Statists need glasses

Statism is a severe form of nearsightedness. Statists can see a little way, but not far enough. They only see as far as they can see and still be able to find a way to justify statism. If seeing even one foot farther would invalidate statism, it's like there's a brick wall blocking them from seeing another inch.

They can see how bad "laws" can be in some circumstances, and still believe in the concept of "laws".

They might agree that a total gun ban and confiscation would be bad but still manage to advocate for "common sense" [sic] anti-gun "laws" which lead to the same place.

They may recognize the wake of death and destruction left by prohibition, yet balk at getting government out of the illegitimate business of regulating drugs.

They may think "taxes" are too high, but still refuse to recognize that "taxation" IS theft.

They may admit the disaster created by every government so far, and yet keep believing if they can just get government right it will be OK.

They can see the tip of their nose, but not the zombie standing right in front of them, ready to eat whatever is left of their brain.

I wish there were some form of vision correction they'd be willing to try. Although, there have been some successes over the years.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

The silly game

Watching political people almost cracks me up.

You have a group playing a game with dice painted gold, while another group plays the same game with identical dice painted green.

They pretend they are playing different games, and they hate each other based on this shared hallucination.

They may call themselves Democrats, conservatives, Republicans, or progressives. Some of them even call themselves Libertarians. They are all playing the same game, with identical pieces, under identical rules. Any differences they perceive are just surface decoration.

It would be nice if this focus on their teammates would distract them from reality long enough for the rest of us to leave them in the dust. To build the agora right under their noses.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Schools or bars?

Someone was showing me a satellite photo of a place where I used to live. A place where I honed a lot of my outdoor skills. Now the entire area behind my former house, which used to be wooded, has been replaced by a gigantic high school. Yes, I get that nothing stays the same. But there are good changes and bad changes. This is a bad one.

I didn't share the person's enthusiasm for such "progress"-- but as I've said before, almost my entire family is involved in government schooling in some way and they feel it's just peachy-keen. They confuse schooling for education.

I grumbled that this was about the worst thing they could have put there. She said, "It's better than a bar". Interesting example.

Before I could stop myself, a slight scoff escaped my lips. But I shut up before turning it into a fight. I've saved the fight for here.

She prefers a kinderprison because her religious beliefs tell her that alcohol is the worst thing ever. It might even lead to dancing or sex. She's ignorant of the realities, preferring her insulated prejudices. If it's something other than attending church, it's sinful (I exaggerate only slightly). Never mind that government schools (in many places) are a prime factor in getting young people to reject religions other than Statism. She ignores that reality, too. She wants both of her religions at the same time.

Yes, too much alcohol can be bad. It can cause archation and other poor choices. It can ruin your health or kill you, but it's not the only thing which can.

I've spent some of the best times of my life in bars, drinking Dr Pepper and singing karaoke. I avoided fights. I've enjoyed some nice dances. And yes, I've found some sexual partners, too. Only one of those was a real mistake. That's a better track record than my experience at school.

But, by even her own professed (though unexamined) standards, a school is no better.

The inmates in kinderprison find sex partners. They have dances. They help each other obtain alcohol and other mind-altering substances. They get into fights, and they engage in (or suffer) bullying-- an activity almost exclusive to schools. They engage in almost all the same activities a bar would offer, plus some bad activities you won't find at a bar.

But what about the institutions themselves?

No one is forced to go to a bar.

Refuse to attend a school and you or your parents may end up in jail (or worse).

No one is forced to fund a bar against their own free will, even if they dislike bars as much as she does.

No matter how much you hate government schools, you are forced to help fund them. Even if you have no kids attending them. Even if you choose (and pay for) alternatives; you'll just be forced to pay twice. If you refuse to comply you will be murdered.

If you choose to go to a bar you won't be forced to drink. You won't be forced to dance, sing, or go home with a stranger. You can almost always avoid any fight that comes your way... if you choose to do so.

If you are forced to go to a school you will also be forced to ingest the government-supremacist propaganda. You WILL be subjected to brainwashing techniques to cause you to accept ordering your life to the ringing of a bell. Waiting for permission to use the restroom. Your time away from school will also be claimed as belonging to the school, through "homework" and other controls. You will be trained to believe answers come from "authority", and compliance is the way to avoid punishment. You will be taught lies sold as facts. That's mental abuse, and emotional abuse. You will be damaged in some way.

If you live next to a bar, you will possibly have drunk people crossing your lawn. They might pass out or puke in your grass. They might do property damage.

I live next to a kinderprison and I have kids crossing my yard every day; dropping litter, damaging plants and landscaping. I've had kids puke in my yard as they cross. They ignore my "No Trespassing" sign-- someone actually destroyed a sapling right beside the sign a few weeks ago.

Opposing a school is seen as anti-social when the schools themselves are anti-social institutions.

No, a bar would be much better than a government school. In almost every way.

A bar is ethically superior to a school because bars are voluntary and schools are not. That's the bottom line. Bars are voluntary; schools are murder.

Give me a bar over a school any day!

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

I'm not your opposition unless you choose to be mine

As long as you are not an archator-- especially a habitual archator-- I'm not going to actively oppose you.

You may or may not be exactly on my side.
You may or may not have valid opinions and good motives.
Yet, it could be worse.
You could feel it's right to be an archator, or you might just do so without caring about right or wrong. Those would both be worse.

If you do choose to archate I don't give you a pass due to your religion, your job, your need, or any other justifications. I will oppose you, and more.
Yes, I will be judging you, but if you feel you're in the right, what would you care about my judgment?

Nor will I really care what you think of me. The opinions of archators/statists are less important than a mouse's sneeze in a hurricane. Much less. By supporting statism and archation you've devalued your own opinions to the point there's nothing there. It wasn't my decision, it was your choice. You've done it to yourself. You have nothing to complain about and no one else to blame.

_______________

Reminder: I could really use some help.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Statists are tired of hearing my opinions-- even when they don't

"Anarchy can't work. People need to be governed."

OK. Whatever you say.

Once someone expresses this religious belief there's no point in further conversation. They won't be swayed by reason, logic, evidence, or anything of value. No matter what you say, they'll have a laundry list of objections and clichés-- mostly the same few restated differently so they seem like new scholarly "observations".

It's why I'd rather talk to you.

They are tiresome. Whiney. Willfully blind or at least shortsighted. And they prefer it that way.

Yes, I sometimes learn things from listening to them, but mostly it involves realizing how much effort they put forth to stay inside their tiny bubble of ignorance. The mental contortions they put themselves through! And the really stupid notions they keep accepting and defending-- things they'd never accept about something they weren't so attached to.

I know it's not nice of me to say these things, but I'm tired. Mostly I just want them to stop ordering me around and robbing me. Stop trying to make me act as though they are reasonable or good. Just stay out of my way.

I'm irritated that it seems to be so profitable to lick boots; to be a part of the problem. And it makes one so popular and socially accepted. Sometimes, I admit, I almost wish I could lower myself to their level.

I'm tired of being expected to praise "laws", schools, troops, and cops, and hate "illegal immigrants", independent businesspeople, and drug users... and I'm tired of the eye rolls when I say even the mildest thing which goes against those popular opinions. I seriously don't talk about these things outside of my blog unless someone else brings it up first and expects a reply from me. And then, if I do say anything, I get told they are tired of hearing my anti-government opinions.

It happened again today, out of the blue, when I was sitting silently, wasn't even speaking and hadn't said anything about government (or other archators) all day. Probably just as a way to make sure I still knew I'm not acceptable, in case I had forgotten.

Well, stop praising aggression and theft and stop bringing it up in my presence and you'll never hear a word about it from me. It's honestly not something I often feel the need to discuss face-to-face. But, yes, I will have expressed these opinions at some point in the past, and you might be able to remember that I said something of the sort, even if you don't remember the point of what I actually said.

On the other hand, those around me speak negatively about cops and government way more than I do. But only when they feel these things will negatively affect them personally-- and they seem to feel the effects a lot. They feel that as long as someone else is being governed good and hard, it keeps government busy and off their own backs.

I think this is a self-centered way to think about it. I don't want you or anyone else targeted by these molesters; I don't only think about myself. But they don't want to hear me say it. So I usually don't.

You know, if I hated people I would be a statist. But I don't, in spite of their best efforts, so I'm not one.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Awareness often first step towards liberty

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for March 27, 2019)

People are often their own worst enemies. They listen to those they should ignore or laugh at while they ignore (or laugh at) those they should listen to. It's always been the same.

Harriet Tubman, the 19th Century abolitionist, is quoted as saying, "I freed a thousand slaves. I could have freed more if only they knew they were slaves."

It's the libertarian's dilemma. People don't like to notice their chains even when that's about all it would take to break them. It's too painful to admit they aren't as free as they should be, so they don't.

No one can free you; it's up to you to free yourself. If someone takes the chains off of you, unless you make up your mind to be free you'll help put the chains back on the first time you get a little scared or hungry.

You'll enslave yourself because you fear immigrants you imagine taking jobs you don't have and don't want.

You'll enslave yourself to keep a neighbor from doing things they want to do but you don't want them to do. Even when they don't violate you in any way, you'll violate yourself just to control them.

If it makes you angry to be told you aren't nearly as free as you imagine; that your liberty is systematically violated every minute of your life by those who tell you how free you are, here's another quote you need to hear; this one from Johann Wolfgang von Goethe: "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."

Your body is yours; no one has a higher claim to it. If you can be prohibited from ingesting something-- whether it's sugar, Cannabis, or bacon-- you aren't free. If you can be forced to act against your interests when doing what you want wouldn't violate anyone, you aren't free.

The property you've gotten through mutually consensual arrangements with others is yours. If anyone else can claim your property-- through such government actions as taxation, licenses, eminent domain, or even property codes-- you aren't free.

If you won't work to be free-- to throw off your chains-- when it would be relatively safe and easy, what will you do when it becomes hard? Will you resign your children's children to an intrusive, controlling police state? If you go along to get along today, you've already answered the question. You've chosen chains over scary liberty.

Added: Here's the headline this same column was given in the print edition...

-
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com

Tortured "complexity"

When someone is about to start doing some mental contortionism in order to try to justify statism, they'll often make the statement, "it's a very complex issue". No, it really isn't. They're lying to try to appear deep and smart and to justify the unjustifiable.

"Gun control" isn't a complex issue. You have no right to forbid weapons of defense to anyone, and you can't delegate a right you don't have.

"Drug legalization" isn't a complex issue. You have no right to forbid the manufacture, possession, or sale, nor the ingestion, inhalation, or injection of substances. You can't magically acquire that right just because you think it's necessary. You have no right to have people do things you have no right to do without asking them to become bad guys. Prohibition is enforced by bad guys, only.

"Immigration" [sic] isn't a complex issue. You have the right to allow (or bar) anyone on (or from) your property. For any reason or no reason at all. You have the right to hire or trade with anyone. Your rights end at your property lines-- the only legitimate borders.

"Taxation" isn't a complex issue. It is theft-- specifically extortion. Nothing can make it something else.

Complex issues" look complex only when someone adds all sorts of twists and turns, bells and whistles, bows and ribbons, and flags and laws. At the base, there's probably a simple ethically right thing to do and hundreds of wrong things to do. They have to tell lies to justify the wrong things-- the statist things.

When someone lies and calls a simple issue a complex issue you can be certain they are looking for ways to justify doing wrong. I've run out of patience with the lies told to harm others.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

World's Dumbest Phrases

It seems an inordinate number of the World's Dumbest Phrases start with one particular word: "our".

"Our government", "our president", "our military", "our CIA", "our elections", "our police", "our borders", "our schools", or whatever. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

If that seems insulting, good. It's intended to be, and a person probably wouldn't be insulted if they didn't know it's true.

Now, "our" isn't always a dumb word to use. If you and I share real-world ownership in something, "our" is a valid word. Suppose we go in together and buy a sword, and we have an arrangement where we both get to use it. It is our sword.

Something doesn't become "ours" just because you want to impose it on me at my expense when I have no use for it. It's also not "ours" if you're trying to spread the guilt around; smearing me by claiming I share in your guilt. If you want it, and it is harmful, but I have opposed it from the beginning-- or even if I withdrew my support when I got smarter-- you don't get to pin it on me. I disavow your ethical and economic disasters. They are your responsibility. Suck it up.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid. And I sure would appreciate getting paid.

"You don't like cops"

The people around me know I don't put up with bullies, thieves, molesters, thugs, or any archators. Yet, they choose to characterize this as "You don't like cops". Really? That's what they get from that? That's what they focus on?

They're right. I don't like cops.

Not because they are cops, but because they are bullies and thieves and molesters and thugs and otherwise nothing but archators. Even if they very rarely do something helpful. There is no such thing as a "good cop"-- no good person can be a cop. Not because they are a cop, but because of what the "job" requires. In the exact same way that there can't be a good rapist.

I don't make exceptions to disliking bullies, thieves, molesters, thugs, or any other archators just because it's part of the "job" they choose to carry out.

To abbreviate this as "You don't like cops" is to miss the entire point.

The only reason I can see that this would be the focal point is that those around me make an exception for behavior they would otherwise recognize as bad, as long as it is carried out by a cop (or other government employee). Things they wouldn't tolerate anyone else doing, they justify when done by a goon wearing a badge. That's kinda pathetic.

-

This blog is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Dumb ideas aren't "progress"

A few days ago I saw someone bringing up the 20th anniversary of the mass-murder by the evil losers at the Columbine kinderprison. They were moaning that 20 years have passed and "what progress have we made?"

They didn't exactly say, but I'll bet I know their idea of "progress", and I'll bet it is what I would consider going backward into deeper slavery.

Because I'm sure their "solution" is more anti-gun "laws" like the ones which not only failed to protect lives, but actually empowered the evil losers at Columbine (and elsewhere in the years since). "Laws" which made sure they could murder without interruption. "Laws" which made it less likely anyone would be able to fight back effectively. "Laws" which make cowering and dying official policy.

It's not the guns. It's never the guns. If you want to solve things like school shootings, but you think it's about the guns you're a moron. Anything you do will only make it worse.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

"SPD"- Statist Personality Disorder

I'm seeing more and more evidence that statism is more than a quirk; it's a full-fledged mental disorder.

It will never be officially recognized as such, of course, because most of those who with the power to recognize it also suffer from it. And they aren't likely to recognize their own mental illness as a mental illness, or admit it is even if they realize it.

But that doesn't change the fact that it is one.

Statist Personality Disorder shares a lot of characteristics with Narcissistic Personality Disorder-- maybe it's a subcategory. There also seems to be a lot of neuroticism mixed in.

It's self-centered and self-important; scared and cruel.
It's the temperamental spoiled toddler and the overbearing parent.
Evil claiming to be goodness.
Greed pretending to be generosity.
Insanity posing as reasonableness.

I have no respect for those who exhibit signs of Statist Personality Disorder.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Windstorm reminder to be ready

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for March 20, 2019)

How much did you enjoy our recent "shingle apocalypse" brought on by the little wind storm? Probably about as much as I did.

I even went out and took a walk in it. I love the feel of gravel pelting the skin of my face, the grit in my teeth, and debris hitting my body. You just can't enjoy this kind of thing in lesser places like Paris, France.

On my walk, I staggered like I was intoxicated, but I told myself it was a good workout, and good practice if I'm ever on a cruise through a hurricane.

The only downside is that my shingles decided this was a good time to go sightseeing. They may be in Amarillo now; so far they haven't found their way home. I'll leave a light on in the window, but hope is fading.

The part I enjoyed most was the fifteen and a half hour power outage. It gave me a chance to light my kerosene lamps, check the function of my flashlights, and use the backup batteries for all the modern electronic essentials. I'm pleased to say they all passed the test with flying colors. It's fun to be a "prepper", especially when doomsday is postponed.

It's satisfying to weather these events without too much trouble just because you were prepared.

Yet, there was one area where I failed myself. I was almost out of firewood, and my gas furnace doesn't work without electricity. I never allow myself to get this low on firewood, but this year I decided to burn up all the old stuff before I got a new load. The coolness of the night caught me off guard. I was lucky this time-- the power came back on just after I lit a fire to warm the house the next morning. It could have been a problem and I have no one but myself to blame.

All in all, it wasn't much of an inconvenience and I enjoyed myself-- as I always do in such situations. I'm not happy about my shingles, though.

I suppose there's really no way to prepare to have the shingles violently blown off your house, other than having money for repairs. I was unprepared there, too.

I hope you were prepared and didn't suffer too much. Just remember: something else will come along. You won't know what or when, so make sure you're as ready as you can be, now. You'll be glad you prepared.

-
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com

Statism = Nihilism = Statism

I am not a nihilist. I don't want to watch the world burn, and I certainly don't want to be the one to set it on fire.

Yes, I hate and oppose negative things like governments and other archators, but I don't hate and oppose everything. I don't want to destroy society (that's why I don't support political governments). I don't want to destroy most people. I don't want to break windows and loot and flip over cars. Well, at least not those owned by people rather than governments. I hate and oppose those things which are most destructive-- things which nihilists should love. It's why I can't be a statist.

However, I understand the frustration which drives some to a nihilistic world-view. I can't even really blame them for feeling that way, even if I would blame them if they carried it out.

I'm a personal pessimist, but a long-term optimist. My own life may never be what I wish, but in the long term-- maybe longer than several human lifespans-- I think things will keep getting better. I am sad when I think how much horror and tyranny will probably have to pass between now and then.

I do what I can to give people the chance to avoid it, but my voice is small and unimportant. I wish I could get through to people to save them the pain, but most people (including myself) don't learn without pain. It's bad enough when people cause themselves pain, but so much worse when their bad choices cause pain to others.

And make no mistake: statism is a bad, bad choice. No matter how many believe it is normal. No matter how few can see another path. It's a really dumb thing to cling to. Yet, cling they do. They will make the nihilists "happy" with the inevitable results of statism: death, destruction, poverty, slavery, and just about all other bad outcomes. Outcomes guaranteed by people claiming to want to help... by doing the opposite of the right thing.

And yet, even with all that, I'm not a nihilist and could never be one.

-

Writing is my job.

YOU get to decide if-- IF-- I get paid.

Pick a side, Dude!

I was in line behind this very confused inDUHvidual yesterday. I know you probably can't read much from that cell phone picture, but his back window and tailgate opinions almost made me laugh.

On his back window, he had a pro-guns sticker, but his tailgate demanded you support anti-gun bigot Trump (and Holy Pole Quilt) and the anti-liberty (against ALL liberty, including guns) Blue Line Gang. Or maybe he was demanding I support the anti-liberty/anti-gun bigots of the unconstitutional FBI (Federal Baby Incinerators) since his sign actually said: "Support Your American Police Force". There is no American police force (and if there were, it wouldn't be mine) but the FBI comes closest to being a U.S. police force. I don't support those liberty diddlers, either.

Then he had a couple of anti-Democrat signs. The top one called Democrats out by name (or is it by brand?) but the picture isn't clear enough to read and I don't remember exactly what it said. The other one said "Put the Swamp in Jail" with a cartoon donkey after it. Clear enough.

Silly man believes one side is pro-liberty. Against all evidence and reason. But he believes it.

Then he had a Bible sticker in his rear window, and a sign near the bottom of the tailgate warning he has road rage and to get off his a**. This on top of showing clear support for the competing religion, Statism. That boy needs to pick a side.

I'm surprised he didn't have a sign bemoaning the crudity of American culture while having a shiny new set of Made in China truck testicles dangling underneath. Plus he was still missing the obligatory "Support the Troops" magnet.

Yeah, he is one confused puppy. And I'm sure he v*tes, somehow believing he's doing his part to protect "freedom". People like him are more laughs than most sitcoms. But it obviously pays to be Statist; his pickup was a lot nicer than mine.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Assange, Trump, and Obama

Yes, president Trump is doing the wrong thing by not dropping all charges against Julian Assange immediately. Very wrong.

Yet, had Obama done the right thing-- and he had plenty of time and opportunity to do so-- this wouldn't even be up to Trump. He could have ended this years ago. He is every bit as much to blame. This isn't just another Trump crime, it's an Obama crime, too.

Presidents are cancer. Assange is a cure, as are all whistleblowers. Of course presidents are not going to be fans of his.

Coincidentally, and with amazing timing, Ammo.com just sent me a link to their newest: A Historical Guide to the Freedom of Information Act.

It's perverse that government believes they have a "right" to decide whether or not (usually not) to let you know what they are up to, and that your right to know what these parasites are up to needs an "act" to codify it and give them excuses to hide things. The very notion that anyone working for government has any "right to privacy" where their "job" is concerned is absurd. But this is the world of statists we live in.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Problems don't call for policies

Buy the book

The existence of a problem doesn't beg for a policy.

A policy will probably make more problems than it solves, especially if the policy is political in nature. Political "solutions" usually come in the form of legislation; a counterfeit "law". And even if it does somehow manage to solve the problem, it is unethical. Legislation always is.

The statist mind is always assuming every problem needs a policy to address it. When theft and coercion is in your tool kit, that's the lazy way to approach it. Statist "solutions" are a band-aid, not a permanent solution.

If, like me, you rule out those statist approaches automatically you'll need to find real voluntary solutions. Voluntary solutions will be more robust and longer-lasting, too. Partly this is because people are willingly embracing these solutions. No gun in the face is needed. With political "solutions", when the political winds shift the gun often ends up pointing the other direction. All political "solutions" are subject to change every time a new ruler is holding the gun. That's not a real solution. Not a long-term solution. You can do better.

_______________

Reminder: I could really use some help.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Gear post: Possibles bag for modern life

Click to embiggen

Mountainmen of Old usually carried a bag filled with anything they might possibly need. Not their shooting bag, which carried support items for their firearms, but a separate bag for everything else. We call this the "possibles bag". I learned the benefit of having such a bag long ago, and have adapted this to the modern world. Some hurtful people have called the possibles bag a purse.

My mountainman possibles bag would actually be a nice thing to have in any difficult situation, but there are some modern problems it wouldn't be ideal for solving. So I took a bag which had belonged to an ex-wife, added some inner pockets, and made it my modern-life possibles bag. I have other bags and pouches I can carry in other situations, but they don't get carried regularly (other than the one I carry when I walk to the post office so I don't need to carry the mail in my hand and hang on to it in the wind).

The possibles bag is made of commercially tanned leather and measures 8.5" wide by 7" tall. It has a button made of buffalo horn (probably water buffalo) secured with a thong of braintain buckskin (for durability and strength). The strap is 2" wide and adjustable, but I haven't changed the length in a long time.
The contents are more variable than any other EDC I carry, and I don't actually always have it with me. Just if I go to the next town by car, or sometimes if I know I'm going to be out of the house for a while.

The picture reflects where in the bag the stuff is kept, separated by the specific pocket it is in. If you look hard, you can probably see how it fits in each pocket.

Top left: home-assembled magnifying glass-- USB cord-- Swiss mini-tool-- cheap folding knife-- Sharpie-- pencil.

Middle left: bullet mini-light-- P-38 can opener-- hair clip.

Bottom left shows how the inside of the bag looks currently.

Top right corner: paper clips-- short USB cord-- USB-C adapter in bag-- back-up battery-- notepad-- wet wipe-- 91% alcohol for hand cleaning and glasses cleaning.

Middle right: lighter-- hair ties-- lip balm.

Bottom right is the contents of the main compartment. Moving sort of from the left to the rightish: a bottle handle/strap made of paracord, and another little bit of paracord-- a rag made from a sweatshirt for cleaning glasses-- a bag containing earbuds-- some little emergency flashing lights-- dental floss-- USB car adapter-- more floss-- leather thong-- 2 types of gum-- medicine vial of coffee substitute-- Maglite (LED)-- prescription sunglasses in their case-- another rag made of cotton shirt. (I carry a lot of things for other people, since I can't seem to get them to be responsible for themselves.)

Now, this will probably be the last regular EDC post unless someone asks about something else. I'm not going to go into defensive tools I may or may not carry, nor a few other "tactical" things I may or may not have on my person at all times. Anything else would just be the clothes on my back or trinkets I wear. I hope you've enjoyed the tour.

_______________

Reminder: I could really use some help.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

The Notre Dame Ruins

From news.com.au

A landmark has joined-- probably at least for the rest of my lifespan-- the list of historic ruins around the world. Like the Coliseum in Rome, the Acropolis, and more.

I have no religious or nationalist (but I repeat myself) attachment to the Notre Dame Cathedral, but its destruction saddens me anyway.

I hate to see any historic landmark or artwork destroyed. Whether by accident or intentionally, by stupid politico-religionists. I like old stuff. Oftentimes more than I like new stuff.

I'm glad to see people volunteering their own money to fund the attempt to rebuild it.

_______________

Reminder: I could really use some help.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Banning real progress

Begging government to ban vaping makes as much sense as begging government to ban car brakes.

No, vaping isn't totally safe. It's safer than smoking.
Your car having brakes won't make driving totally safe. But it's still safer than driving without brakes.

Banning, or heavily regulating, either one is going backward. Kind of like banning (or heavily regulating) suppressors.

That doesn't mean I want government to mandate vaping as an alternative to smoking-- it should be a personal choice. You do your life, I'll do mine.

As a tangent-- I'm always shocked at the amount of dishonesty involved in trying to fool people into joining the prohibitionists (or any statist cause, for that matter).

I saw a "public service" [sic] ad against the JUUL vapers recently, where the woman was horrified that the JUUL "contains as much nicotine as 20 cigarettes!" What is this, standard-capacity magazine hysteria aimed at a different tool?

I'm supposing you don't get all the nicotine the device contains in one inhalation. Even if you did get all the nicotine in one sitting, wouldn't it be just like chainsmoking 20 cigarettes? I've seen smokers do that (OK, I didn't count, but you know what I mean). How many cigarettes come in a pack? 20 or 25? Are you going to shove them all in your mouth at once and smoke them together? I guess you could, but I don't think there's a way to get the entire contents of nicotine from a JUUL in the amount of time it would take to smoke one cigarette-- unless you broke it open or something. But it sounds scarier to lie. Scared people are lemmings you can lead to cry for the privilege of being governed harder. So that's what prohibitionists do.

_______________

Reminder: I could really use some help.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.

Theft Day

_______________

Reminder: I could really use some help.

-

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.