A disturbing lack of discernment

One thing I've noticed about cops is that they seem utterly incapable of telling the good guys from the bad guys. Especially when the bad guys control the purse.

If someone is violating life, liberty, or property, they are the bad guys. If they are paying you to help them do any of those things, then you're a bad guy, too.

There's really no wiggle room there.
Or Wiggum room, either.

-

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

"Brandishing"

The claim that a cupholder can't "legally" qualify as a holster (didn't say it's a good holster), brings up another nonsense "gun offense" that I've seen used against people more than once: "brandishing".

Simply being seen to be armed can't reasonably be the "crime" of brandishing.
Holding a weapon in your hand, ready in case it's needed, can't reasonably be the "crime" of brandishing.

To be a real crime, brandishing must mean pointing a weapon at an innocent person (someone who isn't violating anyone's life, liberty, or property at present). 

Pointing a firearm at a violator is what you should be doing in some cases, and it's not "brandishing" as a crime.
Letting a bad guy know you're armed by showing your weapon is a peaceable attempt to discourage the bad guy and convince him you're not an easy target, not a crime. Only a criminal would treat such an act as a crime.

I hate the way the anti-gun bigots of government use this word to mean whatever they want it to mean to excuse their crimes against self-responsible, prepared people. 

Just so they can shoot their friendly labradoodles, probably.

And, of course, the armed goons who work for the state never get punished for ACTUALLY brandishing in a dangerous manner* when they point their weapons at- or shoot at- innocent people. That's how you can tell it's a nonsense "offense" made up by copsuckers and other government supremacists.

-

*There's a specific case I'm thinking of, and I remember at least one photo showing a family in a car, the man who was driving holding his hands up, and a cop pointing a rifle in his face. It seems the image has been scrubbed from the internet; flushed down the memory hole. Unless I'm imagining the whole thing. I don't think I am.

-

Thank you for reading.
Ways to subscribe or donate.

They'll do what's "best" for you, even if it kills you

They believe they know what's best for you, and they intend to impose it on you. Consent is irrelevant to them. That makes them archators.

Whether it's intentionally spreading a disease that makes people allergic to red meat, trying to criminalize self-defense, collecting all our data to use against us, or filling the streets with their weaponized drones, it's for "the common good".

And, yet, they'll lie and claim that those of us who don't want any of this garbage are imposing our wishes on others. On them. Oh, the poor babies!

No, this goes only one way.

Telling the control fetishists to leave us alone isn't us imposing our will on them. It's drawing a boundary and telling them we expect it to be respected. They can do whatever they want to each other, just leave us out of it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Subscribe or donate.

Choose your own adventure

I saw someone saying that if you think things are bad now, just wait. They’re going to get worse. Much worse.

Maybe. Probably.

The smart way to approach it is to make it an adventure. You don't want "boring", do you? 

Well, the political criminals and other archators running things are working to make sure you live in "interesting times". They're working as hard as they can to impose a police state of surveillance and control, while at the same time letting their freelance soulmates run amok and violate you from the other side. It's a team effort, and you're designated to be the pawn.

You might as well find ways to enjoy it while it lasts.

It's not as though you have the option to avoid it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Money for preps? 

If not, that’s OK.

Government should expect no privacy

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for March 25, 2026)

Privacy is important. Not because you have anything to hide, but because it's no one's business. Otherwise, let's get rid of restroom doors, curtains, or anything else which might shield our activities from everyone else's eyes.

Companies that help government spy on the people are doing wrong. Digital ID. Flock cameras. Age verification. TSA scanners. Government's co-conspirators are not the good guys.

Not all surveillance is a bad thing, though.

You should know everything about anyone who holds a government office. At the same time, they shouldn’t be able to learn anything about you. As long as those offices are allowed to exist- and they shouldn't be- the standard should be that while you hold any government job, your life is an open book. Everything you do is subject to scrutiny and disclosure. No secrets at all, not even those you feel government is entitled to keep from the people. Because those don't exist. Privacy for government and none for the people is exactly backwards.

National security is no excuse. Public safety is no excuse. “For the children” is the most dishonest justification ever.

Author L. Neil Smith once wrote that keeping government secrets from the people is the only crime for which he would support capital punishment. I tend to agree, but we know government will never hold itself accountable.

If I’m forced to fund you, you don’t get to keep secrets from me. But the people have the right to keep everything from government.

Some people say the days of any expectation of privacy are over because government and its corporate partners already have the tools to watch everything you do. They are right. Don't expect to have any privacy. Someone, besides your intended recipient, is reading every text or email you send, evaluating everything you read, and watching everything you save on a phone or to your computer. They have technology which can see where you are inside your home- and possibly more. They have capabilities they won't tell the public about.

This is no reason to be paranoid. It's a reason why you, I, and everyone else should live so freely that we overwhelm the bad guys. Drown them in worthless data and rub your liberty in their nasty, nosy faces. Remember, too, this cuts both ways. They can't collect all the data about us without the same data being collected on them. If they collect it, we can find it and use it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

Robocops are frauds

I oppose archation.

Therefore, I oppose government.
Therefore, I oppose legislation (counterfeit “law”).
Therefore, I oppose the existence of "law enforcement" (police).
Therefore, I oppose traffic police.

If traffic cops are to exist anyway, even though they shouldn't, then they must not be allowed to make contact with anyone who cannot be clearly seen with the naked eye, driving dangerously. 

If the "offense" relies on technology such as radar, traffic cameras, or a breathalyzer to detect, it's not real. It's certainly not worth robbing or killing people over.

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips, please. 

If not, that’s OK.

Don't trade liberty for dystopian world

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for February 25, 2026)

It feels like the world, and America specifically, is becoming an authoritarian dystopia. More rules, harsher punishment, more surveillance; all leading to less liberty.

What disturbs me the most is how many people seem to think this is fine. Or actively demand it because they fear or hate other people or what other people might do. Government is always willing to violate your rights and will oblige when asked to do so.

Too many people will trade liberty for a false promise of safety- a hope for something government power can never provide.

As long as they believe "other people" are getting it worse than they are, they're fine with the police state being built around them. They seem genuinely shocked when it is inevitably used against them and their rights.

Enforcers- police- act as though they have rights above and beyond those possessed by "ordinary people". Their delusion is reinforced by a lack of accountability. This is how you know America is a police state, not a free country.

Those who are politically connected and powerful regularly commit the most awful crimes with no consequences, while people the state considers expendable are killed by enforcers for not obeying conflicting orders fast enough. In the unlikely event consequences do come for the "elite", it's too little, too late, and a slap on the wrist compared to what would happen if you or I were in the same situation.

So, little by little, the dystopia grows. The police state gets worse. People who wish to be ruled deny it's a police state, but this doesn't change the facts.

Although libertarians are frequently accused of being utopian, we are the most grounded realists there are. We don't believe human nature permits some to rule over others. We realize that only the worst people are drawn down that path. I don't believe respecting liberty will result in Utopia, but it will make dystopia more difficult to maintain.

Most Utopias seem nightmarish to me, anyway. Pro-government people want to be protected, taken care of, and entertained. I want the liberty to do these things for myself, in ways that fit my values best. If your Utopia is someone else's authoritarian dystopia and violates anyone's rights in any way, you have no right to impose it on them. Not even if you're scared.

Utopia isn't an option; I wouldn't want it if it were. But I don't need your "safe" dystopia.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

The fate of government

You know things are upside down when government does what it wants, and the people have to beg government for permission to exercise their basic human rights. Government acts as though it possesses rights, and people don't.

It's getting worse.

Government counts on it always moving in this direction. That's a dangerous bet to make.

Government, you treat your superiors as the enemy, and they are likely to eventually get the message. And when they do, you're done. You're outnumbered. You may put a lot of stock in your fighter jets, bombs, and tanks, but people operate those tools. People give the orders. People you treat as the enemy as long as you aren't directly pulling their strings. People who have friends and family that you treat as your enemy. People who still depend on society made up of other people.

You can't win this war, even though it looks like you are winning the battles. To govern others is to fail.  To govern others while treating them as your enemy is to beg them to destroy you. Either directly, or by walking away and ignoring your tantrums. You only govern as long as people comply. It's time the people stopped complying; stopped obeying. You've earned this. It's your inevitable fate.

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips, please. 

If not, that’s OK.

Civilization or The State?

If you believe it's necessary to violate individual rights to "maintain civilization", you don't understand civilization. 

Whatever this thing is you're maintaining isn't civilized or worth maintaining.

Maybe you're confusing The State for civilization. Many statists do. 

If so, I can understand why you'd believe as you do. It is necessary to violate individual rights to maintain a State. They are coercive by nature and financed by theft- quite uncivilized behaviors.

Many statists are perfectly willing to sacrifice individuals, liberty, civilization, and society to The State. It's where their true loyalty lies. "Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State."

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips are nice.

Policing and the downhill spiral into pure evil

Years ago, I noticed that the most anti-cop people I knew were all former cops.

What I don't know is whether they stopped being cops because of how evil cops are, or if they quit first, then realized what they'd been a part of.

One guy was a retired deputy. He told me he hated what cops had become. He was the first to tell me to do the right thing regardless of what the "law" says- but be careful. 

I don't know whether he ever realized cops were always evil, even before he noticed, or if he really believed they had undergone some sort of change over the years. 

Sheriff Andy Taylor was always a myth.

I never really talked to him about his years as a cop and the counterfeit "laws" he had enforced. He was a decent character, and I didn't feel like bringing it up. His last name, ironically, was "Pigg".

I've known and talked to other cops and former cops over the years, so when some copsucker pulls out the "Have you ever sat down with a cop...?", my answer is, "Yes, I have. Many." The decent ones were ex-cops, the crooked ones were current cops, and the very worst of the bunch was a cop-in-training. It's a downhill trajectory, and I don't expect it to get better as the police state grows more controlling and evil- and as the most worthless and evil individuals out there are drawn to policing as a career.

So, maybe they really have gotten worse over the years, and the former deputy was right.

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips are nice.

Sometimes your fans make you even more unpalatable

Every time there's another shooting committed by a government employee and the statists start in with their "Just comply and you won't be shot", "Well, he was carrying a GUN!", and "You can always fight them in court later", I hate the armed government employees just a little bit more than I did before.

I have zero respect, and bottomless contempt, for armed government employees. They can't really do anything to make their position worse.

But, seeing the apologists, and recognizing how they'd be justifying (or cheering) the SS troops in the streets doing the same sort of things, colors my perceptions of the armed government employees even darker.

I keep being disappointed.

I expected too much of people poisoned by politics.
My mistake.

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips are nice.

Obligations and responsibilities of a government "job"

Holding a government "job" comes with extra obligations and responsibilities beyond those an honest person has.

If you work for government, you are obligated to never hide your face while on the clock, even if it puts you at risk.

If you work for government in America, you are obligated to obey the Constitution to the letter- not the Supreme Courtjesters' "interpretation" of what the Constitution might mean if government has its way, but what it really says. Even if this means disobeying a direct order under threat of death, losing your "job"/pension, or being imprisoned.

If you work for government, it is your responsibility to die before you violate anyone's life, liberty, or property in the slightest way, or in defense of anyone's life, liberty, or property. Your life is forfeit if there's any rights violation going on in your vicinity, if that's what it takes to stop it. Whether you are the violator or not.

If you are unwilling or unable to fulfill these obligations and responsibilities, you are unfit for a government "job". So, obviously, this proves that no one is suited for a government "job".

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips are nice.

Cop guns

I own 3 guns that I know previously belonged to cops. 

That means I've done something to get guns out of the wrong hands; guns that may have even been used in the commission of crimes.
I've probably done more good than all the anti-gun "laws" put together.

You're welcome.

(OK, I realize they just bought more guns to replace the ones they sold- and we know freelance bad guys would never do the same, and once they no longer have a particular gun, they are forever gunless. Right? Right?)

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips are nice.

Statism is a tragedy

Many of the events that attract media attention are simply gang warfare, gang vs. gang, and since I belong to neither gang, I don't really care. None of them are "our" teammates.

I don't want innocent people hurt or killed or otherwise violated, but innocent people don't violate life, liberty, or property (fundamental human rights). Many times, I don't see an innocent person where others seem to. 

Often it's a matter of consequences: Do certain things, and you increase the likelihood of certain bad outcomes. Crying about it afterward doesn't change anything. If you don't like getting zapped, don't stick your tongue in a light socket.

I wish the gangs would keep it between themselves and leave the rest of us alone. But they can't seem to do that. They will lie and claim to be on my side, but I know it's a lie. This is why I can't get too involved in the drama surrounding some of these events that I'm told are VERY IMPORTANT for me to get worked up over.

Statism is a tragedy. It would be weird if it didn't lead to more tragedy every time it is applied.

-

Thank you for reading.
Toss breadcrumbs to me.

Pirates, but the lame kind

US Customs and Border Protection [sic] posted on X, bragging about stealing someone's money. They got dragged for their efforts, but that didn't return the stolen money to their victim.

They even admitted that it wasn't "illegal" to carry the cash, but pretended it was somehow "wrong" to not inform them that you're doing so. If not a crime, it's still something they'll use as an excuse to harm you. Typical government nonsense.

By their actions, they've illustrated why people are right to want to hide their money from theft gangs like the CBP.

"We just want to know about it". Yes, I'm sure you do, Scumbags. I'm sure all muggers would like to "require" potential victims to provide a list of any valuables they're carrying. It makes theft more efficient; you won't waste effort on people with nothing worth stealing that way.

These thieves are pirates, but they aren't the cool kind of pirate with eye patches and swords. They are the loser kind with badges, just like those cops who pose behind a table covered with stolen guns, money, and drugs. They are all spiritual clones of Somali pirates- no charisma, just thievery and aggression.

There were a few disgusting copsuckers who said stuff like "Yeah, like they got that money honestly. LOL" Or some variation of the bootlicker mantra, "Thank you for your service". But all the thinking, ethical people were on the same side of this. The side that opposes thieves.

-

Thank you for reading.
Toss a life raft my way.

The inevitable police state

Is a dystopian police state inevitable?

It doesn't look good.

In the short-term, probably.
In the long-term, I don't know. I hope not.

This has been building for years. Thousands of years, with bumps and dips along the way. It's been building as long as the sick idea of governing others has existed. 

No matter who controls government, they work tirelessly to install police state infrastructure and policy. This is how you know government is the problem, not who runs it.

It becomes more and more "illegal" to resist the police state policies and "authorities". It's already "illegal" to defend yourself from them. 

Police state policies are popular with statists of all stripes. They only differ in which police state policies they approve of and who they are aimed at. 

I suppose the question could be asked if police states are invariably dystopian. I don't believe they could be anything other than dystopian, but this is because I value liberty. To people who prefer to be kept as pets, I can see how they might feel better under a police state. At least temporarily.

Nor, I suppose, are all dystopias strictly police states, but that's another subject.

I'm on the outside- I don't approve of any police state policies whatsoever. 

I only hope liberty can come out the other side and be reborn.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip?

Politics no excuse for violating liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for August 6, 2025)

Over the past few years, I've seen many online videos in which an individual brags about how they'll mistreat anyone in their care if they know that person holds an opposing political opinion. The really scary thing is how many of these are healthcare workers. I've also seen videos of teachers who threaten to take it out on students whose parents don't align with the teacher's political bias.

These people sometimes lose their job when their video gets noticed.

Then there are those on video celebrating having legislation enforcers upend and destroy someone's life, when the individual did nothing objectively unethical. Often, they have only broken some unconstitutional "law", which, as the Supreme Court clarifies, isn't a law at all.

It's clear from the videos that all these people think they are the good guys. But who could possibly imagine this is right? People conditioned by politics, that's who. And it's contagious.

If you're engaging in politics, you're not the better person. No matter which side you're on or how enlightened you imagine yourself to be. If you're using politics as your justification for being evil- for intentionally causing or allowing harm to anyone's life, liberty, or property- then you're quite obviously the bad person in the situation.

I realize social media and some of the national mainstream media corporations have put a lot of time and effort into demonizing segments of the population. Those who are most susceptible to being brainwashed don't realize they are being desensitized by bad people to target others as if it's okay.

As long as someone isn't attacking, robbing, or otherwise violating you at this very moment, mind your own business. Do your job. Don't make assumptions or pigeonhole them according to your biases.

There are enough problems in the world without intentionally adding to them with politics.

No one is perfect, but we can all do better. I do my best to not make anyone's day worse. If I can't at least be nice, I try to avoid being mean. If I do something careless (and I'm aware of it), I apologize. And I most certainly won't deliberately harm anyone unless I'm forced to defend myself from an attack.

Respect the liberty of everyone to believe what they believe, to live as they live, as long as they respect your equal and identical rights to do the same. It's not difficult, and it will make you freer.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

Statists participate, but add nothing

Statism makes people stupid. Some statists celebrated the recent murders of the "drug cartel" boat crew. I understand their feelings- I usually understand everyone's feelings- but they are wrong.

One of them expressed her deeply held feelings on the matter:

I can't believe I'm watching people defend the Venezuelan Cartel dug [sic] smugglers. They're terrorists ok. Does the left really think they would agree to a stop and search?! I do not care that they are dead. I do not care about their rights. I care about American lives. 

Some people need to experience the loss of a loved one from Fentanyl or a terrorist terrorizing their home in order to understand that these people are NOT DESERVING of human compassion. (And no, I'm not hoping it happens to anybody, but damn the virtue signaling will be the death of many more Americans.) 

Stop defending terrorists. Just STOP IT.

I responded:

No one has a right to prohibit free trade in substances, or murder those who ignore the prohibition. And since rights are individual, not collective, and governments are collectives, governments have no rights (or imaginary “authority”) at all.
https://kentmcmanigal.blogspot.com/p/kentforliberty-drugs.html

Another statist replied:

This is why no one takes libertarians seriously.

My comment to this bit of wisdom:

Thanks for playing.

He deserves a participation trophy in the contest of having principles and independent thoughts.

Someone scolded those opposed to this murder by saying that if they'd lost anyone to "illegal drugs", they would feel differently. Hmmm.
I lost my older daughter almost 10 years ago due to someone else's abuse of substances. It still doesn't excuse prohibition.
Just like the fact that I've lost people close to me to evil losers shooting them, and this in no way justifies anti-gun rules.

Of course, the statists miss the point. As they always do.
I wasn't defending the Venezuelan drug cartel members. I was standing up for liberty and against tyranny. Standing up for natural human rights- rights government and its fans don't care about. Or actively hate.

Liberty matters, even if you don't care.

If I must become a stupid statist to be taken seriously by the stupid statists, I'll pass.

If someone can't stand up for principles, even when they have deep feelings on the matter, they're useless. Well, useless for any good purpose. They're very useful to tyrants and political criminals. 

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip?

"Law & order" or liberty? Choose

Here's how a normal conversation with a typical "pro-gun [sic] law & order" conservative goes...

Me: The cops who are enforcing this anti-gun "law" are criminals.

Him: While I agree, it doesn't stop corrupt [sic] government from arresting and prosecuting people for exercising their rights despite unconstitutional laws.

Me: Criminals do criminal things. That’s what makes them criminals. Criminals will always exist- they’re a fact of life.

Him: You're welcome to carry an AR-15 into DC openly and see where that gets you. Bet it won't end well, though.

Me: Because the local criminal gang (Blue Line Mafia) will molest or kill me. I’m not arguing that they won’t. If you believe I am, you’re hallucinating.
They are enforcing a counterfeit "law".

Him: Whether or not it is counterfeit doesn't matter at this point. The law in DC is "no concealed carry without a permit and no open carry". Do either and get caught, you will be prosecuted. If you want to do something about it, then get off the internet and get into city hall, where you can actually voice your concerns and be heard.

Me: I’m not going to act as though their counterfeit “laws” are real laws (they are crimes), nor do I ever have any reason to set foot in DC.
But v*te harder or beg the criminals to change their ways if you think that’s helping.

Him: Take it up with the lawmakers. I don't get why you think arguing with random people on the internet is gonna change anything.

Me: I agree. Arguing with random people online won’t change anything. To change things, stop asking permission from political criminals and their henchmen to exercise your liberty. Once you act as though your rights are subject to their opinions, they’ve beaten you. Legislators and courts don’t matter at that point. You’ve handed them everything they crave.

Him: Whether you like it or not, you will be jailed if you try to exercise those rights in certain jurisdictions. Lucky for me, I live in a Constitutional carry [sic] state, so I don't have to worry about what laws DC chooses to enforce. But by all means, go ahead and test the fences.

Me: Again, I don’t disagree. Criminals do criminal things. I wouldn’t expect the Blue Line Mafia to act in an ethical way because they are criminals. Criminals kidnap, rob, and murder because it’s their nature, whatever excuse they use.

Then there's the other conservative path...

Me: You shouldn't support criminals (the cops enforcing the anti-weapons "laws").

Him2: I don't (right after arguing that it's right to arrest people for carrying without a permit).

Me: If you’re supporting those enforcers targeting/arresting people for carrying firearms, you do.

Him2: I support law enforcement. Permits are required to carry in DC.

Me: Those permit requirements are illegal. Imposed and enforced by criminals who ignore the law. If you support them, you’re supporting criminals. Period.

Him2: Challenge them in court, then.

Me: You would have supported slavery until the “laws” changed, then. Good to know.

Him2: Injecting race is a Democrat talking point. ("Don't inject even one marijuana or race!")

Me: Seeing that as racial is hilarious.

And these exchanges demonstrate, yet again, why I can't be conservative. I don't like the taste of boot polish enough. Nor can I get my mind to twist that hard.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip?

Getting ICE-y around here

Here in this small, utterly insignificant speck on the map, ICE is abducting people. Not archators- as far as I know- but a woman and her two kids.

I'm sure some people are thrilled about it. I'm not.

I wouldn't really be able to care too much if they were targeting archators; those who violate life, liberty, or property. Government agents are all, by definition, archators, too. In that case, it smells like intergang warfare to me. Not my circus; not my monkeys.

Ignoring government opinions about where you are "allowed" to live isn't archation. Unless you subscribe to the communistic notion that the collective "owns" the "country", rather than the ethical position of "property lines, not government borders".

I'm not brave or foolish enough to go in guns ablazin' to stop the abductions. I'm not proud of that.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.