Computers Get Sick, Too

My computer has picked up a nasty virus, so I am using someone else's right now. Posting may be spotty until/unless I can get things straightened out. Can I scream in frustration?

This has made me think.... What is the crime that computer virus "Typhoid Mary"s commit? I suppose it qualifies as fraud. It certainly isn't "victimless". Would I be justified in shooting the person who created this virus? I wouldn't take my chances if I were him.

I would like to see a computer "corbomite device" that would reflect and amplify any hacking or virus attempt, sending a pulse of destructive energy right back at the attacking computer, in this case some website with the domain name "safenavweb.com". That would be satisfying right now. Hey, let me dream. It alleviates the irritation a little.

People of the Gun

I finally got my picture added to the People of the Gun webpage. If you are brave (or foolhardy) enough to have a picture of yourself with a gun posted online for all the anti-gun world to see, send them a pic. I think it is nice to see normal, non-violent people posing with their guns. It is a shame that it is necessary to pause to consider if such an action is wise. Don't forget: WE have nothing to be ashamed of. Gun owners are not the ones going around threatening to kill anyone who we disagree with. The victim disarmament perpetrators are the ones doing that.

Captivity is Unhealthy

I have had a lot of experience with wild animals. I was always warned that "wild animals do not make good pets". As I got more experience I came to realize that the reason for this is that too many people do not respect the animal's need for freedom. A raccoon in a cage becomes frustrated and angry. Boiling just below the surface is barely-suppressed rage, waiting for an opportunity to erupt. The captive lashes out at its jailer and both suffer. The wild animals I "kept" still lived life on their own terms; they retained their self-determination and came and went as they wished. They did not depend on me for food, as I didn't feed the adults. Large sexually mature raccoons who choose to stay around do not become resentful, seeking to attack or escape at the first opportunity.


This observation can be applied to people as well. Whether struggling under a tyrannical government or an oppressive relationship, if freedom is suppressed, resentment will fester just below the surface, waiting for a moment of weakness to erupt. People are not well evolved for a life of slavery. Wise people will recognize this fact.

Candidate: "Are You a Libertarian?"

Ads for (slimy) candidates for political office are flooding the airwaves. The first, and often the only, question that needs to be asked of each and every one of these pretenders is "Are you a libertarian? No? Next!"

If, on the rare occasion one of them answers affirmatively, your follow-up statement for the purpose of clarification should be: "So you trust the people of this city/state/country to run their own lives with no meddling from government whatsoever, right? No 'permits'; no 'licenses'; no victimless 'crimes'." If the candidate does not trust you, there is no reason to trust him. "NEXT!"

If the candidate is still on your side, the final test is the big one. Ask if they are willing to back up that position with the Kent McManigal pledge, the pledge that I took as a candidate for President where I state that if elected, I ever support the enforcement of a counterfeit "law", if I ever advocate violating the ZAP, I recognize it as the duty of every American to try to assassinate me if I do not "straighten up", with my successor under strict instructions to give executive clemency to the patriot. If the candidate is still standing by this position, by all means, vote for him or her! Otherwise, find someone better suited for office.

Time to Blind Big Brother

New York City's head tyrant is planning to install hundreds more surveillance cameras to "protect" people on the streets. (No doubt he will soon be followed by his clones in other cities.) Add these to the hundreds already out there, and the thousands of private cameras which are aimed out of their property, and are therefore optically "trespassing", and you have a situation where there is no privacy. This is an intolerable situation. It is a situation that can be solved, though. Make it more expensive to maintain these eyes than they are worth, or make the cameras worthless for the enforcers or as a psychological control tool.

Blinding the cameras is justified, but how? I would never encourage anyone to commit a crime.... Shooting the cameras is tricky since it is often impossible to do without endangering people or property behind the target. Vaseline paintballs are too easily cleaned up. Spray paint doesn't have the necessary range. Lasers are mostly ineffective, especially for the cameras which filter out certain wavelengths of light. However, government does not feel the pinch when paying for new cameras every month. After all, the money doesn't come out of their pockets; it is stolen from you and me.

I have no qualms about blinding government cameras, but privately owned ones .... any type of private property.... should be sacred. The problem is that the owners of those private cameras are only too anxious to hand over their videos to the enforcers, becoming a partner to the oppression. They also aim their cameras across the street or at the crossroads nearby instead of on their own property. They should be given a chance to redirect or remove their cameras, unless they have a clear history or aiding tyranny.

Perhaps there is another way to make those cameras worthless, but I doubt it. Disguises would make you a "person of interest" everywhere you went, unless you were an expert makeup artist. The little dramas and plays acted out for the cameras in some cities have done nothing to make the public aware and enraged. Too many people falsely believe that being watched unceasingly makes them safe. It doesn't work in London; it won't work anywhere.

I think the real value of the cameras (for tyrants) is the psychological effect on people who know they are being watched constantly. Government is not truly concerned with preventing or solving crimes, but only in getting people to "sit down and shut up!" Cameras seem to be very effective at that. It's time to stand up and be LOUD.

Certified Domestic Terrorist

With this bit of treason-by-government it seems my "Certified Domestic Terrorist" banner is becoming more and more true every day. I would suggest that eveyone with a blog, MySpace or Facebook page, or website add Homeland Stupidity's "CDT" banner to your pages. Only by shining the light of ridicule can we reflect the absurdity of the US government.

Thanks to War on Guns for calling this to my attention first.


......

The Libertarian Enterprise

Once again, The Libertarian Enterprise is at its alternate URL.

Pomp, Ceremony, and Goofy Haircuts

Too many people feel a inordinate respect for and are highly impressed by trappings of military pageantry. They crave silly rituals, ridiculous uniforms, and goofy haircuts. As the police become more and more militarized, notice how they adopt those same things. Especially the "goofy haircuts" part. (I guess they go along with the full-auto firearms that protect "them" from "us".)

Getting back to the topic: Could libertarians use this knowledge to our advantage, somehow? Not being one of those who are impressed (or intimidated) by such, I have a hard time coming up with a way to "use" the information. It would need to be solemn, at least to the participants. The rest of us can giggle to ourselves. It would also need to be completely voluntary. That way, those of us who have evolved beyond such needs could overlook it.

The problem is, people who engage in militaristic pomp and ceremony (and goofy haircuts)quickly begin to see themselves as better than those who do not. Would (or does) that hold true even in a libertarian society? I'm afraid it might.

On a side note, I just invented a new word by way of a typographical error: "libertarina". Perhaps that could be a new label for female libertarians. We need more libertarinas!

Tell Me About Yourself

It's your turn, dear readers. You know all about me, now tell me something about yourselves. You don't need to give away deep, dark secrets; you can remain anonymous if you prefer. I am simply curious who is reading this blog, what region you live in, and what your opinions are. What is your background? Tell me why you read this; maybe what your primary interest is. What do you like or dislike about this blog? What subjects have I ignored or given too much focus? If you would prefer to not publish a comment, email me privately and I will not make the information public.

Thanks!

.......

Informative Articles and a Request

Here are a couple of articles I ran across while searching for something else. "Gangster cops" is about a tragic, but inevitable result of the War on (some) Drugs, and the other article is about domestic enemy and authoriturd extraordinaire, Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

What I was originally looking for, but never found, was a flyer I had once run across online that warned of a new criminal gang, the "Blue Gang", and listed the typical behaviors and style of dress of cops and warned people to be alert and to regard this gang as extremely dangerous. If anyone can point me to it, I would be grateful and I will blog it here.

Wolves, Sheepdogs, and Sheep

The "wolves" in this common analogy are the criminals. The "sheep" are the average sleepwalking people-on-the-street; people who will never take responsibility for their own protection. Usually the "sheepdogs" referred to are the cops, which is mostly nonsense. The real "sheepdogs" are the alert, frequently armed, people who take seriously their responsibility to make the world within their sphere a better place. Sheepdogs are not out looking for trouble, or causing it. Some cops do fit this definition. Most no longer do.

When cops enforce counterfeit "laws", they are preying on the sheep around them. They have joined the wolf pack. It is up to the true sheepdogs to then come to the rescue of the sheep. The best, simplest solution would be for the sheepdog cops to keep the badged wolves in line, or to cull them from their ranks. They should never support policies of home-invasion "drug raids", and should certainly never take part in such crimes. They should never make a "gun arrest", but only arrest those who have committed a crime against another person.

A fully armed population is the best defense against criminals. Sheepdog cops know this and recognize their fellow sheepdogs; badges or permits are irrelevant. The wolves hate the sheepdogs. They either take advantage of, or enforce laws aimed at rendering the sheepdogs helpless. We need to turn the tide to make most cops once again join the ranks of sheepdogs, and turn from their wolfish ways. I'm not overly optimistic; the allure of predation is very strong.

The Libertarian Enterprise

The Libertarian Enterprise is hiding at a different URL this week. Find it here.

Useful Forms

Here are a couple of forms that you may find useful when dealing with authoriturds. The Bureaucracy Encounter Form and the Denial of Rights Under Color of Law form could both be used as a self defense tactic or as intellectual ammunition. I would warn you, however, that government thugs do not like being reminded that they are the criminals. Expect to be tasered.

"Firearms Refresher Course" Email

I got this in an email and reposted it here after correcting a lot of things. Feel free to spread around this corrected version.

FIREARMS REFRESHER COURSE
'Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not.'~ Thomas Jefferson

1. An armed individual is free. An unarmed subject is a slave.
2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop.
3. Colt: The original point and click interface.
4. "Gun control" is not about guns; it's about control.
5. If guns are stolen by "law", we will use swords ... while we build new guns.
6. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words and matches cause arson.
7. Free men do not ask permission from government; particularly not to bear arms.
8. If you don't exercise your rights, you don't have any.
9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither.
10. The United States Constitution. Do not resuscitate. RIP.
11. The Bill of Rights did not create rights; it listed a few of them.
12. The Second Amendment was a gentle warning to politicians who ignored the others.
13. 64,999,987 American firearms owners killed no one yesterday.
14. Guns only have three enemies; rust, politicians, and other ignorant people.
15. Know guns, know peace, know safety. No guns, no peace, no safety.
16. You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.
17. 911: Government sanctioned Dial-a-Prayer.
18. Assault is a behavior, not a device.
19. Criminals love gun control; it makes their jobs safer.
20. Murderers and their friends love "gun free zones"; their bleeding victims don't.
21. Only a government that is afraid of its people tries to control them.
22. You have only the rights you are willing to fight for.
23. There is not a single legal "gun law". Look up "infringed".
24. When you ignore the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves, outlaws, and criminals.
25. The first American Revolution started because of gun control. Will the second?
26. The 9/11 plot succeeded only because of "gun control".

Petition the NRA

If you haven't already given up on the anti-gun antics of the NRA, here is a petition that you, as a life member or an annual member of 5 years or more can send them to encourage them to dump one of their most recent tongue stompers (as in, his foot is deeply and actively in his mouth), director Joaquin Jackson.

There are some other tidbits of news on this at the War on Guns Blog.

The Only Good Government Agencies

If there were a government agency or two that actually did only good, without any harm to any innocent party, that could be financed without stealing money to do so, I would support that agency's existence, even if it wasn't specifically authorized in the Constitution.

Using those criteria, here is my list of good government agencies:




....

The Island of Unrestrained Government

I find the artificial island projects off the coast of Dubai fascinating, and it gives me an idea. It makes me think we should build an island somewhere and banish all government to it. To kill two birds with one stone, we could use garbage to build this "Authoritopia". That should help mask the smell of government somewhat, too. I would donate all my garbage quite willingly to such a noble cause. Since this would be a self-defensive act, we would be completely justified in rounding up all the authoriturds at gun-point to deport them.

Maybe a warning could be issued first: "If you try to enforce any counterfeit "law" from this moment forward, you will be deported at gun-point to a new location where your mental defect will no longer harm society. Walk away from your authoritarian mind-set and job today, unless you consent to being forcibly relocated. Any resistance will be interpreted as direct treason and will be dealt with forcefully." Then, just to be fair (much more so than the auhoriturds have ever been with the rest of us) we would leave them alone until they tried to enforce some counterfeit "law". Think how many "volunteers" we could round up at each "sobriety checkpoint".

On their island, the former tyrants and bureaucrats could govern each other to death if they wanted. Just as long as they knew that no such nonsense would ever be allowed in the rest of the world, and any escapees who tried to sneak ashore to spread authoritarianism to the rest of us would be shot immediately, and the shooter would be celebrated worldwide. Well, worldwide with the exception of "The Island of Unrestrained Government".

Government Harms Babies

It seems that everyone I know either just had a baby or is pregnant. Looking into those innocent little faces, you want to be able to protect them from everything. Especially from government agencies that pretend to exist to protect them.

One new mother I know nicked her baby's chin with his zipper when she was dressing him. She was wanting to take him to the doctor's office for a stomach problem, but wouldn't for fear that the "Child Protective Service" would think she was abusive and take him away. Her mother was eventually able to help her with the baby, and it turned out he was OK, but her fear of an overreaching government stood in the way of seeking professional help.


I also knew of a couple in another state who got into an argument with their neighbors who then carried out their threat and called the state and reported them as child abusers. The last I knew they had still never seen their children again. It is hard to prove yourself innocent, which is why the burden of proof is supposed to be on the prosecutors. (Tell that to the IRS!)

In many cases the fear of these things happening is overblown. The problem is that you can never tell which tiny thing will get the snowball rolling. On some occasions children do need to be rescued from abusive parents. I don't think that is government's job. Sure, the scorpion of government can sting those who harm children. But that scorpion is stupid and blind and doesn't notice who it stings. The children are often its victims. Is it worth the risk to let that beast near your child?

Parasite in the News

It is all over the news that "the first baby-boomer" has signed up for Social(ist In)security. Why is that news? Did anyone really think she or those who will follow her down the path of parasitism would have the integrity to say "No thanks"? She has been brainwashed all her working life. The lie is powerful, comforting, and ubiquitous. I doubt the thought even occurred to her to refuse.

I heard her saying that she will now start getting back the money she has paid in for all those years. No she won't. Her money is long gone. It was spent before it was taken; paid out to the parasites of her parents' generation (and for the salaries of the bureaucrats who encouraged and administered the system). Now she will be taking the money of those who continue to work and have their money stolen by government. Just because her money was stolen for years does not give her the right to live off of stolen money now.

If you continue to allow government to steal your money, you should consider that money gone, and plan for the future without counting on "getting it back". Otherwise you will probably have a rude awakening when it is "your turn" and you discover that your retirement welfare check won't keep you warm and fed. Don't allow yourself to be used as an excuse to keep propping up the dead system.

You may think that calling welfare recipients "parasites" is harsh. Perhaps. It is not a judgement; only an observation. Parasites live by draining life from the host without giving back as much as they take. Parasites do not cause themselves to evolve that way. The environment causes them to evolve into a parasitic organism. Remove yourself from the mental environment where it is OK to live off of stolen money. Remind yourself what is really being spoken of when "Social Security" is referred to. Choose to evolve into something other than a parasite. Become symbiotic and give something back in exchange instead of living off the lives of the younger generations. It will enrich you more than cashing those filthy checks.

Recognize the Tyranny

Government atrocities are difficult to watch. Black-armored, masked stormtroopers kicking in doors, stomping kittens to death, and then shooting or otherwise brutalizing families is not a pleasant sight. Not even if the family is running a meth lab, though too many times the stormtroopers have the wrong address in their crosshairs.

Watching government enforcers with automatic weapons staring down unarmed, non-violent protesters is a scene from the worst tyrannies in history, yet is played out in America anytime enough people care about an issue to show up at a protest. It makes those who care "just a bit less" stay home instead of doing their duty. The goons would rather you simply vote and then go along with the results they report to you.

When people like Ed Brown, Wayne Fincher, or Ryan Horsley get targeted for persecution, it is easy to point and say "well, if only he hadn't done _____....." instead of realizing that if the government decides you are an annoyance, it will find some excuse to destroy you. Either a new counterfeit "law" will be enacted to get you, or you will be charged with violating one of the millions already "on the books". It is easier to turn away and ignore the tyranny than to hold the enforcers (and those who are supposed to hold their leashes) accountable. Don't be a tyranny denier. Call it what it is.

Some say that violent movies have desensitized the population to horrific violence. Perhaps that is half of the problem. I think the other half is that some people can't look at violence and unpleasant things at all. They pretend that the world is Candyland. They refuse to see the atrocities no matter what, and if confronted by undeniable tyrannical acts, they will blame the person who makes them look, not the person committing the act.