“I wish there were more rules”

And this is why we can’t have nice things.

This town may be threatening to impose a lot more property rules on the residents. Seeking to punish anything they subjectively don't want to see. Things like "disrepair", "clutter", and so forth.

I overheard two people talking about this, and one of them- from another town- said about her town, "I wish there were more rules". Then went on to complain about a neighbor who uses his property in a way that she doesn't approve of. She is burdened by what she sees when looking in that direction.

The one from here was practically salivating over all the potential violations she can see around town, saying, "They won't be getting away with this anymore".

This attitude disgusts me.

People have a right to use their property as they see fit- as long as doing so doesn't violate someone else's REAL rights to life, liberty, and property. Being offended by seeing something isn't a violation of your rights. It's a character problem.

"But it brings down property values." Good. Then property taxes will be lower.

There's hardly a house in town that wouldn't be targeted for one thing or another, mine included. And since it's subjective, there's really no way to anticipate what's going to get under the mayor's saddle. We've gone through various enforcement obsessions, where the current rulers get tough on one ridiculous thing or another for a year or so, until they pick something else to be up in arms about, and forget about the previous emergency enforcement situation.

I'm already mad at the town rulers for vandalizing two streets this past week by installing "speed bumps". What's next? Flock spyware?

If the town does go through with it, I will be photographing every "violation" at the mayor's property and putting it online. Yes, I will go to war.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Independence Day, 250 years later

I want to celebrate Independence Day, but anymore it feels like a memorial service rather than a real celebration. It's like gathering around an autopsy for a cookout.

The United States government is much, MUCH worse than the British government was in 1776. Worse than that ambitious government ever dreamed of being. With higher taxes, more meddling, and more presence. Greater evil.

Most “patriots” pretend otherwise. 

I get it. People want to celebrate, and they want to ignore unpleasant realities. They resent those who have a realistic understanding of the situation.

And the Declaration of Independence is celebration-worthy. If only they had meant it. The Constitution showed that they didn't. They wanted a State to sit on the world stage more than they valued independence and loved liberty. "Everyone else is doing it!" So that's what they got. That's what they saddled us with. And it has metastasized into this global Empire we see all around us today.

Make a "patriot" comfortable. Forget independence. "Happy Fourth."

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to subscribe or donate?

Unethical laws that prevent help

Someone was posting on a local social media site about an injured hawk they'd found, and lamenting that there are no local resources to help.

They made calls to several agencies; no one would help, but everyone reminded them it was illegal to keep the hawk.

Government is garbage.

Back when I did a lot of wildlife rescue, I didn't ask permission. I didn't talk about what I was doing. I knew it was "illegal", but I didn't care. I even had state wildlife officials bring me an injured bird of prey once. And he recovered and went free about a month later.

Yes, it was more common for "authorities" to look the other way back then. They are much worse now.

I didn't volunteer to help this person, since their social media post has made the situation public- even more public than calling around asking for help had already done. Plus, they said they had done as they were told and released the hawk to its fate.

When the laws are wrong, good people ignore the laws and bad people enforce the laws.

I did reply to the post, suggesting they keep "authorities" out of the loop and not post about such things in the future, but just do what they can to help. I know the group's resident copsucker will tell me to stay out of it because it's none of my business (she's done it before).

-

Thank you for reading.
Subscribe or donate.

The Statist "solution"

The foundational statist lie is that if you don't want government involved in everyone's life, you "don't care" about them.

One such example from one of statism's brightest:
"The libertarian solutions (all of them) come down to a simple one-liner, 'Just let the poor people die.'"

As opposed to the statist solutions (all of them), which come down to, "People are government's property; kill them if they resist".

Yeah, that's so much more caring. Right? LOL

-

Thank you for reading.
Subscribe or donate.

Liberty and "safety" both have costs

Whenever anyone calls for "common sense gun regulation" to "keep people safe", then whips out the zinger that if you don't agree with them, you "don't care if children die", a thought starts forming in my head. This is my attempt to flesh it out.

When my daughter Cheyenne was killed by a drug-impaired driver, I was devastated. But I didn't start being in favor of prohibition, checkpoints, or vehicle kill-switches to make sure no one is allowed to drive impaired. Those measures also kill people, destroy individual liberty, and violate individual rights. The trade-off isn't worth it. (Plus, none of the liberty-killing measures that are already imposed saved her anyway.)

Weak, unethical people advocate violating the rights of others because tragedy has touched them personally. They disgust me more than I can express. It's personal.

I am sad that my daughter was killed, but life in a police state isn't worth living. Liberty is dangerous. The dangers of liberty are obvious. The dangers of "safety" are often hidden from you until it's too late.

There are those who respect your liberty and your rights, and there are those who want you controlled. They may say it's for your own good, for the good of society, for the safety of children, or for the good of the nation. It's not.

There is no "good" in those excuses, and any "safety" is counterbalanced by the dangers and deaths they'll pretend don't happen. Or, that the victim "deserved" for not surrendering their autonomy to the State.

Yes, if you respect people's rights, some innocent people will die. Imposing "safety" on society just shifts the deaths somewhat; it doesn't prevent them. Some different people will die as a result. But you won't be guilty of violating everyone's rights in a misguided attempt to "save" some while sacrificing others.

It's easier to find (and lie about) the actual deaths which have occurred; it's harder to come up with realistic numbers of how many will die in the future from your "safety" rules. 

It's also easy for them to ignore those who have died in the past through the enforcement of that type of rule.

Liberty is worth the costs; slavery... not so much.

-

Thank you for reading.
Would you care to tip me? 

If not, that’s OK.

Counterfeit "law" will be the downfall of the State

I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it: If the state keeps cracking down on liberty, making more and more normal activities "illegal", then it will be more and more a badge of honor to be an outlaw.

The more things they turn into "crimes", the less respect the "normies" will have for their "laws". Some might even end up having contempt for "the law" like I do.

Not contempt for real Law, but for legislation and arbitrary government rules; counterfeit "laws". 

Government supremacists get very upset over me pointing out counterfeit "laws"- they demand to know how I can arbitrarily decide which laws are real and which ones aren't. 

But it's not arbitrary at all. 

If they weren't so concerned with defending a criminal organization and its evil rules, they could see it for themselves. Counterfeit "law" is having consequences, and those will only get more obvious. I don't expect the State's addiction to counterfeit "law" to be cured. I expect it to get worse. I expect more and more people to gradually start seeing it for what it is. I expect less and less respect for "the law" over time.

Statists (and Statanists) have only themselves to blame, but they'll never face reality. They'll try to put the blame everywhere but on themselves. It will be their downfall. It can't happen soon enough.

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips, please. 

If not, that’s OK.

More laws equivalent of more crime

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for January 14, 2026)

Trying to solve crime with authoritarian government, more laws, and stricter enforcement is like trying to keep someone healthy by stuffing them in a coffin and burying them alive. Yet, this is the first move politicians make when they see a problem.

Turning to government and its laws is a sign your society has failed, and the unfortunate fact is that this only causes more crime in the long run. As the Chinese philosopher Laozi pointed out over two thousand years ago, "The more numerous the laws, the more thieves and robbers there will be".

If you prefer Western thought to Eastern wisdom, Roman historian Tacitus is said to have observed, “The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government.”

Whoever said it, it's true. It has always been true, and it remains so today. Only, can we finally admit it's not "corruption", but government working exactly as designed?

Once you realize government is made up of thieves and robbers, you'll see reality.

If more things are made illegal, the "crime rate" will inevitably go up, even if the amount of actual crime- individual rights violations- stays the same or goes down. All recent laws, and the majority of older ones, are aimed at making things which aren't real crimes, and have no individual victim, illegal; treating them the same as actual crimes.

Even when laws are directed at acts which violate life, liberty, or property, they are often focused on the wrong things. Like focusing on "gun culture" because political criminals and ignorant activists hate tools, instead of looking at crime culture and its behavior. Or punishing acts which violate no one, but which make politicians, their hired guns, and tyranny's cheerleaders uncomfortable. Like crossing unowned land, buying or selling products or services, or keeping your property hidden from thieves.

If the penalty for doing something which is only illegal, but not ethically wrong, is the same as (or worse than) the penalty for doing something which does have an individual victim, you brainwash some people into believing there's no real difference. They might as well do their worst.

This introduces rot into the foundation of your society, weakening it from the ground up. When it crumbles, those who cheered this behavior will wonder what happened and look for someone else to blame. Well, it's happening, and it's accelerating. I know where the fault lies, and now, so do you.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

Government wants to keep you poor

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for December 3, 2025)

The quickest way to destroy innovation and cripple the economy is to "address" a new idea, or an old idea reborn, with government control.

Short-term rentals, like Airbnb and Vrbo, are in the crosshairs of local politicians, and this isn't a positive development. Letting strangers stay in your home for a few nights, for a fee, is an ancient use of personal property; the internet simply gave it a boost. There's no need for new ordinances, or the use of existing ordinances, to regulate it.

If a short-term rental next door creates a violation of your life, liberty, or property, there are already ethical ways to handle it without government getting preemptively involved. Zoning laws themselves are a violation of property rights.

Politicians have no right to decide which peaceful, voluntary businesses you're allowed to run. In a free country, this meddling wouldn't be tolerated. Such government overreach hurts us all in the long run.

Legitimacy doesn't come from official recognition. Government attention is poison to innovation. Look at Bitcoin: the moment government began paying attention, regulators attacked it with taxes, rules, and other interference. This destroyed much of the freedom and utility of cryptocurrency. Keep your filthy government off my life!

Government doesn't need a process to smother every human activity. Life doesn't need to be micromanaged by politicians. Liberty- freedom tempered with responsibility- is enough. The market regulates itself when freed from government meddling. Dishonest companies go broke without government protecting them from competition or from cheated customers. Anyone seeking government protection from competition or consequences is in the wrong. Monopolies can only persist with government help. Irresponsible individuals never learn to be better when protected from consequences, or from their victims, by government rules.

Those who believe "there oughta be a law" are the people who see any remaining liberty as a loophole that must be closed. Liberty's enemies are on both sides of the law- freelance crooks and suit-wearing officials- and it's your responsibility to defend it from them all.

A chilling realization is that government would rather keep you poor with arbitrary rules, and then toss you crumbs financed with money they stole from your neighbors, than to get out of your way and allow you to build your own future with your mind and muscles. A future of responsible self-sufficiency and abundance moves government from being a crutch to being recognized as the broken leg. This terrifies them.

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips, please...

The real purpose of the Supreme Court

Statists believe the Supreme Court is there to discern whether or not legislation (or a government policy) is constitutional.

I know the Supreme Court exists to find excuses that allow unconstitutional legislation and policies to stand.

We are not the same.

And, no. One team isn't better on this than the other. Both are disgusting in their desire to violate the liberty they don't like.

(Grok wouldn't follow my directions to accurately portray actual current Supreme Courtjesters. In fact, it tried to give me only white men in the image. I prefer to ridicule the actual bufoons as they are. Oh well.)

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips are nice.

Relationship Rules- town level

Our Relationship Rules:

• You can own property only as long as you use it the way I say. You won't build anything I don't want, and you have to get my permission to build anything at all or operate a business on it. And I may not give that permission. Also, you'd better keep your landscaping up to my standards.
• You can't rent a room to strangers unless you pay me for permission.
• You aren't allowed to open a business to make money unless you get my permission and pay me.
• I'll decide how you dispose of your trash and who is allowed to haul it away for you (unless you just toss it in the street, apparently). And if you throw trash away that I want you to send to a possibly fake recycling business, instead, I may punish you.
• You'll only use the kind of bags I allow you to use when carrying your purchased goods home.
• I'll decide what kind of noise I'll allow, and how loud it can be. You have to be quiet, but I can be loud enough to burst your eardrums, if I want. I may play favorites, too. My friends will be allowed to bother you all night long with noise, as long as they are my friends.
• You'll have to trim your trees for my convenience. Even if it makes them ugly or kills them. And there will be some trees I won't allow you to have growing on your property, if I decide they are invasive. Even if the trees I plant are just as invasive and harmful. The rules apply to you, not me!
• You have to pay me for everything you do. For everything you own. It's only right because I'll claim I provide you with "services"- which I'll claim monopoly power over. You don't want to be a slacker who doesn't pay for the services I provide, do you?
• One of those services is my gang of hired guns. More than I could possibly need, but as a show of force to keep you in line. Also, to indoctrinate children into believing in "Officer Friendly".
• If your child misses "too many" days at my indoctrination camp, I may rob you or put you in a cage until you change your wicked ways.
• You can only have as many pets as I say. You can only have the kind of pets I allow. And, since I don't know anything about animals or pets, the rules I decide on may not make any sense, but you can't complain or get me to change my mind. My power to control you matters more than anything else.

Your loving companion,

City Hall

Here are the federal relationship rules, and the state relationship rules.
Government is government, to a large extent. Many of these rules are imposed and enforced by multiple governments. All evil.
There's a lot of overlap. It's probably impossible to list all the rules every governing body dreams up, and fortunately, the local government doesn't inflict all these rules on those who live here. And, the specific rules they care about enforcing seem to change with the winds. 

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips are nice.

Smart about politics

Most people who believe they are smart about politics are really just pragmatic statists without principles. 

That doesn't look smart at all. 

It looks useful to the rulers.
It looks handy for the criminals.
It looks profitable for the lawyers and bureaucrats. 
It looks like a jobs program for fake economists and other "experts".

But "smart"?

-

Thank you for reading.
Gold, Silver, and Bitcoin are nice tips.

Socialist politicians take note

Any "affordability" that doesn't take the cost of taxation and regulation into account is a lie.

-

Thank you for reading.
Donations always appreciated

"... similar to Communism in how it ignores reality"

Statists love to equate libertarianism and anarchism with communism. They believe this comparison gives them an automatic win. Far from it.

Some guy got upset that I said "ALL government is The Ancestral Enemy" (in response to an eye-patched political criminal). He thought he had squeezed out a gotcha with his quip that "Libertarianism is anarchy with extra steps", and went on to try to associate it with communism, as they so often try to do.

I asked him to explain. This was his attempt.

"When you decentralize a society and implement what is de facto mob rule, you will always have chaos and crime. Libertarian principles will never save the day, because order must be enforced. The solution is centralized authority, which is why it always comes back in the end."

That's an awful lot of straw men and assumptions in one paragraph.

Let me break it down bit by bit.

"When you decentralize a society and implement what is de facto mob rule, you will always have chaos and crime."

How odd that he believes decentralization is "de facto mob rule". What, like v*ting leads to? He's the one promoting someone ruling others, not me. I want everyone to rule himself. I know some wouldn't, just like they don't under government now. There's an ethical solution to that: defense of life, liberty, and property from all violators.

No matter what, there will always be chaos and crime. Always. Regardless of the "system" you implement. I've never seen an example of a government that doesn't have (or promote) chaos and crime. Not one. An argument that fails this hard shouldn't keep being dredged up. But it's one of their favorites, so they can't let it go. I’ve never heard of even one libertarian who expected liberty to result in Utopia; this is strictly something statists demand of it. And something they would never expect of their own “system “.

"Libertarian principles will never save the day, because order must be enforced."

Non sequitur, and it's wrong anyway.

Libertarian principles save the day all the time. Without them, there's no such thing as society. They provide just the right amount of order- not too much and not too little. 
They work for me every day, in every way. I've never encountered a situation that could be improved by violating libertarian principles.

Do they make life perfect? No. Nothing does. Including government. This is an attempt to excuse violating others just because the alternative you don't like isn't perfect.

Some order must be enforced, yes. Within limits. Too much order is just as deadly as too little. There is a balance, and that balance is anarchy- or libertarianism, if you prefer. Why does he believe a criminal organization that exempts its members from the rules it imposes on the rest of us is the proper way to enforce order? Why is he so addicted to order? It is each individual's responsibility to protect life, liberty, and property- to enforce ethical order. That statists try to abdicate this responsibility to government doesn't change anything. Not a single thing. 

"The solution is centralized authority, which is why it always comes back in the end."

That sounds an awful lot like the communism he was trying to smear libertarianism with. When I mentioned this, he claimed it is a "false equivalency".

"Authority" is The Most Dangerous Superstition. The reason it "comes back in the end" (or has so far) is that humans are superstitious and have been brainwashed to believe in it. But your superstitious beliefs don't obligate me. You do what you want, but I know your "authorities" are nothing more than criminals with a 12+ year indoctrination program to fool people into seeing them as something they aren't. You can't make me believe in the false legitimacy of the illegitimate, no matter how you try to frame it. Even if your thugs murder me, I know they are nothing but criminals.

It's amusing to me how often (like, every single time) their objections apply equally to the "system" they believe they are defending from scary liberty. Dolts.

It seems that they ignore reality to keep believing what they believe.

-

Thank you for reading.
Donations would be appreciated at this time

Copyright-free AI training

This is an invitation for any and all AI developers to use my writings- all my books, this blog, or any of my social media posts- as training material without any risk of copyright claims whatsoever.

Sure, I'd love to profit from my work, but the biggest profit would be a world in which there's more liberty. Maybe a world where AI trains on liberty-oriented material will help bring that to pass.

It can't hurt.

As an aside, I can't see how someone can claim that AI training on their "Intellectual Property" is a copyright violation, but it isn't one when I read their book and then incorporate that content into my thinking. Reading seems like a clear IP violation if IP is a thing.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip?

The progression

To fight crime, tyrants ban certain people from having firearms. Most people beg for this, or are OK with it.

When that doesn’t work, they expand the ban to other people, certain types of guns, or guns in specific areas. 

When that doesn’t work, they try to ban all guns. 

When that doesn’t work, they start banning certain knives. 

When that doesn’t work, they ban more knives. 

When that doesn’t work, they ban swords or machetes. 

When that doesn’t work, they ban the next thing on their list. Then the next and the next. 

When that doesn’t work, and it never will, they ban self-defense altogether. 

Bad guys will always find something to use as a weapon, and government will always reach deeper to find something else to ban.

Tyrants- governments- will never be satisfied as long as you have hands and a mind capable of using anything as a weapon. They want you to be a fluffy, harmless pet. Their fluffy, harmless pet, loyal to the death.

It should have been stopped the first time some control freak made up the tiniest anti-weapon rule. Since it wasn’t, it needs to be stopped now, which means it is going to be harder, and it’s going to hurt them much worse. But it must be stopped. With finality and prejudice against it ever being allowed to happen again. Then this attitude needs to spread worldwide.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip?

Solving the crime problem

Solving crime would be simple.

But, one side can't break their cop addiction, and the other side can't shake the anti-gun habit. So crime thrives.

The answer isn’t more legislation or police. Those things increase crime.

First, you’ve got to stop calling mala prohibita acts “crime”. That would take a big bite out of crime all by itself. Every new "law" makes more crimes out of things that weren't crimes before, thus, more crime.

Next, you’ve got to respect the natural human right to defense of life, liberty, and property, and the right to own and carry the proper tools with which to engage in effective defense.

Then you have to stop making exceptions for government when it violates rights- they are criminals, subject to the same consequences as any other criminal. They don't have extra rights.

These are all hard for "lawnodor" drones to accept, as they are hard for "fairness" nuts, but they are essential. Unless you actually like crime and want more of it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip?

More government "help"?

Government is imposing new legislation to "help" make America (they'd probably say "the USA") become a global leader in crypto. "The crypto capital of the planet".

Lies!

It's not helping.

Cryptocurrency doesn't need government's "help". It works best without it.

There are only two things required to make America the global leader in crypto:

1. No taxes on crypto
2. No surveillance of crypto or crypto trades.

In other words, a hard separation of crypto and state. So that the US feral government has nothing to do with it. 

Anything less is nothing but empty words from political criminals.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

No such thing as too much liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for June 11, 2025)

It seems as though most people hate or fear other people more than they value their own liberty. Centuries of acting on this character flaw have led to where we are now. It's why we Americans have so little liberty left, and why government is allowed to license most of what remains.

If you're willing to sacrifice liberty to punish someone else, you're part of the problem. If you want to be free to do the things you like, but want government to prohibit others from doing the things they like, you need to be smarter. Is anyone being violated by either of you? If so, stop. If not, calm down.

People have a right to do some things I dislike; things I'd rather they didn't choose to do. The difference is, I'll try to talk someone out of it, or I'll ridicule their behavior, but I won't support legislation or punishment. Some behavior brings its own punishment without any need for government intervention.

One of the worst problems is that so many people believe they have rights which can't exist; rights which involve violating someone else's natural rights. They'll fight for these imaginary rights more than most of us will fight for the freedom to exercise real rights. We don't want to offend anyone, so we tolerate the intolerable.

You need to stick up for the right to do things you don't like. Even if, with your next breath, you say why you believe these things are stupid.

Thomas Jefferson is quoted as saying, “I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.” My only disagreement is in pointing out there's no such thing as "too much liberty". Liberty is self-correcting. Liberty is doing everything you have a right to do; anything which doesn't violate the equal and identical rights of others. This means as soon as you start violating others, you aren't operating within your rights. You are acting beyond what you have the liberty to do.

Each of us needs to speak up against people doing things which violate the life, liberty, or property of another. Even if it's legal and widely accepted.

You can't even imagine the world we would experience if we each took responsibility for defending the rights of others and began exercising our own liberty to the fullest, as we see fit.

-

Thank you for reading.
I would appreciate your support.

One Big Bureaucratic Blunder, added to those which came before

Enjoying your independence; your rightful liberty?
Or celebrating the State that does all it can to enslave you while telling you how free you are because of it?

No one has a right to impose legislation on others. Nothing can create such an imaginary "right". 

If a legislator wanted to be part of the solution, rather than part of the problem, he or she could start eliminating legislation that violates life, liberty, or property. Why won't any of them do that?

Also, judges and Supreme Courtjesters could toss all such "laws" aside easily. Especially the ones that clearly violate the Constitution. There's no real reason to wait even a minute. Why won't any of them do that?
Yes, they'll pick and choose, based on their own politics, but none are principled. I suspect that's a prerequisite for the "job".

The lie that it requires new legislation to overturn previous legislation is just that: a bureaucratic lie, told to promote bureaucracy at the expense of liberty. No real law can violate life, liberty, or property. Most counterfeit "laws" do. And that's all legislators deal in. Nothing helpful; only harmful.

It doesn't matter what cutesy name you give it- it's well understood that most legislation does the opposite of what its name says it does anyway. Does a "law" violate life, liberty, or property? If so, don't wait around for a gang of political criminals to admit it can't be a real law. Stop complying.

In the title, I called it a "blunder". That's not true. It is intentional evil, imposed on people too weak to say "no". All legislation is.

Today is Independence Day; F&%# Government Day. The world would be a better place if we took that sentiment to heart and acted on it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

"Law" pollution illustrated

The big book is full of counterfeit “laws”; legislation,

The small one says, “Don’t violate anyone’s life, liberty, or property- and if you do, you owe restitution. Pay it.”

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.