Any time I hear of another mass shooting, my first thought is something along the lines of "Did a gun-free zone just kill again?" And, usually, that is exactly what turns out to have happened.
Yeah, I know-- the evil loser who pulled the trigger has ultimate responsibility, but that doesn't absolve those who literally handed him the opportunity and gave him a pool of potential victims to murder at his leisure by forbidding guns in some space.

If you believe the problem with police killings is that the dead person "resisted arrest" you are unqualified to ever sit on the jury of a rape trial. You're too biased in favor of the aggressor.

The idea vs the reality

Many times I come up with an idea of something to make, and often I can't get it out of my mind until I make it or at least give it my best shot. It might be a jacket, a knife, a model, a painting, or something else. I'll plan it all out and figure out exactly what I want before I start making it.

What I end up with is rarely as good as what I originally thought of, but usually, it's still pretty good. Often I've even made certain improvements over my original idea. But some features always end up being slightly beyond my ability or the capabilities of the material I am working in. You don't really know this until you try.

My first idea for the project was somewhat Utopian, and maybe not entirely realistic, but I'm not too disappointed by what I ended up with. It's better than nothing, especially if my original idea got me to push the boundaries of what I thought was possible.

The same is true of liberty.

You might as well plan out what you really want, then start working toward that. No, you'll never get Utopia because that's just not an option. But without that Utopian roadmap, you'll never get anywhere worthwhile. You'll never push the boundaries beyond what other people say is realistic-- which is never quite true anyway. Most people are scared of anything beyond the status quo unless it is based on their own idea.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Crypto is a shark trying to shake off the remoras or a dog trying to shake off its fleas. Don't be a remora or a flea.

There really aren't many unique questions related to human behavior. That's why there aren't many unique answers to what people should do in such-and-such situations. "You always have the same solution to everything!" Yeah, because you really can approach every question by simply respecting liberty and rejecting coercion, theft, and aggression. Some people believe this is a problem, but that's their problem.

There are rules which good people follow so they don't violate others.
There are rules which bad people impose and follow so they can violate others "legally".
I hate it when anyone follows the second kind of rule. I respect the disobedient among us who ignore and willfully break such rules.

By any other name...

Non-consensual bodily penetration. It seems people were against such a thing, once upon a time.

But in recent years the thugs of the state have claimed it is necessary for "public safety". Either to penetrate your body to steal something from you or to occupy your body with something you'd rather not host. This makes it worse than a mere stabbing, since it either intentionally steals something or intentionally leaves something behind, inside you.

How did it become "normal" to support or advocate non-consensual bodily penetration?

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Time to right marijuana wrongs

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for April 28, 2021)

Once the marijuana rules have changed, everyone with marijuana charges on their record should get a clean slate. At least where marijuana is concerned. Then they need to be paid the restitution they are owed by those who harmed them.

People arrested or fined for a crime which is no longer a crime deserve a break. Those who were jailed over marijuana were wronged. Those who were fined need to be repaid the money which was taken under phony pretexts. All for a "crime" which, finally, after nearly one hundred years of false claims and shoddy justifications, is recognized as not actually wrong.

Would you still consider runaway slaves criminals, with a record, after slavery was abolished? False claims and shoddy justification were used to excuse that evil institution, too.

What you ingest has never been government's business. Pretending it is doesn't make it so. Punishing people for ignoring the arbitrary wishes of politicians is wrong. Those who do wrong-- even if someone else has told them to do it-- owe restitution to their victims. "I was only following orders" has never excused such behavior.

Something can't be wrong one day and not wrong the next, or OK one day and illegal the next; based only on the opinions of smug politicians. Situations like this are why I have no respect for legislation. This exposes the absurdity of the whole system.

It seems silly to keep punishing people for past marijuana offenses, which is what is happening if those offenses stay on their record.

Even if the arrested individuals did something which will still be technically illegal under the new rules, it's long past time to let prohibition go. It's no more sensible than the witch trials of the 1690s or the alcohol prohibition of the 1920s. Everyone who once "waged war on weed" looks as bad as those who came before them, and in the future may even look worse.

If you're going to insist on having police and government courts they need to focus only on those acts where someone's life, liberty, or property has been harmed. Beyond this is where any legitimacy ends. It's not a fuzzy gray area; it ends hard at that line. If they violate anyone's life, liberty, or property in the course of doing their jobs, they've become what they claim to be fighting. Prohibition is one example of them having done exactly this.

It's time to make it right.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

The consistency of liberty

Liberty is completely consistent. But those who decide to reject it won't see the consistency because they don't understand what they are seeing.

Years ago a good friend of mine made the argument that gravity isn't consistent. She said gravity works on Earth but not in space. She also claimed that airplanes are defying gravity when they fly. She thought this showed that gravity doesn't always work.

She was no dummy-- very smart and in her mid-80s.

I tried to explain that gravity is consistent everywhere (even though its strength varies from place to place in the Universe due to the uneven distribution of matter), but due to different conditions, it looks different in space than it does on Earth. 

I tried to explain that "zero gravity" in orbit is just the result of falling around the planet. A "downward" falling path that misses the ground and keeps going around. Orbiting wouldn't be possible without gravity. (Deep space would be a different situation.)

I tried to explain that without gravity, airplanes couldn't fly the way they do. Gravity holds the air to the planet so they can use it for lift and thrust.

She wouldn't have any of it. To her, it looked different under those different conditions and she didn't understand the physics behind it, so that was the end of it. Gravity was inconsistent and unreliable, in her view.

Those who don't (or won't) understand liberty are much the same. They see different situations, and imagine that it looks like liberty is different in those situations-- that it doesn't work in every circumstance. But that's only because they don't understand what they are looking at.

Is it possible to explain it to them? Maybe not, but it works the same regardless of whether they accept and understand it or not.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Government doesn't unify people, it divides them

I wonder why so many people seem to be under the impression that political government unifies people. The opposite seems to be the case, and it seems obvious to me.

When I see people suggesting a global government, the excuse they often use is that it would "unite humanity". Well, it would give us a common enemy, but I don't think that's the idea they are pushing.

Political government divides. Whether it is two opposing governments dividing the people living under each, or one government dividing the people it seeks to rule. In the second case it makes me feel at odds with others who want to use that government to violate me in various ways. If I were political, it would make me believe I need to use that government against them in defense.

I can govern myself just fine. I don't feel the need to govern you. If this is a problem which needs to be solved by imposing the same political government on us both, I guess I'm on the wrong side.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Anarchist government?

In one of my recent "Blips" I wrote:

Is anarchy "a system"?
It comes down to what someone means by "system".
If "system" means a general way to do things, sure.
But if they mean an institution with someone "in charge" who imposes their will, no.
Same word, used in different ways, depending on the motives of the user.

It's the same way the word "authority" is used to mean two different concepts: a political bully or an expert.

A government-supremacist was whining that anarchy isn't a system of government-- and that's apparently all he cares about. That's the objection he kept harping on. It's why he kept claiming that others were describing anarchy as though it were a system while at the same time indicating that it wasn't a system of government. It was a distinction he couldn't grasp for some reason.

So, yes, anarchy can be used as a system. It can show you a path to successful consensual interaction with others.

No, anarchy isn't a system of government, but there is one system of government which is consistent with anarchy: You govern yourself and no one else. It's the only legitimate form of government, being removed from politics.

Anarchy, as a system, means as long as I follow it I am not going to try to rule anyone, nor will I accept anyone's attempt to rule me. It means I alone am responsible for my actions. It means I will respect the life, liberty, and property of others.

But there is no room in there for me to claim anarchy while trying to govern you. This use is outside of the "system" of anarchy. Completely. It's as far from anarchy as slavery is from liberty.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

I'm not a fan of face masks as a way to fight viral disease, but if a business requires them, it's not usually a line in the sand for me.
I'm not a fan of Covid-19 vaccines or experimental gene therapies, but if a private business or a corporation (which is government) says "no unvaccinated person may enter", I'll shun them and take my business elsewhere. Yes, I think they are being foolish, but I have no control (with a mask or otherwise) over whether a virus will be released from my body if it were to be present in me, so it is their business, even if their fear is silly and hysterical.

Like a cool drink of water in the hot desert

Yesterday someone wrote and told me a little story of a recent experience of theirs that my writing may have-- in a general way-- played a small part in. You don't even know how happy this sort of thing makes me. Even if I'm vastly overestimating the part my writing played in what happened, it is a great feeling.

I've gotten similar notes from people several times over the years and it never gets old.

If anything I write gives you ideas for standing up for liberty, I'm more successful than I ever dreamed I could be-- whether I'm financially successful or not. Honestly, if I had to choose between monetary success and inspiring others, I'd choose inspiring others nearly every time. (Only having second thoughts about this choice when I'm in a bad financial situation.) Which is why I am where I am.

I get the same kind of rush when people write to gush over my Time's Up flag design-- or even buy one or more. It's a validation that I never really expected.

But I am grateful and I thank all of you.

I'll keep on keeping on as long as I feel I am contributing something. Hopefully, it's not an empty feeling.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

I don't care what the CDC says even when they say something I like. They lost all credibility with me decades ago and they aren't going to get it back.

No matter what else happens in my life, no one can take away that I "celebrated" the roll-over from the year 1999 to 2000 sitting at a campfire in the snow, down by the river, in my buckskins, firing off a blank shot from my Hawken at midnight-ish (judging by the other celebratory noise drifting up from town). I wish I had more ideas as good as that one. It felt like pure liberty.

Is anarchy "a system"?
It comes down to what someone means by "system".
If "system" means a general way to do things, sure.
But if they mean an institution with someone "in charge" who imposes their will, no.
Same word, used in different ways, depending on the motives of the user.

Antisocial diseases

It is so puzzling to see people praising politicians. No matter how bad they are, they all have a big cheering section that won't stop. And won't stop v*ting for them.

People fall all over themselves to praise Bidump (either incarnation) in ways that make absolutely no sense to me. They ignore his flaws, or downplay them, and praise his political actions. Political actions... crimes. And they praise them.

What?

It's as bewildering as the people who can't let go of politicians after they are out of office-- they hate them and are still so obsessed with them that they can't get on with their lives just because that presidency happened. Someone has to pay!

Imagine if people were still looking for ways to punish Obama supporters. (If they are, I haven't seen it.)

Some people care way too much about the politicians who infest civilization. Politicians are a disease. Treat them as such. Cure the sickness and move on.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Twitter feed: "Scientists and public health experts say that vaccines are safe for most people"

Me: Yeah... and so is COVID-19

I had a strange TSHTF dream last night-- or a dream about the beginning of TSHTF-- and it wasn't even a little scary or unsettling. I was just approaching it like "Well, this is what I need to be doing next..." It was very interesting and detailed. I would have liked seeing how it turned out.

Good outlaws are good people

Whenever I see any mention of new legislation that is being plotted, my only thought is that whatever they do, I'm done complying. And I have this thought a lot these days.

Sure, if the legislation respects liberty a trifle more, that's good. But if it doesn't, which is generally the case... well, I'm OK with being an outlaw. Aren't you?

The origin of the word "outlaw" is said to have meant the person so labeled was declared to be "outside the protection of the law". I'm assuming they meant "legislation" (or those who enforce it) rather than "law", since no human can decide another is beyond the law.

How long has it been since you felt legislation protected you in any way? I can't remember the last time I felt that was the case, if ever. I may have always felt I was "outside the protection of the law" and it doesn't bother me even a little.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two