'd so much rather kill you in less obvious ways. I'm sorry, but the disingenuousness from these parasites just infuriates me.

*
Donate?

Sunday, November 14, 2010

The State- the definition

"The State"* is the term used to encompass the entirety of the concept of externally-imposed, coercive government, whether a small, local town council, or a global empire.

It is (obviously) composed of individuals who might or might not be enthusiastic about committing acts of evil on their own, but by working together under the myth of the legitimacy of authoritarianism, they can do nothing else. There is nothing good about "The State". It is, and always has been, criminal.

*Capitalized in order to ridicule The State's empty self-importance.


.

Saturday, November 13, 2010

Free-range idiots- they are out there

As a result of the recent election, the "localish" city government was denied the bond issues they were pushing to build a new jail and courthouse. A couple of days later one commissioner was quoted in the paper as saying: “Tell us how to do it. If somebody out there in TV land or somebody that comes to the meetings has an idea (we want to hear it).” and “We need the public’s help. As our bosses, what do you want us to do?”

So, I posted the following:

I have my doubts you really want "help and solutions", but you did ask:

#1- Stop enforcing counterfeit "laws" (those which have no specific, individual, victim- "society" can't be a victim). No drug "laws", no gun "laws", no prostitution "laws". If someone commits theft, aggression, or fraud, using these or any other things as an excuse, prosecute the actual wrong acts, not the silly "crimes" that are simply based on emotional/religious ideas of what people "ought not do".

#2- The focus of any real justice system must be restitution, not imprisonment. Jailing a thief doesn't restore the victim to his pre-crime condition (what real "justice" is all about). In most cases, it doesn't help the victim of an attack, either.

#3- Let people defend themselves with the correct, fully-functional tools designed for defense, everywhere they may go without fear of becoming a victim of the "justice system".


Surprisingly, and not in any way usual, my comment only got two replies. One of lukewarm agreement (who only slightly missed what I was saying by stating that "...I do believe certain individuals ... should be jailed for an appropriate time."), and a much more typical response.

That one demonstrated very clearly what people with functioning brains are up against. He said:

"Yes, stop enforcing laws. That'll show em! That'll totally make this place safe and crime free. You're right dullhawk (apt screename), cutting assault and robbery rates is easy when you make assault and robbery legal."

Did the idiot even read what I wrote, or is he just too stupid to comprehend the written word? Pinheads like this are why I sometimes wonder if it's even worth the effort.

*
Donate?

Friday, November 12, 2010

Cops found "not guilty" of fabricating evidence

Cops found "not guilty" of fabricating evidence

Three cops who were accused of fabricating evidence against two suspects in a particularly cruel multiple murder case have been cleared by a jury. The "Torreon cabin murders" happened in December 1995, sixty five miles southeast of Albuquerque.

Of course they were cleared. Juries almost always find cops "not guilty". Yet, the preponderance of evidence shows that cops are more likely to be bad guys than the general population. They are not trustworthy. They have more in common with those in prison for crimes of extreme violence than they have in common with you or me. The job attracts damaged people who like to hurt others, yet are too afraid of doing it without the guns of The State backing them up to go freelance. Cowardly bullies with a cruel streak and a badge are a bad combination. Until police are reined in again, it is inevitable.

There are so many cases where cops fabricated evidence, lied under oath, filed false reports, and tampered with the crime scene for their own purposes that I wouldn't trust a LEO's version of events unless I saw the crime happen and the cop's version matched what I witnessed exactly.

So, did the cops really fabricate the evidence? Probably. But no one but the cops and those they accused will ever know the truth. Did those they tried to trap actually play some role in the murders? There is no way to know for sure.

It is important to know who really commits acts of aggression. Knowing the truth is much more important than getting a conviction or fooling the public into thinking you are "doing something". Real bad guys will eventually pay (sooner than later, if the right to own and to carry firearms were respected) with or without cops lying to catch them.

*
Donate?

Monday, November 08, 2010

New comments on an old post

I would like to draw your attention to some new comments on an old post. I am not being very "pragmatic" in my defense of liberty. Anyway, go here and read the rest of the comments.

Friday, November 05, 2010

The Fifth of November...


Remember, remember the Fifth of November,

The Government's tyrannical Plot,

I know of no reason

Why the Government's Treason

Should ever be forgot.

President, Congress, t'was their intent

To violate rights; our money they spent.

Thousands of laws, each a new crime;

Liberty, it seems, had run out of time.

Elections were held to pacify some,

A new batch of scoundrels to Washington come.

Wake up, wake up, your life is your own!

Wake up, wake up, YOU sit on the throne!

And how shall we live? In true liberty!

Thursday, November 04, 2010

Property rights: absolute with one limit

Property rights: absolute with one limit

Yes, I said long ago that I had written my last word on the Bubble Theory of Property Rights. Well, it keeps rearing its head, and the more I examine the concepts and counter-arguments, the more sure I am of where I stand. That still doesn't mean I am right.


Property rights are absolute (even if The State acts as if they are not). Property rights have only one limit: they end where the property ends. You can't claim ownership of your neighbor's house just because it is adjacent to your property, even if your property is completely surrounding his property and he must parachute to his house from deep space in order to avoid crossing your land. Your property lines are where your property rights end in this example. Those who own land in the middle of national forests still retain ownership of their own property (even if the feds aren't happy about it and seek to violate those property rights in myriad ways).

The same goes for smaller units of property such as a house or business and an individual allowed to enter that property. If you allow me to come onto your property, my body does not become your property even though it is engulfed by your property. My property "bubble" extends to the outer surface of my clothing because my clothes are still my clothes even if you allow me, and them, on your property. Your property rights end at my surface, and do not penetrate any deeper. So, anything beneath the surface of my clothes, as long as it remains only there, is occupying only my property even if I am surrounded and engulfed by your property at your permission.

You can insist I leave my rights behind if I enter your property, but the demand is no more valid than the demand that I become your unwilling sex slave if I enter your property. Slavery or murder is not OK just because you "only" do it on your own property. Now, obviously, anyone evil enough to make the demand that you relinquish your rights in order to enter their property is someone you should avoid if at all possible. It is better to avoid putting yourself in these situations if you can. You can cooperate or not as you see fit, but I don't consider it noble to kowtow to bad guys.

Added as clarification: It's not so much that I think I have a right to carry a concealed weapon onto other people's property, it is that I don't believe I have a right to forbid such on my own property. If I invite someone, I invite them as a sovereign individual with all their rights fully intact. I have no right to regulate what is in their pockets as long as it stays there in every way.

* * *

A federal jury in Albuquerque has convicted a Rio Rancho man of the "crime" of being a "convicted felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition". They've obviously never heard of FIJA.org.

The man was charged in the case in June 2009 after a cop stopped his car and during an undoubtedly unethical violation of property rights, found a .40-caliber pistol and ammunition in a computer bag.

Why was he stopped? Why did the cop illegally search the car? And why, if the man is still a danger who can't be trusted with a gun, was he running free? Anyone who can't be trusted with a gun can't be trusted. And rights can never be "lost".

On top of this, one of the two "felonies" he was previously convicted for was probably not even wrong. "Aggravated assault on an officer" is one of those false crimes that anyone who doesn't bow to a LEO's puffed-up "authority" quick enough, and is then put in a position of having to defend oneself from an attack by the authority-crazed cop, could be charged with.

*
Donate?

Wednesday, November 03, 2010

Tribal leaders make bad ruling

Tribal leaders make bad ruling

The leaders of the Jemez Pueblo, northwest of Albuquerque, have banned a newspaper from tribal land because they think it sensationalized a story on a murder.

The tribal leaders claim they are exempt from the First Amendment. I agree, since the Bill of Rights only applies to governments of the US. I'm all in favor of governments not being affiliated or cooperative with that particular criminal organization.

However the tribal leaders are not exempt from the laws of right and wrong, and freedom of speech (and the press) still exists just as fully at the pueblo as anywhere else. Rights are no more subject to tribal "law" than to Federal "law". It doesn't matter if you are talking the right of free speech, the right of freedom of the press, the right of freedom of religion, the right of owning and carrying guns, the right to not testify against yourself, or anything else. "Laws" can never repeal even the most trivial right. A right doesn't cease to exist just because you happen to own (or control) property and you don't like the right.

By trying to violate freedom of the press they are exposing themselves as unworthy of the title of "leader" and are acting as Rulers instead. They are committing evil just as much as any government does when engaging in the same, wrong, acts. Individuals can decide, on an individual basis, whether they want to buy the paper or not. Try to convince them to boycott, don't use coercion.

*
Donate?

Liberty's false friends

Liberty's false friends

You can't get more, or more complete, liberty for yourself by restricting it for others. Liberty is an interconnected web. Pull one thread and the entire structure is damaged.

"Immigration" is a good example. It shows why the Tea Party crowd is not helpful to liberty. You can't claim to be for liberty, but then advocate for government to be more powerful in "just one area"; more government control, but only when you "really want it". It always damages all liberty.

You also can't claim you are for liberty, but be enthusiastic about the government-controlled military. It doesn't work that way. The more powerful and bigger the government's military is, the more exceptions liberty suffers, and the more enemies the military creates to threaten you.

A lot of the Tea Party folk claim that these aspects of government power enhance liberty, after all, their justification goes, you can't be free if your country has been invaded and overrun. Yet, the country has already been invaded (by an ideology- collectivism) and overrun (by statists and authoritarians whose goals are the opposite of liberty). These are a greater
danger to your real, livable liberty than all the "terrorists" in the entire world could ever dream of being.

Add to these travesties the War on (some) Drugs, government-sanctioned or rationed marriage, entitlements, "gun control" that even Tea Partiers say is "reasonable", favoring one primitive and violent religion over another primitive and violent religion, the taxation that Tea Partiers are saying is "enough" rather than admitting it is ALL theft, and all the "required" permits, licenses, red tape, and other government violations of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... it adds up.

One example of those violations of rights and liberty that Tea Partiers are generally OK with: Two massage parlors in Albuquerque were raided and shut down yesterday by LEOs- for prostitution. Consensual trade, "even" in sexual gratification, between responsible, self-owning people is no one else's business. "Laws" attempting to control, forbid, or regulate
it are counterfeit "laws" and it is wrong to advocate or enforce such "laws". (Any "legitimate" massage provider who tipped off the LEOs to the prostitution should be shunned into bankruptcy. It isn't as if they were actual competitors... or were they?)

I'm certainly not perfect, and I have my preferences and opinions. Yet I recognize that liberty is the closest to "perfect" there is, and I can set aside my petty short-term desires to work toward that which I really want. Liberty for ALL, which includes me and those I love. You can't damage your enemy's liberty without doing damage to your own. This is a textbook example of "cutting off your nose to spite your face". It is just a simple truth, and it just isn't worth it.

When Tea Partiers, or anyone else who claims to value liberty, supports these enemies of liberty and their anti-liberty agenda it shows they haven't thought it through, or they are lying.

*
Donate?

Monday, November 01, 2010

You've got better things to do than vote

You've got better things to do than vote

And here are a few things to remind yourself of that truth in case you get tempted to play the rigged game:

* * *

"They're quick and slick, they're insincere..."
Yes, I know that line was originally referring to heffalumps and woozles, but it applies at least equally well to Democrats and Republicans (or any politician for that matter). You'll be surprised at how appropriate to politics this little song is. (I'm surprised no one has ever put the song to photos and clips of politicians who fit every description in the song.) Enjoy it and pay attention to the words: Heffalumps and Woozles.

* * *

From the blog of Kevin Wilmeth, the former and greatly missed Anchorage Libertarian Examiner, comes this explanation of how to (bring yourself to) vote on Election Day.

* * *

Feel free to Mock the Vote from wherever you happen to find yourself when the thought crosses your mind. Don't bother going to the polls to do it, or the vote will be mocking YOU.

* * *

For those of you interested in a local angle, here's an article by the amazing Will Grigg on a home-grown Albuquerque thug. An absolutely disgusting excuse for a human, but it's good to be aware that these parasites walk among us. People like this show why voting will never increase your liberty. You will still be forced to resist and break thugs of this sort at some point if liberty is to be rescued. Might as well get used to the idea.

* * *

I think, for my own amusement, I'll print out, on adhesive paper, the "button" I made to illustrate this article and wear it when I go out today. Feel free to use it, too, if you want.

*
Donate?

Election day approaches- Avoid the trap (Don't vote!)

Election day approaches- Avoid the trap

I'm completely serious: Don't vote!

I'm not even saying you shouldn't vote because it lends a false air of legitimacy to an illegitimate system. Or because it encourages them- the control-freaks- to keep on "governing" as long as people keep consenting to be governed. I won't point out that if non-voting were not a threat to the illegitimate system, they wouldn't keep pressing that idea of "It doesn't matter WHO you vote for, just VOTE!" I won't even tell you you shouldn't vote because it is wrong for a majority to violate the rights of even one person.

Those are all true, of course, but not why I say today "Don't vote".

There are more practical reasons. Such as voting is an utter waste of your time. You could always find something more meaningful to be doing. The system is completely and totally rigged, and you can not improve the quality of your life one iota, in Albuquerque or anywhere else, by voting. Don't vote!

If you have any brains, yet vote anyway, your vote will be drowned out by the vast numbers of voters who are clueless idiots and vote with their feelings. That's how Mr. Hopenchange got elected, you know. And how Mr. "Withus-er-with-the-terrerists" got elected before that. While most people mean well, most people are not smart enough or aware of reality enough that they should be deciding anything for anyone else, even if doing so were not wrong. They feel that new "laws" will actually help people, and they allow themselves to be led down whatever path the Rulers point them toward. Don't be like them. Don't vote.

No candidate who would actually be a threat to the status quo will ever be allowed to take office, if they even manage to get on the ballot and then get enough votes counted in their favor to win. Never. Democrats and Republicans have the game fixed. Tea Party Republicrats are not serious about smaller government, except on the socially "conservative" (and still completely statist) issues they value, and LP candidates who are on the ballot are not going to be rogue enough to change anything, and may even be statist wolves in libertarian clothing. Even if they are liberty-embracing good guys, they will be powerless while the rest of the establishment politicians and bureaucrats conspire to fight over who gets to control the rudder of the government train while knowing that whoever wins the election, the train will stay on the tracks. If one side [sic] wins, they will advance their own anti-liberty agenda for a while, until the other side [sic] wins, and then an anti-liberty agenda coming from a different direction will be advanced. It's just like being swallowed by a snake. Yet there are some agenda items that remain the same through it all. Such as The War on (some) Drugs and the War on Guns. And theft in the name of entitlements and military spending. Police State USA will never be threatened by those working within the system.

Don't vote!

Even in cases where you feel you are voting in self defense such as against a tax or for "legalization" of marijuana, if the results are unpleasant enough for the government or take away some power, the results will be ignored. "Legalizing" pot, but then "taxing and regulating" it is no real improvement. You are just shifting the enforcement power to a different branch of government. And that power will still be used to steal money, and to kidnap and kill innocent people. Remember that "gun control", such as the National Firearms Act of 1934, wasn't originally a ban on functional firearms and safety equipment, but a "tax" scheme. Look how many people have been destroyed or killed through that.

Don't waste your time voting. Actually do something real, and ignore or violate the results of the election in whatever way you can until the train of The State goes off the cliff. Jump off now while you still can. Don't vote.

Since it is claimed that government exists by the consent of "the governed", remove your consent by refusing to participate in the rigged game that is placed before you. I do NOT consent. I will not be legitimizing those who seek to use you for Soylent Green. I will not be asking that force be used against you just because you are in the "minority". Not on my behalf! I will not be voting.

Join me. Don't vote.

*
Donate?