"For your own good"

No one ever disarms you for your own good.

But they'll lie and try to brainwash you into believing that's the reason they do it.

No one ever surveils you for your own good.

But they'll lie and try to brainwash you into believing that's the reason they do it.

No one ever governs you for your own good.

But they'll lie and try to brainwash you into believing that's the reason they do it.

And far too many people- usually the loudest, most ignorant minority (there's a strong correlation there)- will fall for it and cheer to have it imposed on us all.

-

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

Only an evil person "plays" this game

A "patriotic" cop on X was scolding people who hate Flock cameras and other spyware.

He pointed out that you and I have no expectation of (or right to) privacy in public spaces. You aren't protected by the 4th Amendment in such cases. He says, "Don't hate the players, hate the game". And, that it's just too bad if this upsets "Flock haters".

I have some thoughts on this.

You need to hate the players, too, because they choose to play the game, knowing it's wrong.

Guys like this are why more and more people are getting smart and hating cops. He is siding with government by excusing what it is doing- saying only the Supreme Court can decide otherwise.

I recognize that I have no expectation of privacy in public. I've noticed people taking photos of me more times than I could ever keep track of. It doesn't bother me. The difference is "regular people" aren't photographing me in order to track and control me; to use against me later. Government and its partners in crime are. 

Only a cop or other vile government supremacist could pretend not to see the difference.

What about his Bill of Rights claim? The 4th Amendment doesn't apply to random strangers, it applies only to government and those working for government. It doesn't bind you and me; it binds government.

If government is looking for a loophole, that is exactly the situation where there can't be a loophole. Government has no right to photograph or track us because government has no rights. None.

This guy would have been making excuses for slave traders- because that essentially what he's doing now. If that's "patriotic", keep that junk away from me.

Just say "no" to spyware.
The only good Flock camera is a dead Flock camera.

-

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

Their attempted insults have no power here

Just to give a clue to those out there who got really bothered by me over the past weeks for opposing spy cameras...

Calling me a "Democrat", a "Leftist", a "liberal", a "commie", a meth addict, a "criminal", or anything else doesn't work. It never will. I'm on the correct side on this issue.

Here's a selection of replies I copied and pasted (all these from one guy) to me (and others) for saying I oppose Flock cameras, and saying they aren't worth the cost:

"Looks ghey. Ill pass"

"I'm not reading some liberal garbage trying to turn ppl gay" (Both this and the one above were in response to a link to my newspaper column on the subject)

"Go get you some meth money we know the truth about you people."

"I don't break the law. I'm cool with them"

"Go play in a road transtifa"

"You a scrapper? Lol."

"Go watch an episode of first 48 and see how handy these are and solving crime from thugs"

"N!gga you retarded or a crook. Probably democrat"

It also doesn't make me angry that these clowns expose themselves. They want to believe it does, though. It's what they desperately hope for.

I'm a libertarian- I get called worse daily.

The problem for them is, I know what I'm standing up for. It has nothing to do with what they want it to be about. I also see what THEY'RE standing up for, and it's hideous and evil.

The scary thing is, you know these people v*te!!

I don't buy the lies that these cameras are an essential tool for solving crime; I'm not afraid of criminals. Even if they were used that way occasionally, it's not worth the loss of privacy and liberty. Not even close.

But some people are not only OK with them; they crave having them watch you and me 24/7.

That's disturbing. And not very smart.

-

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

LPR (Flock) cameras are watching you

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for July 8, 2026)

One of the most important fights in our lifetime, a fight for the future of America, is shaping up right over our heads. It's the fight against license plate reader cameras and the related spyware that is already being used against you and your liberty...read the rest...

-

Thank you for reading.
Support this blog.

Worse than "gun control" [sic]?

It's quite possible that I hate Flock cameras (and related technology) even more than I hate anti-gun rules. If you know me, you know that's saying something!

You can go here to see how many of those abominations infest your area. And see where they are and where they are aimed. Then use that information as you will.

Someone needs to invent hand-held directed EMP technology that can disable such things from a distance. Or, if they are shielded from EMPs, lasers to burn them out. That's more responsible than using hunting rifles for that sacred task.

Others have said that FOIA requests, public records requests, and/or audits often result in the cameras being removed to prevent disclosure. If you're legally minded, this might be something to try.

On an individual level, I wonder if a small shelf above the slave plate of your vehicle could prevent the numbers from being seen from the height of those spies. Just a thought. Maybe they see it from too far away for this to work. I wonder if there's any spray that would be unnoticeable to the eye, but opaque to the cameras. 

Or, if you just want to avoid being tracked by these things, knowing where they are and where they are aimed can help you. 

It's important to track the trackers, regardless. 

-

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

"What about...?"

If it results in more power for government, I'm against it.

If it results in more money for government, I'm against it.

If it results in more data for government, I'm against it.

If it results in more control for government, I'm against it.

If it results in more employees or dependents for government, I'm against it.

If it results in more "responsibilities" for government, I'm against it.

If it results in more reach for government, I'm against it.

If it results in more government, I'm against it.

-

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

A new way to celebrate Independence?

I'm opposed to vandalism.

I'm also opposed to ubiquitous surveillance. I'm not going to damage some individual's doorbell camera because of this. Nor would I support anyone who does.

Flock cameras and that sort of thing are an entirely different matter. The people who destroy the enemies' spy cameras are heroes to me. They are no more "vandals" than Robin Hood was a "thief". They are fighting back against the nasty modern equivalent of the Sheriff of Nottingham. Or worse. 

Flock cameras are tools of anti-American spies; dangerous invaders, even if they were born here.

I'm not proud to have reached this point. But if you're going to put cameras everywhere to provide information to government, you are a bad guy. A terrorist! I want you to lose your investment. I want it to not be worth the effort and expense to replace them, even though I know the political criminals will keep paying out the stolen money for these things because they are determined to rule us. Even if it kills us. Even if it means the end of America.

It's not about safety for you and me, but only for the political criminals who want to know what you're doing every second of every day.

I hate them, and I hate their spy cameras.

The ONLY good Flock camera is a dead Flock camera. I think Independence Day could have a new tradition beginning this year.

-

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

No good reason to reject liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for May 13, 2026)

People find many reasons to reject liberty. Fear. Envy. Ignorance. Tradition. In fact, there are probably as many reasons to reject liberty as there are people on this planet.

Those whose careers depend on violating liberty will use any excuse they are handed.

If they use envy, they can impose socialism and raise taxes on the rich. They can make people believe they have a "right" to things which others must work to provide them. It can never be your right to enslave others!

Using ignorance, political criminals lie and hope that too few notice to do anything about it. It's how we get things like "assault weapon" rules, carbon credits, and the War on (some) Drugs.

They also combine ignorance with envy, so those cheated in the brain department will demand to be coddled to dumb down society so that no one feels stupid. Ignorance is simply a lack of knowledge; stupidity is a dedicated effort to remain ignorant.

Tradition, when applied to historical evils, is a particularly dangerous justification for rejecting liberty. Just because "it's always been done this way" doesn't mean it should continue to be done this way. When certain rights have been sacrificed in the past, it was wrong. It's wrong to violate rights now, even when ceasing to violate them is unthinkable. Slavery has been around for thousands of years, in every society all over the world. It was traditional everywhere. That's no reason to keep enslaving people.

Of all the reasons to reject liberty, fear may be the most common excuse, used even by some people who generally support liberty. Fear is the one thing politicians count on the most. They feed it, fan the flames, and lie about how much danger you'll be in if other people don't have their liberty crushed under the heel of The State. They'll construct nightmare outcomes they hope will scare you, so you'll beg for someone's liberty to be limited in some way. Liberty restricted is liberty violated. Nearly everyone has one fear a politician can use. You need principles to say "No".

The problem is, no matter what facet of liberty you want to consider, someone is deathly afraid of it. If your rights depended on not scaring anyone, you would have no rights. You would have no liberty to exercise.

Don't fall for any reason to reject liberty. Instead of rejecting liberty, reject the excuses used to justify violating it.

-

Thank you for reading.
Ways to tip.

Self-destruction by ambition

I suspect that every new "law" and every new form of surveillance crammed in our faces and under our beds ratchets us one step closer to the collapse of the current government. They are dooming their own scam and don't realize it.

Their own ambition is killing them.

They think they are gaining more control. They think they are making us more controllable. And, in the short term, they probably are. I don't think it can last as long as they imagine.

"Forever" stamps are unrealistically optimistic.

I would like to think enough people have matured beyond the infantile need to be governed and to want others governed on their behalf that the species can stop making this same old stupid mistake, but chances are, we'll have to go a few more rounds, sacrificing a few more generations to this false god, before enough people catch up and catch on.

Whatever comes, I still see every new surveillance tool and every added "law" as another nail in the coffin of the State.

-

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

If not, that’s OK.

It's all staged

Years ago, a friend of mine owned a video rental business. Remember those? It was a small operation in a tiny strip mall in the middle of nowhere, and was manned by one person: the owner. 

My friend, known by all as "Video Bob", eventually hired a mutual acquaintance to work there part-time. A couple of months later, the place got robbed, and the acquaintance, who was the one working at the time, was tied up, and the robbers got away with all the money in the register.

Only, things didn't quite add up. No one bought his story, which seemed more like the acquaintance was trying out versions of events to see which one people believed.

Our suspicion was that the robbery was staged, with the acquaintance in on it. As these things tend to do, the "official" investigation dragged on, and I moved away, so I don't know how things turned out.

But this made me think of how the state works. It's all staged.  The state causes a situation, plays the victim, lies about it, pursues its own bad "solution", and we are all robbed of our money, our privacy, and our future. 

Worse, the state investigates the situation and finds it did nothing wrong, then doubles down on the wrongdoing it was already engaged in.

It doesn't seem like anyone would still buy it, but most of them do. I think considering the implications is just too uncomfortable for most people.

-

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

If not, that’s OK.

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.

Bigger government is enemy of liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for January 28, 2026)

There is no "right vs. left"; no "conservative vs. liberal"; no "Republican vs. Democrat". These labels are deliberate distractions- tools used by the true culprit to keep people confused, angry, and divided.

The real conflict has always been simpler and more fundamental: the State against you and your liberty.

Anyone who helps expand the State, either by giving it more wealth, providing an excuse to gain more power, or cheering its growth, is an enemy of individual liberty and human rights.

Here's the reality: Storming churches during worship services to score political points is anything but noble. It violates individuals and plays into the hands of those who want more government power.

Plotting to annex Greenland as a step towards building a global empire is not about protecting America- it’s about concentrating government power.

Neither path serves you as an individual; both serve the State. Yet, this is the false choice we are given. "If you aren't with us, you're against us."

I'm against anyone who tosses liberty aside for any reason.

I'm pro-America. America is not the US federal government, just as you are not the tapeworm in your gut.

If you are in favor of government power, and especially more power over more people or more places, you're not on the right team.

It's the impulse to fight for a Bigger Government to use against everything they hate or anything they fear. It doesn't matter how they justify it, or which side they believe they're on. They are wrong.

The people wearing masks to hide their identity while working for the state, the people disrupting church services as protest theater, the people blocking cars of those who are only trying to go about their business, the people enforcing rules that directly violate life, liberty, or property- such as mandating a "kill switch" on your car- and anyone supporting any of these actions, are not the good guys.

Breaking the law in order to enforce laws is ridiculous and hypocritical.

Saying you're standing up for someone's rights while violating someone else's rights is absurd.

"It's for your safety" is the nastiest lie there is.

Evil succeeds when people stop caring about doing what is right.

I understand why people do these things. I can empathize with them. But understanding and empathy don't equal approval. They are still wrong.

In the choice between more government control and individual liberty, there's no compromise possible.

-

Thank you for reading.
Leave a tip.

The Terminator meets 1984 meets Idiocracy meets Star Wars meets...

So far, I believe all the videos of robot soldiers are AI-generated fakes.

Eventually, they won't be.

You and I need to be coming up with ideas for disabling military robot soldiers. And drones. And those who deploy them.
At least to buy time until government collapses of its own top-heavy, evil incompetence, and can no longer find anyone willing to work for it.

We should probably not discuss those ideas online, because the internet has become one of those robot soldiers. You can generate digital chaff, though. It would be funny to see them design defenses against things no one was planning to do.

I have ideas, and I'll bet you do, too. Low-tech ideas, high-tech ideas, and no-tech ideas. Have back-up plans for your back-up plans, too.

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips are nice.

Stop assisting Evil

If you're helping government in any way, you're probably not helping the people.
If you're helping government spy on any of us or control us, you're the enemy of the people of America.
You're the enemy of America and everything America was meant to be.

It doesn't matter what letters come with your bureau or agency; you're a domestic enemy. Just like the US federal government is an enemy of America- although I consider the US government more of a foreign occupation force.

It doesn't matter what else your businesses do; you're an enemy of liberty.

Maybe you even do some good. Great! Now stop doing evil. Stop helping government commit its evil acts.

Helping government- especially helping it spy on or control the individuals- is unhelpful in the extreme.

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips are nice.

Relationship rules- State level

Our Relationship Rules:

• You will not trade with others unless you pay me for my permission first, or you'll get locked in a cage. For some things, like alcohol and guns, you'll have to beg and pay me twice. (Because I don't like you having access to them, but I'm afraid you might throw me out if I flat out deny them to you.) And getting my permission means you'll let me nose through all your papers and harass your customers anytime I feel like it. You'll thank me for it.
  
  
• You aren't allowed to hire any help unless you pay them what I say. Or I'll destroy your livelihood and lock you in a cage
  
  
• Your car belongs to me, as demonstrated by the plate I'll force you to rent and affix to it, and you can only use it as long as I say you can.
  
  
• You won't travel faster in your car than some arbitrary speed I've decided on, or I'll stop, molest, and rob you. I might decide to lock you in a cage or kill you if I get scared. The same goes for wearing a seat belt.
  
  
• You must at all times carry the identification card I'll rent you, and you will not use your vehicle without it.
  
  
• You have to insure your car to my standards, and carry proof that you've done so, through those I've made arrangements with, or I'll take it from you. With violence if you resist.
  
  
• Your house and land will remain my property forever, which you can keep using only as long as you pay a yearly ransom. Your money is also mine, for you to use only as long as you continue to hand a percentage of it to me.
  
  
• You will hand your children over to my employees to be indoctrinated into believing I am good and necessary for survival. You will, of course, have to pay an excessive fee for this "service" or I'll take your property to sell to someone more compliant. I may also take "your" children and give them to someone else to raise. You must pretend I am educating the children.
  
  
• If I don't feel like others have strict enough rules against you owning, carrying, and using weapons of defense, I'll impose my own additional rules. You'll only defend yourself from others with my permission, which you'll never quite be sure of having. And, if you do, I'll steal your weapon and lock you in a cage, only letting you out if you can prove you didn't really mean it. 
  
  
• You are never allowed to use weapons against me, no matter how abusive or threatening you believe I have become. Or I will kill you or lock you in a cage.
  
  
• Certain plants can only be grown, sold, or consumed if I say so, and if I can find a way to get you to pay me. Otherwise, I'll lock you in a cage.
  
  
• You can only play games using money as a way of keeping score if I say so. And if I'm getting a piece of the action, obviously.
  
  
• I can make up any new rule at any time. I'll decide which rules I will enforce, and when.
  
  
• If you cross some imaginary line, any or all of these rules may change because you're now in a relationship with someone else.
  
  

This is kind of a joke, and kind of not.

I still like the format of the other list better.

There's a lot of overlap between the state's relationship rules and the federal rules. Some of the above could be added to the federal rules- and probably should be.

Here are the local rules.

-

Thank you for reading.
Tips are nice.

Space invaders

The right of association is an essential human right; this means you can exclude anyone from your space for any reason, or on a whim. Any "law" saying otherwise is a violation of your basic human rights.

It's a bad feeling to be excluded. I've experienced it and I didn't like it.

It doesn't matter.

People have a right to their exclusive spaces. They can base them on any criteria they choose, or it can be totally arbitrary, based on "I don't like how you look".

Those who have been excluded from some space have the right to establish their own spaces and exclude those who excluded them. Or not.

It doesn't bother me that I am not allowed in a women's dressing room or restroom. I can imagine an emergency situation where I might invade a women's restroom- but I would know I am doing something I have no right to do, and I would be as respectful and contrite as possible. I wouldn't act entitled, but I would be extremely apologetic. If someone punched me for being in there, I would deserve it.

If people of some particular "race" wish to have a club for only "their own people", I would respect that wish. Even if I really wanted to participate. If I liked their club idea, I might establish a similar club for myself and those who want to join- I can't imagine excluding anyone because of something as trivial as "race". Anyone who didn't enter and try to archate would probably be welcome. If they smelled really bad, I might ask them to address that issue before coming back- unless stinking was fundamental to the purpose of the club.

I have never understood those who want to invade other people's spaces. Why insist on being where you aren't welcome? So often, they then ruin those spaces, making them into something even they don't want to be a part of anymore. It's just dumb.

Respect the right of association. If you want to join, try to earn an invitation. If you can't, move on. You'll be OK.

-

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

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.

Nowhere left to go?

I know of someone in this area who is in America for political asylum.

She is originally from Venezuela. She wasn't an activist; just a woman who got on the bad side of government when it nationalized her employer's business. She was told to say publicly that this was a good thing. She wouldn't. (Governments sure do love compelled speech!)

Soon after, while she was visiting a family member in America, her home was ransacked by government agents and friends warned her to not come back because she was in danger- so she didn't, and applied for asylum.

It's a shame that statists are pushing to make America more like Venezuela of today than America of 1776. If things don't turn around, there will be nowhere left for people like her to go. Or for people like us to go.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.

You are the terrorist they want to find

Whenever anything is proposed to "fight terrorists", it's going to be used to hurt you. Anything, every time.

If you aren’t 100% enthusiastic about letting government track your every movement, spy on all your communication, control every dollar you spend, turn rights into privileges, etc., they consider YOU the terrorist. 

You are the target of these programs and this legislation or policy. If it happens to catch a real terrorist somewhere along the way, that's just the cherry on top that they'll point to when claiming success. And most of those terrorists are probably their guys in one way or another.

Government considers you the enemy, and it will show you by what it does if you're paying attention.

Imagine being gullible enough to believe government protects you and is essential for your well-being. Or to conflate government with society.

-

Thank you for reading.
Show your support.