"Proportional response"

The rather dangerous concept of "proportional response" keeps raising its ugly head.

"Proportional response" is nonsense. Once someone has aggressed or stolen, the burden is on them for "starting it", not on you to make sure you only defend yourself or your property "just enough".

Does that mean I would shoot a kid for cutting across the corner of my yard? No. I haven't done it, and kids cut across my corner lot every single day- and have even damaged stuff.

Instead of being so worried that a response might be unproportional, pay more attention to not doing anything which will cause a response in the first place. As I have seen expressed so "eloquently": Don't start nothin', won't be nothin'. But if you do start it, don't whine when it doesn't go how you have visualized it going.

.

Don't be scared; be prepared.

Those who carry a gun don't need to be afraid of the bad guys.

Those who have a Bug Out Bag don't need to be scared of emergencies.

Those who have prepped their homes don't need to be scared of natural or man-made disasters.

Those who know "government" is an illusion don't need to fear anarchy.

It doesn't mean things will always go well for you- it means you have done all you can to increase the odds in your favor. No one can do more.

Don't be scared. Prepare.

.

Solve a mystery

1t
2J
3n

The above are 3 text messages which I got last night/this morning at 12:01 from "Unknown. They all arrived within about a half second, in numerical order.

Even stranger, when I actually open the texts, the letters aren't there, only the numbers.
There is no way to reply to the texts, not that I would anyway.

Does anyone have a clue what this might be, or has anyone ever gotten something like this?

.

Happy Secession Day!

Or, maybe Liberty Day. Because you're independent every day, right?

I refuse to celebrate a day which was originally set aside to celebrate independence from a tyrannical State by worshiping the growing abuses of a tyrannical State which is in the process of building a planet-wide Mega-Empire of aggression, spying, and theft.

Nope. I'll celebrate the spirit of secession- as it should be.

And, when I encourage secession I don't just mean an independent nation of Texas or something like that- although that would be fine too, as a first step of smashing Leviathan into manageable-sized chunks- but secession all the way to the level of the individual. Not isolated islands of one person each, but a sea of equal individuals. No slaves; no masters. Just sovereign individuals living their lives, not under any false "authority".

That is Liberty, and secession is a necessary step on the path to get there.

Happy Secession Day!

-

I see this as the antidote to the fictional Unification Day from "Firefly". Yesterday I was shocked and disappointed to see a supposed Browncoat on Facebook defending and praising the real life Reavers... I mean PurpleBellies.  Oops, Alliance... uh... cops. Whichever... the real life bad guys. The cognitive dissonance seems like it would painful. Can't much figure out how copsuckers survive such high levels of it.

.

Restricting liberty inevitably tragic

Restricting liberty inevitably tragic

(My Clovis News Journal column for May 30, 2014. Sorry, I was late posting the whole thing to the blog this time!)

As soon as I heard about the Santa Barbara, California, murders I held my breath and waited for the anti-gun advocates to start dancing in the blood- I didn't need to wait long.

Six innocent people died- three of those shot to death. All because one person (who came from a home of confessed anti-gun advocates, by the way) felt rejected and inferior. He was seething with homicidal racial hatred, against "white people" and "black" men, which he blamed on blonde women who wouldn't date him.

His rants showed no hint of self responsibility for his situation, nor any awareness that perhaps women- all women- rejected him because he was exhibiting violent tendencies, socially awkward behavior, and harboring violent fantasies.

I'm sure if he had survived his murder spree he would claim no responsibility for those who died at his hands, but would blame his victims in some way.

Many other people will choose to place the blame elsewhere, as he did, but on one tool he used, instead. He blamed blonde women; most observers with an anti-liberty bias will blame the gun. In their minds it couldn't be entirely his fault.

Might as well pretend the stabbing deaths didn't happen, or find a way to blame them on the gun, too. It's the standard drill after these tragedies occur.

California already has some of the most onerous anti-gun laws in the country- the same kind we are told will keep us safe. How is that working out?

Gun haters believe if you just keep kids away from guns, and keep them ignorant about how guns work, the kids will be safe.

Let's try the same with water safety and see how refusing to teach kids to swim, or sensible behavior in and around water, pans out. Don't act shocked and angered- and don't blame water- when kids drown due to enforced ignorance.

Kids and guns do mix. It's the best way to teach them the proper way to use the tools, and the consequences of mishandling them, early enough for the lessons to stick. In addition, the libertarian principle of never "initiating force" will go a long way toward avoiding intentional aggression, with or without a gun.

Some people find it easier to blame inanimate objects, or claim other people made them do bad things. Plus, as long as people keep seeking excuses to justify aggression, while at the same time demonizing defensive violence, more tragedies will result.

Restricting liberty is never the solution, and inevitably leads to a tragic destination. It's long past time to start respecting the Rightful Liberty of every person, whoever and wherever they may be.
.

Liberty Lines, July 3, 2014

(Published in The State Line Tribune, Farwell, TX/Texico, NM)

I can't believe the arrogance of those who decide to give themselves more power over the lives of people they previously had no "authority" over.

Some people choose to live beyond city limits in order to enjoy a little extra freedom from the intrusive and meddlesome rules that towns are known to make up out of thin air (usually "justified" by "health and safety") and enforce.

Extending a town's jurisdiction in this way is a betrayal, no matter what "state law" may allow. It's really no different than Canada suddenly deciding to control what people in Montana can do on their own property. Sure, governments jealously guard their own tax cows, and Montanans are already claimed, and well milked, by several different levels of government, but people choose to not live under more government than they want for a reason. This status quo is like a truce- live and let live. This proposed expansion of "jurisdiction" is a violation of that implicit truce.

Take a hard look at those pushing for this expansion of government intrusion. Never believe them if they claim to be for "limited government" while seeking to expand government control in such a large way. You now know exactly what they are and how they see you.

Does this mean the Farwell police department is admitting there isn't enough actual, real trouble in Farwell proper to keep them busy, so they feel a need to extend their territory? If so, cut back on employees, put the remainder on part time, and refund the savings to the residents. I can "police" myself- as can almost every other person in town. And together, without any "official help", we can keep the actual aggressors and property violators in line- apparently unless they hold political office or draw their pay from the tax loot.

_

Mike Pomper- In last week's Border Banter you wrote "us homies cannot do a blasted thing about" all the new federal regulations which will be imposed on us in the near future. Sure we can! We choose whether to obey or not. I realize you may not want to be an outlaw, but you had better get over it. Soon, all the decent people will be outlaws. Maybe "soon" is already here.

In "Atlas Shrugged", Ayn Rand wrote "There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." That time is upon us. It's interesting how applicable that quote is to the first part of my column as well.

.

Don't crawl in bed with the bad guys and it won't rub off on you

Government is strictly forbidden by the Second Amendment from making up rules regarding guns. Period. That's what "shall not be infringed" means, even though government employees lie about it.

That means courthouses, post offices, cities, and Washington, District of Creeps can't legitimately (or legally) regulate guns in any way. Not without becoming criminals (yeah, I mean in even more ways).

But I think it also means that anyone who gets in bed with government can't either. And, by that I mean those who give up their private business to become a corporation, with government perks and benefits, have given up more than they realize. Those "benefits" have a downside.

(That may even have implications for Hobby Lobby's latest win. Are they really private property, or are they in bed with government/incorporated and therefore seeking to have their cake and eat it, too? And, no, I don't believe anyone is "entitled" to have anyone else pay for their healthcare.)

There's a simple way to avoid this and make up all the anti-liberty rules your little heart longs for: don't prostitute yourself (and not in a good, honest way) and your business by becoming a corporation. Yes, that has drawbacks, but you can't have it both ways. Either you are a free market business and make up all your own rules, or you become a quasi-governmental corporation and have to abide by the rules you willingly signed on for. What? You didn't think that was part of the deal?

.

Great minds think alike

So many times I'll be writing something and run across someone else's writings that parallel what I have been thinking and writing.

Or, I will publish something only to have someone else tell me they have been writing about the same topic.

I'm sure events probably trigger thoughts that tend to lead in similar directions to people who reject the institutionalization of theft and aggression. But maybe it's more than that.

Maybe "great minds" just tend to think alike.

We are all endlessly repeating and exploring- and discovering- the same concepts over and over. And that's OK. In fact, it's probably essential. To get an idea into your brain it helps to hear it over and over, and hearing it from multiple sources probably helps even more. Universal truth doesn't get diluted by being presented by lots of people. It gets reinforced.

.

History? Their-story.

I have almost no interest in history as it relates to what governments and their militaries did. That's a club I have never belonged to, so their "history" isn't mine.

That's why history in school was so dreadfully boring to me.

The history I am more interested in is what normal people did while simply living. Yes, some of what they did was in reaction to governments, but that's polluted history. Not the real stuff.

I enjoy dabbling in the ways they lived. I have hundreds of thousands of years of human history to experience. Why just focus on the worst bits and the worst thugs and pretend that's the "important part"?

And why limit myself to this current time when choosing what to wear and what to do? Pick and choose the best history has to offer.

The past is deep. Jump in.

.

Auction: The very last "Time's Up" shirt

I'm down to the last "Time's Up" T-shirt, so I took it off the website and have listed it on eBay.

If you wanted one, this is probably your very last chance- at least for this design (the Gadsden and Culpeper modified design).

So, if you are interested, Check it out here.

Terrorize the bad guys

Are you a "terrorist"? And, by that I mean do you strike terror into the hearts of bad guys?

I must be a terrorist because I have seen fear in the eyes of bad guys on a few occasions when I went up against them- or more accurately, when they pushed where I wasn't willing to go.

Some weren't smart (or observant) enough to be scared. They never knew how close things came to getting really ugly. (And, no, I'm not foolish enough to imagine the outcome was assured.)

I am no threat to those who are not initiating force or violating property, so obviously anyone who considers me a "terrorist" must be doing something really wrong.

.

Statist losers and their desperation

Now, not all statists are necessarily "losers"- some are. Some libertarians are, too. It's a human thing. But sometimes....Oh, the comments my CNJ columns attract... Here's what some statists resort to when they have nothing else:

Statist Tax-Addict Commenter

It's easy to be a freedom loving libertarian when you live in your parent's basement.

• 
  

  Me
  

  My parents don't have a basement. They are welcome to come to my house and use my cellar in the event of a tornado, though. Statists are such sore losers. LOL

  
  
• Statist Tax-Addict Commenter

  I heard different. At what age did you move out?

  
  
• 
  

  Me
  

  Not that it is any of your business, but just after my 22nd birthday. Decades ago, in other words.
  
  And, it wouldn't matter regardless.
  
  Do you reject scientific discoveries if you disapprove of where the person lives when they make the discovery? Truth is truth, and rejecting theft and coercion is still the only ethical way to live, no matter who espouses it, or where they live. Just like theft and coercion are still evil no matter how you believe you are justifying it with "necessity" or a "job".
  
  I know lots of freedom-loving libertarians, and have never concerned myself with what their living situation might be. Just like I have never considered where a statist lives as relevant to the debate. I don't need to worry about pointless things like that, because the statist ideas are so deeply flawed and self-contradictory it gives plenty of *real* ammo against their position. But it's a pathetic attempt I see dredged up over and over by statists. It's just a diversion to try to find something irrelevant in order to try to discredit liberty, since there's no real foundation with which to attack it. It's a tactic of desperation pursued by people who know deep down that they have no leg to stand on. Can't argue with the truth, so let's find a way to attack those telling it. As if it somehow gives their position credence.
  
  Now, supposed "libertarians" who advocate aggression or theft ("taxation" of any sort, as an example, even a "flat tax") are the ones discrediting themselves, because they are not living up to what they claim to believe.
  
  I suppose I could also point out that statists who don't go around robbing their neighbors (in person, I mean, not just by supporting "taxation") and attacking or kidnapping innocent people are also failing to live up to what they say they believe in, since there is no difference in doing those things in person or by proxy through the State/government. Evil is evil.

  
  

  .

You'll know them by their badges

The badge.

Every time a cop pins one of those metal trinkets on his chest, he is aligning himself with the State and against you. It's no different than when Nazis wore swastikas to show where their allegiance lay.

A badge is the moral and ethical equivalent of a swastika. Those disgusting trinkets should be known as "badgstikas".

Someday, soon, they may be seen in the same light by more than just me.

.

Rattling the tin cup

I'm changing this into my generic "I could sure use some donations or subscriptions" post. So, if I have linked to this, it is a quiet request.

Any updated information is below:

I'm sure someone has a few thou$and sitting around they were just gonna toss in a bonfire, but started thinking "How else might I dispose of this stuff?", right? Well, now that you asked...

If you have the desire and the ability* to donate, click on the button over there on the right side.

Thanks!

*And, as always, please DON'T donate anything you can put to better use! Seriously!

.

Why "they" can't win

Even if "they" manage to criminalize every liberty, and ban and confiscate every gun in the right hands (yours and mine, not "theirs"), "they" still haven't won.

Because at that point I am perfectly willing to kill a government employee to take his guns and fight for my life, liberty, and property. Maybe not at that precise moment, but it will then become a legitimate path for each and every person to take. Not just on a whim- there may still be better and smarter ways to act at that moment- but if I find myself backed into a corner, and see no better option... yes, I'm willing.

I will also support anyone else doing the same- even if it's before I am forced to act.

And I know there is nothing "wrong" with doing that even now, although it is usually a foolish, suicidal choice.

As long as some of us accept this terrible responsibility, "they" can not win. Not ever. And don't kid yourself- it IS a responsibility. You can accept it, or you can deny it, fear it, and try to hide from it, but you can't change it.

.

The cost is too high

If people choose to destroy their own lives with drug abuse, that is their right. The War on Politically Incorrect Drugs is often "justified" by the fact that drug abusers don't just destroy their own lives, but the lives of innocent people around them, too.

Well, guess what- so does the War on Politically Incorrect Drugs.

People who were doing nothing wrong are murdered in their homes by drug enforcers showing up at the wrong address. Or the "right" address when no one there is even accused of initiating force or violating private property in any way.

If those in favor of prohibition were honest they would have to see that those deaths cancel out any supposed benefit of the War on Politically Incorrect Drugs saving the innocent victims of drug abusers. If. But they aren't honest.

Nope. They'll start pulling out numbers and statistics. None of those numbers matter to an innocent baby or grandmother who just happens to be unfortunate enough to become one more number or statistic.

Drug abuse isn't smart. Using your addiction or habit as an excuse for violating people or their property is wrong. Harming an innocent is tragic and incurs a debt you probably can't afford. But the drug war is even worse. In that case innocent people are harmed and it's just "Oh, well. That's the world we live in. It's worth it to fight this plague." No, it isn't.

Support for prohibition is wrong. It's evil. It's disgusting.

.

Politicians useless, irrelevant

Politicians useless, irrelevant

(My Clovis News Journal column for May 23, 2014. I can actually say the headline which was written for this one is much more harsh than the tone of my column was intended to be.)

Many people are terribly obsessed over what a tiny minority of rather unimportant and silly people are doing. It would be funny if it didn't waste so much life. So much time and space is taken up by the news media discussing them, and so much time is spent by individuals debating which one is best, which one is worst, who they like and who they hate, and who did what to whom.

No, I'm not talking about Miley, Kanye, or the cosmetically altered Star Trek aliens (oh, wait, that's Kardashian, not Cardassian), although those celebrities are silly and unimportant too. The unimportant people I speak of are politicians. Yet serious people laugh at those who are consumed with celebrities while acting as though those who follow the political realm are more high-minded. It's two sides of the same corroded zinc penny.

I understand why people pay attention to politicians. Somehow things have gotten twisted around upside down and backward so any ill-advised notion which gets into a politician's head can wind up written down somewhere and enforced as though it were law- but nothing which violates human liberty can ever be a real law. Of those real laws, there are only three: don't use force against someone who didn't strike first; don't violate other people's property; do what you say you'll do. Anything else can't be a law, but only a made up rule. It's "mala prohibitum"- which means the prohibited action or thing is not wrong, it's just illegal.

I suppose this unearned power is why people hang on every word politicians utter, and why they pay attention to the ridiculous things they do.

You don't need politicians- they need you. If you stop paying attention to them, stop letting them shrink the boundaries of your life with their silly law tantrums, and start living your Rightful Liberty to its fullest- just as the founders of America intended- you'll quickly see how irrelevant they truly are.

When enough people stop consenting and stop complying, the support will be pulled out from under their feet and the politicians will tumble right over the cliff, like a giant statue topples when the sand supporting its foundation sifts away. This is why they work so hard to fool you into believing they are important to your life and without them society would collapse. If you ever see through the lie you'll have taken away every last scrap of their power.

One of my fondest wishes for you is that you'll eventually see them for what they really are, and in that moment, take back your authority over your life.
.

Misguided fears

Are you scared of Muslims? Wake up! (And I hate hearing or saying "wake up!")

Cops and their religion of officer safety, combined with "I don't make the laws, I just enforce them", are much more dangerous to you, personally, than the vast majority of Muslims will ever be.

You will probably never even personally see a dangerously radical Muslim, but how many dangerously radical cops do you run across in a day? You don't know, but since they are all wearing the visible gang symbols- the badge and uniform- you had better assume they have chosen to stand against you.

It frustrates me that people will rant endlessly about some threat from people they'll never encounter, while worshiping the brutal thugs they see every single day.

Worry about defanging the real and present threat, then we can move on to things that are less likely. And, make sure no religious notions are EVER allowed to become "law" or to be otherwise imposed by "government" and the threat shrinks even further- down to as close to nothing as is possible in this imperfect Universe.

.

L. Neil, you magnificent ... thinker. ;)

To anyone who knows how to look, what's heartbreakingly obvious—and more painful to me than I can possibly express—is that we, the United States of America, have, by fits and starts, become the very evil that we have always believed we were fighting. Our young soldiers are invaders, villains, no matter how they look or sound, not heroes or liberators, as they claim—or it is claimed for them. By any objective standard, they are being killed by people trying to protect their property, their rights, and the way that they choose to live their lives, no matter how repulsive and abhorrent that may seem to us.

My only quibble is that there is no "we", I am NOT a part of this and it isn't being done on my behalf, and "the United States of America" exists only in certain minds.

I recommend you go read the whole thing in this week's issue of The Libertarian Enterprise.

.

"Freedom? Here, let me take that for you."

There are psychological defects that go along with becoming a politician. First of all they think everything is theirs to control and use. And they also think every human activity needs to be regulated.

Just look at this article for example: Commissioner considering land use policy

"Lack of zoning and other regulations have meant that Curry County has little control over what is imposed within its limits."

Yeah, heaven forbid there's a little bit of freedom you perverts haven't yet outlawed.

And, what was that back up there in the first two paragraphs?

"Curry County has little control over what is imposed within its limits."  "...help the county achieve more jurisdiction over its land."

Oh no, the land isn't "its (Curry County's) land" that you seek to violate through control- it belongs to the individual owners, ONLY. Hands (and "laws") off!

But, it's about "protecting" you- or at least the local power-grabbers:

"A land use policy, Bostwick said, can help give an area some protection from federal regulations — of particular concern are those regulations that pertain to the Endangered Species Act or the Environmental Protection Agency."

So, in the name of protecting residents from the feds, you steal more false "authority" for yourselves.

What's worse: the tyrant thousands of miles away whom you can ignore without him even noticing (unless some slimy local statist wants to report you for a chance at a pat on the head), or the tyrant next door who can drive past your property every day?

"A land use policy would also allow the county control over businesses, though Bostwick insists the renewed interest has nothing to do with a recently proposed strip club."

Sure...

"A land use policy allows officials to designate an area’s best use."

"Best use"? Determined by who? Not the property's owners, I am certain. What if your idea of "best use" is wrong, and yet you impose your will on me anyway, when my idea would be better? Or just as good. What if the reality is that there are many different equally good possible uses for a piece of land? Or what if I, as the owner, want to use it in a way you don't consider "best"? Well, in that case you should jump off a bridge into molten lava instead of imposing your will on the property owner.

"There are zoning opportunities in the land use policy,"

"Opportunities"? Does that mean he sees every woman as a "raping opportunity" or every car as a "theft opportunity"? That is only exciting to a control freak.

"Bostwick and Pyle said it will be the residents of Curry County who would have to help determine what the county’s best use actually is under a land use policy."

That's still socialism. Crowdsourcing evil is still evil. I have no more "right" to say what my neighbor does on his own property than does a dictator.

"We’re going to engage the public."

Is that like asking your victim if she'd prefer to be beheaded or drawn and quartered? What if "the public" just says "No!"? 

Interesting word, "engage". In war, the soldiers often say they are going to "engage the enemy"- so I guess "the public" should understand how they are viewed by these control freaks.

So, yeah, just look at how these people think. They are entitled to your property- Oh, they'll still let you "own" it so they can keep collecting the ransom ("property tax"), but the ultimate control, they believe, is theirs.

I think a wake up call for all molesters of this sort is long overdue.

.