Hot Libertarian Topics

I have nothing to say (for once), so I will let my mind wander a bit. It is very small and shouldn't be left to wander alone for too long. Kinda like when I used to take my kids into the mountains and say "If you get attacked by a bear, scream really loud and I will come shoot it." They never screamed and were always right where I left them.

So, anyway. Ron Paul is still shocking people with his libertarian answers to some issues. The issues for which he has only Rep(tile)ublican answers ("immigration"?) shock no one. No one except libertarians, anyway. He should start giving libertarian answers to those questions too. Just to shock the general populace more. Couldn't hurt, and it might get him more attention. I notice his webpage has "borrowed" Alexander Hope's slogan. He isn't quite Alex Hope, but maybe with a little encouragement....

In other current events, a jabbut (jack-booted thug) in Hot Springs, Arkansas was caught on video choking skateboarders. This shocks no one anymore; we are getting desensitized to the thuggery of the authoritards. It does make some of us really mad, though. Well, me at least.

Wayne Fincher is still in jail for owning guns the tyrants are scared of (and hurting no one). Red's Trading Post is still being harrassed by the BATFE (Barbaric "Anti-Truth and -Freedom " Extremists) who have hissy fits over paperwork while ignoring the total lack of integrity in their dead, fishy heads.

Ed Brown seems to be going crazy because of the seige. The feds have ruined this man's life simply because he wants to keep his own money. Money that he and his wife earned; not the federal government. Just because he doesn't want to give in to thieves with badges. Sad.

I'm getting a growing number of hits on this blog from countries other than America. Welcome guys! We are all in this together, and I appreciate your interest.

In other words, it is a typical day in America. Get out there and enjoy it while you still can.

Idiots Have Freedom of Speech, Too

First this:

NEWS RELEASE
CCRKBA DRAFTS LEGISLATION TO STOP
JACKSON-STYLE GUN SHOP PROTESTS

BELLEVUE, WA – After denouncing the demagoguery of Rev. Jesse Jackson in
his continued protests at a suburban Chicago-area gun shop, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms today announced that it has drafted federal legislation that would prevent such protests from interfering with legal businesses.

“This is not an attack on the First Amendment rights of Jesse Jackson or
anyone else,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “But it would put an end to
the kind of publicity-seeking shenanigans that Jackson and his cohort, anti-gun
Catholic priest Michael Pfleger, have been conducting at Chuck’s Gun Shop in
suburban Riverdale for the past three weeks. We’re working on Capitol Hill right
now to gather sponsors.

“Nobody is saying Jackson can’t protest a gun shop,” Gottlieb added. “We
are, however, seeking the same protection from interference that is now
guaranteed by federal statute to reproductive health services facilities.”

Added CCRKBA Public Affairs Director John Snyder, “It is against the law
for anti-abortion activists to block access to these clinics, and it should be
just as illegal for anti-gunners to block access to gun shops. This is neither a
First or Second Amendment issue but rather a Fourteenth Amendment issue relating to equal protection.”

Jackson and Pfleger have been demonstrating at or near Chuck’s Gun Shop for
the past few weeks. Last Saturday, both men were arrested by Riverdale police
after their activities created access problems for Chuck’s customers.

Under CCRKBA’s proposal, anyone who uses force, a threat of force, or
physical obstruction, or intimidates or intentionally injures another person who
is attempting to enter a gun shop, or who operates such a store, would be
criminally liable. Three weeks ago, Pfleger caused considerable alarm by telling
a crowd that he would find gun shop owner John Riggio and “snuff him
out.”

“This proposal would provide protection to law-abiding firearms retailers
and their customers nationwide,” Gottlieb stated. “Chuck’s is a legal business,
operating under state and federal statutes. Jackson and his followers don’t have
to like it or agree with it, but under this proposal, they will have to accept
the fact that a firearms dealer has as much right to operate a business as they
have to shoot off their mouths. They have no right at all to prevent public
access to a gun shop, or to intimidate or otherwise discourage customers from
entering.”

Now, the commentary. Jesse Jackson is a two-faced media-whore. Michael Pfleger is an anti-christian. They still have the absolute right to say whatever they wish to say. Freedom of Speech, ya know. But ... while they have a right to display their infantile, coercive ways, they do not have a right, no one does, to initiate (or threaten to initiate) force or fraud. Once they do, they should be subject to darwinization (not terribly applicable, I know, since Pfleger has supposedly done us that favor with his "priestly" vows of celibacy). Are Jackson and Pfleger trespassing? I would bet they are, if they are able to effectively block the entrance. What is the ethical method of dealing with intentional, hostile, repeat trespassers? If the gun store owner or one of his customers is touched in an unwelcome way or if these clods threaten to initiate force (as has already been done on video by Pfleger) while trying to go about their business, then force has been initiated .... with all the ramifications that go along with it. New laws are not the way to solve boorish or dangerous behavior. Dealing justly with these control freaks, under the constraints of the Zero Aggression Principle, is the proper response, and one that would lower the chances of bad behavior like this happening in the future. We have been too "nice" for too long; allowing parasites to get away with behavior that should not be tolerated. Time's up, vermin!

Tyranny Fears....

What are the things tyrants fear the most? Guns and brains. In the hands of the people, anyway. They love their own guns (pointed at us) and their own brains (insane with lust for control).

Tyranny fears guns, because regardless of whatever "laws" and security it enforces, there is always the risk of a patriot doing the world a favor by culling a mentally diseased control-freak from the herd. Leaders have no reason to fear armed regular people. Leaders do not drag us along behind them. Rulers force us along a path that we have no desire to be on. This makes us cranky. This means if we get a chance to rid ourselves of the tyrant, we will take it. It is therefore necessary, in the tyrant's unbalanced mind, to impose more draconian edicts on us to take away our weaponry. As if this will stop the inevitable. No one who wants to take your gun, any gun, away from you does it for your benefit. They do it so that they can do bad things to you that you might resist effectively if you were armed. Once they utter an intention to pass a "law" regulating some aspect of gun ownership they have declared that they intend to hurt you in some way. Never forget that fact.

Tyranny fears brains possibly more than it fears guns. They have tried to sabotage knowledge through government controlled "education". They may have delayed their downfall by a generation or two. Some people are immune to the mind-numbing effects. Anyone with a mind can devise an effective weapon, even a gun, from things that are so common in an industrialized country that it is completely impossible to prevent. This scares tyrants out of their minds. And it should. They can outlaw, confiscate, and destroy every gun and bullet in the world, and by the next morning there could be enough new guns and ammunition to cause Rulers to have a very bad, very short, day. As long as the knowledge still exists. (On this note, I recommend that everyone immediately go to this website and buy this guy's book(s). Do it now... I will wait...) Besides the danger to tyrants of "us peasants" making guns, the awareness of what constitutes tyranny and oppression is dangerous for them. If we thought they were justified in their "governments" we would probably be content in our shackles. Knowledge of liberty, the Zero Aggression Principle, and the Covenant of Unanimous Consent make for a smoldering volcano lying just below the surface. Rulers never know which new rule will cause an eruption. We know that what they attempt to do is wrong. We know how to make weapons, poisons, and traps. We know how to communicate our knowledge to others. To get rid of the knowledge, they will have to kill us all, burn all the books, and erase the internet. They can't do that. They have lost; they just don't know it yet.

Self Righteousness

Is it "self righteousness" to say what you really believe?

I often do a Dogpile or Google search on myself to see what crops up. I ran across a forum where I was being discussed (as a minor part of a SelectSmart discussion). One of the posters was infuriated by me, saying that I am "self righteous" and that everything I say is "the Libertarian Party line". Strange argument.

I don't know if I am self righteous or not. I do know that I am much more radical than the LP. Last summer's LP reform has seen to that. He claims that I am "saying the same stuff that the LP was saying 11 years ago, using the same wording half the time." So? I was not a member of the LP back then and never read any of their literature. How many ways are there to say the same thing? Maybe everything I say is strictly libertarian in nature, but I am libertarian, what else can I do? If a physicist says things that happen to agree precisely with the way the world really operates does it make him wrong? Do you demand that he incorporate creationism into his observations to soothe your bruised ego? Gimme a break!

OK. Let's go to Dictionary.com to look up "self righteous". Hmmm. "confident of one's own righteousness" does not fit me. I am confident of my rightness, but not of my righteousness, and there is a big difference in the two. I am not saying I am not righteous. I do try to be. I don't believe anyone can judge that in themselves. So we go on to the next part: "smugly moralistic and intolerant of the opinions and behavior of others" is the exact opposite of what libertarianism is all about. There are many behaviors that I find personally repugnant that I defend on a daily basis, precisely because I understand that my personal opinion on these things is trumped by individual liberty. As long as no one else is being hurt people should be free to live however they see fit.

The poster in question has no personal knowledge of me. How can he decide if I am self righteous or not? I think he is simply threatened by my confidence that I am right, and maybe afraid he is wrong. If you think I am wrong, tell me so in the comments. Others have. You may not convince me but I will not delete anything you say (unless you decide your comments make you look foolish and ask me to delete them, as I have done for one person in the past). Perhaps your words of wisdom will keep some other misguided person from embracing individual liberty and responsibility. I still think I (and others who think like me) are right, and those who worship the state are dead wrong. If I doubted that for an instant I would shut up and stop blogging.

"Conspiracy Realists of the World Unite!" by Wilt Alston

By way of The Libertarian Enterprise and KarenDeCoster.com comes this article by Wilt Alston about 9/11.
Conspiracy Realists of the World Unite!

Wanted: A Frontier

For the first time in all of human history, there is no readily accessible frontier available for those of us who need to move beyond the grasp of "civilization". Never pretend it is not a NEED. This is a tragedy that may spell the end of our species if it is not remedied soon. Social pressures and nonsensical "rules" are not easy for some people to deal with. These people need to be able to move to freer spaces. To force them to stay in crowded, regulated areas is a recipe for disaster. This does not mean they are bad people; just that over-management has unintended, but entirely predictable, consequences.

Without going underground, undersea, extra-dimensional, into interplanetary space, or building a new continent, we are trapped. Of these options, I think leaving Earth completely is the best long-term option. Governments will try to prevent it if they discover your plans, and will risk everything to shoot you down upon launch. Can't allow any subjects to declare independence, you know. The problem is that projects like this will probably be large group projects and will be prone to becoming "governmental" in their complexity and administration. Maybe it would be possible to form a group based upon Unanimous Consent. It's worth a try.


There is also the fact that a planet-wide catastrophe could cause human extinction. It is imperative that humans get spread out away from our planetary cradle before that happens if we want to survive. If left to governmental agencies, we will never leave Earth in large enough numbers to form sustainable populations elsewhere. If any of you have a nice Firefly-class ship full of kind-hearted "pirates", I can clean toilets for passage.

Seeds of Freedom

I have lived in a few places around America. Some places are pretty free; others are very socialistic. Some places actually have pretty bad laws governing them, but most of the people ignore the laws and simply go about their lives regardless of what any "authorities" demand. Where I am living now is not too bad as far as the laws go, but the people have a fawning attitude toward "authority" that I find disgusting. They live as though they are subject to more rules than they actually are. My flippant attitude toward the stupid laws meets with shocked disbelief. Even my close friends will say "You don't CARE what the law is???" I refer to police officers as "enforcers" or "terrorists" depending upon what they are doing at the time. I have a Time's Up flag flying from my house and a small one on my car. Freedom, true freedom, comes from your own mind. I don't know how many of you have read this article I wrote for Strike the Root a while ago, or this one I wrote for The Libertarian Enterprise.

I don't know how much the "authorities" watch people who write things like this. They probably ignore us completely, thinking that as long as we keep venting our frustration harmlessly, we will not start the revolution. What they don't realize is that the revolution starts in our minds. We are watering the seeds of freedom with every thought. We are ignoring the government edicts a little more every day. It has begun and will only grow. Socialistic governments only cause those seeds of liberty to germinate faster and spread to more minds with every idiotic law or control they impose on us. Don't let the state worshippers trick you into accepting your chains. Toss them aside, or turn them into jewelry if you can't.

Don't Fall Into a "Cult of Personality"

Everyone is fallible. Even the most brilliant person is capable, with his next breath, of uttering total crap. This is why we should all avoid "cults of personality". Yes, there are people whose written words I read hungrily. I try to keep my BS detectors engaged, though, so that I can filter out anything that doesn't meet the test.

Form your own opinions and don't let others weigh you by how much you are like or different from someone else. Some great (famous?) libertarians of the past and present had horrible ideas or inconsistencies in some areas. Nowhere does this get more discussion than with Ayn Rand, but it is true of everyone. Cull out the bad and keep the good. In this way you can build upon the foundations others have laid while you rise higher than they could. Liberty wins.

Sometimes I even have the alarm bells go off in my own head at my own thoughts. When I am falling asleep I have the most remarkable epiphanies at times. The next morning some of them reveal themselves to be absolutely ridiculous. Aren't you glad I get to sleep on these ideas instead of having them automatically blogged? I mean with some of the things I post even after cogitating.... I shudder to think....

Libertarian Left, Right, or Wrong?

I see a lot of blogs and websites that claim to speak for "the libertarian left". I haven't run across any from "the libertarian right" but I am sure they are out there somewhere. I don't know about you, but I think that distinction is nonsense. Either you are "libertarian" or you are not. I am not talking about "libertarian purity" or anything silly like that here. You may hold some left-over views, call them "scars", from your past, but don't pigeonhole yourself by those aberrations.


I considered myself on "The Right" long ago. Does that make this blog "a blog of the libertarian right"? I hope not. I have moved beyond all that. Or at least I think I have. Yes, I defend the "keeping and bearing" of guns. I also renounce the supreme stupidity of drug prohibition and "enforcing the law at all costs" that seem to be such a turn-on for The Right. Unlike The Left, I don't believe there is any such critter as "social justice"; either each individual gets justice or no one does.


I just think the false distinctions of "left" and "right" miss the boat completely. They are both authoritarian scavengers patrolling the bottom sludge. The libertarians are up top, in the light. Therefore this is "a blog of the political top".

Welcome to The New Dark Ages

This article in Wired, Don't Try This at Home, about the government's war against home chemistry got me thinking. It really does seem like we are entering a new "dark age" with it's own witch hunts and inquisition. Mystical superstitious nonsense like creationism is replacing scientific inquiry. Intelligent, curious people are being targeted by government thugs as "terrorists".

The subject of the Wired article, Bob Lazar, is well known to UFO/Area 51 aficionados. His is a fascinating tale. He may be a pathological liar, or he may know some bizarre things about the government's UFO cover-up. Either way, it is his sales of chemicals that has government goons after him. Chemicals that used to be available in home chemistry kits, but which the government now fears for their potential use in unapproved medicines or "things that go bang". How is our country supposed to advance with a government crack-down on experimentation? Demand a separation of government and science. Remember: tyrants want you to be helpless and stupid.

"If I Can't Dance..." by Jac

Here is something written by "Jac" at The Claire Files that I ran across recently. I think it is pretty good.

If I Can't Dance... or A Certain Person's Manifesto

"I did not believe that a Cause which stood for a beautiful ideal, for
anarchism, for release and freedom from convention and prejudice, should demand
the denial of life and joy."--Emma Goldman

When tyranny reaches a certain level in a society, as it always does (which
may sound strange coming from an anarchist, but hey, I'm a realist), the freedom
lover has a number of choices, which, in essence, are really three: he can
commit suicide, he can hide, or he can fight.

Suicide in the face of tyranny is, I think, more frequent than any of us
care to imagine. How many "stress-related" heart attacks and strokes in the
United States do you think have more to do with a simple lack of will to live? A
society such as we have today is truly a killer, and whether it's through
cowardice, lack of direction, or simply a lack of physical or emotional stamina,
many people succumb with little resistance. Even some who live a "full" life
commit a form of suicide, if they repress their desire for liberty; if one
allows his passion to die, can his continued physical existence
truly be called a life?

On to hiding. As often as some of the "hard core" types dismiss it as
cowardly, I see hiding as a very valid option for the liberty lover. Indeed, my
own goal is to run away (which is a subset of the hiding choice). In fact, this
continent was largely settled by those who fled tyranny rather than fighting it.
As my friend George Potter says, statism is largely a function of population
density. It is always around but, like any parasite, requires certain conditions
to truly flourish. And often, when so many people are subject to such a
parasite, quite a lot of them actually form a symbiotic
relationship with it, and rely on its survival for their own. And when a
despotic government commands such support, and has access to the resources of a
large civilization, what recourse is left to the liberty lover but flight?

Which brings us to fight. The favorite of novelists (some of them quite
good) and die hard patriots (some of them quite sane). But really, the reason I
saved fighting for last is because, despite the romance toward it felt by some,
or the terror others imagine it with, fighting tyranny is the one thing that every liberty lover does at some point along their chosen path.
The "quiet one" who goes toe-to-toe with the cops before eating his gun; the CEO
who struggled with her principles in school before accepting her "inevitable"
fate; the gulchers who fight in court for their right to homeschool, or keep
goats; the expatriates who dodge Uncle Sugar's taxes. The computer geek who
posts rambling screeds to the internet. Ahem. All of them choose their path, and
all of them fight their battles against the same enemy. In fact, the only real
difference is the weapons they choose, which is what this piece is really about.
Specifically, it's about that most potent of weapons: laughter, and those who
wield it.

Throughout history, one of the greatest banes of kings and presidents,
princes and popes, has been laughter. Whether inspired by subtle satire or
dick-and-fart jokes, tyrants cannot stand to be laughed at. Jokesters have been
the cause of revolutions and the target of book burnings and press smashings
(and people hangings).

So, I stand before you today (actually, I'm hunched over a legal pad in bed
writing this, but you're reading it on a computer, so I'll go with some dramatic
license)... I stand before you and proudly join (as an acolyte, of course... I
could only ever dream of attaining the satirical summits
reached by some) the ancient and noble line of Certain Persons, members of which
include: Tom Lehrer, Groucho Marx, H.L. Mencken, Emma Goldman, Samuel Clemens,
Ben Franklin, Jonathan Swift, Aristophones... so many more.

As one of our wiser contemporary members recently wrote (actually, he's not
really all that wise; kind of a goof really, but he's the best writer of us all
and, as a writer, needs an ego boost now and again): "I am convinced, now more
than ever, that the best action against the enemies of freedom, the enemies of
all that is best about being human, is to be human. Inconquerably human.
Unapologetically joyful."

So, if you are offended by our smart-assed smirks, or our immature sounding
attacks against statists, or our seeming lack of regard for The Cause or The
Party or The Mission, perhaps you should think twice before admonishing
us.

Because if you can't have fun in the pursuit of liberty, what, really, is
the point?

Fun With Acronyms

BATFE=Barbaric Anti-Truth and -Freedom Extremists

CIA=Cannabis Importers and Assassins

DEA= Destroying Everything American

DHS=Department of Hitlerian Schemes

FBI= Feral Brutality Instigators

IRS=Insane Revenue Stealers

TSA=Traveller-Squeezers Anonymous

USA (as opposed to "America")=Usurpers Supressing America



Laugh at them, then abolish them ALL!!

Why I'm Radical

I'm a radical libertarian and an anarchist because I see what happens if people continue to believe that government has a legitimate function. It grows out of control. The way I see it, in the alphabet of government, too many people say "the government should regulate A but leave everything else alone". The problem is that there are other people who then pipe up and say "government should regulate X or Y and leave everything else alone". Government is always only too happy to begin to regulate something new, but never decides it is time to back off. It is like saying that cancer is good because it kills a few really bad people while ignoring the fact that it kills more far more good people. Government is not worth the destruction it causes even if during its existence it occasionally does something good. Government: there is no excuse for it.

What Good are "Laws"?

Do you think laws make you safer? Do they somehow protect you? Laws are not passed to prevent or stop any crime, but only to provide for punishing those who have committed the crime, if they survive to escape the scene and are later caught and proved to be the guilty party. How does this protect you? What about the really stupid laws designed to protect you only from yourself?

Guns in the hands of the intended victims can (and do) stop and prevent crimes. But this takes power away from the government authoritards. That is one reason they don't like privately held weapons. Another reason is that in too many cases, the authoritards in question ARE the attackers.

Some people think that fear of punishment will keep bad people from committing crimes. I don't think that works very often. Premeditated murders would never occur if that were the case. Everyone thinks "I won't get caught!" Criminals who have been interviewed admit to being more afraid of armed victims than of being caught by cops.

Civilized people need to be able to stop a crime just as it starts. The best and most effective way of doing this without putting yourself in even more danger, is to have a gun, know how to use it, and be willing to do so.

Hey NRA, Please stop "Helping"!

I have written to the NRA again expressing my disgust at their "help". Wayne LaPierre: at this rate, you will negotiate away all of my guns. Compromise is for losers. Compromise is what you do if you are on the losing side of a battle. Or if you think you have done something wrong. It is like plea bargaining. Schumer and McCarthy should be begging gun owners to allow THEM to plea bargain instead of you, supposedly representing ME, running to them to show them how to rape our rights more effectively. Our side can't be the losing side; we have the moral high-ground, we have objective reality, we have the guns. Of course, the feds have more guns. They also have you worshipping them and their stormtroopers.

How can you have time to help to violate gun owners? There are plenty of REAL crises happening right now that you could be working on instead of helping the traitors in Congress to outlaw gun ownership. If you really want to help the good guys, Mr. LaPierre, join with JPFO in calling for the shutdown of the BATFE. Hold them and their accomplices accountable for their harassment of Red's Trading Post. Insist that they immediately release Wayne Fincher and return all of his guns and pay for the militia headquarters that burned. Make them pay from their own pockets, not from "public funds".

Either start helping gun owners or merge with the Brady Massacre Fan Club. You couldn't hurt us any worse than you are now.

Ed Brown and The Feds

What is this case about now? It is purely to punish someone for not paying their bribe. How much do the feds claim Ed and Elaine "owe"? How much have the feds (and their state and local co-conspirators) spent trying to "get" the Browns? Is this a cost effective siege? What function of the US government is so important that it justifies killing a person or taking their home or business? Over tax money? Get real, Uncle Scam.


I know all the arguments about "they were convicted in a fair trial". Your definition of "a fair trial" may be different than mine. Taxation is theft. Theft can not be justified or made right by passing "laws" authorizing it.


I would much prefer that Mr. Brown refuse to pay on the grounds that taxation is immoral rather than using the "show me the law" tactic. That isn't my call. America is watching the US government. What will it do? Murder or otherwise destroy lives over some money? Why not. It does this and worse on a daily basis. Just ask gun owners, or non-sanctioned medication users, or un-papered drivers, or........

Scared Sheep? Or....?

When people run into my ideas unprepared they get frightened. They call me a wacko, insane, loony, nut case, a weirdo, "Krazy Kent", and a variety of other creative names. They suggest I go back to smoking my crack pipe and leave opinions to the traditional statists. The really funny thing is a lot of this comes from people who take the Presidential Candidate Selector and find that I am their top-scoring (former) candidate.

I really don't understand this reaction. Do people think so little of their own opinions that they secretly think they are crazy? Do they fear anyone who voices these things out loud? Or do they read only snippets of what I have to say, and then take them out of context. Surely that is the only way they could be exposed to my brilliance and be unconvinced. (<---- a joke)

Claire Wolfe Time

Claire Wolfe, in her book 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution, made the statement "America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."

The question constantly arises, "Is it time, yet?" Yes, it is time. It has been time since the dawn of humanity. Look back at history and you will see there has never been a time that fighting against oppressive rulers was the wrong thing to do. If our species had always remembered that fact, and exercised it, we would not be in the situation we are in now.

Our problem is that we abdicated our responsibility when it was easy to fulfil. We thought that the tyrants were not too bad; besides we knew them personally. Now the rulers have erected a huge wall of "laws" designed to ensure their "continuity of government". People with a blind sense of "lawfulness" will point to those laws and say that it is wrong to fight back against the evil rulers. Only if you look at it through the eyes of the tyrants themselves is it "wrong". Of course they will forbid fighting back. Tyrants always do.

Before anyone gets worked up, I'm not advocating any actions here, I just want you to realize that regardless of whatever "laws" the tyrants erect around themselves, fighting against tyranny, with whatever you have, is never wrong.

Safety Nets?

I know some people (OK, a LOT of people) feel that modern society owes some sort of "safety net" to the poor, sick, or disadvantaged. I don't think it is a case of "owing a debt", but I do think that a civilized society will provide something to assist those in need. In fact, just about every society always has. Where I have the problem with a "safety net" is when it is financed through theft. Government runs on theft and is not legitimately responsible for taking care of anyone. Private charities (or even "private charity" as in "personal kindness") are not coercive and are more able to adapt to the individual situation. They are also more likely to detect those who abuse "the system" and become parasites. "Kindness" does not then attempt to take possession of the lives of those it helps. "Safety nets": another empty excuse by people who fear freedom and do not trust themselves to do the right thing if no one is holding a gun to their head.

Legitimate Government

What is the legitimate purpose of government? From my radical libertarian perspective, the only legitimate purpose of any government is to protect the rights of the individual from being violated. This is what The Declaration of Independence was talking about. If the government fails in this it has to go. If the government becomes the main culprit violating individual rights it has negated the very reason it had for existing in the first place. Therefore in order to fulfil its duty to protect the rights of the individual it is necessary for that government to abolish itself.

Every government sooner or later, usually sooner, becomes the people's worst enemy.

My Neighbor's Nuke

The right to own and to carry any weapon is often belittled using the extreme scenario of your neighbor having a nuclear bomb in his garage. Forget for a moment the fact that extreme cases make for really bad laws. If you have an absolute right to own any weapon, what can you do if your neighbor has a nuke?


If my neighbor had a nuke, and I thought he was that much of a danger to me, I would try to destroy his bomb or shoot him before he had a chance to use it. Then I would take my chances with a fully informed jury. "Self defence" applies here, as it does in any instance of imminent danger. My neighbor would also be able to claim "self defense" if he shot me when I tried to get him, so it would probably be better to try to reason with him first. If I felt he was so mentally unstable that reason would not get through to him, then I'd take my chances.


What I would not do is use this case to argue that since my crazed, nut-case neighbor wanted to threaten my life, and the lives for miles around, by keeping a nuclear weapon in his garage that government should ban me from owning guns or ban children from having and using rubber band guns. That is insanity.

Help Red's Trading Post

Red's Trading Post is the oldest gun store in Idaho. The thugs from BATFEces are trying to shut it down. There is a lot of background information at War on Guns Blog about this case and today there is a suggestion on what YOU can do to help.

It's a Protest Vote - Really

I realize that any write-in votes for me won't be counted by "election officials" because I am not willing to jump through the hoops to become "legitimate" as far as the feds are concerned. I am a write-in candidate only as a protest; just like if you write in "Bart Simpson" or something. The difference is that I stand for something. If you tell someone that you wrote in "Kent McManigal", they can Google me (if they can figure out the spelling) and see exactly what I am all about. I think we all know Ron Paul doesn't have a chance of being the Republican nominee; not the way the system is rigged. (If he did become the nominee, I would need to question whether the system is rigged like I think it is.) A Libertarian has even less chance of winning the election than Ron Paul has of being the Republican nominee. If you still feel that not voting is shameful, then you can write-in my name, knowing the Powers-That-Be will not count it, but still sending a message, just the same.

Domestic Enemies in Black Robes

When elected officials take office they pledge to protect the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Then they immediately break that oath by not recognizing that almost every thing the federal government does is in direct violation of the Constitution, and trying to stop it. In direct violation, but sanctioned (wink-wink) by federal courts.

How can you protect the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic when some of the worst domestic enemies have placed themselves in charge of deciding what the Constitution means? Whether or not the Constitution is worth defending is another matter. As has been said, either it established this governmental monstrosity we now suffer under, or it did nothing to stop it. Fortunately "freedom" does not depend on a piece of paper, but on each of us as individuals. Freedom is ours to take and live, if we will only do it. Pay no attention to the black-robed gremlins of the court. Let them paint themselves into a corner with their pronouncements-from-on-high. Just get on with the business of living free from coercion.

Leaders or Rulers?

Leaders can be a good thing. They lead by showing the rest of humanity the trail, and then striking out along that path, alone if necessary. If you trust the Leader, you follow him. If not, you find your own path.


Rulers dictate which path you will follow, often times from the safety of their fortresses. A Ruler may send an envoy in front of you as a decoy to make you believe you are following the Glorious Leader. You are given no choice whether to follow the path the Ruler chooses for you. A set of imaginary rules will be enacted to show you that the Ruler's way is the only right way.


Is the President (or governor, senator, etc.) a "Leader" or is he a "Ruler"? If you have a Leader and he begins leading you astray, you are free to stop following. If he threatens you or forces you to continue following him by dragging you along, he is no longer a Leader, but a Ruler. The Rulers in the US claim we are free to follow them or choose another "Leader" in the next election. We will be dragged along unwillingly until that time, of course. The "Leaders" insist we are not free to say "No thank you. I don't need a Leader".


Leaders lead; governments drag. Which situation seems more like America in 2007?

"Bill of Rights" or Simply "Rights"?

A group I belong to, JPFO, is working to educate people everywhere (not just in America) about the Bill of Rights; advocating what they call a "Bill of Rights culture". I would like to live in such a culture, but I don't think it goes far enough. People need to be reminded that rights were not created by the Bill of Rights. Some of the founders of America were afraid that if a Bill of Rights were written, government would try to claim that those rights mentioned were the only ones held by the people. Even though the 9th and 10th Amendments were adopted to try to avoid this, it has still occurred. Plus the government has "reinterpreted" away any protection of rights enshrined in the document.

Instead of a "Bill of Rights culture" I think we need a "Rights culture". A deep understanding that rights exist regardless of government attitudes or usurpation; are inseparable from responsibilities; are inborn in every person everywhere; do not come from "Bills", government or anyone else; are not additive or divisible; are absolute and not subject to restrictions; are the opposite of privileges; and are worth defending to the death.

The Bill of Rights was a good idea, but learning that actual Rights exist with or without government permission is more empowering. At least it has been for me.

New CafePress Products

Check out my new "Government is Evil" and "Live Free Today" products on CafePress. Straight to the point, don't you think?

Consistent Liberty

Freedom is not "pick and choose". I can't acknowledge that government in all its incarnations is evil while begging government to "keep out the foreigners" or to punish "hate speech". If freedom is a good thing for me, then it is also a good thing for my enemy. I must be consistent. I can't turn to government for help when something happens that I couldn't stop. If I can't stop it, then neither could government, at least not without violating someone's rights. You must live up to the principles of freedom even when it makes you uncomfortable.

"The Gang" from JPFO

The JPFO documentary "The Gang" is now available ($29.95). This film details the history and the abuses of the BATFE, one of the most vile and disgusting of all the criminal organizations inside the US government (my words; not theirs). Beat me to the draw and get your copy before I get mine!

Forum 21

There is an interesting forum that I have joined. It is called Forum 21 and is run by Phil Defer. It is based in France, but they have started a thread about me in English. Phil asked for an interview and I explained that I am not actively campaigning anymore, but answered his questions anyway. He invited me to join his forum to answer the participants questions, so I did. I find it interesting to see how other cultures view "liberty". Go on over and take a look around. If you can't read French, use Babel Fish to translate. You can even ask me questions there, too.

The Abusive Relationship

Do people enjoy abuse? Do we seek out or stay in abusive relationships because somewhere, deep down, we like being miserable? I know people who seem to. Government is like an abusive partner. It steals from our bank accounts and wants more, claiming ownership of all our possessions while contributing nothing of value. It sets bizarre, arbitrary rules with extreme punishments for even accidental infractions. It demands to know every detail of our private lives "for our own good" as if we are stupid children needing constant supervision. It claims moral superiority over us while behaving like a drunken lecher. It warns us of dire consequences if we ever dare to tell it to hit the road. "You'll be sorry! You are nothing without me! You'll never make it on your own! Everyone will kill each other without me to make them behave!" Yet we keep defending its indefensible actions, and behaving like it really does have some claim on our lives. Kick the bum out. If it resists, you know what to do.

Pragmatic Perfectionism

"The perfect is the enemy of the good". I hear this quote a lot in libertarian circles. Usually quoted by the "pragmatists" and directed at the radicals (like me). They are wasting breath because I already know this fact. I think on a personal level it is a good thing to remember. Don't waste your life spinning your wheels with your bumper against a brick wall. On the other hand, why bother at all if you don't have "perfect" as a goal? Don't ever forget: all government is totally evil. With that in mind, it exists, and probably will all of your life, so use it against itself if you can. Don't use government against individual people unless they are an instrument of the state. "Live by the state; die by the state" you might say. Work toward Libertopia within the current system when you must, and outside the system when you can. Acknowledge that nothing will ever be perfect, but LIVE free now, and never stop striving.

What Kind of "American"?

I am a human being who lives in America. Beyond that, I hold the values that were apparently espoused by the founders of America in high regard. I believe that each person is a sovereign individual who owes nothing to anyone else other than to not aggress against them. I am not a "Soviet American" such as runs the government and fawns over the institutions of tyranny. I support freedom of speech; not laws against "hate speech" and Free Speech Zones which protect the President from hearing dissent. I do not support government spying on Americans under the pretense of trying to catch terrorists plotting. Torture is evil no matter who is doing it and no matter what you call it. You do not protect freedom by torture. You do not increase Liberty by restricting Liberty. Outlawing self defense and the tools which facilitate it is plain wrong. I do not support government programs or agencies which label as "domestic terrorists" anyone who believes the same things that the founders of America believed. I do not seek Liberty for myself and then use the bludgeon of government against those who irritate me. I believe that the US is the worst threat America has ever faced, and I don't know if America can survive the threat.

Drugged Drivers

I know of someone who is suffering from injuries received in a car wreck a year ago. The driver of the other car was at fault, and was on drugs. Now my friend will probably suffer pain from nerve damage for the rest of her life, and need powerful pain medications in order to function. This fact has made her question her libertarian opinion as to drug prohibition.

I can understand her thoughts. No one wants impaired drivers careening into them out of nowhere. On the other hand, driving while impaired or even distracted is already illegal, and yet things like this still happen. The current War on Drugs destroys freedom on a massive scale and yet doesn't prevent things like this from happening, so what can we do? Is there a real solution? Or do we simply accept that tragedies will always happen as a part of life?

Memorial Day: Remembering Our Past, Considering Our Future.

JPFO ALERT:

Memorial Day: Remembering Our Past, Considering Our Future.

Each year on Memorial Day, JPFO reminds our readers to honor those who died in America's wars. We mourn for them and we thank them.

But we also remind you that as the United States becomes more like the brutal police states we once fought, we must mourn as well for the loss of our freedoms. We mourn the loss of the great promise that once was America -- now betrayed by politicians, bureaucrats, thuggish enforcers, and uncaring citizens.

We've been heavily advertising our new documentary The Gang because it showcases the BATFE as a supreme example of this betrayal. Corrupt, inept thugs enforce not just unconstitutional laws but arbitrary bureau "policies" against honest citizens. And no one speaks up ... because they could be next.

Recently, the television show "Boston Legal" aired an episode entitled "Stick It". You can read a summary at http://www.boston-legal.org/19-stickit/ep19-stickit.shtml . More importantly, you can watch the video (or read a transcript) of a closing argument by one of the show's characters (scroll down to "Alan Shore's Closing Argument").

This speech is probably one of the most eloquent, timely, and terrifying recitations of the dark turn our country has taken over the last few decades. It concludes with the statement, "I know we are all afraid, but the Bill of Rights -- we have to live up to that. We simply must."

Indeed.

On this sad holiday, we urge you to take a moment to consider not only what we've lost, but why and how we've lost it. Consider, too, how we might get it back. There are 100 million gun owners in this country, and only 2300 agents. So why are we putting up with this treachery?

We can start by abolishing the BATFE and all federal control and regulation of firearms. Ultimately, though, we must attain a Bill of Rights Culture.Let's make it happen.

- The Liberty Crew

PS: The day after JPFO aired our "Talkin' to America" interview with Ryan Horsley, owner of Red's Trading Post, he was visited by THREE BATFE agents, including an area supervisor. Read Ryan's update at www.jpfo.org/redsupdate2.htm . Yet another example of the BATFE's vindictive actions against honest American gun owners. By allowing this activity, we are allowing the deaths of our fallen soldiers to be in vain.

Mr. Wood

A few blogs ago, I mentioned the high school teacher who was instrumental in teaching me to think critically about what I was being "fed". Mr. Bill Wood taught Physics, Chemistry, and a "special" class. After spending two years in his classes, he is to blame for a lot of who I am. I would skip other classes to sit in the library and read; but I never skipped his classes. That was the only class time, since first grade when I learned to read, where I learned anything important.

During my high school years there was a big creationism uproar occurring statewide. He even testified in the court case. He encouraged us to look at the issue critically from all sides. He never hid his opinion, but had his students on both sides attempt to defend our own position coherently during discussion. He also led us in a study of advertising and the ways it influences our thoughts. I was always dreadfully bad at math, but he often gave me credit for being the only person in his physics class who understood the concepts being discussed. Even if I never got through a calculation without an error during the entire year. The main thing I remember from all his classes was this: while other teachers told us what to think, he emphasized how to think.

I heard through hearsay that he quit teaching within a couple years of my graduation. The politics of the "education system" are an obstacle to education, screening out the best teachers. Just another reason for the separation of school and state. Mr. Wood was the best teacher I ever had.

When I think of him I feel that he would be disappointed in me today. After all, I never made anything of myself. He would have told me I could do better.

Permits: The All-American Bribe

America; land of the free... as long as your pay your bribe to the right agency to get official permission to practice your freedom. Only, in this case, the corrupt bribe-takers are so morally vacant that they actually keep a record of their criminality! The bribes have been institutionalized and codified.

Want to add a room to your house? Get a building permit that not only gives your "permission" to do the work, but gives "implied consent" to the local government to tell you how you can build it, and allows them to trespass to "inspect" the work (and maybe just snoop a little while they are there). Wish to carry a gun for self defense? Apply for a permit that puts you into a database of criminals for government to keep a wary eye on. A permit that can be denied or revoked on a whim and can be used to track you when it is decided that common folk no longer "need" to own guns. Want to drive your car? That entails a whole stack of permits if your wish to have official sanction. Once again, by getting their permits and trying to work within the system, they claim you have given implied consent to go along with all the anti-American garbage that the authorities commit. Things like "safety" check-points, seatbelt laws, and DUI (known as "drunk driving" back when it really was about being drunk while driving) laws that have become meaningless by their pettiness.

Freedom-by-permit is not freedom at all. It is slavery. It is "freedom if you can afford to pay for it". Be an outlaw and take your freedom without begging permission from any government thug.

"Continuity of Government"

Leave it to the parasites of government to think that they are so important and their job so critical, that even if some event destroys all of the productive people in America, the government MUST survive! That is like preserving the disease organisms after the host is dead. Take the most useless sector of the population, and the one thing we can all do completely without, and make certain it survives. After disasters, people who sit and wait for the government to rescue them frequently die. What makes anyone think it would be different next time? What "job" does government do that would still be "necessary" if the rest of the population was dead? I mean, really, who would be left to care? Other than those disease organisms who call themselves "government". Plus, those who would be left after such an event would most likely be the people who are least reliant on government bail-outs, and also the least compliant with government orders. Do the authoritards think it will impress China that America will still have a government rattling its sabres after doomsday? Unfortunately, they probably do.

Good Idea vs. Compulsion

There are a lot of things I think are good ideas for liberty-seekers to get involved with. Things like jury duty and gun ownership. There are other things that I think are just a good idea for anyone like wearing a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet. There is a difference between "thinking it is a good idea" and making it mandatory. Only government can destroy a good idea that way.

Although I believe that jury duty is the best weapon we have to peacefully stop the US police state in its tracks, I would never encourage making it compulsory to serve. Who does that benefit? If you have 12 disgruntled jurors sitting there daydreaming about strangling the people responsible for their captivity is justice likely? I think not!

Or how about guns? I think that owning them and knowing how to use them is a very intelligent thing to do. If someone has no interest in having one or learning to safely handle one, then that person would be happier, and so would I, if he just didn't bother with it. I have gone shooting with one person that I refused to shoot with ever again after seeing his disregard for basic safety rules. He then joined the military and left the area.

I am the first person to insist that everyone in my car wear a seat belt. Yet, whenever I see those "Click it or ticket" propaganda ads on TV, I want to never wear one again. It is smart to wear a seat belt, but it is incomprehensibly evil to require it by "law".

Government can take a perfectly good idea, and by passing counterfeit "laws" make it into a reprehensible compulsion.

Dissonance

I have heard that stress is caused by an internal conflict. Such as being put into a situation where the biological "right thing to do" is fight or flight, but the "socially expected thing to do" is to stand there and tolerate some authoritard giving you ridiculous orders. I had my own way of dealing with this while trapped in the government indoctrination centers called "school": I daydreamed a lot. After I learned to read, school didn't teach me anything of any value until high school, when I was fortunate enough to have a teacher for a couple of years who taught his students to think critically about what we were told. He is probably to blame for a lot of who I am now. That is another item for another day.

Back to the current thoughts. I already live in Libertopia in my mind, so when I am confronted by the stupidity of the authoritarian dystopia surrounding me, the dissonance causes a lot of stress to my system. I know how I should respond to a given situation, but the societal realities mean I would be punished violently by the "law". We are expected, and "legally" required, to sit down and shut up and by all means, don't bother the noble authorities by making a scene. So, I put up with a lot of nonsense that no one in a free society would ever be forced to tolerate quietly. I am sure the same thing applies to you.


This goes back to my post on "enjoying what liberty we have left" from a few days ago. Enjoy what freedoms you have left, and the ones you can probably get away with. After all, "They can't control us all".

What Do They Want?

There are people I run into online, who although they frequent the "libertarian" or "quasi-anarchist" websites, and align themselves with the freedom seekers, they don't seem to agree with "us" on much of anything. Try as I might, I honestly can't see that these people are looking for any type of "freedom". So, what is it they are really wanting?

Maybe I am looking at this the wrong way. Perhaps I should be glad that they have enough interest to try to hang out with libertarians (I have heard we can be difficult to get along with). I can't stop wondering about their motives, though. Are they there to try to start arguments; to sow discord? Are they there under mistaken impressions? Do they believe they can show the rest of us the "error of our ways" by shining the light of authoritarianistic thought on our ideas? Maybe they are a single-issue libertarian and just want to be left alone to smoke crack, but have no interest in allowing anyone else their own brand of liberty.

Whatever is going on, I get the distinct impression that they just don't get it. When possible, I do not engage them in a heated debate. Tempers flare quickly and that helps no one. I try to mostly ignore these folks in the hope that they will absorb, by constant exposure, some inkling of what "liberty" really means. Who knows, maybe one day they will rise up to be exactly the person the world needs to stand up for liberty.

Blood-Thirsty Americans

I am disturbed by how blood-thirsty otherwise normal people around me seem to have become. They celebrate the deaths of foreigners, and seem happy to send more troops to kill and terrorize them.

Maybe the real reason Americans seem so anxious to slaughter people, guilty and innocent alike, overseas is a frustration over what is going on closer to home. Perhaps, like me, a lot of people are seriously frustrated with the US police state that is ratcheting its controls tighter around us. Since they see no way to fight the monsters and win, they take their frustrations out on foreigners that the government encourages them to hate. The anger has to go somewhere, so they choose a safe, officially sanctioned target.

I don't want to consider the alternative: that people have become fans of genocide, torture, and terrorism, as long as "the home team" is doing the dirty deeds. If that is the case, we have already lost the "War on Terror"; it has adopted us as its favorite child.

A Libertarian, Ron Paul, and Hitlery

My dream presidential ballot would offer the choices of the Libertarian candidate (whosoever that may be), Ron Paul as the Republican, and Hillary Klinton as the Democratic/National Socialistic (Natso) choice.

In my view, this would be an impossible election for freedom to lose, in the long run. Any Libertarian would be better than anyone else. Ron Paul would be better than anyone other than me (in my oh-so-humble opinion, LOL), and with Hitlery elected, the gloves would be off and we could get down to the business of "The War of Independence II". No, I don't want all-out war, but I feel it is probably inevitable now. America is already at war with the US, most people just don't realize it yet.

Begin working hard to promote one of these candidates in order that this election can be the most entertaining election imaginable. After all, isn't that what politics is really about?

My Credo

Claire Wolfe is attempting to write a credo for herself. I am not sure I need one, but decided it would be a good mental exercise. So, here goes my attempt for a credo of my own:

On my honor as a human being, I will give zero respect for, or obedience to, counterfeit "laws" or systems of belief, present or future. I do not, nor have I ever, consented to be subject to the whims of the criminal collective known as "government". I will strive to avoid aggression, but will defend myself and others in whatever way I see fit against all attacks. I will seek to live as free in my body as I already envision in my mind.

At least that is how it stands for now; to be modified if the mood seizes me or I get a better idea at some later time.

Enjoy the Fossils of Liberty

Don't get trapped by the thought that you can't enjoy some freedom if you do not have total freedom. Setting goals is admirable. Knowing what Libertopia would look like is good; maybe even essential. How can you strive for something if you can't even picture what it is you want? But refusing to enjoy what freedom you have now, simply because Libertopia is not yet a reality, is very bad and self defeating. This is a pattern I fall into a lot.

I despise the very concept of "government". I utterly despise the existence of its armed enforcing apparatus; the cops. This does not mean I personally despise every government employee or cop I have ever met. Some of them are obviously OK people. They are absolutely dead wrong in what they are supporting with their time and their lives, but they honestly may not see it that way.

I need to relax about some things. I need to get on with the business of living free. I need to simply ignore those "laws" that I know are counterfeit, and not stress over it. If I get punished for living as I see fit, as long as I do not initiate force or fraud on anyone else, then I am not the one in the wrong, even if I am in jail. If there are some "laws" that I can live with, even comply with, knowing that they are wrong, then I should not worry about it. Choose your battles, as they say. "Getting away with" things under the watchful eye of the Malevolent Empire can even be fun. Think of it as a game. Become a Simon Jester. Thumb your nose at them (or flip them off) behind their backs.

I think some people see me as an angry anti-government loon. I am not angry, even if I come across that way sometimes. I hate injustice, especially when disguised as a "law", or cloaked with a flag. Certain situations do make me angry. These are often the ones I end up writing about. Things that don't arouse passion in me get short shrift. This is too bad. Rather than "anti-government", I am pro-liberty. Government is the opposite of liberty. Government is anti-me. Whether or not I am a loon... who knows. Do crazy people know they are crazy? I doubt it; that is part of what makes them crazy.

I will not stop promoting my vision of Libertopia, even while I quietly enjoy the fossils of liberty I still find in America. If by my rambling screeds, I inspire someone else to throw off some governmental shackles, then his victory will also help make the environment a bit more liberty-friendly for me as well. A victory for one is a victory for all. Victories, small though they may be, add up. I will rejoice in every small increase of liberty, even while I demand real, complete, lasting liberty for everyone everywhere. It is the only way I know.

Cops, Cops, Cops

Many people seem to think I am too hard on cops. I hold cops to a higher standard than I hold anyone else to (except politicians) because they have a greater power to destroy innocent lives, and get away with it. I have said many times that a badge and a gun are a dangerous combination. That being said, I do recognize that there are shades of gray. No cop, or anyone else, is all good or all bad. Some are better than others, and some are far worse.

With cops I have made a couple of personal observations that may or may not be correct. First, the shorter the cop's hair; the more hardline "I don't make the rules; I just enforce them" antifreedom he is. (I have yet to find an exception to this observation.) Secondly, it seems most older cops are less draconian that most younger cops. I personally believe this is a result of the current training protocols. "Us vs. Them"; "Thin blue line", "Busting ours; Saving yours", and all of that crock of .... ahem, nonsense.

If a cop enforces a few counterfeit "implied consent" type "laws", while avoiding most of the harshest rights violations, I suppose he is not as bad as the murderers who killed Kathryn Johnston (and countless others). I would still not recommend turning your back on him. Never trust a scorpion; they are what they are.

Media Ignores Ron Paul. It's a Start...

I read a lot of complaints that the mainstream media is trying to ignore Ron Paul. Going so far as not putting him in some polls that include everyone else. That obviously is not fair. To mention the other candidates while ignoring Ron Paul is dishonest.

In order to return to the fairness that you MediaHeads pretend to have, I suggest a way to pay restitution: Please ignore the rest of the candidates as well. It would be better. Imagine a Presidential race that was completely ignored by the media. It boggles the mind. All information would only be gotten by those with enough interest in the outcome to search, on their own, without being spoon fed what Big Media and Big Government want them to believe. The simple-minded authoritarian worshippers would probably forget there was even an election coming. The election just might actually go to the best person instead of the anointed one. That would be completely different.

Why Do I Keep Harping on "Guns"?

I really don't like to concentrate on one subject too much. You can't tell that from my blog, though. Time after time I keep returning to the subject of "guns". Why is that? Because I have always believed that someone's opinion on gun ownership is what tells you how they truly feel about you. L. Neil Smith explains it better. He compares the issue to an X-Ray. It lets you see right into any politician's rancid core.

The Write (In) Choice

Even though I have stopped campaigning, I still offer myself as a write in candidate for President. You can think of it as a protest vote, or use me as a threat to get your party back in line with what you want from your candidate. I probably have exactly the same chance of being elected this way as I did by actively campaigning. This simply moves the burden of promoting my ideas back onto you again.

Keep spreading the word, and I will keep agitating and blogging.

One Good Cop

Show me one good, honest cop who has never violated anyone's humanity by enforcing a counterfeit "law". Show me one who has never arrested anyone for putting any chemical into their own body. A cop who has never arrested anyone for carrying a gun peacefully, regardless of what local or national "laws" may dictate. Show me a cop who has never once given a speeding ticket or a ticket for not using a seatbelt. Or just show me a cop who will pledge to, from this day forward, live by the Zero Aggression Principle in his daily life and on the job. Then, and only then, will I believe that it is possible to be a good, honest person, and be a cop.

George Orwell Saw It Coming

The terrorists in government have redefined "terrorism" to mean "anyone who opposes them and their agenda". According to the US government's new definition, America was founded on terrorism by terrorists like George Washington, Patrick Henry, Paul Revere, and Thomas Jefferson.

This webpage has been around for a while; I have seen it before. Apparently the goons at The Department of Homeland Stupidity quickly took down their similar site when it was exposed recently. To keep this one (from the Pennsylvania authoritards) from similarly disappearing, I printed it and then scanned it and posted the resulting picture here.

I would bet that every state has an almost identical page; all received from DHS originally. We need to show everyone that the values that America was founded upon are now labelled as "terrorism" by the US Federal Government, and by the state governments as well. Maybe this will cause some of the authoritarian-lovers to recognize who they are now supporting. I won't hold my breath.

Notice that they also fear the Gadsden "DONT TREAD ON ME" flag as a symbol of domestic terrorists. Everything is turned on its head by these traitors. "Newspeak" is here.

You Can't Go Back....

I have often felt, and I have heard others express this, too, that it would sometimes be nice to be able to go back to being a "sheeple". To be like the oblivious masses of humanity who are able to look at the flag flying over the courthouse and have the simple-minded "America: love it or leave it" kind of attitudes that so many of the "patriotic" people out there have. The kind who can ignore the US government torturing "other people". The kind who can pretend that Wayne Fincher really did do something bad, or that Kathryn Johnston shouldn't have shot back at those "fine young officers" who were violently invading her home in the course of the hideous "War on Drugs". The kind who can pretend that "it is for our own good", whatever that happens to be.

For the sake of my family and friends I have tried many times in the past to "just go along to get along". The problem is that government and those who work tirelessly to prop it up are a ravenous dragon, seeking to devour and destroy all individuality and rational thought. They demand an almost religious devotion to their evil causes. You must submit to their numbering and tracking or you will be ground up and used as fertilizer for those who do embrace the wyrm.
In many cases, to acknowledge the true situation is to have family and friends think of you as a malcontent, or a nut-case. It can lead to a lonely existence, as it is very hard to find another of the same awareness with whom to share your life. Yet to turn away from the truth is to live a lie. How does that make your life any better or more livable? Could you "fake it" for the rest of your life? Could you truly change your world-view and accept the status quo?

Unfortunately (or fortunately?), once you "take the red pill" there is no turning back. You can try to ignore it; you can try to deny it; but the truth will keep slapping you in the face. It won't leave me alone. How about you?

Just Another Anarchist/Libertarian Blog

One reason I held onto my Presidential campaign longer than I probably should have was the realization that without my campaign, this blog and my website would become "just another anarchist/libertarian ranting on the internet". And who needs another one of those?

Now that I have abandoned my campaign, I intend to keep my blog going, and keep updating my website. "Why?" you may ask. Because I still have something to say. I still have the same things to say that I did before, it just may not be as important now that I am not "running" (if it was ever important before).

I still feel that there is no candidate who adequately shares my views and could therefore "represent" me. I would prefer to see a Libertarian elected. If I had to choose one of the Demopublicans, I would of course choose Ron Paul. Fortunately, I don't have to choose anyone or anything. Neither do you.

KentForLiberty.com Updates

The post-campaign KentForLiberty.com updates are coming along nicely. Check it out again and see what changes I have made.

Stupid, Evil and/or Insane

If New York Congresscritter Carolyn McCarthy were a smart (or nice) person she would have channeled her grief over her husband's death at the hands of a murderer into making certain that people like her husband would never again be left defenseless in the face of aggression because of some evil victim disarmament law. Instead she chose the path of blind reactionism that leads straight to more massacres. She feverishly works to guarantee that it will happen again. Is that stupid? Is it evil? Or, is it insane?

Stupid, evil, insane, or a combination of all three. That is how L. Neil Smith characterizes people like her. I tend to agree. Since political power is a result of being backed up by the guns of government, people like her who are stupid, evil and/or insane use their guns to take away our guns. If they can try to deny gun ownership to those of us they deem to be "mentally ill", then they should give up their positions of power for the same reason.

Prohibit Guns to the "Mentally Ill"?

You didn't ask, but I'll tell you anyway why I oppose forbidding guns to those judged "mentally ill". Mainly it is because I do not trust those who get to decide who is mentally ill, and what constitutes a mental illness. By their hoplophobic reasoning, anyone who desires to own a gun or does not bow to their "authority" is mentally ill. The simple desire to own a gun could easily become the excuse to deny the right.

Violent people, mentally ill or not, would be culled from society by their intended victims if government meddling were to stop. The only way to be truly safe from predators is to protect the absolute right of everyone to own and to carry any type of weapon they want, any where they go, in any way they see fit; openly or concealed. That way when a person who is truly mentally ill decides to go on a killing spree, it will be ended quickly by the fully free people around him. Just as it should be.

Rights and Government Whims

Rights do not come and go at the whim of government; they cannot be legislated away. People in Great Britain still have the right to own and to carry any weapon they wish, but their government does not recognize that right. Do you think that you have only those rights that the government that currently occupies your land "allows"? Absolutely not. Under the most oppressive regimes, the right to live is not even recognized, but I doubt anyone would side with the government in that case. Everyone can clearly see that such a government is acting outside its legitimate authority. It is the same if your current government refuses to admit that you have the right to use any medications that you wish; or to own and carry the most effective means of defending your life; or if it tries to require paperwork for going about your daily business. These governments are also stepping outside their proper authority. We are simply so accustomed to this violation of our basic human rights that most of us don't see these acts for what they are: tyranny.

Don't allow governments to ration your liberty to you in small doses. Take what is yours.

Checks and Balances

Did you learn in school the concept of "checks and balances" as it relates to the government? Do schools even pretend to teach that anymore? Historically the President was supposed to be kept under control by the courts and the Congress. The Congress was supposed to be reined in by the courts and the President. The courts were supposed to be restrained by the President and the Congress. What has gone wrong? The three branches of the government are supposed to be working against one another, but they have now joined forces against the average American.

I think what has happened is that they have forged an "alliance of criminals". If they all gang up on the innocents, they can share the spoils. Together they can take more than they could working separately. The Congress passes counterfeit "laws"; the president signs them; and then the courts, if forced to do so, uphold their "Constitutionality". America loses and the government gets more power to enslave.

They think they have won, but they forgot the final "check and balance": The people of America, where the only legitimate authority lies.

These criminals are forgetting that they are operating under our authority. We are under our rights and obligations to bring them back in line with the highest law of the land by any means necessary. By "outlawing" our basic human rights, by ignoring our petitions, by rigging the system to favor them and their cronies, they declared war on America in the name of the United States. We, the people of America, have the authority. We let the government borrow it on our behalf, but the second they began misusing it, it was forfeited back to us. Now they are nothing but a gang of usurpers and tyrants. They need to pack their bags and vacate the country peacefully so that Americans can fix the mess these miscreants have spent over 200 years making.

If I Were Sheriff....

Yesterday someone named Matt suggested I would make a good sheriff. I kinda like that idea, although I don't think I will be seeking that office either. I am through with the whole "campaigning" thing. That doesn't mean you can't draft me.

In my mind a good sheriff is like a barrier between the people he serves and the government at large surrounding them. He would be the main "legal" protection between the criminal elements, both government and freelance, and the people.

Since I care very little (OK, not at all, actually) about whether something is legal or not, but only if it is right, and have no experience in such matters, I would be an interesting sheriff. Do sheriffs take an oath to "uphold the Constitution"? I could take that oath seriously. But if I was supposed to "uphold" counterfeit "laws", well.... that wouldn't go too far before I got forcibly removed from office.

If I were ever to become a sheriff I would:

-Publicly announce that everyone in my jurisdiction was hereby automatically authorized to carry a gun, openly or concealed, without any further permits necessary. I'd deputize every person in the county if it became necessary.

-Warn any municipal police agencies that if their officers were caught harassing any peaceful people and enforcing any counterfeit "laws", I would arrest those officers. I would also ban the use of tasers by police.

- Announce that any feds who want to take any enforcement actions in my county would be required to come to me for permission first, and leave their body armor, weapons, and government issued picture ID in my possession until they leave the area, or face arrest.

- Wear my six-gun, hat, boots, and duster everywhere. Just because it would be cool.

Any towns in Wyoming interested in recruiting me? I happen to be free now.

The End of the Trail

After a lot of thought I have decided to end my campaign. Last night while trying to delete spam comments, I accidentally deleted most of the content on the Boston Tea Party's website. That was the last straw for me. I appreciate all the encouragement and support I have received in the past two and a half years. I apologize to anyone who is disappointed that I have withdrawn. I will probably keep blogging, and plan to change KentForLiberty into something other than a campaign site. I have come to realize that we will never get government back in line with the Constitution or with what is right by using methods approved and "allowed" by that same rogue government.

Liberty... or Death? America.... or US FedGov?

"Give me liberty or give me death!" Strong words from a strong man named Patrick Henry. But there is more to him than just this quote. Here is a good article about him from Ryan McMaken. Read it and think about what Mr. Henry would do in today's "Occupied America". Which side would he be on: the side of the US police state, or the side of America?

Kathryn Johnston's Murderers Escape Justice

The drug-thugs (Gregg Junnier, Jason Smith, Arthur Tesler, and every other cop or police department co-conspirator in the drug war) who murdered Kathryn Johnston, and then tried to frame her, have gotten minor slaps on the wrist in denial of the seriousness of the crimes they committed. The "police" department that created these monsters has not been punished at all. Justice rolls over in her grave yet again.

In Search of the Second Amendment

I recently bought the documentary In Search of the Second Amendment. I found it very educational and entertaining. There are a few technical audio problems that are a little annoying, but the research that went in to the making of this video is obvious.

It isn't stated in the video, but I came away with the distinct impression that the Second Amendment actually protects two rights instead of only one. Just as the First Amendment prohibits government infringements of five separate rights, the Second Amendment protects the right to form a militia and it protects the right to own and to carry weapons.

Just remember, the Bill of Rights grants no rights, but instead prohibits government interference with the rights you were born possessing.

At $24.95 In Search of the Second Amendment is a good deal and it gives you the legal ammunition to use against massacre-enablers in this time of knee-jerk legislation.

Gazing into the Mirror

I have been spending the past week or two examining whether I have anything to offer. I am still not sure. I hear a lot of "I would support you if you would ____ ". Fill in the blank with whatever you think may fit. It seems that people are eager to get behind candidates who are flashy, polished, and/or are good at public speaking. I am none of those things. I am not even particularly shocking or profane. I am decidedly uncomfortable with interviews. I can't fill large expanses of minutes talking about myself or my views. I don't have anything to say that I haven't said dozens (or hundreds) of times before, and I begin to feel foolish repeating myself. I have an elderly relative who asks me who I am every five minutes (or less) when I am around her. Sometimes it seems the same in this campaign.

I do know the shape of the future that I want to see for my children and their children. I just don't see that this road leads there.

US Department of Misery

The primary function of government seems to be to ensure that no one enjoys themselves, unless of course, the proper licenses are acquired first. There are people like this all around us. They gravitate towards particularly rigid religions or government positions. Call them wet-blankets, party-poopers, buzz kills, cold showers, whatever, they have only one purpose: to try to make certain everyone is as miserable as they are or more so.

Usually these people are powerless. They can gossip about you or look down their noses and sniff at your "childishness". They can get angry because your idea of "fun" is different than theirs and they fear it. Who cares? Let them gnash their teeth in frustration.

The true destructive nature of their fractured personalities comes out when they get into government. Then it is all-out warfare on pleasure. They are usually willing to "allow" you to have fun, if you pay them for the privilege first, and stay within insanely well-defined limits. Have you noticed how many enjoyable things are now "licensed" or require permits? The few pleasures left that are not, are vilified and railed against by these joy vampires. If they can find a way to regulate or prohibit it, they will.

The point of all this is that one of the best ways to thumb your nose (or raise a middle finger salute) to government is to go out and enjoy yourself today. So do it. They will resent you for it.

Sarah Brady Wants to Profit From Massacre

I got yet another email begging for money from Sarah Brady and her "mass murderer fan-club". She wants a dollar for every innocent victim of the Virginia Tech massacre. Nice. Here is a response to her:

The Virginia Tech massacre was a rousing success for a gun free zone. It did exactly what it was designed to do, or did you not notice that no one was able to fight back? They were all disarmed just as you want. They all died like the good little victims you want us all to be. So why are you whining? You got exactly what you have been clamoring for.

People like me want to be able to fight back and to kill the next mass murderer before he completes his "mission". We believe that human life is valuable and worth defending. Cho broke laws against murder 32 times; what makes you believe he would have abandoned his plans if there were more laws against what he did? He targeted a "gun free zone". He knew no one would be armed. That is why he targeted a school that requires its students and faculty to submit; to lie down and die when attacked. What would have happened if even one of the students he encountered had been sensible enough to break the rules and take responsibility for his own safety? If someone (other than a badged "officer") had stopped the rampage, would you want that person arrested? That is the end result of your perverted policies. You would rather see people dead than fighting back. You are disgusting in the extreme.

People like you celebrate mass murder as a means toward the end of disarming us all and making everyone into another dead body for you to dance on while you beg for more blood-money. Congratulations, your ideas have killed again.

If "our leaders" really wanted to end the killing zones, they would remove all legal prohibitions of armed self-defense. They don't, and neither do you and your organization. Shame on you for the blood on your hands. It won't wash off, and we will never forget how you have worked to empower the mass murderers.

Reading "Liberty" or Living It?

Which is more important: reading other people's ideas about liberty or asserting your own liberty? Obviously living a life of liberty is vastly more important than merely reading what other people have to say about the subject. You can read my blog every day, but unless it inspires you to take your own life by the rudder and steer into free waters I have wasted my time writing these words. You can study the words of Thomas Jefferson or any of the old libertarians from history and still live as a slave. I read things everyday that have been written about liberty. Historical observations and current events. I often get ideas that way. Sometimes I am inspired to do something to expand my own freedom. Other times I file the thoughts away until they are needed.

Freedom isn't an armchair (or computer chair) "activity". You must live it for it to exist. It is often said that you "have only those rights you are willing to exercise". So use the ideas that you have absorbed from others, and get up and have a good liberty workout today.

The REAL Jury Duty: the Duty of a Juror

The duty of a juror is to protect his community; both from dangerous criminals and from dangerous laws. The jury is the highest authority in the courtroom; towering above the judge. Judges don't like for the juries to recognize the pecking order, so they try to frighten jurors into complying with their demands. Judges lie and tell jurors to only consider the facts of the case, which is only half- the weaker half, of the jury's historical duty. You hold the power of jury nullification of counterfeit "laws". It is an awesome power and responsibility and one that causes judges (and corrupt government at every level) to tremble in fear. The time to understand the power and authority of the jury is before you get called for jury duty. If you find yourself sitting on a jury, remember: if the law that was violated is counterfeit (attempts to regulate something other than initiated, actual force or fraud) you must find the defendant innocent, even if you don't like the person. Even if you are sure the person is a scum who has committed real crimes in the past and probably will again. That will be dealt with at a later date. Your bigger responsibility at that point is to protect your neighbors from a "law" that has much greater potential for harm that any two-bit thug could ever hope to have. Then you can go on to warn your neighbors of your suspicions about the defendant.

Become acquainted with the Fully Informed Jury Association and go to www.fija.org to read more about the job of a juror.

Email Warnings

Do you get those forwarded emails warning you about the latest crime fad? Like the cellphone cameras taking pictures of your credit card numbers, or notes stuck to your car windows to make you get out so your car can be stolen. So do I. Well, there are other warnings that should be taken to heart. Such as:

Warning! Proven tactic to steal your money.... Criminals from the IRS are posing as legitimate agents of the government and are threatening and intimidating your employer into stealing a large portion of your paycheck to hand over to them! They do this through the use of the "Social Security Number" which they trick innocent victims into applying for.

Or:

New threat-----> Control freaks wearing badges or holding public office are tricking people into applying for permission to defend themselves! They do this by making up fake laws, laws which they have no authority to make, saying that they will arrest you for carrying the best means of defense with you where you are most likely to need it. Once you are helpless they are free to impose any crippling punishment they wish on you or to steal other things from you. Remember: No one ever takes away your means of self defense to help you.

Warnings like these would actually be useful.

Washington County Militia HQ Fire

The headquarters of the Militia of Washington County was damaged by fire Friday. Hollis Wayne Fincher, who was kidnapped by government agents and is currently being held illegally on counterfeit charges of owning "illegal guns" was the militia's lieutenant commander. He is currently awaiting his sentencing. It is too bad that the organization which will be investigating the fire is connected to the organization that probably burned the building. I doubt we will ever know the truth about who or what started the fire.

Cycle of Government

In this mixed up world there is a cycle of destruction tightly connected to government: the Virginia Tech massacre will bring more gun control, which will directly cause more murders; poverty empowers more welfare which causes more poverty; government backs liberty into a corner and chaos erupts bringing with it more government; REAL ID will cause more subtle terrorists which will cause government to clamor for more tracking methods on its subjects. The pace of this cycle has risen to a frenzy in today's world.

I suspect, and hope I am right about this, that liberty can also be a cycle. The more freedom you assert, the more it grows. The less you allow government or its ignorant enablers to control your life, the more responsible you become, and the less you rely on "the system" to give you support and validation.

We all live in the 21st century. A century marked so far by out-of-control government across the globe. There are things we cannot avoid simply because of where and when we exist. Government records used to track us and measure our "legitimacy" may not be avoidable, but they are fallible and sensitive to errors. Encourage and exploit those failings. The electronic eyes of Big Brother watch our every move, but as Big Brother (AKA Big BOTHER) gets more dependent on those eyes, the weaker he becomes in reality. Eyes can be poked out. Magicians routinely trick the eye. You can resist and strike blows against the encroaching tyranny in thousands of ways that don't alert the Beast to your true loyalties. Added to the pin pricks of millions of others we can be as annoying as a swarm of biting gnats.

More government will cause more liberty warriors, which will undoubtedly cause more government. Being a centralized edifice, government will collapse when it grows beyond what its foundation can support. It is only a matter of time; it is heading in that direction with or without our help. For once I say give government whatever help you can.