Seatbelt Laws Can Be Deadly

Print Friendly

Not “buckling up for safety” can get you killed all right. By a cop.belt 1

That’s what happened to Deland, Florida resident Marlon Brown about a week ago. Brown was killed – run over – by Deland Police Officer James Harris, who pursued him with his squad car after Brown tried to run away on foot after being stopped over a seatbelt violation (see here).

Brown – according to news reports a popular neighborhood barber – hadn’t done anything to anyone.  His “crime” was to have asserted self-ownership, which in a slave society is the gravest offense there is. He probably thought to himself: I am a grown man. No one has any more right to demand I wear a seatbelt than they have a right to insist I eat my veggies or wear a sweater because it’s cold out. Whether eating veggies or wearing a sweater on a cold day – or “buckling up for safety” – is a good idea or a bad idea is completely irrelevant insofar as it’s my self that’s involved and thus, no one else’s business. Certainly not a cop’s. Aren’t cops supposed to fight crime? When did the job of a cop become parenting or life-coaching at gunpoint? Who the hell are these people to point guns at me over my decision to not “buckle up”?belt 2

Brown likely had such thoughts as he saw the wig-wag lights of Officer Harris in his rearview. Then, he probably got mad. I know I would have. You are driving along, minding your business, causing no harm to anyone. Then you glance up and see the bright lights – and the buzz-cut head – of Officer Unfriendly. This costumed menace is about to threaten you with violence and – at minimum – shove a piece of paper in your face that will demand what amounts to a ransom payment, or else. The “or else” being a jail cell. Over… nothing. A non-crime.

And so, Brown attempted to flee. It ended up costing him his life.

Mind, “officer safety” was never threatened. Brown merely tried to get away from an obnoxious costumed thug who had no business bothering him in the first place. But that was sufficient to justify summary execution by motor vehicle.

It is not an isolated happenstance anymore. Not a month goes by – oftentimes, hardly a week goes by – without some godawful report of a citizen being killed by cops over…. nothing. A murder – and that’s exactly what this was – prefaced by some petty affront to the authority of someone in a state-issued costume. Talk back – hell, dare to question – and the Tazers come out. Attempt to ward off the blows – and you will hear Stop Resisting! as the blows continue to rain down. They may – or may not – stop at merely a beating, a kicked-in skull.belt 3

Marlon Brown learned just how far it can go. A witness to the event, Sabrina Waldron, stated: “After the car hit Marlon and landed on him the back end of it was up in the air.” Thus ended Brown’s life.

Was it worth it? Was it right?

A man is dead – for no reason. Or rather, for a very bad reason.

In a sane society, Officer Harris would have had no legal pretext for bothering Marlon Brown. He may have looked askance at him for electing to not wear his seat belt – just as I may look askance at a grossly obese person ordering a double cheeseburger and 64 ounce Coke – but insofar as Officer Harris’ legal authority was concerned, he (in a sane society) would be powerless to intervene. That’s how it ought to be. For the same reason most of us – dear god, let us hope – do not want costumed men with guns rousting us out of bed to go for “healthy” morning jogs or supervising our dinner menus, threatening us with nightsticks and Tazers and guns if we don’t abide by their “recommendations.”belt last

And yes, that is where we are headed – if  people (enough people) do not come to their senses. If enough people don’t learn to discipline their inner busybody – if only for their own sake. Because most definitely, what goes around will come around. You may find it appalling that some people choose to go unbuckled. Resist the desire to insist they do so. Because if you do insist,  you’ve just given license to the inner busybodies of all those people out there – among whom, no doubt, there will be busybodies who just can’t abide something about the way you live your life. . . some “risky” hobby, some “unhealthy” habit. No small corner of what used to be your life will be left to you. Chained to a collective – compelled to Submit & Obey.

And the antidote to this horror? Self-ownership. You own you. I own me. Neither of us has any claim on the other that’s enforceable at gunpoint. Feel free to suggest. To recommend. But when it comes to the use of force, the one and only legitimate justification is self-defense. Otherwise, leave me alone – and I will leave you alone.

If that had been the law in Deland, Florida, Marlon Brown would still be alive.

And James Harris would not be a murderer.

Throw it in the Woods?

Share Button

  399 comments for “Seatbelt Laws Can Be Deadly

  1. May 25, 2013 at 5:02 pm

    I wonder if while the costumed murderer was yelling ” STOP RESISTING, STOP RESISTING!” while crushing the life out of his body?

  2. Tor Minotaur
    May 24, 2013 at 12:58 pm

    Venice was never technically an autonomous city state. But it certainly has a productive mercantile export tradition and greatly enjoyed the degree of autonomy afforded by its geographic isolation from mainland Italy.

    Venice was founded in 421 AD on April 25th, Saint Mark’s day, who’s the patron saint of Venice. During the Romanic period, Venice was the name given to the northern region of Italy, not the city.

    Only after the fall of the Western Roman Empire and the arrival of the Longobards was the name used for the settlements built in the group of small islands in the lagoon. For nearly 1400 years, the two or three miles of shallow water separating Venice from mainland Italy, protected and helped isolate Venice from invaders and from much of day to day Italian politics.

    Being relatively unmolested by the Pope and his imperialist warfare, feudalism and territorial squabbling, they fixed their attention toward the Eastern Mediterranean and the rich markets of the Levant and Constantinople.

    Thus Venice began its rise as a grand trade empire of the Venetian Republic. After having fight against Romans, Arabs and pirates to maintain its economic autonomy,

    The one big exception was in the year 1000, when Venice started spreading its commercial boundaries. Venice joined the Pope’s Crusades in the context of a business opportunity. Many works of art and other valuables were taken to Venice as booty: for instance, the four bronze horses of St. Mark’s.

    The Veneti people had inhabited the region since the 10th century BC before being subsumed by Rome. Venice has been known as the “La Dominante”, “Serenissima”, “Queen of the Adriatic”, “City of Water”, “City of Masks”, “City of Bridges”, “The Floating City”, and “City of Canals”. It is often described as undoubtedly the most beautiful city built by man.

    The Republic of Venice was a major maritime power during the Middle Ages and Renaissance, and a staging area for the Crusades and its War Plunder. It was an important center of commerce for silk, grain, spice, and art from the years 1200 until 1700. This has made Venice a wealthy city throughout most of its history.

  3. Tor Minotaur
    May 24, 2013 at 8:52 am

    Gil – guess what? Your favorite Simpson’s episode was written by John Swartzwelder, a “staunch libertarian.” John is also a gun rights advocate, and despite having written many of the environmentally driven episodes, he has been described as an “anti-environmentalist.”

    Swartzwelder used to write episodes while sitting in a booth at a coffee shop “drinking copious amounts of coffee and smoking endless cigarettes”. When California passed an anti-smoking law, Swartzwelder bought the diner booth and installed it in his house, allowing him to continue his process in peace.

    Bart Gets Hit by a Car – Simpsons – Seasom02Episode09 – Jan 1991
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_Gets_Hit_by_a_Car

    John Swartzwelder – Writer of 59 Full Simpsons episodes
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Swartzwelder

  4. Tor Munkov
    May 21, 2013 at 10:12 am

    All laws are dangerous. All vehicles and roads are dangerous. Unplug from the grid. Eat food grown in primitive organic gardens. Avoid the sun and technological devices they are highly carcinogenic. Build yourself a thick walled adobe hut deep in the woods away from the killing fields of modern convenience. Only come out at night with a heavily armed group.
    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
    Clouds – Celebrity Response Video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zxXAtmmLLc

    Zach Sobiech
    http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20679770,00.html

    Sandcastles – Zach Sobiech and Sammy Brown
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_swFWMoiRE

    So grab the shovel and start digging deep
    cause your own sandcastle is all you can keep.
    Some say my sandcastle never did exist,
    but I’ll always dream and build our lives in it.
    So sorry for never finishing your room,
    Didn’t have time to make it beautiful as you.
    As I lay my head to rest for the very last time,
    I’m will always keep dreaming of our sandcastle life.

    Star Hopping – Zach Sobiech, Sammy Brown, Reed Redmond
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUO0vxrkhwU

    Zach Sobiech and Sammy Brown met on a picnic blanket when they were toddlers. Since then, they remained close friends and shared life’s most important moments together. They began playing music together at the age of twelve and never looked back. As treatment options dwindled for Zach, the pair formed the band A Firm Handshake, along with their friend Reed Redmond.

    Fix Me Up – Zach Sobiech and Sammy Brown – “A Firm Handshake” Band
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvSYZHmhIAM

    Blueberries – Sammy Brown and Zach Sobiech
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kl2flXdApoU

    Lyrics
    http://ambilyrics.com/f/firm-handshake/fix-me-up-feat.-zach-sobiech-and-sammy-brown

    Zach Sobiech – Final Days
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NjKgV65fpo

    • May 21, 2013 at 10:22 am

      Good stuff, Tor!

      Hey, do me a favor?

      Register as a user… that way, none of your posts will be held up in the moderation queue for approval. As it stands, many of your posts (such as this one) are held in moderation by the system, because of the links you include.

    • May 21, 2013 at 11:17 am

      Thanks, Tor!

      Just approved…

      • Tor Minotaur
        May 21, 2013 at 11:55 am

        Thanks, Eric for making all this happen!

        This Gary Busey School of Hard Knocks dropout appreciates having a goto place to get my mind right again. (or wrong again, from the POV of any clover trolls in attendance)

        Tor Minotaur aka Tor Munkov

        • Ed
          May 23, 2013 at 6:37 pm

          “Tor Minotaur aka Tor Munkov”

          Goddam, Tor. What happened? You must have been drunk when you registered and forgot how to spell Munkov. May as well just own up to it. ;-)

          • Tor Minotaur
            May 23, 2013 at 9:31 pm

            I plead the fifth…of a gallon that is.

          • Tor Minotaur
            May 23, 2013 at 10:09 pm

            Slim Dusty(born 1927)
            Waltzing Matilda

            -a striking itinerant worker killed by 3 pigs is seen to pass by as a ghost.

            Troopers: cops or enlisted soldiers
            Swagman: a tramp or itinerant worker, travelling from one location to another.
            Billabong: A waterhole.
            Coolabah Tree: A type of Eucalyptus tree.
            Billy: A tin in which he boils water or tea.
            Matilda: a bag (swag) for his elongings. Often slung over over his shoulder and
            swinging from side to side (waltzing).
            Jumbuck: Male sheep.
            Tucker: Food.
            Squatter: A landowner with no legal claim to the land.
            – – – –
            Overkill – Men at Work (from 1983)
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lcu7OCIqlqE

            I can’t get to sleep. I think about the implications. Of diving in too deep. And possibly the complications. Especially at night. I worry over situations. I know will be alright. Perhaps it’s just imagination.

            Day after day it reappears. Night after night my heartbeat, shows the fear.
            Ghosts appear and fade away.

            Alone between the sheets. Only brings exasperation. It’s time to walk the streets. Smell the desperation. At least there’s pretty lights. And though there’s little variation. It nullifies the night. From overkill.

            Day after day it reappears
            Night after night my heartbeat, shows the fear
            Ghosts appear and fade away
            Come back another day

            I can’t get to sleep
            I think about the implications
            Of diving in too deep
            And possibly the complications

            Especially at night
            I worry over situations that
            I know will be alright
            It’s just overkill

            Ghosts appear and fade away…

  5. Tor Munkov
    May 21, 2013 at 6:38 am

    Gil. Gil. Gil.

    The closest thing to a Golden Era for Libertarians was the Mediterranean Sea.

    Not much infrastructure or centralization was needed. Just some ships. Independent City States dealt with each other on the basis of trade and earned their power and independence through producing goods for willing exchange.

    This peaceful system of cooperation was eventually ruined by Roman Infrastructure Empire Builders, Christian Crusaders, and Islamist Caliphate-Mercantile Jihadists.

    Somalia is a 100% Sunni Muslim Shari’a system. It has a religious authoritarian system of government. It is also a battleground site between the Russian Eastern Military Block and the US Military Alliance.

    Karl Marx rather than being a useful idiot, was a useful intellectual. His dystopian results make him the poster child for why we can’t shoot or guillotine our way out of tyranny.

    • DownshiftFast5to1
      May 21, 2013 at 8:33 am

      “…why we can’t shoot or guillotine our way out of tyranny.”

      That’s SO very frustrating.
      Takes every ounce of energy to resist.

      Resist I/we must.

      Suffer til the end, we/I must?

      Not ’til we see the whites of their eyes?

      The camera is ‘the new gun’ until then.
      And a road to riches for some.
      Or a road to ruin?
      Depending on the angle of the military boot.

      Psft, i don’t get how people can remain oblivious to everything.
      My expectations of many of my fellow mankind must be too high?

      • Tor Minotaur
        May 21, 2013 at 4:35 pm

        I find it best to expect nothing from my fellow man.
        Otherwise, I start chimping out into a death-spiral of rage-filled despair and wall-punching.

        Behold the future Dystopian American. Ruling the New Metrosexual Revolution while we all waste away on FEMA reservations filled with memory-holed hate criminals like ourselves.

        Phat Gay Kid
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LF-9gVWtx8Q

        • May 21, 2013 at 5:14 pm

          Jesus Christ, Tor!

          I much prefer this version:

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmbhfI8f_Ek

        • May 21, 2013 at 5:25 pm

          For those who missed the ’80s, here’s a sample of what a Top 10 hit used to sound like:

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcXT1clXc04

          • BrentP
            May 21, 2013 at 11:50 pm

            What about those of us who just miss the 80s?

            It’s something to look at stuff from the 70s and 80s and realize that world doesn’t exist any more. Not like it is just the past and things have moved on…. but that world doesn’t exist any more. Things today (outside of lingering pop culture) is as if that world never was.

            In the 1980s the 1950s still seemed quite real, the present was just an extension from then…. but to look thirty years back today and it was an entirely different world. I lack the words to explain it… were we ever like that? Without this crushing paranoia and nannying? With bright colors and sunshine? It looks like fiction now.

          • Ed
            May 22, 2013 at 1:03 am

            “What about those of us who just miss the 80s?”

            I can’t supersize with you there, dude. I was real drunk and missed a lot of the ’80s.

            I know what you mean, though. To me, the ’70s are like a work of fiction. It’s as though that time couldn’t have been real. To accept my memory of that decade would require that I really look hard at how things are now and try to see how they got to be the way they are.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 22, 2013 at 2:17 am

            50’s were funky, neat in lots of ways, very few laws. 60’s were all over the place, Ravi Shankar, hookahs, hot chicks everywhere. I recently had a memory of a friend and I early in the morning listening to Cream playing In-A-Godda-Da-Vida before going out to work cattle…..Yee Hawww!

            • May 22, 2013 at 9:49 am

              Morning, Eight!

              Yeah – and: Some of that (relative freedom) lingered into the ’80s. I’ve mentioned here before that in those days, you could waltz right into an airport – with a cigarette betwixt your lips – buy a ticket in cash without showing ID – and then meander to the gate and just hang out. No one hassled you.

              The highway speed limit was 55 – and they would go after you for doing 63 – but it was just a ticket. It was inconceivable back then that you’d have a gun drawn on you or feel physically threatened. You could even get out of your car and go over to the cop’s car to talk about it. “Buckle up” at gunpoint was far away on the horizon.

              People more or less did what they wanted to – and were left alone.

              It is amazing – and scary – how quickly this place transformed into a police state.

          • Ed
            May 22, 2013 at 2:30 am

            Eight, y’all must have been drunk. That was Iron Butterfly, not Cream. Cream did “White Room”.

            I remember the 50’s, but I was born in ’52 so they’re kid memories. The 60s were, indeed all over the place. Aside from that fake-ass California culture, the late 60s are a good memory to me.

            What was exciting to me in the late 60s was the southern music scene. Johhny Winter And, The Allman Brothers, and Leon Russell were great. You could just tune out those fakes from LA, like CSN, the Byrds, mamas&papas… crap.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 22, 2013 at 3:50 am

            Ed, Iron Butterfly and Cream were almost one in the same. Cream did that song also although I could have been listening to Iron Butterfly at the time. I see we disagree musically. While I have always been a fan of the groups you mentioned liking, Mama’s and Papa’s were great vocalists. I always liked CSNY but was a hard core fan of the Byrds, people who have roots as deep as it can go, all the way to the Loutin Brothers who wrote and made records of Everly Bros. as well as Emmy Lou, Gram Parsons, etc, etc. You probably let Commander Cody and the Lost Planet Airmen get by you as most did as well as NRBQ. CC had some great music. It doesn’t get any better than Down to Seeds and Stems. All, great music. One thing my wife and I have always regretted is having to get a mortgage and credit cards. Like eric, the only cherry I popped auto-wise was a brand new GSL 1000 Zuk. Everything else was cash and carry.

          • Marc
            May 22, 2013 at 4:35 am

            I would classify Cream as psychedelic blues. Clapton, Baker, and Bruce got together for two sold out concerts in 2005. Both concerts got good reviews. Iron Butterfly, on the other hand, was more heavy metal with some unique nuances.

          • May 22, 2013 at 10:23 am

            Cream – White Room
            Live At Royal Albert Hall (2005)

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJZHWMD6N3k

          • May 22, 2013 at 10:30 am

            I’ve fund a new appreciation for the psychedelic sound of the 60’s and give it much credit for the development of the progressive rock of the 70’s.

            Bubble Puppy “Hot Smoke & Sassafras”

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_otNCZ5T2o

          • Eightsouthman
            May 22, 2013 at 12:44 pm

            mornin eric, not to whip a dead horse but I got a ticket the day the speed limit changed to 55mph. I was headed to Dallas to get a torque arm for Hendrickson suspension and doing 70mph because it made no sense for it to change that day, thought it was going to change the next day, one of my actual “honest” mistakes. marc, I gave my wife the double DVD of that concert at RAH. She gets it out now and then and we watch it. I keep thinking old Ginger is going to fall over at any time every time I see it.

          • Ed
            May 22, 2013 at 1:04 pm

            Yeah, Eight. Musical taste is going to differ even among like-minded people.

            C,S&N had one musician onboard: Stephen Stills. Their studiomixes used a group of musicians called the Wrecking Crew, who played for all the fake groups like M&P, the Monkees, the Byrds etc. Glenn Campbell was a guitarist in the Wrecking Crew before becoming a solo artist.

            Gram Parsons and Emmylou…Country, deep roots? Nah. Gram was a trust fund baby who admired Spade Cooley. Neither he nor Emmylou do much for me. Hell, anybody can do covers of Charley and Ira’s songs. That doesn’t make Emmylou anything special. I like the real stuff like the Amazing Rhythm Aces.

            Seeds&Stems was by Poco from their “Pickin’ Up the Pieces” album, another band from the genre of Flying Burrito Brothers, the Byrds, etc., but they did leave behind some good work.

            CCR was an iconic group, pure genius, some of their stuff like “Run Through the Jungle” still sets standards for the term “cookin’ rhythm”.

            Not much got by me. Commander Cody was OK, I liked some rockabilly. Bill Kirchen is still at it and plays that tune, Hotrod Lincoln at his live gigs.

            NRBQ didn’t get by me, but I shined them on. Not to my taste. Yeah, different strokes, and all that. It’s why they make chocolate AND vanilla ice cream. ;-)

          • Eightsouthman
            May 22, 2013 at 1:45 pm

            Ed, you brought up one of my favs, Amazing Rhythm Aces, got nearly all of their albums. I enjoyed the Alternative Country or Progressive as it was sometimes referred to. I wish you could have gone to the Armadillo World Headquarters with me to see some of them. AATW does a great act with countless great songs of their own. Somewhere, I have the 1960 45rpm record of Hot Rod Lincoln done by Johnny Bond, a great version. I could talk about music all day and be ready to talk about it again the next day. I never worry about having the same ring tone as anyone else….who else would have Hot Rod Lincoln as a ring tone? Most people hearing it these days don’t have a clue. Of course, Bob Wills is still the king from where I sit.

          • Ed
            May 23, 2013 at 12:23 pm

            “AATW does a great act ”

            Oh, HAIL yayuh. Asleep at the Wheel rocks out, bigtime. Even their name rocks. Rockabilly is still big on the west coast. Remember Jackrabbit Slim?

            Stray Cats were the most visible and fairly recent rockabilly group to get much attention, but lots of artists still throw some rockabilly into their CD releases (guess they don’t call’em albums anymore) Like Mickey and the Motorheads and Drive-by Truckers.

            The Aces had a great rockabilly tune on their “Chock Full of Country Goodness” CD, titled “Guardian Angel” about a trucker picking up a ghost during a blizzard.

            Yep, Bob Wills music still rules the country swing roost.

          • Boothe
            May 23, 2013 at 12:29 pm

            Eric – I’ll see your Fabulous Thunderbirds and raise you a ZZ Top http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nZniMYCZp4

            • May 23, 2013 at 3:01 pm

              ZZ Top!

              Excellent

              Music – popular music, at any rate – has turned to scheisse. FM radio is unendurable. An endless stream of squealing (or doggerel mumbling) no-talents backed by synthetic/manufactured noises.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 23, 2013 at 1:31 pm

            Boothe, wish you coulda been with us in the spring of ’71, Lubbock, Tx. when ZZ came to town. Sweet Baby James was their front, strange combo. They had huge speakers stacked up on stage. When they played they sounded like half the musicians in the country all playing, unbelievable sound that went right through you. I would have been more comfortable without the psychedelics and a cooler of beer but you work with what you have. Ed, ever listen to any Slim Dusty?…a great musician.

          • Boothe
            May 23, 2013 at 2:48 pm

            Eight – I wish I could have been there too, but I was only 12 at the time. The only big name concert I’ve ever been to was ZZ Top at the Richmond Colliseum back in ’91. Seriously, the only one in my life. My wife took me because she knew how much I liked the band. The Black Crowes opened for Top and I must say they were awful. Their sound system sucked and I was really disappointed…at first. But once the crew tore down the Crowes shitty sound system and Top fired up, that concert was everything I expected and more. I can still clearly recall much of that show 22 years later (probably because my job at the time would have been threatened by my use of herbal enhancements). That experience is one of the best gifts anyone has ever given me.

            • May 23, 2013 at 2:58 pm

              I saw Van Halen – real Van Halen, with David Lee Roth – when I was 15 in the early ’80s.

              Nothing against Sammy Hagar, but Van Halen without David Lee Roth is like Kiss without Paul Stanley or Zep without Robert Plant.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 23, 2013 at 3:43 pm

            Boothe, eric, doesn’t matter if it puts a minor kink into a family budget, time doesn’t wait and I’d wish as many good concerts on everyone as could possibly be had. There is one FM station I “could” listen to if they hadn’t worn out all those “classic rock hits” they play. So much more good rock than what is on their lists. I listen to CD’s or just the sound of the road. Every now and then I roll down the drivers window and listen to the exhaust, turbo sound between gears. I drive my wife crazy reaching over to shift gears when I’m already in the highest gear but starting up a grade. When my mind wanders I find myself reaching over for a gearshift in anything, an automatic car, whatever. A friend who was with me a great deal on the road used to ask “need a beer?” and I’d realize I’d been reaching over. He finally quit asking but I can’t quit doing it. Give me a ten speed, or a thirteen speed or a 4X4 or 5X6…I’m happy. No telling how many times I have reached a certain rpm in my pickup and reached over, moved the shifter to the next gear only to realize I didn’t have another.

          • Ed
            May 23, 2013 at 6:32 pm

            SLIM DUSTY? HELLLL NO. I AIN’T THAT DAMN OLD.

            ahaha.. Just joking. No, I’ve never heard anything by him. I’ll see if there’s anything on amazon by him.

            I do like Buddy and Julie Miller, though. Steve Earle, too. That old Utah Phillips song, “Rock Salt and Nails” is on one of the Millers’ albums. I think Buddy and Steve are a couple of communists. I know Utah Phillips was. Still, they’re excellent musicians.

          • May 24, 2013 at 12:49 am

            “Rockabilly is still big on the west coast.”

            You’d probably like this Youtube page, Ed:

            rockabilly hillbilly

          • Ed
            May 24, 2013 at 11:38 pm

            Thanks, Iberns1. Youtube is a hell of a source. Ten years ago, I couldn’t imagine being able to just google a few words from a lyric and get several pages of videos that could be streamed free.

            Amazin’ times, these.

    • Charles
      May 24, 2013 at 10:15 am

      Tor when you mean City States do you mean the Maritime Republics such as Venice and Genoa or ancient Greece??

      • Tor Minotaur
        May 24, 2013 at 12:33 pm

        Ancient Genoa yes. Back when the Phoenicians, Etruscans, or Ancient Greeks were there.

        Ancient Carthage yes. Founded by the Phoenicians 3,000 years ago. The alphabet we use comes from there.

        I mean any great city/state that independently thrived through Trade For Export and Self-Defense. The Minoans lived that way. They built Knossos on Crete Island. They built the Colossus at the City/State/Island of Rhodes – certainly both the equal of modern NYC in every way, and without predation or an empire.

        Modern Switzerland – The export trade driven municipal state is probably the closest city/state type entity with significant power and autonomy that I have in mind.

        – – – –
        Knossos – A Labyrnth Complex For 100,000 Citizens
        http://www.totallygreece.com/destinations/greece/crete/heraklion/knossos.htm

        Knossos, Crete: City/State – Europe’s Oldest City
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knossos

        Between 1,700-1,450 BC, the Minoan civilization was at its peak and Knossos was its most important city-state.

        – – – –
        The death knell for the Sovereign Trader system came in 380 AD, when the Roman Empire made common cause with the Pope of Rome. A deal still thwarting freedom today.

        Theodosius Roman Emperor of the East and Gratian Roman Emperor of the West, both ardent Christians, decreed Christianity as the official religion of both halves of the Empire in 380 AD.

        Both ceded their customary titles of Pontifex Maximus (head priest) to Pope Damasus I in Rome

        Severe punishments for Pagan, and ‘heretic’ Aryanism were thenceforth enforced and the established Church became a Third Throne of the new Roman Triumvirate of Power and riches.

        In 390 AD, a massacre ordered by the Emperor of 7,000 people who revolted in Thessalonica resulted in his own 8 month penance. This shows the equivalent to Emperor Power of the Pope. He was a check on the Emperors power, and in return given a force monopoly on religion he could use to force converts and increase Rome’s hegemony.

        The Popes & the New Christian State Church grew from a fledgling mystery cult into a power on equal terms with the Roman Emperors. The Popes began in earnest to increase power through war and conquest over Germanic tribes and in places such Britain, Christianity slowly came to dominate the entire western world, making the Roman Empire a global force. Pagans were imprisoned, enslaved, or killed. Greek philosophy schools were closed. Public brothel and social conjugation temples were razed.

        Between the 2.2 Billion Statist Christians & now 1.7 Billion Islamists, the moral concept of non-interference with a sovereign nation is impossible to defend. These busy-body Zombies will not rest until their dominion is complete over every square inch of the world.

        Notice how Christians only feed the poor. Build public works. Cultivate dependency and institutionalize impoverishment. They don’t want to overly empower the starving peoples of Africa or India. They’re in the long-term command and control business.

        The Muscles, Mysticism, & Mercantilism 3 M’s Triumvirate is the system that dominates the world today.
        – – – –
        Today only five weakly-sovereign city-states exist: Monaco, Singapore, Vatican City, San Marino and Malta.

        There are also autonomous cities of unitary states of nations without a federal administrative structure:

        1 PRC China Special Admin Regions
        Hong Kong and Macau
        2 Spain – Ceuta and Melilla
        3 UK – Gibraltar, and Greater London (as part of the UK, it has its own elected mayor and assembly under devolution).

        Federally Administered Cities:
        I United States – Washington, District of Columbia
        II Australia – Canberra (Australian Capital Territory)
        III Mexico – Mexico City (Mexican Federal District)
        IV Brazil – Brasília (Brazilian Federal District)
        V India – Delhi & Chandigarh
        VI Malaysia – Kuala Lumpur, Putrajaya, Labuan
        VII Nigeria – Abuja, (Federal Capital Territory)
        VIII Pakistan – Islamabad (Islamabad Capital Territory)

  6. Charles
    May 17, 2013 at 8:52 am

    Typo- I meant driving for the above as Im sure you’ll know.

  7. Charles
    May 17, 2013 at 8:48 am

    Why is it that they seem to place not wearing a seatbelt for one’s safety as dangerous drinving?? It annoys the **** out of me!!

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/delivering-road-safety-what-does-the-future-hold

  8. Tor Munkov
    May 17, 2013 at 12:51 am

    A Declaration and Covenant of Independence

    Having learned the Lessons of History – that no Form of political Governance may be relied upon to secure the individual Rights of Life, Liberty, or Property. I now declare these truths to be self-evident and pledge my life, property, and sacred honor to establish and maintain the following fundamental precepts during my Interactions with other people at all times:

    Individual Sovereignty

    FIRST, that I will recognize each individual to be the exclusive Proprietor of his or her own Existence and of all products of that Existence, holding no Obligation binding among Individuals excepting those to which they voluntarily and explicitly consent;

    Freedom from Coercion

    SECOND, that under no Circumstances will I acknowledge any Liberty to initiate Force against another Person, and will instead defend the inalienable Right of Individuals to resist Coercion employing whatever Means are proven necessary;

    Association and Secession

    THIRD, that I will hold inviolable any Relationships among Individuals which are totally voluntary, and that any Relationships not thus mutually agreeable will be considered empty and invalid;

    Individuality of Rights

    FOURTH, that I will regard Rights to be neither collective nor additive in Character – two individuals will have no more Rights than one, nor will two million nor two billion – nor will any Group possess Rights in Excess of those belonging to its individual members;

    Equality of Liberty

    FIFTH, that I will maintain these Principles without Respect to any person’s Race, Nationality, Gender, Sexuality, Age, or System of Beliefs, and hold that any Entity or Association, however constituted, acting to contravene them by initiation of Force – or Threat of same – will have forfeited its Right to exist;

    Supersedure of Individual Sovereignty

    UPON UNANIMOUS CONSENT of myself and all other Members or Inhabitants of my Households, Neighborhoods, Villages, Associations or Territories, I further stipulate that this Agreement shall supersede all existing governmental Documents or Usages previously pertinent. I declare that all other Constitutions, Charters, Acts, Laws, Statutes, Regulations, or Ordinances contradictory or destructive to the Ends which I have here expressed will be considered null and void, and that this Declaration and Covenant, being the Property of myself and any other Signatories, will not be Subject to Interpretation excepting unless it should be agreed and consented to by myself and all other parties involved.

      • Tor Munkov
        May 17, 2013 at 8:37 am

        Good stuff Dennis, the html, txt, and pdf that I can access, unfortunately I can’t open or read .doc files.

        http://www.lneilsmith.org/utopian.html

        http://www.jilliannyc.com/clips.html

        http://hermetic.com/bey/

        Here it comes again, the latest warning of The Great Islamic Threat! Of course, they have been trying to conquer us for 1200 years now, but that need not deter their issuing another warning. After all, how could the government in DC justify its existence if there were no threats from which to protect us from while taxing and enslaving us?

        Weren’t those Islamic types around during the Cold War? How come they only became a threat when the Russian threat collapsed?

        • DownshiftFast5to1
          May 17, 2013 at 9:00 am

          I’m sorry, Tor, there’s this image to my right, something about Date Locally, and there’s this hot looking chick holding a steaming bowl of something she may or may not want to share with me, so I have no idea what you just wrote… Conquest, Russian, army ants, what?
          J/K my man. Heh. But she IS pretty.

          • DownshiftFast5to1
            May 17, 2013 at 9:06 am

            Whoa! Then the wild man takes her place, “Ever Been Arrested?” You know, the guy with the almost handle bar mustache. Like he’s a step up from the chick with the spock eyebrows? Not that either of them are bad people. [Did they get paid for that? If not, that’s sooo wrong.]

            Ok, the trance is undone. … Fuck the Empire!

          • Tor Munkov
            May 17, 2013 at 3:21 pm

            No problem DS.5->1 0:38 Enough about me, I hope this hasn’t been boring for you. It’s just that whenever I start to talk about Elaine I get so carried away I lose all track of time. Well I could go on for hours, but I’m probably starting to bore you…

            Best Clips from the Movie Airplane

          • DownshiftFast5to1
            May 19, 2013 at 8:06 am

            “Best Clips from the Movie Airplane”

            Ha. Exactly.

        • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
          May 17, 2013 at 10:24 am

          Tor, to access .doc files, download OpenOffice. Does all the MSOffice does, but free – http://www.openoffice.org.

        • May 17, 2013 at 4:32 pm

          Thank you, Tor. I was pleased to see comments by another Signatory.

          The only MS Word .doc file (downloadable) contains a copy of all the Collected Articles about the Covenant–currently ending at 2012-01-24. I will create an updated version when I complete my additions about the relationship and importance of the Middle Ages to the Covenant. When that is updated, I will also create a downloadable pdf of the entire collection of articles.

          Dennis Wilson
          Signatory: Covenant of Unanimous Consent

    • May 17, 2013 at 9:56 am

      Tor,

      This is simply outstanding. Did you write it?

      I’d like to give it a wider audience….

      • Tor Munkov
        May 17, 2013 at 10:59 am

        It’s inspired by Chapter XVII of “The Gallatin Divergence” by L. Neil Smith. Dennis’ postings referred to it. It’s also shares similarity to the Free Keene Shire Society’s New Covenant, which seems to be near verbatim to the words written by L. Neil Smith.

        As a sovereign individual who does as he pleases, I am more than comfortable saying I wrote it and fully disclosing the influence and derivativeness of the effort in regards to L. Neil Smith’s original work.

        Adhering with complete Clover Compliance to the broken process that robs writers and serves only monolithic publishers doesn’t seem like it helps L. Neil Smith.

        I’m more than willing put forth effort to advance the cause for individual freedom, but I don’t want to pour salt in gift horses’ wounds with my take on the festering issue of internet copyright breech either, unless the end result is Eric Peters or L. Neil Smith are rewarded for their efforts, and not merely robbed by online file sharing and copy-paste hacks and the like.

        Here is Neil’s email.
        lneil@lneilsmith.org

        Here is the book for sale
        http://www.amazon.com/The-Gallatin-Divergence-Neil-Smith/dp/0345303830

        Here is one example of it’s “fair use”
        http://freekeene.com/2010/07/31/shire-society-decleration-available-for-download/

        – Rather than be a part of some commonweal, or of a “greater good,” I want only to be part of a lesser good.

        I want only to be a part of a voluntary-wealth. To contribute freely and equitably in inadequate amount as a token of appreciation to those men of minds and efforts who are truly responsible for my well-being and relative ease of living.

        I reject anything offered of the mandatory division of labor and social capital made available that is tainted by statist slavery and brute force regional monopoly.

        • Charles
          May 17, 2013 at 12:24 pm

          That book is brilliant and certainly one Id like to read.

      • Ed
        May 17, 2013 at 12:23 pm

        Eric, it was linked on the page Dennis provided in his post a few days ago about the bare minimum, etc.

        • May 17, 2013 at 12:30 pm

          It’s top drawer stuff!

          • Tor Munkov
            May 17, 2013 at 1:17 pm

            http://www.lneilsmith.org/new-cov.html

            Possibly, your use of a version of that pledge (my unauthorized improvement – without fancy words and without the awkward we point of view) could be a very important evolution in the world of freedom. Or maybe not so much.

            What does your gut tell you?

            What, if anything, is proprietary about Ron Paul’s message? Probably very little, truth be told.

            Who cares that most of Tesla’s inventions were derivative of European University projects. He being the rare man who read multiple languages, understood cutting edge tech, and had mechanical engineering chops to make physically manifest emerging tech in a low priced mass reproducible process.

            So what if the Star Trek episodes were all rehashes of Golden Age of Radio broadcasts?

            L. Neil’s work is itself inspired by Thomas Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson was merely the possessor of the best quill penmanship, certainly not the “sole author” of anything.

            Maybe just let the principles percolate and congeal, what’s one more libertarian dithering, wait until they diverge so far as to leave no traces of their origin. Perhaps this waiting is the very essence of Libertarianism itself.

            It really is a very good question though:

            What is the Bare Minimum principles we need agree to, to live freely?

            I can’t think of too many more important questions than the Bare Minimum.

          • Ed
            May 17, 2013 at 1:37 pm

            ” I don’t want to pour salt in gift horses’ wounds with my take on the festering issue of internet copyright breech ”

            Copyright being a government scheme to empower itself while pretending to protect a writer, the festering will boil out on its own soon enough, I think.

            My view is that an idea, expressed openly, ceases to be the private property of the one who formulated that idea. I could maintain my ownership of an idea only so long as I kept it to myself.

            Of course, someone else could have the same idea and express it themselves, leaving me to fume impotently, if that was in my nature.

            I’m not a professional writer, so my view will tend to differ with the views of those who make their living expressing their ideas.

            OK, I’ll get off that hobbyhorse of mine now. ;-)

      • May 17, 2013 at 5:49 pm

        Thank you Eric. I also think it deserves a wider audience.

        Excerpt from
        Living for 1000 Years – The “Dark” Ages?
        http://tinyurl.com/1000-Dark-Years

        ….while comparing the collapse of the Roman Empire to our current situation, ask yourself this question…:

        “When central governments collapse, what is the nature of the agreements that people will make to provide for the security of themselves and their family?”

        In the following articles, many of the agreements during the Middle Ages were based on religious oaths. *I* think that the secular Covenant of Unanimous Consent can fill that role in our modern-day situation.

        Furthermore, there is no need to wait for government collapse. The Covenant can play a very useful and meaningful role in your life, right now, today.

        Dennis Lee Wilson
        Signatory: Covenant of Unanimous Consent

        • Ed
          May 17, 2013 at 6:39 pm

          “When central governments collapse, what is the nature of the agreements that people will make to provide for the security of themselves and their family?”

          What agreements did people make when the central government of the USSR collapsed? I don’t remember reading anything about that. Seems to me that when governments collapse nowadays, other governments take their places.

          Not to try to put a damper on y’all’s enthusiasm for this Covenant of Unanimous Consent, but I don’t really see how it does anything.

          Dennis, clue me in here; where is the evidence that people in Europe took oaths or made covenants to protect themselves after the Roman government collapsed?

          Anyway, what do you do when one of your signators gets drunk and fails to hold inviolable some other signator’s relationship of some kind? Do y’all flog his ass or what?

          Isn’t signing this thing tantamount to joining a collective, or agreeing to be ruled? Do you require that anyone wanting to live among y’all sign this covenant? If so, what do you do when the inevitable happens, that is, someone signs the covenant without intending to honor it just to be allowed the privilege of living among y’all or having access to your market, or whatever the benefit is?

          I’m just trying to see what this actually means and how it would have any effect on the lives of anyone who signs or declines to sign it. It certainly won’t have any effect on any existing government the agents of which don’t even understand their own laws but are willing to enforce them on everyone who lives in an area they define as theirs.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 17, 2013 at 8:07 pm

            Ed, actually our law dates back to when Europeans were sorta free after the Roman empire collapsed. They did have written law hamlet by hamlet that varied according to where you lived. I’m thinking it was in the 1200’s sometime that there was an overall law written for England but local laws were specific to well, locals. Damn Ed. you musta spent more time in Tx. than you allow. You say yall as much as I do although I doubt it takes you five seconds to say it. Try growing up in this part of the world and not have a drawl everybody laughs at. Hell, yall is a three syllable word when we say it. Only 106.6° right now and climbing rapidly. Yall come on down, it’s heatin up. I remember grade school where the alphabet lined the walls of the room. Somebody picked up a g, looked at it for a while and then threw it away.

          • May 17, 2013 at 8:37 pm

            Ed..: “What agreements did people make when the central government of the USSR collapsed? I don’t remember reading anything about that. Seems to me that when governments collapse nowadays, other governments take their places.”

            William Grigg did a good article answering that question…:

            Abolish the Police, Arm the Citizens:
            The “Sagra Model” of Privatized Security
            William N. Grigg
            Sunday, September 18, 2011

            http://tinyurl.com/Sagra-model

          • May 17, 2013 at 8:44 pm

            Well that is frustrating. My longer, more comprehensive reply went missing–twice, and my brief reply about a lesser important comment got posted.

            I’m not ignoring your other comments, Ed. I just can’t get thru.

            Dennis

          • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
            May 17, 2013 at 9:58 pm

            Eight;

            Magna Carta, 1215.

          • Ed
            May 17, 2013 at 10:13 pm

            ” Somebody picked up a g, looked at it for a while and then threw it away.”

            Ahaha, sounds about right. I’m from SC. ‘Y’all’ was our contraction, homegrown, but we let Texans use it because Travis and them brought it down there to y’all.

            It was funny when I moved to Longview. The boys I was working with on a masonry crew didn’t think I taked funny. I said something about “where I’m from” and one ol’ boy asked where that was. I said SC and he looked like I had betrayed him. He said, “Shit, I didn’t know you was a yankee”.

            He was also shocked when I told him that most of the defenders at the Alamo were from the Carolinas, Tennessee, Louisiana, etc. rather than from Texas. ‘Course I rubbed it in on him and said that the only native born Texans who died in that fight spoke Spanish…..ahaha

          • Ed
            May 17, 2013 at 10:26 pm

            Well, Dennis, I found this in the article:
            “After the Hammer and Sickle was furled in 1991, the plague of ideological Communism mutated into form of state gangsterism incapable of reproducing itself beyond Russia’s borders. The Party Nomenklatura abandoned the conceit that they were History’s infallible vanguard, and settled into a very comfortable new role as Russia’s crony capitalist oligarchy. ”

            Since the central government of the USSR fell, Russia and the other former soviets have established national governments to replace the old one.

            The article doesn’t have any reference to the people there signing any covenants, I’m not quite getting your meaning. They did band together as a village and fight off the gangsters, but that was told as though it was simply a spontaneous alliance of neighbors.

            Anyway, take your time. I’m not against your decision to sign any covenant you wish. I’m just a little slow. I don’t quite get it.

          • methylamine
            May 17, 2013 at 11:24 pm

            @Ed:

            I think I’ve already told the story of how a native Texan corrected me once…
            I was extolling the virtues of “ya’ll” because English lacks a second person plural.

            He said “No, ya’ll is singular. All ya’ll is plural.”

            Also: much like the Soviet nomenklatura became the new oligarchs…

            …so too, we defeated Germany in WWII, but we didn’t defeat Nazism aka national socialism. We just imported it here via Operation Paperclip.

            I read Jim Marrs’ Rise of the Fourth Reich last summer…highly recommended.

            I believe those forces are being used by the globalist elite to run their program here…just as those same elite use and funded Hitler in the first place.

          • May 18, 2013 at 12:17 am

            THIRD attempt to reply—removal of all but first active links
            ——————-

            Clue #1 was in the message to which you replied…: http://tinyurl.com/1000-Dark-Years

            Clue #2 was posted above in reply to TOR. I have encountered all your remaining “concerns” at various times in the past and have written articles answering them. As with Clue #1, reading is required. There is no spoon feeding.

            h—–/tinyurl—-/Index-to-Covenant-Articles

            As with all things, one must be responsible for oneself, in education and all other aspects of life. I have contributed to and collected articles about the Covenant, but I cannot put the information into another person’s mind–and especially not an unreceptive mind. (See comment about “attitude” below.)

            The Covenant is NOT for everyone. I even address THAT in one of the articles.

            ————–

            h—–/tinyurl—-/Security-and-Justice
            [2011-04-15] Security and Justice WITHOUT government — article by Dennis Wilson

            I answer questions that, taken without thinking can lead to the emotional equivalent of “Oh yes, yes. I can see that we DO NEED government.” However, simple reflection and the connection of some widely known facts can put each of these concerns to rest.

            ——————

            A slave is a person who waits for someone to come along and free him.

            h—–/tinyurl—-/Individual-Sovereignty

            There is an old saying that “a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step”. The VERY FIRST STEP on the road to freeing one’s self is ATTITUDE. If a person thinks like a slave, his own servitude is guaranteed. If a person thinks like a free man there are no guarantees, but the first requirement to being free has been accomplished.

            When a person realizes the condition of servitude into which most of us are born and unthinkingly live, when that person deliberately chooses to rid himself of his complacent servility and end the dependence and the slavery, that person has taken the first step. Without that attitude change, no journey on the road to freeing one’s self is possible, no individual freedom can ever be achieved.

            If you want to BE free, you must do things that MAKE you free.

            Dennis Lee Wilson
            Signatory: Covenant of Unanimous Consent

          • May 18, 2013 at 12:23 am

            Well, Ed. It looks like you get the last word on the subject. My third attempt to post the reply has apparently failed also–even after I removed all but one active link.

            I provided 3 active links in my prev postings. Your answers are contained therein.

            Dennis

          • Ed
            May 18, 2013 at 12:33 am

            “He said “No, ya’ll is singular. All ya’ll is plural.””

            Ahaha. I guess he’s right, in a way. It probably depends on the context. Now some of my acquaintances have said, “All y’all sonofabitches”, which just tangles the plural states aaaaalll up.

            Southern speech is comforting to me, no matter which dialect I hear.

          • Ed
            May 18, 2013 at 12:50 am

            “THIRD attempt to reply—removal of all but first active links”

            Dennis, maybe if you tried just answering the few questions I asked without linking to your site, we could have a discussion. When a person’s answer to any question is a link to somewhere else, it gets a little tedious for me.

            If you’d rather not answer, that’s fine, too, but the snarkiness about “no spoon feeding” isn’t necessary.

            What do I know, maybe you haven’t gotten around to working out what y’all might do in the situations I mentioned. That’s ok, too.

            No problem.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 18, 2013 at 1:29 am

            Dennis, Ed, I read the contract and immediately had a problem…it’s a fuckin contract….. that basically limits me as to what I “might” do instead of being very simple and rewarding everyone for all those things they haven’t done to anyone and their continued exemplary conduct of never having done any wrong(as far as I know). I could go on and on about this subject but it actually suffices to say I have no need of a contract to bind me to anyone or anything(govt. entity, for the main part). In my world you’re simply judged by your actions with me, nothing more.

          • DownshiftFast5to1
            May 19, 2013 at 7:34 am

            Ed asked, “Anyway, what do you do when one of your signators gets drunk and fails to hold inviolable some other signator’s relationship of some kind? Do y’all flog his ass or what?”

            Maybe it works like it did in the Old West: ostracism, shunning and such?

            Have you ever read,

            The Culture of Violence in the American West: Myth versus Reality

            http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo195.html

          • Ed
            May 19, 2013 at 12:06 pm

            “Maybe it works like it did in the Old West: ostracism, shunning and such? ”

            Yeah, that’s kind of what I was thinking. In absence of any rulers who use enforcers to assault their hapless subjects, that would be the best alternative I could think of. Naturally, to me, any alternative to being assaulted by the ruler’s goons is better.

            I was trying needle Dennis into expanding a little on what the covenant is and isn’t.

            “Have you ever read,”….etc.

            Yes, I did read that when LRC first carried it. Tom D is a fine historian and I read everything I can get from him. His writing helps when the court-approved version of history makes no sense, which is most of the time.
            ;-)

          • DownshiftFast5to1
            May 21, 2013 at 8:19 am

            Ed, your comment was good to read. “needle” pretty much makes me stop thinking you’re one of them.
            Thank goodness.

            It’s so hard to tell, online or off.
            ?The Heart of Darkness is everywhere.

            Of course everyone can use a little bit of refinement. Self included.

          • Ed
            May 21, 2013 at 11:02 am

            “Of course everyone can use a little bit of refinement.”

            True, that. To me, refinement is a necessary and ongoing process of learning. I think that my cognitive function would deteriorate without learning.

            I hope that Dennis didn’t take my questioning as an attack. It’s just that when something is presented as a complete concept, it must be open to explanation and examination.

            I don’t view any idea as the last word on a subject. If I do, I’m closing my mind to other possibilities.

            Dennis may have been thwarted in his responses by the threading style of the siteware here. It does take some getting used to, and I’m not completely used to it yet.

        • Ed
          May 18, 2013 at 12:36 am

          ” It looks like you get the last word on the subject.”

          Aw, shoot. I don’t LEARN anything when I get the last word. I hate when I get the last word.

          Well, OK. ;-)

          • May 21, 2013 at 9:05 pm

            “I hope that Dennis didn’t take my questioning as an attack. It’s just that when something is presented as a complete concept, it must be open to explanation and examination. ”

            Of course it was an attack. I’ve seen it all many times before.

            The Covenant IS open to explanation and examination, but not in this comment section! I have NO motive or interest in trying to drag or trick anyone into the Covenant. For those seriously interested in something like the Covenant, links are provided. It certainly is NOT for everyone, as I made clear in my article “What IS the Bare Minimum”.

            For those who prefer one-liner, “snarky” exchanges on public boards: no thanks. Been there, done that. Got old in the process and have better things to do with the remainder of my life.

          • Ed
            May 22, 2013 at 12:55 am

            Well, Dennis, do you want to discuss it on your site? The problem that presents itself to me is that you want to post a link to something on your site instead of actually discussing it.

            I’ve been to your forum and saw long sections of “discussions” which consisted of a post by you followed by several responses from you.

            Not to try to intrude upon your conversations with yourself, but you seem to view all humanity other than yourself as vermin or retarded children.

            Objectivists who exhibit behavior like yours had me believing for the longest time that objectivism is more a mental disorder than a philosophy. I know better now, of course, but hugely inflated egos do seem to be the norm among objectivists.

            I’ve exchanged views with several self identified objectivists who are more reasonable and who are receptive to humor, so I know now that not all objectivists are like you.

            Anyone who likes can click on your screen name and visit your site. In the forum is an illustration of what I’m saying.

            “Dennis Lee Wilson
            Creator of This Site
            Administrator
            Hero Member”

            OK, then. Whatever. I wish you well, no hard feelings, take care, be nice to yourself, and take it easy, but take it.

  9. Tor Munkov
    May 17, 2013 at 12:47 am

    A Declaration and Covenant of Independence

    Having learned the Lessons of History – that no Form of political Governance may be relied upon to secure the individual Rights of Life, Liberty, or Property. I now declare these truths to be self-evident and pledge my life, property, and sacred honor to establish and maintain the following fundamental during my Interactions with all others at all times:

    Individual Sovereignty

    FIRST, that I will recognize each individual to be the exclusive Proprietor of his or her own Existence and of all products of that Existence, holding no Obligation binding among Individuals excepting those to which they voluntarily and explicitly consent;

    Freedom from Coercion

    SECOND, that under no Circumstances will I acknowledge any Liberty to initiate Force against another Person, and will instead defend the inalienable Right of Individuals to resist Coercion employing whatever Means are proven necessary;

    Association and Secession

    THIRD, that I will hold inviolable any Relationships among Individuals which are totally voluntary, and that any Relationships not thus mutually agreeable will be considered empty and invalid;

    Individuality of Rights

    FOURTH, that I will regard Rights to be neither collective nor additive in Character – two individuals will have no more Rights than one, nor will two million nor two billion – nor will any Group possess Rights in Excess of those belonging to its individual members;

    Equality of Liberty

    FIFTH, that I will maintain these Principles without Respect to any person’s Race, Nationality, Gender, Sexuality, Age, or System of Beliefs, and hold that any Entity or Association, however constituted, acting to contravene them by initiation of Force – or Threat of same – will have forfeited its Right to exist;

    Supersedure of Individual Sovereignty

    UPON UNANIMOUS CONSENT of myself and all other Members or Inhabitants of my Households, Neighborhoods, Villages, Associations or Territories, I further stipulate that this Agreement shall supersede all existing governmental Documents or Usages previously pertinent. I declare that all other Constitutions, Charters, Acts, Laws, Statutes, Regulations, or Ordinances contradictory or destructive to the Ends which I have here expressed will be considered null and void, and that this Declaration and Covenant, being the Property of myself and any other Signatories, will not be Subject to Interpretation excepting unless it should be agreed and consented to by myself and all other parties involved.

  10. Tor Munkov
    May 16, 2013 at 2:28 pm

    Good is Evil – Stefan Molyneux

    When Will the Anti-Bully Assholes Learn that Fedgov is the Alpha Bully Who Cages Kids With Hostile Strangers In Intolerable Prison Schools Until the Kids Finally Kill Themselves to Escape?

  11. phelps
    May 16, 2013 at 1:29 am

    I don’t know what disgusts me the most. The actions of Harris, or the comments defending that defend him.

    • May 16, 2013 at 9:29 am

      Same here, Phelps.

      The curtseying to our “heroes” in costume sickens me.

  12. May 15, 2013 at 11:34 pm

    Modern day witch hunts. The Inquisitors slow roasted people over a fire, ladeling grease on their bodies to keep them from burning too fast, in order to torture the “devil possessed” soul to save the person from eternal damnation. Here is post modern America, that takes too long. Now we kill them quickly to save them from themselves. All hail the modern religion and it’s inquisitors; the police!

  13. jharry3
    May 15, 2013 at 8:56 pm

    What is really disingenuous is how the Harley lobby got a lot of states to change helmet laws using the exact same arguments ya’ll are using against seatbelt laws.
    If it’s true that motorcycle helmets are a choice why isn’t it true for seatbelts in automobiles?

    Personally I don’t get on my bicycle without a helmet and no law says I have to do that.

    I also wear a seatbelt all the time – but this has been my choice since I started driving in 1973.

    • Boothe
      May 16, 2013 at 3:01 pm

      jharry3, I’m feel the same way as you with respect to wearing brain buckets on motorcycles. I wear a high end full face helmet whenever and where ever I ride. At least my face will probably still be (mostly) intact as they shove my remains in the oven should the worst happen. But I don’t need a law to coerce me into doing this. If one wants to ride with nothing but air between their noggin and the pavement, that should be their choice. Just don’t expect the rest of us to pick up the tab for one’s ventilator and feeding tube if one’s reflexes aren’t up to snuff.

  14. hoser
    May 15, 2013 at 6:46 pm

    LMAO!! Not about the crime committed by Officer No-Constitution, but by the commentary here.

    There is one reason to use deadly force: to respond to the threat of deadly or severe body-injuring force from another.

    Thus, “Officer” Harris, having initiated deadly force without such reason, … hmmm… yes, you can probably finish that sentence, with Brown still alive and Harris? well, no longer a cop; we’ll leave it at that.

  15. May 15, 2013 at 6:34 pm

    “And the antidote to this horror? Self-ownership. You own you. I own me. Neither of us has any claim on the other that’s enforceable at gunpoint. Feel free to suggest. To recommend. But when it comes to the use of force, the one and only legitimate justification is self-defense. Otherwise, leave me alone – and I will leave you alone.”
    .
    What *IS* The Bare Minimum…
    …that two people need to agree upon, in order to live together peacefully and productively…?

    And why does no one ASK this question?

    http://tinyurl.com/The-Bare-Minimum

    Dennis

    • Tor Minotaur
      May 22, 2013 at 3:10 am

      Good questions Dennis Lee Wilson. How do we sell it to those not in the 98th percentile of Mensa like yourself? I’m a former Performing Monkey Prodigy Kid of the 99.8th+ percentile and believe me, I get it.

      Don’t give so much credence to Intellectualism and Lawyerism. The guys here are all about Techne results not Episteme eggheads. Einstein and Judges are statist controlled suckers with no autonomy.

      Even by the age of 10 I knew enough to play mediocre so I could start pursuing my own happiness and not be some Isaac Newton nutjob marionette with easily pulled strings. There’s builders here and they trump theorists, it’s just that simple, adapt and make your worthy ideas anti-fragile and accessible to even the Hoi Polloi.

      By all means, keep spreading the work of Lester Neil Smith, a man with as good a claim of inventing the NAP/ZAP as anyone. Lacking credentials, he won’t get the credit for it, but who cares.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle

      Things that work don’t need other people to act a certain way. Creators don’t need acolytes, they do it for their own reasons. Ed doesn’t have to be respectful to Karl Benz when he turns the keys in his truck’s ignition does he. Karl made Universal Internal Combustion a reality for all men, not merely the serious minded pointy headed intelligentsia set.

      The precepts of the Unanimous Consent Covenant need to be propagated even on the shop room floors and beer hall bars. Why couch them only in legalistic jargon and blustery Harvard dandyisms. They need no official color of law, their legitimacy is undeniable. Why only put on short pants and pontificate in powdered wigs about them?

      Ed argues from a redneck nihilist ad absurdum posture, but in reality, he just sandbagging you and feigning weakness, when he’s actually holding pocket aces.

      Is not the violin a worthy creation whether used by Itzhak Perlman or Charlie Daniels? Aren’t demands for propriety a statist bully’s cry to stifle legitimate criticism?

      IMHO, taking the opportunity to construct articles that can withstand the stresses of irreverent EPAUTOS posters, will leave you with something of real and lasting metaphysical value.

  16. Brad Smith
    May 15, 2013 at 6:26 pm

    The seat-belt laws are one of the best laws around, if you intend to point out the slippery slope. Anti-Second Amendment freaks are always claiming they are not really about disarming you and they swear that one more law isn’t going to kill you. Well as we see it can kill you, one more law that is.

    When Seat-belt laws first came to Michigan they came with a “Solemn Promise” that they would never violated your rights of free movement, by pulling you over just for a not wearing yours. They would only bust you if you broke another law and then they saw you had no seat belt on. Well a couple short decades later they now have cops on the street with a walky-talky calling ahead to other doughnut eaters so they can pull you over and they are proud of the results. They announce their success with news stories like “Last year we stole XXX amount of dollars from the citizens of Michigan and showed them who is boss”.

    So yes I will believe that they only want me to register my guns for my own safety just as soon as I get around to believing they will never pull me over for simply not putting on my seat-belt.

    By the way, almost every libertarian I know does in fact wear their seat-belt. Why? Because they believe it keeps them safe and they want to stick around for some ungodly reason.

    • DownshiftFast5to1
      May 16, 2013 at 3:48 am

      “Because they believe it keeps them safe”

      I had a number of friends who believed that too. They died in car crashes wearing theirs. Lotta good that did ‘em.

      I seem to recall a few who only survived because they weren’t wearing theirs and were ejected.

      Myself, I see danger in wearing seatbelts, what if you go into a ditch, land upside down in water and start to sink and you can’t get you’re damn seatbelt off? Maybe it’s not due to malfunction (or maybe it is?) but merely due to panicking? Same result either way.

      I wonder about the control aspect too, if you’re in a spot where a person needs a seatbelt to keep them behind the wheel, what kind of control do they have? Especially after the airbag goes off. There might be some instances, but I imagine not many.

      Perhaps wearing seatbelts makes drivers feel invincible and causes them to drive in ways they wouldn’t otherwise, which leads to a crash. I imagine it’s common with younger people. Of course, YMMV.

      I resent being told I must wear my seatbelt while driving 25 M.P.H. Can anyone say it’s truly about safety at 25 M.P.H. or less? If so, I wonder if they wear a helmet while taking a bath?

      It’s been about a year now since I stopped wearing mine except when I go out on the hyway or Interstate. It’s so wonderful and so almost free-like. When I get a ticket it will equal out to about 38 Cents per infraction, …unless they run me over for it.

      • Ed
        May 17, 2013 at 12:51 am

        “what if you go into a ditch, land upside down in water and start to sink and you can’t get you’re damn seatbelt off?”

        Well, then you’ve drunk your last longneck. I hope it wasn’t a rodeo-cold MGD. ;-)

    • Ed
      May 16, 2013 at 11:39 pm

      “By the way, almost every libertarian I know does in fact wear their seat-belt. ”

      Yep. I wear mine, to keep from hitting the steering wheel if I’m in a crash. Also, now that we have airbags, seat belts are important to keep you from being met in the middle by the airbag. An airbag can plumb fuck your ass up.

      I don’t need a law to get me to wear a seatbelt. I also don’t need some skinhead fatboy leaning into my car to see if I have mine on.

      • Eightsouthman
        May 17, 2013 at 12:06 am

        Ed, seatbelts rocked during a roll-over. CholleyJack didn’t seem to think it more than a good carnival ride, me, not so much. Then again, CJ seems to think chasing longhorns that can keep a 20′ circle clear are the bees knees, lotsa fun.

        • Ed
          May 17, 2013 at 12:46 am

          ” CJ seems to think chasing longhorns that can keep a 20′ circle clear are the bees knees”

          From what you tell on ol’ CJ, I get the idea that he ain’t right in his mind, but he’s a good’un anyway. He can flat clean a pair of shades, too, can’t he? ;-)

      • methylamine
        May 17, 2013 at 12:20 am

        “…can plumb fuck your ass up.”

        ROFL, Ed, that’s a keeper!

        If you’re not already in Texas, move here immediately. We need you to offset the idiot Northeastern fucktards who’re coming down here because they’ve wrecked their states and they’re looking to wreck some more.

        • Ed
          May 17, 2013 at 12:34 am

          Hey, meth and Eight, I used to live in Longview. Yeah, I know that’s barely Texas to y’all. East Texas is more a part of the old South than it is of the western states.

          I loved Texas when I was there. When the slump hit in the mid 80s, I came back east and ended up in Virginia.

          My daughter’s Granpa lives in Longview. Maybe we’ll go back there someday.

      • DownshiftFast5to1
        May 19, 2013 at 8:21 am

        “now that we have airbags, seat belts are important to keep you from being met in the middle by the airbag.”

        From what I’ve read so far, that’s not exactly true. The air bag still comes to you and, as you say, can plumb fuck your ass up.

        You might wear yours to keep from hitting the steering wheel if you’re in a crash… I don’t wear mine so it doesn’t act like a guillotine if I’m in a crash. I’ll take losing a few teeth vs. my losing head.

        • Ed
          May 19, 2013 at 11:51 am

          ” I don’t wear mine so it doesn’t act like a guillotine if I’m in a crash. I’ll take losing a few teeth vs. my losing head.”

          To each his own. Seems to me that a crash with enough force to make the seatbelt cut my head off would have enough force to impale me on the steering column, but what do I know.

          Anyway, it would be better to be left alone to choose whether or not to wear seatbelts or to have airbags installed in our cars or removed/disabled, without laws that empower retarded lardasses to fuck with us over our own free choices.

          That way, I would be free to be guillotined and you would be free to be plumb fucked up, without having Porky fuck with us over anything.

          So, how ’bout a little of that?

  17. Blake
    May 15, 2013 at 4:57 pm

    It is obvious that Gil changed his name to Old Hickory. The arguments (if you want to call them that) are vebatim.

    • Ed
      May 15, 2013 at 6:35 pm

      “It is obvious that Gil changed his name to Old Hickory”

      No doubt. If those two aren’t one and the same, then they’re sucking on the same………. hash pipe.

  18. GARY
    May 15, 2013 at 4:15 pm

    The cop should get manslaughter. All drivers should wear their seat belts. The thing with a seat belt is that during low speed accidents it keeps you behind the wheel of the car where you belong and not on the floor or passenger side seat. This at the least gives the driver a chance to try and control the vehicle after impact. Its just common sense when your behind the wheel of a 3000 lb vehicle.

    • May 15, 2013 at 4:24 pm

      Gary,

      Whether wearing a seat belt is “safer” is irrelevant. The issue is whether you – or anyone else – has the moral right to force another adult to wear a seat belt. If you say yes, then I have a right to force you to eat your veggies and maintain an ideal BMI index – and many other things besides.

      • Brad Smith
        May 15, 2013 at 6:34 pm

        I can see both arguments as valid. No you should not be forced to keep yourself or even others safe. You should only be punished if you commit a crime, harming others or their property. However as a quasi-libertarian I also consider being responsible as my most sacred duty. Not because the government says so but because I say so. How can I expect the government to treat me like a responsible adult if I refuse to act like one? Libertarians should lead the way in being responsible in the first place. I have no problem with flouting the law, in fact I do it on a regular basis but it has to be a law I can flout without risking harm to anyone. I do have a problem with acting irresponsibly and I think that was Gary’s point. Be responsible because you should not because you need to be told to.

    • Ed
      May 15, 2013 at 6:32 pm

      “The cop should get manslaughter”

      I’d say the charge should be murder. Manslaughter would indicate that he didn’t mean to kill the man. This was murder, according to the witnesses. Of course, a courtroom is where the trial should take place, and not in the news media, but still, I think a trial is in order.

      • Shazaam
        May 15, 2013 at 11:00 pm

        Definitely murder.

        That cruiser didn’t run the victim down without someone operating it.

        The goon behind the wheel chose to use the vehicle as a weapon. This killing was a deliberate act, there is no reasonable logic in claiming it was an accident.

        Doesn’t matter if the copper bloviates that “he didn’t mean to kill him”. He used his cruiser as a weapon. Pedestrians are no match for a vehicle used as a weapon.

        Unfortunately, the modern (in)justice system will somehow manage to protect the cop, and he’ll be back at work after his paid vacation.

        However if you or I ran over someone we were chasing with a vehicle, we’d never see the light of day without striped shadows again.

        Such a wonderful double standard. It will bite the tax parasites in the backside eventually… (I hope)

        • May 16, 2013 at 12:18 am

          If I, as a Mere Mundane, fired my gun wantonly in the direction of people – and someone was killed as a result – bet your bippie I’d be (rightly) charged with manslaughter – at the least. Yet a cop – ostensibly trained in the judicious use of force – can use a deadly weapon (a car) just as wantonly, just as recklessly – just as fatally – and it is “30 days paid suspension.”

  19. jimmyh452
    May 15, 2013 at 3:38 pm

    Methinks Old Hickory is a troll who should get no more meals here. If not a troll, what’s the point of arguing with someone so feebly minded as him? You’ll never convince a hopelessly brainwashed goon like him so why waste the effort?

    • Ed
      May 15, 2013 at 6:28 pm

      Methinks Old Hickory is a troll who should get no more meals here.”

      I’m with jimmh452. Starve the cocksucker.

  20. May 15, 2013 at 3:24 pm

    … problems with the video cam from the cruiser… right!

  21. Joe
    May 15, 2013 at 2:04 pm

    Of course, these same arguments apply to some states’ helmet laws. Once, when seat belt laws were being considered in my state, I e-mailed my state senator and asked him what right the state had to tell me to wear a seat belt. His answer was instructive. The state has a vested interest because if a person is seriously injured because he was not wearing seat belt and that person has no medical insurance or the means to pay for his medical care, then the state has to pay. I wrote back and said that such a situation brought up a whole new issue – government meddling in health care. When government gets involved in controlling one aspect of society, there is a domino effect that seems to end only in tyranny.

    • Steve Rogers
      May 15, 2013 at 2:31 pm

      Well stated, Joe.

    • BrentP
      May 15, 2013 at 3:26 pm

      In many things now we hear from the mainstream media about lost productivity because of a particular activity or habit of people. How much productivity is lost to businesses and government.

      The slaves having a beer with lunch means they produce seven less widgets per day! No more beer with lunch for the slaves.

      Of course it isn’t stated that way which people can understand it’s that businesses “lost” eleventy billion dollars due to employees having a drink with lunch. Never mind they didn’t lose anything, they still got what they paid employees for otherwise said employees would be fired. It is simply supposedly that the habit of some employees to have a drink at lunch means they didn’t do as much above-and-beyond work for no extra compensation.

      Modern slavery at its finest. At least the cages are nice.

      • Jean
        May 15, 2013 at 6:39 pm

        Cages are nice until a Stainless Steel Rat chews through the wires and ferroconcrete of the city… :-)

  22. Tor Munkov
    May 15, 2013 at 12:46 pm

    Even court-jester lapdog Jon Stewart, mouthpiece of the GE Defense Industry controlled Comedy Central is forced to concede Libertarians were right about Big Government.

    Jon Stewart Destroys Obama Administration Over Scandals
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izc_IaBTr50

  23. Eightsouthman
    May 15, 2013 at 12:30 pm

    To EVERYONE. I read the article about the guy getting run over. It said there were no outstanding warrants or tickets for him. He thought, with good reason, that White, child with a badge and gun had a bad attitude and would make up some reason to charge him with a crime. If you can’t understand that you’ve been asleep your entire life and just woke up….kinda.

    • Shazaam
      May 15, 2013 at 5:37 pm

      Welcome to the ranks of the awakened.

      Saddest part of this story is the copper will likely get 4-6 months vacation with pay, then re-instated to his road-side-tax-collector’s position. The local prosecutors will most likely decline to charge the cop with murder. Funny how the dash cams never seem to work when data will incriminate a cop….

      And even if a grand jury were to issued a murder indictment, a prosecutor can always decline to pursue the case…. It happens like that all the time for law enforcement goons.

      The road-side-tax-collectors are getting more and more violent. Partly due to training, and partly due to their previous profession which is usually: “Armed occupying force in foreign country”. Is it any wonder the cops now treat the tax payers like Iraqi civilians?

      The cops have been trained that “mundanes” are the enemy. Which equates in their low-wattage brain pans as treating all “mundanes” like Iraqi or Afghan civilians.

      We live in interesting times.

      NOTE that the Daytona Beach New-Journal has removed the article linked by Eric…. Anyone want to bet the coppers demanded that it be removed?

      • BrentP
        May 15, 2013 at 5:52 pm

        Funny how the dash cams never seem to work when data will incriminate a cop.

        Did anyone notice that with the Boston bombers/patsies/informants/whatevers they had years-old dash cam video of one of them available at their fingertips? But all too often if a mundane requests a video more than a few days old it’s been ‘deleted’ and is no longer available.

        • May 15, 2013 at 6:01 pm

          Of course.

          Just as all video of the Pentagon hit on naaahhhhnlevven has gone down the memory hole. Meanwhile, rest assured they are storing a copy of every last e-mail and phone call you and I make.

          Cue Len Greenwood…

        • Jean
          May 15, 2013 at 6:14 pm

          Request it immediately and they have hardware failures…

      • Eightsouthman
        May 15, 2013 at 9:00 pm

        We just re-discovered our SS Rat collection. Great memories. I just LOVED how he handled cops.

  24. Eightsouthman
    May 15, 2013 at 12:23 pm

    Texas Chris, I had a boss much younger than me once who was bragging about his baiting abilities, been to the lake, baiting everyone’s hooks. I started to ask if they were all gay. I suppose I shouldn’t say that but the only time I let anyone bait my hook was after they’d already baited theirs and I wanted to learn how they did it so they’d show me on mine or someone is right over the bait bucket or livewell in the boat and it’s easier for them to bait than move and let you in there. This guy kept on and I told him I’d heard he was a really good baiter. Well, he fell for it and by the time I’d dropped the punchline everybody was waiting for it, about 10 people standing around in a lab working and listening. The woman behind me had her back to us and I could see she was just shaking. All the men were literally hanging off the counters, flopped back in chairs holding their sides. Never could figure why the guy wouldn’t give me a raise.

  25. Ed
    May 15, 2013 at 11:44 am

    Has anyone else noticed the recent influx of people who appear here, claiming to be “libertarians” and making the most ridiculously statist claims in their posts?

    Now we have one using the screen name “ajnock”. He doesn’t claim to be libertarian, but he uses the name of one of the best known early 20th century libertarian authors. Can anyone imagine Albert J Nock taking the position that a man with a criminal record forfeits his life by running from a cop?

    What a dimbulb cocksucker this asshole is. It sucks to be trolled. To be trolled by imbeciles sucks out loud for a fat man’s ass.

    Yeah, I know. I just fed a troll. I amaze myself with my own inconsistency.

    • May 15, 2013 at 11:46 am

      Hey Ed,

      Yeah – I’ve noticed this, too.

      I almost posted a comment about the “AJnock” handle. I found that as bizarre as you have.

      • Ed
        May 15, 2013 at 12:12 pm

        eric, it just occurred to me that this asshat is likely the same imbecile who posted the silliness about “I need to be convinced of the soundness of your libertarian thought”, the one who was such a got-damned genius. He also posted as the libertardian who griped that we were all so mean and wanted to obey “the laws that only” we agreed with.

        I think we identified one subspecies of troll here, to be called henceforth, the Libertardian troll. He fancies himself a genius at misdirection, and thinks we’ll recognize him as a fellow libertarian who has a small disagreement with our view.

        • Eightsouthman
          May 15, 2013 at 12:42 pm

          Ed, guess this is a sign of the times but I was over to my niece’s house yesterday and asked if she had a newspaper. She goes into this “I don’t buy a newspaper, this is the 21st century” thing so she handed me her ipad. That fly never knew what hit it.

          • Ed
            May 15, 2013 at 2:07 pm

            “That fly never knew what hit it.”

            Ahaha. Hey, Eight. How many knots do you have on your head from you niece’s broom handle? ahaha

        • May 15, 2013 at 12:44 pm

          Roger that, Ed.

          Notice, also, that once called out they never return?

          “Greg,” for instance. After being politely asked what his specific complaint was – beyond objecting to calling Clover “Clover” and quibbling over grammar – he just… went away.

          • Ed
            May 15, 2013 at 7:23 pm

            “he just… went away.” Or maybe he just…..changed his screen name.

      • Jean
        May 15, 2013 at 5:09 pm

        The government is waging cyber-warfare.

        If you cannot control the resource, control what happens using the resource. Dove-tailed with other aspects of mass communication and state indoctrination, can be very effective.

        Repeat the lie, label the dissenters as outliers and kooks, repeat as necessary, keep the people divided en masse, yet also voting “your way” (which is easy when you wrangle control of both parties)…
        They had elections in Soviet Russia, too, you know… :-P

        I’m trying to wake people up here, but most get their “news” from TV and newspapers, and dismiss out of hand anything that impinges on those “realities.” I want to re-enact the scene from “Instinct” to show how LIMITED they truly are. (But that would be bad for future employment… OTOH, nothing so visceral as a demonstartion. )

    • Eightsouthman
      May 15, 2013 at 12:33 pm

      Ed, I noticed aj right away and didn’t recall the moniker and then when I saw what he’d written, I wanted to find him in person and insult him the way he insulted one of the greats.

      • Ed
        May 15, 2013 at 12:50 pm

        Eight, he insulted himself with the retarded comment he posted. That kind of thinking is indicative of the mindset of a federal prosecutor. He throws out a non sequitor as what, in his twisted mind, amounts to an irrefutable response to the reasoning of his opponent.

        It’s the kind of non-sequitor that Larry McMurtry puts into the lines of characters in his novels, such as the one in “Lonesome Dove”, Gus McCrae. Their cookwagon driver says he’s unwilling to strip to his underwear to cross a river since there’s a woman traveling with them. McCrae responds with something like “Well, you’ve got a hole in your belly anyway, so you may as well go ahead”. It’s a comical device by the novelist.

        It’s really a stupid way of arguing, and should only be used as a joke, but people with that prosecutor’s mindset use it as a serious strategy. They think it’s pure genius on their part.

        Got a point on his head, so the thinks he’s sharp. Buncha fuckin’ retards. ;-)

        • Eightsouthman
          May 15, 2013 at 2:46 pm

          Ed, Lippy, hilarious.

    • ajnock
      May 15, 2013 at 7:47 pm

      Another brilliant example of the vocabulary of the Left.

      • May 15, 2013 at 7:48 pm

        AJ,

        If you know anything about the real AJ, you’d know that he saw no meaningful difference between left-liberal-Democrat-progressives (or whatever you wish to call them) and right-conservative-Republicans.

        He saw both as fundamentally the same – because both agree on the essential thing: Collectivism, enforced at gunpoint. The motives are immaterial – because the end is the same: The individual has no rights – only whatever privileges (and obligations) the collective decrees.

        I oppose collectivism in all its forms – and reject the authoritarianism that always and necessarily accompanies it. Therefore, I oppose threatening people with violence to compel them to “buckle up” – or for any other reason. Self-defense against aggression is the only ethically legitimate use of force.

        That’s something the real AJ also believed.

        And clearly, it is something you do not comprehend.

  26. ajnock
    May 15, 2013 at 10:35 am

    Peters, nice straw man argument built around cherry picked ‘facts’. Then again, you don’t claim to be a journalist.

    Even the slightest checking would have shown you that Mr. Brown (the ‘victim’) has a very long felony history. You would think a felon would be smart to know by now that not wearing his seat belt gives the police the probable cause they need to stop him. One would think even you, Mr. Peters, would be smart enough to know that Mr. Brown didn’t run to avoid a seat belt ticket. He ran to avoid another (deserved) stint of jail time.

    • May 15, 2013 at 10:43 am

      AJ,

      You miss the point entirely.

      The issue here is whether it’s ok to give cops legal authority to hassle anyone over something like a seat belt “violation.”

      I think not. You, apparently, disagree.

      The victim’s previous history is irrelevant.

      He was targeted for the non-crime of “failing to buckle up for safety.”

      He had every right to be left alone insofar as that is concerned.

      Perhaps he was a bad guy – a criminal. Fine, pursue him for that.

      Not for a “seatbelt violation.”

      “Law and order” conservatives routinely make the gross strategic error of justifying something such as the chain of events that led to this man’s death – because, hey, he “had a record” or “deserved” it.

      They fail to see that, once accepted, the same tactics can – and will – be used against them, too.

      Numerous – and should be obvious – examples include:

      Let’s get dangerous drunks off the road – now we all have to endure probable cause-free “checkpoints” where we’re subject to interrogations and searches.

      Let’s get the “terrorists” – and now we’re all treated as presumptive terrorists; we can’t even board an airplane without being degraded – our genitals fondled by a blue-shirted thug as we stand there abjectly in the “I surrender” pose.

      So, again: Leave people – all people – the hell alone until they, as individuals, have done something that caused actual harm to another person.

      PS: I have run from cops over exactly such trumped-up crap. I’m not a criminal; I’m a productively employed, college-educated, married middle-aged white guy. But my back gets up when some asshole in a costume wants to hit me with a $100-plus fine – money I’ve worked hard for and which that piece of shit and his fellow tax-feeders have no right to. If I deem my chances good, I will split. For the same reason that a man confronted with a street thug who decides he’s got a decent shot at either running away or hitting the son of a bitch in the jaw will do exactly that.

      Point being, what happened to Brown could also happen to someone like me. I’m no physical threat to anyone insofar as my not “buckling up.” The badged bastard set in motion the chain of events – not me. Not Brown.

      You have put the cart before the horse.

      So much for “straw man” arguments.

      • Eightsouthman
        May 15, 2013 at 11:17 am

        A friends dad got stopped by a porker for speeding. The guy wasn’t speeding and knew it so he said so. The porker then told him he had a very expensive machine to determine that, did he still want to argue. The guy said yes, I do, this is a very expensive machine too(Caddy). The porker let him go.

      • Eightsouthman
        May 15, 2013 at 11:28 am

        eric, how’s that back this fine morn? A hopefully good day to you. I have quit pouring slabs, the one my squeeze chute sits on is the last, my final word. From now on my job is QC. little more jitterbug in that area, add some to this low spot, etc. Seems like we’re not the first to have a legitimate gripe: “We are taxed in our bread and our wine, in our incomes and our investments, on
        our land and on our property not only for base creatures who do not deserve the
        name of men, but for foreign nations, complaisant nations who will bow to us
        and accept our largesse and promise us to assist in the keeping of the peace –
        these mendicant nations who will destroy us when we show a moment of weakness
        or our treasury is bare, and surely it is becoming bare! We are taxed to
        maintain legions on their soil, in the name of law and order and the Pax
        Romana, a document which will fall into dust when it pleases our allies and our
        vassals. We keep them in precarious balance only with our gold. Is the
        heartblood of our nation worth these? Were they bound to us with ties of love,
        they would not ask our gold. They take our very flesh, and they hate and
        despise us. And who shall say we are worthy of more? … When a government
        becomes powerful it is destructive, extravagant and violent; it is an usurer
        which takes bread from innocent mouths and deprives honorable men of their
        substance, for votes with which to perpetuate itself.”
        — Cicero

        • May 15, 2013 at 12:47 pm

          Hi Eight,

          It’s ok!

          I mixed the bags by hand (wheelbarrow method) too. I’m still young enough and dumb enough to do it that way!

          Good stuff in re the Old Dead Roman Dudes… one of my favorite/frequent re-reads being ol’ Marcus Aurelius.

        • methylamine
          May 15, 2013 at 1:52 pm

          Wow! That is a fantastic quote. I sensed somewhere about halfway it was Rome, with the reference to gold…something about the language too.

          But it could have come from a contemporary writer with a latinate turn of phrase.

          That, and the Declaration of Independence, are more timely than even when they were written.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 15, 2013 at 2:52 pm

            meth, the very reason I posted it. Someone could have said those very words just yesterday for the first time and they would be right on. Striving for a libertarian goal has always been man’s highest quest in my estimation.

        • Boothe
          May 16, 2013 at 12:55 pm

          Eight, here’s the decline of Rome shown in silver: http://www.theburningplatform.com/?p=16324 Any questions? Now, about our currency…

          • Eightsouthman
            May 16, 2013 at 1:13 pm

            Boothe, you probably noticed they’re(US treasury)trying to nix the penny and find a cheaper material for nickels. If someone told you a currency was worth more as metal than coin you might get some fancy ideas….

          • Boothe
            May 16, 2013 at 3:25 pm

            Yeah, Eight you’ve nailed it. Seems like Rawls over at survivalblog has suggested stockpiling nickels as one low cost hedge against inflation more than once. The PTB may recall / revalue the paper money, but they probably won’t mess with the tokens…errr…”coins.” One poster noted that .30 cal. ammo cans full of nickels make a pretty good defensive shield stacked inside the walls of a room too. Just don’t plan on grabbing your nest egg and running off with it if you have to flee…unless you have a deuce and a half to load it on.

          • BrentP
            May 16, 2013 at 3:31 pm

            Given the recent things going on in the precious metals, which are way down for no good reason since there has been no fundamental changes, I am wondering if nickels aren’t the better option.

            1) No loss in numerical dollars.
            2) upside of being a physical asset.

            Downside is of course storage for any significant amount.

      • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
        May 15, 2013 at 11:28 am

        Well said Eric. So what if Brown had a record, was he wanted for anything? Probably not, but that’s irrelevant.

        His heinous seatbelt “crime” was simply an excuse for another stab at an unknown victim’s wallet and yet after the stop, further opportunity for the cop to find more heinous violations such as unpaid parking fines, a bong, a slightly bald tyre or one taillight slightly smaller than the other.

        His choice is his own. A man cannot commit a crime against himself.

      • ajnock
        May 15, 2013 at 7:41 pm

        I am not missing anything except the ability to make my points without profanity.

        • May 15, 2013 at 7:46 pm

          AJ,

          You defended both obnoxious busybodyism at gunpoint (e.g., seatbelt laws) and extra-judicial murder. Excuse me for “using profanity” in response.

    • Ed
      May 15, 2013 at 11:35 am

      ” One would think even you, Mr. Peters, would be smart enough to know that Mr. Brown didn’t run to avoid a seat belt ticket. He ran to avoid another (deserved) stint of jail time.”

      And this would prove your point, because…….?

      The point isn’t that Brown had a criminal record, and it isn’t that he ran. The point is that the cop murdered him by running over him with a car.

      If the cop ran over him for fleeing the scene of a murder, it would still be a case of a cop deliberately killing an unarmed man.

      So, yours is simply a “nice straw man argument built around cherry picked ‘facts’.”

      The police aren’t empowered to kill anyone for running. If you think they are, then show how you came to such a twisted conclusion.

      • ajnock
        May 15, 2013 at 7:44 pm

        Remarkable. You seem to be able to discern intent (‘murder’ requires ‘intent’) from a very tiny set data points…..brought to you courtesy of the local muckrakers.

        • Jean
          May 15, 2013 at 8:36 pm

          Um, big chunk of steel runs over little ball of flesh?
          Big Chunks of Steel don’t move of their own accord, you know. They don’t target a ball of flesh by themselves. We’re not talking about someone who falls in front of a moving vehicle…

    • methylamine
      May 15, 2013 at 1:48 pm

      His history is completely immaterial.

      The issues at stake are:
      a) the morality of a seatbelt law; without which, the chase would never have ensued
      b) the morality of chasing a man to death for a non-crime

      If this man were wanted immediately for a murder, and it was likely he’d soon commit another, I’d support a vigorous chase.

      But STILL not a reckless, fatal chase–because we don’t punish extra-judicially, civilized societies have due process…you know, like we used to have?

      You accuse Eric of a straw man–then inject two fallacies into your own argument.

      You slyly accept the validity of the seatbelt law, and you impute justice to the chase because of the victim’s state of mind.

      Nice try; it would work on a stupid audience, not this one.

  27. kaptain Kanada
    May 15, 2013 at 5:27 am

    If I understand this correctly, it’s hazardous to your health to drive without wearing a seatbelt… because the cops may decide to kill you — for your own safety, of course.
    And people tell me we “don’t live in a police state.” Right…

    • Ed
      May 15, 2013 at 12:16 pm

      “because the cops may decide to kill you — for your own safety, of course.”

      Of course. I’d rather be killed by a cop for my own good than to get a bloody nose in a minor crash. Wouldn’t you? ;-)

  28. ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
    May 15, 2013 at 5:20 am

    I should have added: “After all, one cannot commit a crime against himself!”

  29. May 15, 2013 at 4:48 am

    I got one of those fucking seat belt tickets one time. I took it to court. I asked the cop if he was my mother. Then I asked the judge if he were my mother. Neither was amused. I rested my case and they found me guilty. I paid the fine, but I am secure in the knowledge that my taking it to court cost them more in administrative fees than the fine was.
    Next time I get one of these stupid seat belt tickets i will ask the cop if he is my mother. when he says no, I will then ask him if he has any relationship to me at all. when he says no, I will ask if I have a signed contract with him saying I will wear my seat belt. when he says no, I will ask if this case is a criminal case or a civil case. and when he says civil, I will immediately tell the judge that I move to have the case dismissed because the cop has no standing to bring these charges. Let’s see where that goes.

    • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
      May 15, 2013 at 5:18 am

      Exactly. If they say it’s a criminal case, ask them who the victim is. If the say it’s the state, then ask them how the state is responsible for personal safety regarding one’s own decisions. It can only be unconstitutional, because that would mean interference in the Rights of one’s personal freedoms.

      “Your Honour, I can freely skydive and decide for myself at the last minute to not open the ‘chute – is this a crime against anybody and if so, who is the victim?”

    • DownshiftFast5to1
      May 15, 2013 at 5:22 am

      I like what I read. Cool response(s). I imagine he would say yes when asked, have a signed contract with him saying I will wear my seat belt.

      In the past I would have tried that route, but these days, I’m following the motto:

      Don’t talk to the police.

      Never Talk to the Police: They’re Trained to Lie

      http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/43037.html

      • Ed
        May 15, 2013 at 7:04 pm

        “Never Talk to the Police: They’re Trained to Lie”

        True, that. If they weren’t paid to lie, they would pay for the privilege of doing so.

        An attorney I hired for my daughter related to us how in a previous case before the court my daughter was scheduled to appear before, she entered into evidence a copy of the county’s police procedures manual, which contained explicit instructions on how to lie during interrogations, on arrest reports, in depositions for charging documents and how to lie in testimony before the court.

    • May 15, 2013 at 5:50 pm

      California is making it so that you pay additional costs if you take it to court and lose, so that it is no longer a big cost to them.

    • Matt
      May 15, 2013 at 7:14 pm

      The judge will tell you the officer does not need standing as he is not he moving party, the ‘people’ are. His role in the court room is merely as a witness to the offense in question. Your act results in higher damages being paid out by insurance companies (ignoring the fact they force us to have it in many states) and thus cause premiums to go up for all your fellow citizens.

      The mistake you are making is you assume the system is still bound by rules. In Michigan for example we dropped the pretense that you are actually going to court for driving infractions. The law was changed to revoke the right to appeal on all civil infractions as well as limit your venue to that of a district court magistrate (you do not even have the right to appeal to the sitting district court judge).

      It basically goes like this in Michigan:
      1) Get ticket
      2) Setup court appointment
      3) Sit in lobby of court house for 30 minutes
      4) Talk to the assistant DA
      5) Strike deal with DA (I always get no points and just pay fine).
      6) Sign on line
      7) Take copy to cashier & pay

      At no point to you even see a judge, and the cops are no longer required to attend the hearing if you do contest it. We dropped the pretense that it is anything other then a way to extract money out of people.

      • Jean
        May 15, 2013 at 7:37 pm

        And no one has burned out a DA yet?

        Down Texas way, a DA and his wife got shot just recently, IIRC.
        Unfortunately, it turned out to eb somethign stupid, not a righteous revenge situation. Just some numb-nuts killing them as some people sometimes do. :-P
        (Wonder if the DA was Pro2nd or was a disarmed victim…? ) HEH….

        • Eightsouthman
          May 15, 2013 at 8:38 pm

          Jean, that isn’t the situation at all. The prosecutor got killed a couple months before. The DA(top dog)began saying he wasn’t scared(this is a huge thing out there where it happened because they’re always running drugs and the cops and DA’s are part of this)because he was military and knew how to handle himself. A week later it’s a perfect hit on him and his wife. If the judicial bunch and cops have their way no one will ever know what happened. They certainly don’t want to catch the real killers and definitely not alive.

          • Jean
            May 15, 2013 at 8:46 pm

            Thank you for clarifying.
            When there’s no difference between criminals and LEOs, maybe we have a broken system. ;-)

    • Ed
      May 16, 2013 at 12:46 am

      “I will immediately tell the judge that I move to have the case dismissed ”

      Good luck with that. Traffic tickets are a matter of administrative law unless they are also felony charges, which few are. The judge can simply deny your motion and find you guilty. He probably will.

      I’m not taking his side, and I think it’s explicitly wrong and unlawful, but there it is. I learned from hard knocks that it’s pointless to waste a day in court to avoid paying a fine that amounts to less than half of what I could make doing business instead of waiting around in a courtroom all day.

  30. TheShocker
    May 15, 2013 at 4:34 am

    The point of all these laws by government is control, revenue and an excuse to initiate action. Police love seat belt laws, cell phone laws, expired safety inspection stickers, etc., because it gives them an excuse to pull you over with the intention of finding additional violations and generating additional fines and revenue. Government has no concern for the safety of citizens, we are merely cash cows in time of peace and cannon fodder in time of war.

    • Tim from the Bay Area
      May 15, 2013 at 4:13 pm

      ^^^ this.

  31. Matt
    May 14, 2013 at 10:55 pm

    The only good thing about the nanny state is the larger it gets the more people it victimizes. At some point the whole “It doesn’t effect me” mindset will go out the window because it will effect so many different people.

    With the proposed DUI change being pushed by the NTSB I hope more casual drinkers get caught up in the net so they will quit viewing the government as some benevolent force of good. Nothing is better at making someone anti-police/state then a quick run though the system (which is never quick and always costly).

    • Me2
      May 15, 2013 at 3:49 pm

      I would not be so sure about your conclusion. Logically what you say makes sense but for the most part, people are not logical. Most are narcissistic and oblivious to the plight others. Even if a Sheep is caught for some infraction, they will claim they have been unfairly persecuted. On the other hand, when ‘others’ suffer the same fate under the same circumstances, Sheep bleat ‘they deserved it’.

      • Matt
        May 15, 2013 at 6:57 pm

        I can see your point. I just hold out hope (trying to see the silver lining) that as the state becomes ever more intrusive it will force more people into our ranks. History is littered with examples of a small (yet sizable) minority who force change and take the majority (the oblivious/narcissists) with them.

  32. Ed
    May 14, 2013 at 7:51 pm

    ” otherwise, the PTB would not be doing everything they can think of to kill the golden goose of the free market.”

    I know it, Mama L It seems to me that the whole point is to destroy things, not to create or build anything. Some people seem to see what’s happening while others are oblivious. I’ve said it before, but I think that the urge to control other people is evil.

      • Ed
        May 14, 2013 at 9:29 pm

        Yes, I saw that. How low can they go with it? .08 is low enough to be an anomaly in the testing. .05 probably IS an anomaly. Anything lower than .10 should be considered zero.

        These control freaks need to bite their own asses.

        • May 14, 2013 at 10:44 pm

          Hey Ed,

          It’s much worse than .08 – in some states, at least. In my state – VA – you can be arrested (and convicted) for DUI at .06 BAC and if you’re not 21, any BAC above 0 is sufficient pretext to arrest the driver. “Zero tolerance,” doncha know.

          Yes. Really.

          Cue Len Greenwood…

          • Ed
            May 14, 2013 at 10:51 pm

            I was pulled over by two Arresterfield county porkers one night because one of them saw me drinking an O’Douls.

            He asked if I had been drinking and I handed him the bottle. He read it carefully, then said that it had 5% alcohol. His backup told him it said .5%, not 5%.

            They went looking for another victim, but if I was tested, their test could show .08 easily, since that’s within the parameter of error for their blowtube outfits. Funny how that might work out, since I haven’t had a drink since August of ’84.

            Guess we’re all felons nowadays.

          • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
            May 14, 2013 at 11:12 pm

            Throughout Australia, some states used to have 0.08 and others were 0.05. They’re all 0.05 now, which makes me believe that if not for bullshit lobbying by pressure groups, including the greater ease in which to convict and fine someone, there was nothing wrong with 0.08 to begin with.

            Learner drivers here have “L” plates and require a licensed passenger as instructor – both with 0.00 BAC.

            Probationary drivers have “P” plates, red ones for first year and green ones for final year. 0.00 BAC is the limit, including limited number of passengers for both years too! What a nanny country we have here.

            It’s pretty stupid, seeing that many foods, such as sauerkraut contain small amounts of alcohol, it can make life pretty confusing.

            The laws on BAC are too wide a brush really, considering someone who never drinks, being at 0.05 might not even be able to walk – let alone get the keys into the ignition, whereas it might take a whole 0.30 for a seasoned drinker to have the same effect.

            One thing we don’t have here is your “sobriety test” of nose-touching and walking a straight line. We have the roadside handheld breatho as an indicator, then if that indicates, there’s what we call the “booze bus” parked on the side of the road that has a desk-mounted machine.

            The general booze bus stop has cops everywhere, cones etc. Their buddies in the background will do all sorta checks on your plate while you puff away. There’s a reason they’re affectionately called pigs.

            Cop shops (police stations) also have the desk machine, which is where they take you if there’s no booze bus around. A refusal at ANY stage through this process will virtually reflect a hanging offence in court, whether blowing positive or not.

            They also have the option of blood sampling, but apparently not over the hood of a cruiser – yet. Hospitals only so far.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 14, 2013 at 11:27 pm

            REV, yall just haven’t caught up to Tx. yet. We can be tested anytime, anywhere by a pig with a rig. Yep, passed that years ago, don’t say you want a blood test and don’t say when they hold you down they can’t take a blood sample. They can in this state,but not if I get their gun.

          • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
            May 14, 2013 at 11:46 pm

            “but not if I get their gun”

            Heh. I only wish it were that simple Eight. No, really I do. Here we’ve also fallen victim to the breatho on every stop beginning years ago, regardless of suspicion. It’s just another way they can intervene (against S.92 of OUR constitution) in our daily lives in order to find ANYTHING they can to exert their supposed authority granted to them only by cowering clovers and faceless control freaks in gubberment.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 14, 2013 at 11:57 pm

            REV, hope you didn’t think I was being facetious. Tx. DPS can blood test you THEMSELVES against you will. A great bunch of cases in court, judges putting them off as long as they can. Like I said, they’ll have to knock my ass out to have a pig stick a needle in my arm. I’m old, ready to go so to speak.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 15, 2013 at 12:01 am

            REV, while it’s not legal simply to test you for alcohol here…yet, they only have to say “I smelled alcohol” and the chase is on. It’s not like they don’t do it every stop either but they have to lie which is almost worst since now lying is just de rigueur.

          • liberranter
            May 15, 2013 at 4:17 am

            Ed said:

            I was pulled over by two Arresterfield county porkers one night because one of them saw me drinking an O’Douls.

            He asked if I had been drinking and I handed him the bottle. He read it carefully, then said that it had 5% alcohol. His backup told him it said .5%, not 5%.

            Leave to a porktard not to know the difference between an integer and a fraction, even simplified decimal form.

          • Ed
            May 15, 2013 at 12:04 pm

            “Leave to a porktard not to know the difference between an integer and a fraction, even simplified decimal form.”

            Liberranter, if they knew anything much, they wouldn’t be porktards. ;-)

            It’s bad enough that they don’t know anything, but these assholes don’t even SUSPECT anything. That’s probably how they fail to make basic connections in logic, such as ‘ yes, this guy is running, but it isn’t necessary to run over him with my car’.

            Maybe it’s why cops aren’t brought to trial when they commit a little faux pas such as deliberately running over someone who is on foot. They aren’t mentally competent to stand trial, and have no concept of the difference between right and wrong.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 15, 2013 at 3:03 pm

            Ed, speaking of families exercising their own power of Americans for over 200 years yesterday it was the Marshall’s I was specifically thinking of. Although Marshall is no longer the name of the family they are still their descendants who make contrary law to this very day.

        • Eightsouthman
          May 14, 2013 at 11:15 pm

          Ed, my lawyer explained to me that the courts won’t allow anyone to examine the breathalyzers on the basis of them keeping their “secret” as to how they work. Since you can’t show the court the machines are rigged, voila, no defense. .1 is a joke, .08 is a travesty. No beer, no reason to live in this state. I can be abused by rednecks anywhere….and I am one.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 14, 2013 at 11:16 pm

            Excuse me, didn’t mean to use incorrect grammar, I Are one.

          • Ed
            May 14, 2013 at 11:49 pm

            Yep, I read that a person tested with the blowtube at .08 passed the blood gas chromatograph at.00 It’s like their radar guns that read a hill at 24mph, in the old Whistler radar detector ad.

            There are stretches of I85 in Virginia with signs that read “Speed Checked by Aircraft”. I suppose that means they’ve had drones patrolling that highway since the late ’70s which is when those signs went up.

            The system is rigged for control, yes, but also for revenue. It has expanded to the point that it’s just impossible to fight it. It’s also a full employment program for lawyers, who don’t actually contest the charge against you, they make a deal so that you pay them instead of the court.

            As the character in the film “Little Big Man” said, “Sometimes, this world is just too ridickluss to live in”.

          • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
            May 14, 2013 at 11:56 pm

            Heh. “I are one”.

            That’s a pretty good defense right there Eight. If they can’t be open and honest with the technology, it more than likely doesn’t conform to numerous measurement, trade practices and other specific Acts and laws. That detail should also be in the patent.

            If the manufacturer cannot explain how it works and the entire thing’s a secret, the device can’t be trusted and therefore the evidence is inadmissible. That’s just ONE way I’d consider arguing.

            Imagine you building one on your kitchen bench and using it against your neighbour. The judge would laugh you out of court if you refused to disclose its units of measurement and internal workings, let alone any perceived authority to use it.

            If the device doesn’t conform to certain laws, the authority to use it is also null and void.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 15, 2013 at 12:21 am

            REV, that’s the whole point. The courts have already ruled in the favor of non-disclosure. You can’t beat a deal like that. No, no one has yet taken a Tx. DWI to the Supreme Court for one reason, they won’t hear it. Sure, the shit they pull is not legal in any court of the people, just the courts in Tx. It’s a great deal like when an appeal judge upheld the ruling that if any part of a plate here is not visible, the little cotton bowl, the pump jack, the judges dick, you can be stopped and then anything can happen after that stop. I had a friend whose 16 yr. old daughter was stopped by a paedophile DPS, stopping every single girl he found in a few towns. He used the old “your license plate light is out” routine, typical for here. She got out after he’d try to seduce her and intimidate her and looked at the license plate lamp. Sure, it was on as had been all the other little girl’s plates since their daddies didn’t want to get stopped on a BS charge. She told her dad, That light was working to which he replied, Now, you’re catching on. That DPS by the way was narrowly saved by fortune, just didn’t happen to be around when a couple dozen dads all came to the court house at the same time and filed complaints against the perv. The state rescued his ass and sent him elsewhere, to ply on other little girls.

          • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
            May 15, 2013 at 12:29 am

            Ed;

            “Yep, I read that a person tested with the blowtube at .08 passed the blood gas chromatograph at.00 It’s like their radar guns that read a hill at 24mph, in the old Whistler radar detector ad.”

            Exactly. If the device can’t measure accurately every single time it doesn’t conform to any standard of measurement and therefore is inadmissible.

            Notice the fruit scales in the supermarket even require a certification number clearly marked on the unit so it can be read.

            Here in Oz, the number is NSC XX/XXX.XX or similar. It’s certified by the National Standards Commission under the National Measurement Act.

            Even our household electric/water/gas meters have NMI XXXXXXXXXX, being certified by the National Measurement Institute.

            If the device doesn’t have these tracking numbers, it’s unlawful to use for trade or revenue – in effect – “fines”.

            I’ve got out of quite a few speeding/parking/red light cam fines over the years but NONE of these devices conform to our National Measurement Act, because they don’t have the NSC number, BECAUSE they are too inaccurate to receive one.

            I even have a reply email from Dr Richard Brittain, Senior Legal Metrology Policy Officer, Legal Metrology Branch, National Measurement Institute in Feb 2011:

            “There are currently no pattern approved vehicle speed measuring instruments in Australia”

            Notably, if you get a camera fine of any sort, you have the right to cross-examine your accuser – the informant. If you demand that right (make SURE you do), the case will most likely be dismissed because the cam is the actual informant and obviously can’t be cross-examined. usually always works for me.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 15, 2013 at 12:31 am

            Ed, the first time I was ever in Virginia I was hauling a Uhaul with an Old 98. The drivers on the interstate starting going bonkers and talking trash about my Whistler on the dash. Yeah, big fucking Texas thinks he can come here and do whatever he likes. I never heard the like of crap. I was truly astonished people could be such dicks. We had a 2,000 watt bi-directional amp and my buddy grabbed the mike and held it for about 2 minutes. When he let off, it was complete silence, silence like I hadn’t heard on the air since the 60’s and finally one guy says What was that? and then another says I don’t know. It stayed quiet for a good while. We stopped and got a tribe size box of Kleenex, took the Kleenex out, put the Whistler in the box with holes cut out on the front and went on our way. What the hell is it with Virginians? I couldn’t believe anyone even looked at our plates, just a typical brown ’98 with a U haul, who’da thunk it? I can promise you nobody with Virginia plates ever got raked over the coals in Tx. like that. Of course, it was another state then. I notice I’m the only one on the road flashing lights at people for radar ahead, and giving them the hand sign. And what’s with that? Everybody now is braindead.

          • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
            May 15, 2013 at 12:44 am

            “Sure, the shit they pull is not legal in any court of the people, just the courts in Tx.”

            I know Eight, they make it up as they go along. It’s corruption filtering down from the highest level for control and revenue.

            Still, the device should be duly certified, if not they run the risk of losing the case. If need be, I just start by poking a little hole in their prosecution, something they can’t answer, then go the full assault with everything else they can’t answer. Love to watch them squirm.

            Your laws might differ somewhat from here. One thing I noticed is the laws differing a VAST amount between states in the US. We have only minor anomalies, however we have the law that states:

            “If a law of a State differs from that of a law of the Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid.”

            At least we have a good chance here, but it sounds like you guys are fuckered unless you can appeal such things like we can.

          • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
            May 15, 2013 at 12:50 am

            “The drivers on the interstate starting going bonkers and talking trash about my Whistler on the dash.”

            Arseholes! As Seinfeld says: “Who ARE these people!?”.

            I like the way ya got ‘em back. I did a similar thing back in the 80’s when I found a coupla “mates” (so much for that) talking trash about me on the air. I mean, shit.. did they think I was outta range or somethin’?

            Anyway, the world has changed, largely not for the better.

          • BrentP
            May 15, 2013 at 2:18 am

            Ed, not sure if you are joking or not, but back in the 70s and I think it’s fairly rare now… they’d get some cop up in a small plane and he would use a stop watch to time a car between sets of lines painted on the road below.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 15, 2013 at 3:02 am

            Don’t know (no, as clover would say)why I’m not getting Ed’s posts. Only thing I can think of in this state that has actually stood up in court is timing from the air. Ticketing someone from hearsay, I.E, a plane or some other LEO that witnessed it but didn’t stop to deliver the ticket doesn’t fly here. No one can be ticketed on hearsay evidence. One reason is because speed limits here are not law, they are merely suggestions by Tx. law so that going faster is not necessarily a crime. If more people knew that, they’d probably change the laws. It does allow one to get a lawyer(pay through the nose)and get out of it though, a fairly big deal with state mandated insurance, a down in the dirt low blow dirty dealing law unto itself. On the other hand, everyone in this state is subject to getting stopped for speeding, even the judges although they won’t get charged with anything. But even they know how far it is to get anywhere. I had someone tell me I should go get a source that wasn’t a drug to clear up a problem I was having. What they don’t realize is the closest place I can even hope to get something like that is a 120 mile trip. Run down to the store, yeah, I’ll be back in a few hours. And we do that, but not for one item. Other states, Yeah, we had to drive all the way across town to see that doctor, Here, yeah, we had to drive to Houston to see that doctor, 500 miles one way.

          • Ed
            May 15, 2013 at 3:08 am

            ” What the hell is it with Virginians?”

            It goes back to the end of Lincoln’s war. Virginia was the first state to get out from under military occupation, and the first to recover, economically, from the war, though most of the war destruction was in Virginia. Former Confederate politicians became scalawag republicans.

            The old folks in SC referred to Va as the scalawag state. For those who don’t know the definition of scalawag, it was a term used during “reconstruction” to describe a former Confederate who went over to the military occupation side, run by the radical republicans.

            A scalawag was lower than a carpetbagger, and Virginia was the land of the scalawag. State government corruption is so solidly entrenched that there’s nothing for Virginians to do about it, but clank their fuckin’ chains, you know? It’s a point of pride with many of them.

          • Ed
            May 15, 2013 at 3:13 am

            “Ed, not sure if you are joking ”

            Sorry to report, I am not EVEN joking. The signs start at Petersburg on I85 and are posted here and there all the way to the NC line.

            As those of us my age say, “I shit you not”.

          • BrentP
            May 15, 2013 at 4:54 am

            I meant about the drone part… the aircraft part is a simple thing like I described… it’s rarely done where I live now if at all.

          • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
            May 15, 2013 at 5:01 am

            Hi Brent;

            “..they’d get some cop up in a small plane and he would use a stop watch to time a car between sets of lines..”

            Yeh, they did that here in Oz as well, long before radar. It’s been discontinued since radar came in because:

            1. it was too easy to challenge and thwart, because it’s hearsay – even when the cop down the road was radioed by the plane and pulled you up to write love letters and, if you saw a white line you’d just slow down for a few k’s until you passed the sniggering Sheriff Rosco P. Coltrane waiting in the weeds.

            2. It was too expensive to justify. The bottom line of revenue mattered more and the advent of radar saved their sorry arses.

            We still have signs (Warning – aerial speed checks conducted in this area) and lines painted on the roads 500 metres apart in country areas just to try and scare us, but it’s well and truly over since more than a decade ago and that’s about the last time I heard the threat on the news they were going to implement it for Easter or Chrissy or somethin’.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 15, 2013 at 11:10 am

            Ed, ok, I won’t debate a point I don’t understand. It would seem Virginians oughta be of like mind with Texans, both abused by the same overlords. The reason Texans were so independent is that you have to be. Revenooers were rare here. They knew most never returned and even didn’t get their pay, had to be a reason and there was, they were dead for the most part, at least, those who didn’t do a 180 after being here a bit. That was often the case, doing what they were supposed to stop, paid a lot better and no one to stop you since nobody cared and it was a long way from DC. I hate to interject logic in one of these things that date from the war of aggression but you’d think the two states peoples would be of like mind. Both got screwed by everything Lincoln.

          • Ed
            May 15, 2013 at 12:26 pm

            “I meant about the drone part”

            Yes, the drone reference was sarcasm. The existence of the signs is what I meant was no joke.

            The first time I saw one of those signs I laughed and said “yeah, riiiight”.

          • Ed
            May 15, 2013 at 2:01 pm

            ” It would seem Virginians oughta be of like mind with Texans, both abused by the same overlords.”

            Yeah, Eight. So it would seem. You have to remember, though, that Virginia gave us chief justice John Marshall, the supreme state power loving asshole of the founders’ generation.

            Virginia is ruled by the northern counties around DC which are home to almost no Virginians. DC infects Virginia like a pox, for which the cure would kill the patient.

            Virginia is so heavily infested by federal employees, mostly retired federal employees, that anything the state government bureaucrats want to do can be lobbied for by the federal tit addicts. That lobbying gives the legislature the pretext for any insane law that can be dreamed up to further state interests.

            Still, I love living here, because of the fact that there is a hard core remnant of decent old fashioned people whom I would miss terribly if I moved back home to SC.

            This is the “land of ticks and chiggers” that killed more bluecoats with miserable fever than the Army Of Northern Virginia managed with shot and shell. Yankees are despised and shunned here, more so than in any other Southern state.

            It’s still the cradle of liberty, though too many have forgotten that fact.

          • Larry
            May 15, 2013 at 2:17 pm

            You can’t beat a deal like that.

            Eight, the only way to beat that deal is to force the court for a jury trial. Personally, I would not let one man have judgement over me. I would not even give them authority when the judge asks how do I plead, guilty or not guilty. My answer would be, “I’m here specially, your honor, not generally. How can I help you?” Don’t let the judge try and trick you into saying anything else. If he tries to trick you, respond, “I don’t understand your question, your honor. I’m here specially, not generally. How can I help you?” When you appear generally, you are giving one man authority over your body. Stick to your guns about appearing specially will force the judge to either dismiss or have a date set for jury trial. Any other action from the judge will place the judge on judicial notice and you can tell him that, “I hereby place you on judicial notice.” They can try to play the game that traffic offenses are infractions and are not civil or criminal but the law is clear – if the cost is more than $20… One other point. If you are going to do this, stack the courtroom with your friends and have them take out notebooks and write. It doesn’t matter what they write – it will freak out the judge and, hopefully, make him mind his p’s and q’s.

          • Ed
            May 15, 2013 at 2:22 pm

            “the case will most likely be dismissed because the cam is the actual informant and obviously can’t be cross-examined. usually always works for me.”

            Glad it works that way there, but in the USA, we have this tyranny called “administrative law”. It’s a whole body of case law established by bureaucracies in administrative law courts. Basically, what it does is to erect a barrier to defense against any offense not actually deemed a crime, but instead, a violation of some regulation.

            Becky Akers does a good job of exposing it here:

            http://lewrockwell.com/akers/akers170.html

            I used to do business with a great old coin dealer who had a huge inventory of ancient and medieval coins. I stopped buying from him when I found out he was a retired administrative law judge.

    • Boothe
      May 14, 2013 at 8:26 pm

      I think the real “elite” (i.e. those who are so supremely evil that they’re rich beyond even my imagination) do indeed want to kill off the vast majority of the population, reserving about 500,000,000 out of the “herd.” That’s a “sustainable” number. In other words, that’s enough folks to maintain the cathedrals, museums, parks and the grounds of their estates. And also enough to put to work demolishing all the unsightly malls, hotels, big box stores and other nasty blemishes the hoi polloi have put on the landscape.

      The figure would still allow the continuation of “approved” technologies, agriculture, art, music, productions and architecture; while leaving enough pawns around for playing the occasional real live war game with. The infamous “they” don’t want to kill off all the peasants, tradesman, soldiers, servants and courtiers. Good heavens! It’s no fun being king without the ass-lickers and servants around.

      I’m convinced, from having done business with some of the very wealthy in the past, that there are people that actually think like this and are planning to do it as soon as it is possible. And the only thing preventing them from getting their way right now are those of us who see through their smoke and mirrors and call them out on it publicly.

      • Jean
        May 14, 2013 at 8:33 pm

        Doesn’t AGenda 21 claim 500 THOUSAND, not million?

        Of course, they’ll ALL be Chiefs…

      • Eightsouthman
        May 14, 2013 at 9:02 pm

        But probably not enough people to tear down all the old buildings in Canton, Cleveland, Detroit, Pittsburgh, etc. 20,000′ nuke, let mother nature take it all back again. You won’t catch any of the Illuminati in those places so they’re obviously expendable. Dallas/Ft.Worth, Houston, San Antonio and then neutron bomb the rest of Tx., what a nice place it would be for them. Here I am bitching and I can’t even see…oh hell, I can see a neighbor’s house. I’ll take care of that one, mansion on the hill indeed, a damn double wide would go up in a heartbeat.

      • May 14, 2013 at 9:22 pm

        Boothe, I don’t think being any kind of “rich” is the evil, by any means. Are some rich people evil, of course… But that is not the real problem.

        The aggressor is anyone, anywhere who does not recognize and respect the self ownership of others, as well as himself.

        Does your neighbor think he/she should be able to control what you do, either directly or through those they “elect?” Does your neighbor live off “tax” (stolen goods), and consider it his due – that “society” owes him a living? Are the politicians and all their legion of bureaucrats and enforcers any different than that? Do they really earn the stolen goods they accept as payment… even if they do not deliberately and personally harm others? They all believe they should control the lives of others, somehow, at least some of the time. Why else would they take those “jobs?”

        Aren’t these people all aggressors? Are they less evil than the richest, slave keeping potentate in the world?

        And do you really think that the “super rich” could exist as potentates if it were not for the millions of “lesser beings” who support him/her in obvious hope of a share in the loot, and even the power to control the lives of other people? And all the while those “little people” are being robbed and deprived of the dignity of life themselves, yet the lust for power makes them blind to it.

        Evil doesn’t really have a quantity. There is right, and there is wrong. It either is or it isn’t. And the lust for power over others is simply evil.

        • Boothe
          May 15, 2013 at 3:12 pm

          Great observations MamaLiberty. My apologies for not being clearer. Evil is evil, no matter the social status of the evildoer. And I wasn’t impugning people for being wealthy. Quite the contrary, it is our right to acquire and amass wealth in any amount we find desireable so long as we don’t infringe the rights of others. Free exchange and building capitol, without the interference of government or anyone else for that matter, are the cornerstones of civilization. Building wealth is indeed one of the many pursuits of happiness which is a fundamental right.

          But when a small cabal of well connected families and their favored sycophants, “money changers” if you will, literally steal the value out of the currency, profit from the mayhem and destruction of unnecessary wars and use corrupt government (I repeat myself) to legislate and regulate our rights away to collect their unrighteous mammon, that is not legitimate “business.” As you well know, that is criminal behavior on a grand scale. And we are all victims of it. If the owners of any business can turn even massive profits through free and voluntary exchange, more power to them. But when any person or group amasses ill gotten gains through theft, fraud, murder and coercion, we need to air out their dirty laundry and take them to task for doing so.

          Right now “they” own the courts, the police and the military. Their propaganda machine churns out lies daily to maintain a level of fear that stampedes the sheeple in the direction “they” want them to go. It’s up to those of us who are awake and aware to act as sheep-dogs in the face of these wolves and coyotes. To recap; money is no more evil than a gun, a fire extingquisher, a hydrocodone tablet or a laptop computer. It is merely an object. It is people who are evil, without regard to the tools or methods they use. It is the scale or volume of that evil we must consider. Someone breaking into your house stealing your butter and egg money is no more or less evil than the money changers stealing the value out of everyone’s money. I think we agree on that point. But it is a matter of identifying and punishing the perpetrators for the magnitude of this present crime, since it afflicts all of us.

    • rEVOLutionary
      May 15, 2013 at 5:53 pm

      Gary North makes a very important distinction between jealousy and envy. Jealousy says “I wish I had the (fill in here: money, house, car, wife, job, etc.) he has.” Envy says “If I can’t have it, I will destroy it so he can’t either.” Politics is about envy.

      • May 15, 2013 at 6:00 pm

        Spot on, amigo –

        I think one isn’t truly an adult-minded person until one can honestly state that they aren’t resentful about what other people have (assuming it was acquired honestly). It’s perfectly human – and decent – to want stuff that’s like what your neighbor has. But not his actual stuff – as in: I wish I could take it from him.

        That’s envy.

      • Ed
        May 15, 2013 at 6:24 pm

        “Gary North makes a very important distinction between jealousy and envy,……..”

        I don’t exactly agree with that distinction. Jealousy is the natural desire to safeguard one’s possessions, relationships, or status from encroachment. It isn’t listed among the 7 deadly sins and isn’t considered a sin at all,according to the Bible.

        Envy is the desire to take what belongs to another, or to destroy it if it isn’t something tangible that can be stolen. Envy is listed as one of the 7 deadly sins in the Bible, and it is the motivation for crimes committed against others.

        Not knowing the context of the writing by Gary North that you’re referring to for this example, I can’t say that he is getting something wrong, but the distinction you’re ascribing to him seems somewhat out of character for his writings.

        North is, after all, quite a Bible scholar and has written prolifically on topics based on the Bible.

      • Eightsouthman
        May 16, 2013 at 2:58 am

        I read that column and couldn’t disagree more, even talked with my wife about it. GN is strung out on some sort of Christian religion that purports to psycho-analyze via “the words of the bible”, or the words of a bunch of old protein deprived men who lived under the stars and had not a clue as to much of anything. I see things other have and say Gee, that’s really neat, I’d sure like to have that. So where is the need to take it from whoever owns it? That’s certainly not my meaning. Countless things in life I have said the same thing about and some I actually ended up owning, not the same item I first viewed and desired, but something very similar. I call that “envy”. Hey, that guy’s house is really made neatly, very warm in the winter and cool in hot weather, very durable. So I buy one very similar. Envy of that type of shelter motivated me to buy one or build one but would never motivate me to steal it. Jealousy on the other hand implies it rips my butt to see someone with something I don’t have. That too doesn’t necessarily mean I want to take theirs. I think GN is full of it on this one. How many times have I seen something I really like and decide I’m going to have something just like it, a clone in every way often? I do not agree with his interpretations. Say a friend has something, or someone I don’t know at all but I like it and vow to have one. That’s not jealousy. I don’t want him to not have it, a quality I identify with jealousy. I see things I might or might not ever be able to afford but I would have those things if I could. I call that envy. I like it, want it but haven’t ever thought about taking it from someone else. That is envy. It’s the very thing to make people have a superior house, clothing, means of transferring water, wow, means of heating water. Most people’s house is a veritable temple of envy, rarely jealousy, simply something they desire. GN misses the boat on this subject as far as I’m concerned. Maybe I like eric’s bike, want one just like it. Does it mean I want his? Does it mean I don’t want him to have it or want me to have it and him not? Certainly not. Am I the only one who has seen, used, had fun with, etc. something someone else already owns and likes it so much you go right out and buy one of your own or build one of your own? That was envy and when I got one built just like it or bought one, I satisfied that urge. I just don’t agree with any of his assessments.

        • DownshiftFast5to1
          May 16, 2013 at 4:01 am

          Eightsouthman, if not envy or jealousy, what word do you use to describe seeing something and wanting to take it from them?

          • Boothe
            May 19, 2013 at 2:49 pm

            DownshiftFast5to1: the word you’re looking for is “covet.”

  33. Rooney
    May 14, 2013 at 7:42 pm

    I wonder if there’s any seatbelts in the backseats of those limos that wall street wonders, bankers,celebs, and political figures seem to enjoy traveling in?

    • Eightsouthman
      May 14, 2013 at 7:48 pm

      Rooney, well there by god better be if they want to not get their heads knocked in Tx. yep, the good yanks in Austin passed a law to require rear seat belt use for everyone….dammit. And that means you!!! I told everybody TX. was the biggest Nanny state in the union and that proves it. Now it’s illegal to get some rest lying down while traveling. Oh yes, we’re SOOO proud of our lawmakers.

      • Rooney
        May 14, 2013 at 9:27 pm

        Hmmm…Sounds like Denver. Although us rubes in the hinterlands have been ghosting around their stupidity for years now, they’re beginning to annoy a lot of people they REALLY shouldn’t be messing with.

        It’s like the old movies.

        The time to worry isn’t when the tribal drums are sounding.

        The time to worry is when the drums STOP.

  34. May 14, 2013 at 4:39 pm

    Rich, the “revenue” is simply a side perk. It’s all about CONTROL. If you don’t believe you own yourself (and everyone naturally does), it’s fairly easy to let other people push you around… especially if they can convince you it’s for “the common good,” or even just “for your own good.”

    Too few people seriously question that “good.”

    But make no mistake, the fact that frantic government interventions have the entire economy circling the drain demonstrates that CONTROL is the very most important thing to them, and “revenue” is second… otherwise, the PTB would not be doing everything they can think of to kill the golden goose of the free market. Even if they kill themselves in the process, they prefer control over revenue.

  35. Rich
    May 14, 2013 at 2:57 pm

    It never was about safety — it’s about revenue.

  36. Ed
    May 14, 2013 at 2:41 pm

    It’s obvious now, some years after this insane law was inflicted upon us, that the entire reason for it is to give cops probable cause to stop us.

    It’s used as a pretext for illegal searches and for any other brand of harassment a skinhead donut muncher can dream up. That’s pretty much what opponents of the seat belt laws said when the push was on to make it nationwide.

    Today, you can wear it or not (as the alarm in car may allow), and it doesn’t really matter. Cops can and will pull us over with no probable cause, and judges have become impervious to arguments of probable cause. Cops lie on the stand and their testimony is the only evidence accepted by the production line judges who oversee fee extraction.

    When the law becomes this absurd, it becomes irrelevant, and people stop having any respect for it at all.

    • Eightsouthman
      May 14, 2013 at 3:12 pm

      Ed, it’s just like you say. I had OHS’s number from the gitgo but he IS funny, but I won’t feed him anymore. It does get old after a couple posts.

  37. SlaveDjango
    May 14, 2013 at 1:40 pm

    How true…
    Isn’t it interesting that it’s legal to smoke cigarettes (and end up consuming potentially scads of dollars of medical care) but it is ILLEGAL to not wear a seat belt because you MIGHT have greater injuries IF an accident occurs? I mean, come on! Which one really costs more in the long run? The hypocrisy burns…

    • Eightsouthman
      May 14, 2013 at 1:51 pm

      Slave, don’t know the 2012 stats yet but 2011 showed 527,000 smoking related deaths in the US. Mother died young from it, many others in her family did, just buried the last a few months ago, all smokers. It contributed to my dad’s demise. What’s so tough to see? I’ve heard doctors say it’s easier to kick heroin that cigs. I don’t believe that. Heroin makes you feel GOOD and doesn’t destroy your system. Various studies have show that left alone, horse addicts will taper off and quit as they age, just like many drinkers so maybe there is something to the claim cigs are more addictive. You notice I said cigs, not pipe tobacco or rolled cigars. It’s the fag smokers who make you wait for everything and then make their families watch them die a very cruel death. I’ve had friends as young as their thirties die from smoking. Gee, is it really THAT good?

      • SlaveDjango
        May 14, 2013 at 2:07 pm

        Yep..

        To me, it’s pretty clear it’s NOT really about “saving lives” if you can smoke, drink, consume fast foods, etc. legally but you are FORCED to wear a seat belt.

        The mindless and oh-so-annoying Clovers love controlling your every move but they are too stupid to see that they are just useful idiots for “The Man” to manipulate as needed. Even so-called “small Government Conservatives” will vote for this kind of crap to get government into EVERY aspect of your life. It’s just sickening…

        If there were money to be made by someone in people NOT wearing a seat belt, there would be a BIG lobby to allow people to go belt-less.

        • Eightsouthman
          May 14, 2013 at 3:19 pm

          It’s also about making sure insurance companies profits stay high, take the risk out of nearly everything for them. Just yesterday I read where the Tx. legislature had passed this HB303 bill, gives docs exclusive rights on DNR’s and immunity to boot. Doc is not legally liable so no worry of getting sued, all to the good of the insurance company, hospital is left totally immune, all to the good of the insurance company, and the patients, well, hell, the patients can go somewhere else right? And if the doc decides your kid isn’t worth saving, you are screwed, not one person or institution you can hold liable so what is your child’s life worth? What’s your SO’s life worth? Your life? This bill says whatever the insurance company would give for you….and that ain’t much.

          • SlaveDjango
            May 14, 2013 at 4:01 pm

            Wow, I thought Texans were smarter than that…

          • Eightsouthman
            May 14, 2013 at 4:38 pm

            Texans are no longer Texans. After the huge influx started with RR and continued unabated for decades, Texan only means something to those who had family here from way back. Of course million of the current “Texans” wouldn’t walk out into my pasture. It’s probably “icky” out there or just plain dangerous and why would they want to leave the mall? It’s the largest “Nanny” state in the union. I would have gone to Alaska decades ago if they could just warm it up a bit. I can take 110° heat but not -60°.

          • SlaveDjango
            May 14, 2013 at 4:59 pm

            God, the whole country’s gone to hell. I’d go to Alaska, too, if it were warmer. And, then, we’d have to share it with all the morons from California and Mexico, etc…

          • Eightsouthman
            May 14, 2013 at 5:11 pm

            Slave, when I was young half the people you knew you only recognized when they were on their horse. The women were all so good looking it made your teeth hurt. Fat girls? What fat girls?

          • michael.white
            May 14, 2013 at 7:02 pm

            Eightsouthman – what part of Texas are you in? I’m south-west of Austin in Hays county. Come for the open spaces, stay for the scorpions and centipedes (and rattlesnakes and tarantulas and fire ants and …).

          • Eightsouthman
            May 14, 2013 at 7:17 pm

            michael, I’m about 60M NW of Abilene. I used to live in Cedar Park. I swear there were more rattlers there than here. One dog bit Twice. That’s some rough country where you live. Having said that though, we have plenty of it all plus more wild hogs than you can shake a stick at. Saw a big Tom out in the grass patch this morning doing a little reconnaissance. Not hot there is it? We’re forecast to be over 100° Friday, can’t wait. I shouldn’t complain. This is the first “spring” we’ve had in years.

          • michael.white
            May 15, 2013 at 12:52 pm

            Eightsouthman – I’ve been through Abiline a few times on the way to Mexico – lots of “leave me alone” space. I wouldn’t mind moving there but not many engineering jobs (other than energy I’d guess).

            I looked in the Cedar Park/Leander area before moving to Dripping Springs – they wanted too much there for what you get. I’ve only seen one snake here, and that was before I got the bush hog to cut back the weeds/grass.

            The lower 2/3 of my property is pretty good soil as it’s at the bottom of a valley with a dry run. I can dig down 2+ feet without hitting rock. The upper part is very rocky though.

            Got a good rain this morning – supposed to stay in the 80s. We hit 90 a couple times, I don’t see 100 in the forecast yet….

      • Boothe
        May 14, 2013 at 5:40 pm

        Eight, I smoked for 27 years. Quit back on April 10, 2005 at 09:35 AM. I used nicotine gum and got hooked on that. If I understand correctly (methylamine, feel free to correct me on this) some of us are genetically endowed with more nicotinic acetylcholine receptors than others. My ex could smoke one cigarette or even a whole pack, put them down and then smoke another one a year later. Damnedest thing I’ve ever seen. She apparently didn’t have the propensity for nicotine addiction I did.

        Let me smoke one coffin nail and I’d be back to two and half packs a day in 24 hours. Hell, it took a round of Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, six months after I quit, that damn near killed me to get me off the nicotine gum (be careful what you pray for, you just might get it… good and hard). I don’t know about the big H, never tried it. But if a junkie tapers off with age, that doesn’t sound too much like what smokers do. You’ve either got to want to quit badly enough to do it or have something happen that breaks the cycle. My dad went in the hospital for about a week a few years back and it was a non-smoking campus. He had no choice but to quit. After he went home he decided to stay quit.

        Pipe tobacco and cigars are just as addictive if you inhale. Usually the folks that can just give them up take the smoke into their mouth from what I’ve heard. I couldn’t do that. I love nicotine. I had to inhale. I thought it was the best drug ever because it clears your thoughts, it’s a stimulant when you need it to be and a depressant likewise. There was probably only one other substance I liked as well as nicotine in my youth. But if you want to be president, you can’t inhale that. ;)

        • Eightsouthman
          May 14, 2013 at 6:11 pm

          Boothe, so glad you quit. I’d just as soon every warm body on the hill smoked 4 packs a day. When I referred to cigs, I merely meant that are much more addictive and contain many more chemicals than plain tobacco. They are intentionally made that way, public information by an industry whitle-blower decades ago. The other thing is a life-saver for someone with lupus such as mine. I suppose if I’d never known I wouldn’t miss it. As far as addiction, some people(me)are predisposed so they say to become more easily to addicted to almost anything. I’ll stick with a little beer although not by choice. I have no problem with anyone being addicted to anything although I know most things are life shorteners but sometimes the quality they give offset the shortened span. I know people who can’t function without painkillers. Do they like it? No, but there’s not much they can do about it. I have a bad back, part of the lupus and thought I couldn’t live without them until I simply got sick of being a slave and decided no matter the pain I’d do without. Obviously I’m not in so much pain I can’t take it. When I broke my leg though, the doc gave me hydrocodone and I gladly gobbled them up. Of course it still hurt like the devil but it was better than nothing. My wife had some so the first thing I did after dragging my broken(both bones and other things…look ma, my footk’s a plumb bob) leg into the house was down a couple, take a couple shots of whiskey and have her bring me a cooler of beer. I laid here that first night sweating bullets and waiting for the sun. My wife wouldn’t drive at night. The next day the emergency room doc said “So why didn’t you wait a while longer?” just giving me a hard time. I smiled through gritted teeth. It was a new experience for me. It sure brought back some arm muscles though, crutches being what they are. Actually, the ER thing bothered me and still does. They just couldn’t let it go that I’d slipped on a steep bank and fallen. The doc only asked a couple times but the nurse just went on and on. You SURE you broke it like that? I guess I was supposed to fess up to some altercation or wreck. I never quite figured it out. Rolled my truck last year and have no memory of it. I found my way home, no knuckle skin left with the windshield laying on my fingers on top of the steering wheel. I still get a fired up knuckle now and again and a piece of glass finally breaks through. Got a good knock on the head too and other places. My dog was fine though, something I sweated afterward. Pickup landed on its tires and you could see where I put it in 4WD and backed out after we finally found the scene. I backed it out and went the wrong way. I have one snippet of memory, about 10 miles away but I was only a couple miles away when it happened. It’s been an interesting year with a brown recluse bite a few months before that. Some people have all the luck and I had plenty of it when you look at it from the long way.

          • rEVOLutionary
            May 15, 2013 at 5:43 pm

            This is just “anecdotal evidence,” but there is a much higher percentage of smokers in Lebanon than the US, with a much lower percentage of lung cancer. The difference? They grow their own tobacco. They are not smoking commercial cigarettes with tons of chemical additives.

        • Eightsouthman
          May 14, 2013 at 7:22 pm

          Downshift, I realize numbers lie and the people who churn them out often have an agenda or work with bad information. I just have seen so many people I knew that died from cigs I don’t have much problem believing those. But like you say, you can make numbers say anything you want. Just look what the anti-gun lobby does. Or MADD, or countless other agencies, groups, etc. Everybody has an agenda and you can almost always FOLLOW THE MONEY.

          • DownshiftFast5to1
            May 16, 2013 at 2:54 am

            It’s not just about the numbers, Eightsouthman. Doctors and technocrats say people die from this or that, but do they really know the true cause? Consider this from the link below:

            “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”

            (Marcia Angell, MD, The New York Review of Books, January 15, 2009)

      • DownshiftFast5to1
        May 14, 2013 at 7:01 pm

        The stats on smoking related deaths is horseshit. A pile made up the same way they make up the stats on seatbelt deaths and alcohol related deaths and all brought to you by a pack of liars and murders.

        Doctors routinely kill thousands, why would anyone want listen to them about how dangerous smoking is?

        The FDA is just as bad.

        “In other words, the science itself is fraudulent.”…

        http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2013/05/05/the-medical-cartel-too-big-to-fail-too-evil-to-expose/

        When the world’s oldest living man says the secret to his longevity was whiskey, cigarettes and wild women, that never gets entered into ‘the stats’.
        Many smokers live to be very old and are very healthy, in spite of ‘the stats’.
        Many non-smokers die of illness that would be attributed to smoking IF they smoked. Can you see how that might tilt ‘the stats’?

        Its a pattern of deception.

        A rock or a bird hits an airbag sensor causing the driver to loose control, roll into a ditch, and hit a tree killing all inside. The cops find a beer can or the trace of alcohol and attribute the death to alcohol and add it to ‘the stats’.

        Another person dies in an accident where it would make no difference if they were wearing a seatbelt, but because they were not, put that on ‘the seatbelt stats’ too.

        I wonder how all the above ground nuclear testing that has taken place over the years tilts ‘the stats’ and do you seriously think any goberment body would notice?

        Hell, they don’t even acknowledge problems from MTBE

        “The medical PR machine will grind on. …

        Here’s a number for you. Three maniacal spokespeople from the CDC, backed by five major television networks, can brainwash the public about a virus in seven days.”

        http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/category/germ-theory/

        • rEVOLutionary
          May 15, 2013 at 5:48 pm

          When George Burns was “only” 95, he was asked what his doctors thought about him smoking 18 cigars a day. He replied, “They say nothing. They’re all dead.”

        • Charles
          May 16, 2013 at 9:13 am

          Well said Downshift- and this is without mentioning the stats on “Passive smoking” which are even more horseshite. Especially when they say it is killing thousands now come on…………

      • May 19, 2013 at 5:07 am

        On a side note, “vaping” is becoming very popular. It’s a new delivery system for ingesting the drug smokers crave: Nicotine.
        The common name for the devices used to vape is e-cigarette, but there are whole huge and growing subculture out here who have put up their cigarettes, cigars and pipes and are making their own e-juice in a variety of flavors. I was a cigarette smoker for over 40 years and a cigar smoker after that. But now _I_ decide how much nicotine I ingest, not some corporation, not some government regulator. And lo and behold, states, cities, and governments are quickly jumping on the bandwagon to outlaw my choice to vape!
        I no longer smoke! It was extremely easy to quit getting my drug via that outdated and dangerous delivery system and to pick up an electronic cigar. I buy all the ingredients for my vaping experience from companies all over the country, and pay NO TAXES on any of it. The government and their “f*** boys” in the tobacco industry don’t like it!

  38. methylamine
    May 14, 2013 at 1:39 pm

    God help me Eric, I’m having those thoughts again.

    • May 14, 2013 at 3:42 pm

      Me too, Meth… I’m going to pour some concrete today to take my mind off it… and burn up some energy….

      • DownshiftFast5to1
        May 15, 2013 at 7:25 am

        I wonder if that worked, going out and doing stuff to forget, or try to not let it get to you. I tried that today too. It didn’t work for me.

        I clicked a bit after reading about the guy getting the death sentence for not wearing his seatbelt and came across the story about the guy getting beaten to death by the cops for being drunk in public and… I think maybe I’m morally outraged. ?

        “A mob of nine men beat David Sal Silva, 33, to death… They hogtied him, bashed his head with batons, picked him up and then dropped him at least twice as he screamed and pleaded for his life. They committed this crime openly – I would say in broad daylight, except that it was around midnight. Nonetheless, they slaughtered Mr. Silva on a fairly busy road, across the street from a hospital and in view of the neighborhood’s residents and passers-by. …
        “…These cops have no reason to do this to this man.” She repeatedly stressed in her comments (listen to them here…”

        http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/137564.html

        No doubt, the clover’s of the world would say he should’ve submitted and obeyed. Ack!

        • May 15, 2013 at 9:49 am

          Morning, DS –

          Piddling with my project (pouring a concrete pad) only helped distract me a little. Like you, like many others, I can’t not think about all the things – the awful things – going on in this country. But it’s not so much the things themselves that anger me. It’s the oblivious complacency – the dismissive attitude – of my “fellow” citizens. I’ve been reading about NS Germany since I was a kid, but it’s only been in recent years that I have come to really understand, at a gut level, how such a thing could happen. How people – seemingly “decent,” civilized people – could just sit there (if not actually cheer) while a police state was built up all around them… .

          • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
            May 15, 2013 at 10:46 am

            Morning Eric. Well, in that case I may have a story for you and everyone. I’ve been checking on this over the last couple of years.

            Some things I read on the net now in places about this story are completely wrong, inspired by a mindset created by the media more than anything else without any evidence.

            It’s a long read, but it led Australia down the dark path of weapon bans never before seen – with barely a whimper from most of us. Once you read this, it may only further deepen your disgust of the way your country’s being mis-handled, and where the infants at the very top want it to go.

            It would be good to do a decent post on this as it highlights all the things we and on many other sites concerning freedom, now understand. The spelling and punctuation aren’t fantastic, but it’s highly readable:

            http://www.truthology.org.au/index.php/resources/port-arthur-australia-false-flag-attack

            Just a footnote, I’m not particularly into conspiracy theories as I prefer evidence over hearsay and innuendo, but this reflects much of what I’ve researched about the case. Enjoy – sorta.

            • May 15, 2013 at 10:55 am

              Thanks, Rev –

              I’ll look into it!

          • liberranter
            May 16, 2013 at 8:45 pm

            I know, Eric. I feel.every micron of your pain and frustration
            On some days I find I just have to back away from thevblogosphere because what I read so enrages me that I’m afraid I’ll stroke out. To see the depths of sheer stupidity to which this country has descendef is enough to move me to tears.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 16, 2013 at 9:12 pm

            Lib, obviously you’re just “mean-spirited” as an old classmate from TTU said of a mutual friend turned libertarian. Strange that she’s from Md. but moved to Austin immediately after college and has been there over 40 years. Why not go back to beantown and be with like minded brethren? Oh, I know why, just forgot for a moment, everybody from beantown got sick of the crap and being robbed and moved to Tx. where they have tried to emulate yankee laws here….and have done pretty damned good. If Tx. ever gets nuked it won’t be from terrorists but from people who want the Capitol back.

  39. May 14, 2013 at 1:25 pm

    “And the antidote to this horror? Self-ownership. You own you. I own me. Neither of us has any claim on the other that’s enforceable at gunpoint. Feel free to suggest. To recommend. But when it comes to the use of force, the one and only legitimate justification is self-defense.”

    Amen! It’s just so hard to understand why more people can’t see this, and see how anything else is so terribly destructive to us all.

    • Terry
      May 15, 2013 at 8:46 am

      Because the little runts refuse to grow up.
      Institutionalized Infantilism. Public school and TV has produced a mentally retarded and violent society…parasites that demand everyone else live for them. Gil has the mind of a dependent brat child and I bet the runt is over 40 years old.

  40. Old Hickory Switch
    May 14, 2013 at 12:38 pm

    Yeah, the guy died. Thats a shame. But lets get a couple of things straight: 1) Don’t run from cops. 2) Follow the law, in this case, just wear your damn seatbelt.

    • methylamine
      May 14, 2013 at 2:15 pm

      Wow. You really are phenomenally stupid.

      You don’t get the point, do you? He did nothing wrong; he owns his body. What he does with it, as long as he harms no-one else, is his business. Everything that happened, happened because of this idiotic law–and people like you that support it. In effect, YOU killed him.

      And the same philosophy of busy-bodied nanny-statism will eventually kill YOU, too; you’re just too dumb to connect the dots and see it.

      Now fuck off. We’ve trounced you already; are you like the Black Knight, that we have to hack off every limb before you’ll concede defeat?

      • Old Hickory Switch
        May 14, 2013 at 6:28 pm

        CloverNo, YOU are the stupid one. Would it kill you maniacs to slow down, quit tailgating, and just buckle up?? Would it kill you jackasses to not road rage at every other driver you percieve has disrespected you??
        Clover
        As a civilized society we have laws. When people dont obey the law, bad things happen. Im sorry the guy died, maybe he should have been smarter.

        • Cloverism = Disease
          May 14, 2013 at 6:47 pm

          Go away, you shit-stick clover. You’re nothing but a disease.

        • mithrandir
          May 14, 2013 at 9:50 pm

          Old Hickory Switch,

          I think the heart of the matter is this: If you are not harming other people and/or damaging the property of others, do you as an individual have the freedom to be left alone?

          I do not think it is relevant if someone is safer by wearing a seatbelt. Is the individual free to make that decision for him/her self?

          Can I decide if I want to drive a car? About 30-40 thousand people die each from automobile accidents.

          Should automobile use be banned?

          According to the CDC, every day about 10 people die from drownings.

          Should we ban pools and their use to help prevent drownings?

          Would it not be better for people to be informed about the risks involved in various activities and give them the freedom to decide which risks they are willing to accept in their lives?

          In the US I have been told that people are legally considered adults at the age of 18. If this is true, why do various levels of government continue to treat supposedly free adults as children?

          • May 15, 2013 at 1:52 pm

            Well spake. The law has no business protecting us from ourselves. If we elect to be fat, out of shape, to drive without seatbelts, that should be our affair, and ours alone. It may be stupid, but half the country votes Democrat, and we don’t attempt to penalize them.

          • Ed
            May 15, 2013 at 2:12 pm

            ” It may be stupid, but half the country votes Democrat, and we don’t attempt to penalize them.”

            You’re right, John. Also, a good portion of the other half vote republican and we don’t penalize them either. The remnant, apparently, doesn’t vote. The rest should applaud the remnant.

          • David
            May 15, 2013 at 5:19 pm

            Not voting is better than voting for idiocy, but there’s still the Libertarian Party. And if that’s not good enough (And admittedly, Gary Johnson was NOT my favorite either) there’s always a write-in for Ron Paul…

            Not voting almost seems nihilistic to me. With reservations, I’m going to be supporting Rand Paul in 2016. If he isn’t the GOP candidate, or if he gets completely corrupted by Washington, I’ll be voting LP, or if its like 2008, I’d vote for the Constitution Party (Bob Barr really, really sucked, Chuck Baldwin was better that year.)

          • Ed
            May 15, 2013 at 7:17 pm

            “Not voting is better than voting for idiocy, but there’s still the Libertarian Party.”

            Maybe you’re young and don’t know yet about the LP. The LP doesn’t intend to win any elections. They just want their “teaching moment”. Mainly, though, they want the money they can raise from the people they fool, just like the two main parties.

            “there’s always a write-in for Ron Paul…”

            Oh yeah. Didn’t you notice ol’ Ron’s last two campaigns? They were carbon copies of his earliest presidential campaign with the LP, all three were “teaching moment” campaigns . His campaign staff had to work their asses off to throw the primary to Mitt. Remember that they effectively withdrew him from the campaign, while he kept touring and claiming that he was still in the race….. C’mon.

            “I’m going to be supporting Rand Paul in 2016.”

            Well, shit. OK, thanks for illustrating my point about voters. I agree with Clyde Wilson, who said that while voting may not actually be an evil act, it’s still an act of general cluelessness, like chewing gum.

            Enjoy your voting adventures, but I won’t be joining you.

            • May 15, 2013 at 7:43 pm

              Ed,

              I’ve come around to the same view myself. Ideally, voting as such should be a non-issue. That is, our lives, our property, our personal choices – none of these things ought to be matters up for a vote. The fundamental premise behind elections – sanctioning the auction of other people’s property, or the disposition of their lives via the ballot box – is itself a poisonous doctrine.

              I’m not the least bit interested in leaders and representatives.

              I’d like to be left the hell alone – that’s all.

          • Ron47
            May 15, 2013 at 10:32 pm

            No, we should ban water. Liberals who love an always-growing Nanny State would love that solution, since they love nature and hate humanity. We should do away with their water first and see how that works out for them.

        • May 14, 2013 at 11:02 pm

          Nice package-dealing … you conflate tailgating (a wrong action because it absolutely represents a danger to others) and not wearing a seat belt (which may – or may not be – inadvisable for the individual involved, but is no one else’s business because no one else is put in danger or harmed by someone else not wearing their seat belt).

          Your statement is silly – and the sentiment behind it strongly implies you’re a control freak; the kind of person who thinks its ok to shove guns under other people’s chins to get them to behave as you think they ought to behave – even though their actions aren’t hurting you or anyone else.

          And: Has it ever occurred to you that “when people do obey the law, bad things happen”? Must I provide examples? Are you one of those simple-minded types who believes anything that’s “the law” must be – ipso facto – moral perfection and that any action in violation of any law – again, ipso facto – constitutes a moral failing?

          • Choppz
            May 15, 2013 at 5:16 pm

            The fact is that there are plenty of idotic laws. I for one, believe that if people don’t wear seatbelts, helmets etc….that they shouldn’t have to. If they are harmed or die as a result then they will not have any input to the gene pool….survival of the fittest and smartest is the best way to go….people engaging in risky, life-threatening behavior would probably fade out over time, as they would no longer be around. On the other hand some laws make more sense than others. I don’t know about there, but here in Texas, fleeing from a police officer is a felony, so if it is the same there then I have to surmise he would not be dead if he had not broken the law….

          • Paul Trombley
            May 15, 2013 at 6:05 pm

            Eric,

            Old Hickory Switch is not just a control freak. In fact, the rhetoric and the pseudonym imply a stereotypical jurisprude who has a craving to live vicariously through uniformed people who, in turn, enjoy an appearance of legality that protects them from nearly all prosecution for bad behavior. What a malevolent little coward.

            It’s tempting to assume that our malevolent coward is a rightwinger, but rigtwingers have no monopoly on jurisprudishness, not to mention on the aforementioned character flaws. In fact, in March or April of 2010 I heard basically the same sentiment about the law, so called, expressed by a progressive who sneered on WCPT radio about hostility to the central government in general and to Obama in particular. WCPT is “Chicago’s Progressive Talk”. Both the host and the guest had a good laugh about it.

            • May 15, 2013 at 7:38 pm

              Agreed, Paul.

              Unfortunately, there are millions out there just like him.

        • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
          May 14, 2013 at 11:37 pm

          Hickory, there should be only one law:

          “No harm shall be done to any person’s life, liberty or property.”

          Any more and the situation just becomes confusing. Last time I was in court (a few years ago) about a speeding fine, I stated the above and noted to the judge – although I’m an atheist – “the rest were carved in stone by the hand of God himself!”

          After some deliberation and lack of any evidence that I was speeding in the first place (the cop just implied or thought I was going a tad fast – no laser), including the fact that I had argued there was no proven intent that I was to harm someone, the case was dismissed.

          Many people do stupid things and only WHEN things go awry, should they find themselves in court answering to their misdeeds – but only THEN. Prior to that they should ONLY receive a stiff warning, as no harm has yet been done and cannot be proven WILL eventuate.

        • Duane
          May 15, 2013 at 4:04 am

          I don’t think this imbecile (with the gay shamrock avatar) could really be this stupid….

          • Texas Chris
            May 15, 2013 at 11:25 am

            If he is baiting us then he is a master of his craft. A master.. Err… Baiter.

          • RevolutionFaerie
            May 15, 2013 at 3:51 pm

            Let’s not “gay” bait now, which does harm people. Solidarity.

          • Zee L Usay
            May 19, 2013 at 5:05 pm

            It is a happy little icon isn’t it; As for your bigotry it’s not so pretty or happy. He has a view that differs from yours so he becomes a less valid individual? The breadth,length, and (most especially) the depth (or lack thereof) of your thinking becomes more apparent as I read. You look to others to agree with you, your opinions do not stand well alone? Like the schoolyard bully glancing around to make sure others agree before going farther into his schtick,

            While I think Old Hickory Switch’s attitude is indicative of a sheeple, I believe he has the right to voice it. Yes you have the right to disagree and voice that opinion but tact and good manners would suggest that insults toward him should at least insult him and not shotgun blast others. If your vocabulary and grammatical skills are not up to the task I suggest the local community college is an excellent place to improve them.

            In some states the seat-belt infraction is not a valid reason to initiate a traffic stop. Has anyone questioned Florida law? Did You? Have you done anything constructive to this case or are you just out from under the bridge for the day? (see an insult to you. not the homosexual community at large as if being homosexual is something bad,or makes you less intelligent.)
            I personally think seat-belt, helmet and other types of laws are over reaching. However, I think Pennsylvania has the right idea in having a person sign a waiver to absolve the state from any responsibility to pay for your ongoing medical care should you not die as a result of your choice to not use safety equipment usage. Why should I pay for your choices?

            I find it strangely convenient that the state police are “having difficulty” downloading the video involved. I find myself wondering how the man had time to get out and run but the officer did not have time to stop. It will likely the officer tried to knock Mr Brown down with his car and screwed up. I feel there are many questions that need to be answered about this incident but I have no need to distract people from them by ‘trolling’ other users.

            • May 19, 2013 at 5:21 pm

              Hi Z,

              I am “bigoted” toward people who believe they have a right to assault me (or anyone else) for non-crimes such as electing to not wear a seatbelt.

              Should I be civil toward people who threaten others with violence who have done them no harm?

              Hitler – and Stalin and Pol Pot – also had “views that differ from mine.”

              What endlessly amazes me is that people such as yourself get all upset over someone like me – who believes in live and let live, who espouses non-violence and free association – calling a Clover – a person who advocates coercion and violence against people who simply wish to be left in peace and who haven’t harmed anyone – a name.

              The “validity” of Ole Hickory as an individual isn’t the issue. It’s the validity of the ideas he espouses.

              And his ideas suck.

        • ray
          May 15, 2013 at 6:13 am

          When the story involves the murder of an innocent person by RUNNING THEM OVER WITH A VEHICLE AS THEY TRIED TO FLEE and the vile man responsible will have nothing done to him because of a state-sanctioned costume and accompanying jewelry, please don’t to say anything about ‘civilized society.’ That is ridiculous.

        • Trevor H.
          May 15, 2013 at 7:31 am

          CloverNo, YOU are the stupid one. Would it kill you maniacs to slow down, quit tailgating, and just buckle up?? Would it kill you jackasses to not road rage at every other driver you perceive has disrespected you? Would it kill them (or, more properly, would it enhance your sense of manhood or duty to the State of Colorado Too KILL THEM in the name of compliance with state directives?).

          In other words, you the Clover-Statists see nothing wrong with the assasssination of a driver who does not fit YOUR profile of an acceptable driver, even though no accidents or fatalities enused, until said driver put himself directly in the crosshairs of your statist system.

        • Peter Courtenay Stephens
          May 15, 2013 at 12:46 pm

          Old Hickory, Where do you get to decide what is Civilised? Tailgating and Murder are hardly the same thing.
          The man did nothing to anybody and he was Murdered for doing nothing.
          You should have soem serious discussion with the mirror as you are a plain and simple Nazi.
          Wake Up !
          Government is the Enemy!
          Sic Semper Tyrannis !

        • Jake
          May 15, 2013 at 2:01 pm

          One would think a civilized society would frown upon crushing someone to death with a motor vehicle for a simple non-violent infraction.

        • Barry Soetoro
          May 15, 2013 at 2:23 pm

          It is against the law for you to express your opinion (in many nation-states). Therefore, you are breaking the law. Moreover, you are upsetting me with your opinion. I think you should be jailed. If you resist, I believe you should be killed.

          • May 15, 2013 at 2:33 pm

            That’s just where we’re headed, of course.

            Too bad so many people can’t see it coming.

        • Freedom
          May 15, 2013 at 2:36 pm

          Adherence to or the having of laws does not equate civil society. Ar you saying if you were alive in the 1840’s, you would have insisted slavery was something we should all accept and love?

          If you were a German in the 1930’s, you would have insisted that the Jews had a moral obligation to be exterminated and go to the camps, because it is the law?

          You are a word salad posting idiot. You have an ax to grind about your self-centered asshole approach to your narcissistic life and you are trying to use “adherence to the law and civilization” to back your argument.

          Well “appeal to authority” and “appeal to the masses” are both logical fallacies that are non-existent basis for philosophical or moral arguments. All you have here is you think something different then someone else, and you would be happy to have the state punish them for their difference of opinion.

          You are a disgusting human hickory. Absolutely disgusting. Inside of you is the heart of a Hitler, a Mao or a Pol Pot.

        • Kralizac
          May 15, 2013 at 2:41 pm

          Exactly what kind of dumb@ss are you. What does speeding, tailgating, and road rage have to do with going down the road, not bothering a soul, and deciding as an adult responsible for his own life, to not use a seatbelt. Please consider reading the book ‘Final Exit’, and follow the instructions……

        • MyersKL
          May 15, 2013 at 2:59 pm

          Brown didn’t “die.” He was executed by a psychopathic out-of-control brute dressed as a cop.

          Not all laws are good laws. Some are designed to harm us, to enslave us. Are you suggesting that all laws deserve to be obeyed without question? If so, you would have been considered a model citizen in the former Soviet Union.

          I don’t know how any person with any sense of morality can defend the killing of another human being for the crime of not wearing a seat belt. What next? Will we eventually see the police killing jaywalkers who dare to run from the scene of the “crime”?

          Shame on you.

          • Ed
            May 16, 2013 at 11:25 pm

            “Brown didn’t “die.” He was executed by a psychopathic out-of-control brute dressed as a cop.”

            I agree. This was a murder, committed in high spirits by a shameless asshole who never once considered what he was doing anything but fun.

        • May 15, 2013 at 3:57 pm

          Yea the thing is you’re not sorry the guy is dead you cunt. You just really don’t get it. What did he do that deserved his murder? Oh, you shouldn’t run from the cops. What kind of chicken shit answer is that? The man claimed claimed rightful ownership of himself and was murdered for it.

          As for your civilized society crap, which of your vaunted “laws” could have possibly been violated to warrant this?

          My guess is that you’re a pig or related to a pig or you wanted to be a pig but failed to pass their tests. You clearly weren’t turned down because your IQ was too high. Either way you’re just another fascist prick.

          Sacha

        • Dutch
          May 15, 2013 at 4:28 pm

          Uh yeah Hickory those laws say hitting someone with your car is a worse offense than not wearing a seatbelt. The law also says that the punishment for not wearing your seatbelt is a fine, not on-the-spot execution. The man not wearing the seatbelt suffered the punishment of death. Will the perp suffer a worse fate for the legally defined, WORSE crime of killing him? Of course not. So WTF does any of this even have to do with what the law says. It was flagrantly violated by the person paid to enforce it. And you can be sure it won’t apply appropriate punishment to him either. When that happens can we count on you to protest this violation of the law as annoyingly as you have here? Or will you be a coward we know you are when it comes to actually doing something besides posting idiotic comments from your mom’s basement?

          • Ed
            May 16, 2013 at 11:22 pm

            “those laws say hitting someone with your car is a worse offense than not wearing a seatbelt.”

            Exactly correct. Even if the departed was running with a kilo of heroin under his arm, and had a record like a phone book, he was still murdered.

            The cops don’t get to kill us for their own amusement. That’s exactly what it appears that the cop driving the car did.

        • Julie
          July 2, 2013 at 4:47 pm

          I suppose WWII Germany then is your definition of the most civilized society.

      • liberranter
        May 15, 2013 at 4:13 am

        Now fuck off.

        Yes, let me echo that statement hundredfold, the only response that belligerent trolls deserve.

        This is the last response to any post you’ll ever get from me. You are hereby consigned to the memory hole and no longer exist.

        • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
          May 15, 2013 at 8:59 am

          Onya Lib – Ditto :)

      • clover
        May 16, 2013 at 1:21 pm

        What a joke. The guy did nothing wrong? He had a criminal record. It was 1 am and he was running from the police. He had his drivers license taken away years ago. He ran out in front of a cop car? People run in front of a car get hit!

        Explain the nothing wrong part? Clover

        I guess you say the two that set off bombs in Boston did nothing wrong also?

        • Terry
          May 16, 2013 at 1:40 pm
          • clover
            May 16, 2013 at 9:17 pm

            What a joke Terry. I had to laugh at the video. It talked about indoctrination in our schools stating at the age of 5. Explain that one! How about the indoctrination of your libertarian views! Pretty strong evidence that it is happening! The only problem is that your libertarian views includes hurting others and then just call it libertarian rights. Speeding is OK, reckless driving is OK, road rage is OK, evading the police is OK and it goes on and on. Your rights as you call them kills and injures others daily. It also causes loss of property owned by others. Do you call that a good indoctrination? I always hear that libertarianism means you have the right to do anything as long as it does not hurt others. Everything I have heard of libertarian rights are things that hurt others daily!

          • Gil
            May 19, 2013 at 3:00 am

            Indubitably clover, I’m sure Libertarians’ “do what you want until it harms others” definition isn’t what most people would think it means. After all, look at their view on insurance – they don’t see why they should have to prepare to pay any restitution if they could have their way.Clover

            • May 19, 2013 at 10:43 am

              No, Clover Troll – as usual, you’ve got it inverted.

              Libertarians merely demand that you leave us alone unless we have caused you (or some other person) a tangible harm. Because we take the position that neither you nor any other person has the right to use force against a person who has caused no harm.

              Not “might” cause harm. Not “because someone else has.” Not because you feel threatened. Or because you don’t like what someone else is doing.

              Only if they have actually caused harm. Not before.

              It’s not “do what you want until it harms others.”

              (Italics added.)

              It’s: Leave a person alone unless he has caused harm.

              I realize you’re too dense to appreciate the distinction.

              But, it practical terms, it means you have no right to force me to buy insurance because I might cause a theoretical “someone” harm, or might damage their property. To argue the opposite – that it’s ok to force me to buy insurance because I might damage someone’s property or might harm a theoretical “someone” and might not be able (or willing) to compensate the person on my own – that amounts to arguing in favor of pre-crime … and pre-punishment.

              You are forcing me to hand over my property – tens of thousands of dollars, over the course of a lifetime. Money that I worked for, money I could have used to provide for myself and my family. Money I will never see again. Just – taken. But I have caused no one any harm; I have damaged no one’s property. Yet I am punished nonetheless.The money forcibly taken from me is more than the heaviest fines imposed for a variety of criminal convictions. But what crime have I committed, Clover/Troll?

              Pearls before swine, I realize….

          • BrentP
            May 19, 2013 at 3:38 pm

            Gill,
            the people who have hit one of my cars, but they did not have insurance have a much better track record of paying for the damages than the ones with insurance companies handling it.

          • Gil
            May 21, 2013 at 1:06 am

            “But the real criminals won’t pay restitution any hence I don’t have to prepare for the occasion when I will have more restitution owing than I can pay.”Clover

          • clover
            May 22, 2013 at 2:02 pm

            Eric, I have no problem with you saying you do not need insurance. With that said can we send the bill to you for the deadbeat person that only has a couple of hundred dollars to his name but he caused 10s of thousands in damages? Yes you can throw the guy in jail if he does not pay but that is not compensating me for the loss.Clover

            I pay for uninsured motorists coverage on my insurance policy. Would you be willing to pay me the extra couple of hundred dollars a year it would cost me if my state threw out mandatory insurance? That would cause thousands of people to not be able to pay liabilities?

            I am not sure how insurance got into the discussion on how you like criminals to be able to run from the police but it happened some how.

            Tell us Eric, where is it in the constitution that says you can drive your car or truck on our roadways? Driving a car is a privilege and when you have a privilege you need to show that you are a responsible person that we should let you on the roadway driving 80 mph or whatever with other people.

            • May 22, 2013 at 5:10 pm

              “With that said can we send the bill to you for the deadbeat person that only has a couple of hundred dollars to his name but he caused 10s of thousands in damages? Yes you can throw the guy in jail if he does not pay but that is not compensating me for the loss”

              Clover, why do you believe I should be held responsible for what someone else does?

              “Tell us Eric, where is it in the constitution that says you can drive your car or truck on our roadways”

              “Our” roads, Clover?

              They’re mine as much as yours.

              I am forced to pay for them, Clover. So I am entitled to use them. I have the right to travel without being threatened with violence by costumed goons.

          • Me2
            May 22, 2013 at 2:25 pm

            “With that said can we send the bill to you for the deadbeat person that only has a couple of hundred dollars to his name but he caused 10s of thousands in damages?”

            Um, Clover, that is EXACTLY what insurance is. Forcing those who have done no harm to cover for those who have.With the insurance companies siphoning off a major portion of course.

            God you are thick.

          • BrentP
            May 22, 2013 at 2:28 pm

            Clover, how is someone who has “only has a couple of hundred dollars to his name” going to purchase insurance? He isn’t. He will take his chances of not getting a ticket for not having insurance. He’ll play all sorts of games not to pay it because things like food and rent are more important. So he won’t have insurance just because he’s too poor to afford it.

            If he’s an irresponsible dead beat then he’ll still be one with your law. The mandatory insurance law doesn’t stop it.

            Your law did nothing wrt responsible people but restrict their choices and enrich the insurance cartel. It didn’t do a think with regards to the problem you claim it is to solve.

            Furthermore, just because someone has insurance doesn’t mean that insurance company pays out. A common thing for people to do is get minimum insurance from an insurance company that doesn’t pay claims. Why? It’s cheap and it complies with the law. Never mind that to anyone this person runs into that insurance is as good as no insurance.

            This law only burdens the people who weren’t a problem in the first place, like most laws.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 22, 2013 at 2:40 pm

            BrentP, my wife used to work at an insurance agency. She said a large part of policies they sold had one month paid for a card. That left 5 months coverage they didn’t have to pay for and not get a ticket. I can understand it, been mighty broke before myself and NOT driving wasn’t an option. I have always managed to have insurance and generally had ‘uninsured’ motorist added for a few dollars. The problem with that is trying to collect on it. Insurance companies are for the most part, legalized stealing.

          • Ed
            May 22, 2013 at 5:25 pm

            ” Insurance companies are for the most part, legalized stealing.”

            Sho’ is, Eight. Insurance companies do what lawyers call ‘post-claim underwriting’. That’s a way of rewriting their coverage once a claim is made.

            Also, insurance companies can estimate what it will take to settle a claim and put that money into an interest bearing account which is exempt from taxes because it’s listed as a loss because it’s for settlement of a claim. They stall the payment process for as long as possible to maximize the interest they gain.

            When a person defrauds and insurance company, it’s a felony called “insurance fraud”, a criminal charge, punishable by jail time.

            When an insurance company defrauds an individual, it’s called “bad faith” and is actionable only in civil court, and often only in small claims court.

            They have access to the system. We don’t.

          • May 22, 2013 at 9:36 pm

            I believe it is generally accepted as fact that every time a Clover takes a dump, his IQ drops by at least 50%

        • liberranter
          May 16, 2013 at 8:34 pm

          Well, Clover, I might as well serve you a copy of the same notice I served Hickory.

        • Zee L Usay
          May 19, 2013 at 5:22 pm

          He did do something wrong; he did not pull over when the laws of Florida state dictated he should. You have mistakenly 9 yet it happens so often) introduced evidence that is available only to hindsight. The cops had no way to know who was driving the car and so the police record you use so handily is irrelevant. You are probably one of those people that point out that the gun the dead criminal had was unloaded. Well the cop left his X-ray specks at home. When a weapon is drawn you assume it has it’s full potential. When a driver does not stop for police it is assumed (by the police)that the driver is guilty of a serious crime. (or why run?) The police do not have the luxury of assuming the guy that won’t stop is just a guy that doesn’t like seatbelts. Until the can determine otherwise he is and armed and dangerous felon. Sometimes the cops DO get it right you know. There is more here than meets the eye and the important point of this incident is whether or not the facts come out.
          Do not make the leap that I think the cops are justified in killing him but the mere fact that the ran him over does not indicate an execution only a homicide. As it appears to be a homicide it merits some sort of charges. What charges are to be determined by the fact and actions of those involved not by public opinion.

          • May 19, 2013 at 5:29 pm

            Z,

            The core issue here is whether the law empowering cops to pull a person over for the non-crime of not wearing a seatbelt is legitimate.

            Nothing more.

            The cops had no right to bother the man. Legal authority, yes. But that is something entirely different.

          • BrentP
            May 19, 2013 at 5:44 pm

            Have you ever asked yourself how it came about that we have police forces? Why they demand our obedience as if we are children?

            Most people don’t ask these questions. They simply accept it as the way things are.

            I asked and found the answer. For the USA it is because some wealthy individuals decided they could create utopia if they could only ‘guide’ people to it. Their first attempts were private. People worked for their companies had to live by their rules. The trouble is it didn’t work, people didn’t like it, and narrowed labor available to them. So they had to move on.

            What they moved on to was government. And thus we now have armed costumed men telling us to wear our seat belts. Throwing people in prison for possessing substances they don’t approve of. For doing a lot of things that were once the rules of the company town.

            The odd thing is that through government people accept what they previously rejected. Perhaps it is because those wealthy few also created the government schools to condition people as children to accept it.

            Then there is the ‘training’ cops get. Makes them paranoid. 99 times out of a 100 the guy running is scared of cops.

          • methylamine
            May 19, 2013 at 5:53 pm

            “…when the laws of Florida dictated he should.”

            And there it is; you nicely summarize in one word the difference between lawful and legal.

            As for your objections to the treatment of shill “Ol’ Hickory Switch”–perhaps you haven’t read the original polite rebuttals…until he became even more abusive than his initial post.

            You seem eager to lick boots.

          • Boothe
            May 19, 2013 at 9:23 pm

            Z a basic premise of American law is that the individual is innocent until proven guilty. The fundamental concept of “crime” is that someone has demonstrably injured someone else. Not wearing a seatbelt while driving, whether you believe it to be a foolish act or not, does not constitute a crime. Barring a valid reason to believe one has done his fellow being(s) an actual injury the police have no mandate to interfere with the travels of a free person, Florida or any other laws notwithstanding. In fact, they have always been prevented from doing
            so until recently.

            As you should be able to see, the “if it will save just one life” mentality (foisted upon us by the group responsible for the termination of millions of lives – government of course) resulted in the unnecessary loss of a life. The testimony of witnesses in this case indicate that the police officer ran this man down with his car. That is vehicular homicide. It would undoubtedly qualify as second degree murder if you had done it, regardless of the victim’s rap sheet. And if your assertion that the police didn’t know who this man was is true, that makes this non-judicial termination that much worse from a human rights standpoint: “We suspect you may have done something because you ran, so we’ll preemptively kill you.” What a *wonderful* way to manage crime.

            So you apparenlty believe that the police (a) did not know who this man was, and (b) they were therefore justified in assuming this man was the worst of the worst. So somehow they were within their rights to use whatever force was necessary to stop him from committing the non-crime of running. That’s kind of like finding fault with the rabbit from running from the coyote, is it not? And If that resulted in this particular man being “culled from the herd” that was his fault. Is that correct? Maybe you also believe it was okay because…you know…he was a “darky”?

            How about, this man may have had sufficient prior experience with “the system” to know how fairly and just he would be treated by those sworn to “protect” and serve, weighed his alternatives and decided running was the best choice he had. We’ll never know, because just like Chris Dorner, his side of the story will never be heard. It’s pretty convenient when you can silence dissenting voices before they ever reach the courtroom. And be able do so with utter impunity, how cool is that? Z, you’d better pray that the dark shadow of police judgement that fell upon this man never falls on you.

          • Ed
            May 19, 2013 at 9:36 pm

            Zit,
            Here is a song for you:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIJjYt-IBmE

        • May 25, 2013 at 5:13 pm

          WE WILL NEVER KNOW!!!

    • Me2
      May 14, 2013 at 2:27 pm

      Curious OHS, when the death panel says you are a burden on society, will you show up willingly to be ‘put down’ at your appointed time. It will be the law you know. Probably be road checks to see if you are past the ‘kill by’ date.

      Or, will you claim ownership over your own self and resist those who claim to own you. Maybe even run?

      Don’t bother, we know the answer.

    • Ed
      May 14, 2013 at 2:33 pm

      Don’t Feed The Trolls.

      • Eightsouthman
        May 14, 2013 at 2:37 pm

        Ed, I wouldn’t but this guy slays me. Everything he writes makes me laugh. I’m sure in an hour or so the funny will have worn off though.

        • Ed
          May 14, 2013 at 2:44 pm

          Eight, he wants to derail the discussion, and he does it by making these retarded comments. If his kind makes comments and nobody replies, he loses.

          • methylamine
            May 14, 2013 at 3:29 pm

            You’re right, Ed, and I’m sorry. I started the troll-feeding :(

            Sometimes I just can’t resist.

            But I promise, no more feeding the OHS troll…let it starve.

          • DownshiftFast5to1
            May 15, 2013 at 7:11 am

            methylamine, don’t be sorry about that! I’m sure there were 25,000+ other people who felt that needed to be said.

            Clover put it perfectly, too: The whole condescending, and Good Ole Boy’s Network, intertwined with the New Age snobbery, ‘I’m So Above It All’ persona came out loud and clear with what he/she wrote. [It’s a she?] It’s ‘the new’ KKK, and any color can join.

            I’ve seen that attitude my whole life. It’s gross.
            And it needs to be challenged when it’s front and centered, and ignored when it’s from the back of the room.

            This event comes across to me the same way as the scandal about the Ambassador being killed over in Libya. It’s as if people were just objects and there’s no remorse or outrage or responsibilty.
            The buck stops nowhere. How obscene!

            Imagine if that had been a child on a bicycle? Why is there no outrage when a grownup child dies at the hand of goberment that could have been restrained, but was not?
            Why are they not doing everything in their power to avoid going overboard? [Because they are sociopaths, eh?]

            “The law” is a blind and heavy hammer swinging for whatever it can hit. Every clover is the power behind that hammer.

            In other words, the clovers of the world killed that guy, and the Ambassador and his fellows, and every other nobody the state smashes without cause or justification, and then some. And they don’t think it’s a shame, even if they say so! They like it like that.

      • liberranter
        May 15, 2013 at 4:14 am

        Echoed, in bright neon.

    • May 14, 2013 at 3:46 pm

      Hey ol’ hick –

      Are you at all overweight? Do you exercise regularly? If not – your health is at higher risk. You “impose costs on society.” I think you should be fined – at gunpoint, if need be. Why should you be allowed to eat whatever you like?

      Pearls before swine.

      • Old Hickory Switch
        May 14, 2013 at 6:17 pm

        I just love your little libertarian philosophy. Too bad the only way it can work is if you live alone on an island.

        • May 15, 2013 at 12:49 pm

          Well, OHS, too bad it’s never been tried.

          Instead, we have your system – the one built on authoritarian-collectivist ideas. The system built on violence and coercion deployed against people who just wish to be left in peace and who haven’t harmed anyone. The one that cannot abide free association, voluntary cooperation and most of all, live – and let live.

          You’re a thug, OHS. That’s the difference between us.

          I would never seek to impose my will on you or interfere with your life and personal choices in any way whatsoever – provided that these don’t impose an actual harm on me. You, on the other hand, smack your lips at the thought of using force against others (or having someone else do it for you).

          Despicable.

          • Gil
            May 19, 2013 at 3:01 am

            And true Christianity and Communism has never been tried.Clover

            • May 19, 2013 at 10:37 am

              Yes, Clover/Troll – that’s true.

              And neither has a manned mission to the sun.

              Doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to try, now does it?

              Now, I’m all for you – and those who are like minded – to go ahead and try out “real” communism. Or Christianity. Just keep it peaceful – meaning, on a voluntary basis.

              Ah, but there’s the rub. Your system can’t work on the basis of voluntarism – free people choosing to work together. You must add the element of force. Always, force. Guns and violence.

              That’s your world, Clover/Troll.

              Not mine.

          • Gil
            May 19, 2013 at 3:50 pm

            Libertarian’s Golden Era was the 1800’s in the West (and apparently in Iceland too) hence it was “tried”. The results is what Libertarians fear – it didn’t last. However at what point was Communism or even certain religions “tried”? It was all pretty much forced onto people.Clover

            • May 19, 2013 at 4:02 pm

              Never has the core ethical concept of Libertarianism – the non-aggression principle – been explicitly accepted as “the law” by any society.

              But that’s not the question, Clover/Troll.

              The question is: Which is preferable – a system based on peaceful, voluntary interaction? Or one based on coercion and violence?

          • Gil
            May 19, 2013 at 3:52 pm

            CloverHeck Karl Marx lived long to see Marxism in practice and when seeing the actions of the French Marxists proclaimed “All I know is that I am not a Marxist”.

            • May 19, 2013 at 3:58 pm

              Non sequitur.

              Answer the questions posed.

          • BrentP
            May 19, 2013 at 5:29 pm

            Gil,
            no libertarian society of any significance has failed under its own weight. That’s something statist systems based on violence do repeatedly and predictably.

            Statist systems destroy themselves financially, morally, and physically. The very system leads to economic collapse, criminality and war. The statist system rewards parasitic behavior and thus the host is eventually killed. The trouble is that what happens is a new less hungry state replaces it and the process starts anew working towards the predictable end.

            libertarian systems fail when some people impose a state from within or from without. They work fine until that happens.

          • Gil
            May 21, 2013 at 1:02 am

            Your question? Or false dichotomy? After all, a Libertarian isn’t one of “peace” so much as “doesn’t have a government”. Hence, a rather Libertarian place like Somalia can be quite violent whereas many Western nations are still quite peaceful and cosy to live for the Average Joe. Your question really is “do you think society should have no government and instead be run by private organizations?” I would say “nope”.Clover

            • May 21, 2013 at 10:19 am

              It never ceases to amaze me. The low-watt imprecision of the Clover/troll mind.

              The “mind” that equates a society in which violent gangs fight one another for control – to determine which of them shall be the sole authoritarian power in the land … with Libertarianism!

              I’d laugh, were it not so pathetic.

          • May 21, 2013 at 2:31 am

            Gee, another authoritarian collectivist control freak descendant of state worshiping pigs claims Somalia is a libertarian paradise. Reading right from the statist book of logical fallacies, eh bootlicker?

          • DownshiftFast5to1
            May 21, 2013 at 2:50 am

            A lot of people confuse libertarianism with anarchy. It seems those people refuse to use their brain to understand the world, instead they mindlessly react based on assumptions never proven or ignore the small segment of history known.

            Decentralization Hidden in the Dark Ages

            http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2013/02/decentralization-hidden-in-dark-ages.html

            Many Western nations SEEM TO BE still quite peaceful and cosy to live for the Average Joe, however; that’s just an illusion built on the backs of others. The illusion is much like the cow has moments before entering the stockade.
            Some moments last longer than others. Some aren’t realized until they hit the pavement after jumping out a ten story window.
            Most All the moments rest on a pile of skulls.

            The Fourth Turning is pending.

            Insert ‘Interview with a Somali’ here x.

          • Gil
            May 21, 2013 at 3:00 am

            Simple question, lberns1, is there a central authority called government in Somalia that has law enforcement capacity or not? If not then it is a Libertarian scenario in practice.

            “But they’re not playing nice!” Oh darn.Clover

            • May 21, 2013 at 10:04 am

              Clover/Troll:

              Really – seriously?

              Are you that dense?

              Somalia is writhing with violence. Gangs of thugs vs. other gangs of thugs – vying to control the entire area, or whatever parts they can seize. And so, control whomever falls under their dominion.

              This is the very essence of that which Libertarians revile – and which you defend.

          • May 21, 2013 at 3:19 am

            Well, there are certainly plenty of gangs calling themselves government (including the one occupying Mordor on the Potomac) who’d love to impose a gang of thugs as a central authority calling itself government.

            But, as usual, Giiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil, you miss the point entirely. Sorry to send your little pea brain in a tizzy, but a stateless society is not one without rules, but one without rulers.

            I just submitted a post to Eric’s site that explains this idea quite well. If he approves it, feel free to follow the link to it’s original source. The author loves taking on fanatics like you. To him it’s like shooting fish in a barrel.

            • May 21, 2013 at 10:00 am

              Morning, Iberns!

              I’ll approve the post shortly (I’m sure it’s great)… just doing some housekeeping first.

          • BrentP
            May 21, 2013 at 3:42 am

            Gil,

            Somalia’s problems are from groups fighting to be a government and from governments of other territories. The reason Somalia has any sort of functioning society in spite of the attempts to impose a state is because of their stateless traditions. If the thugs trying to be a government were removed it would be just fine.

          • Gil
            May 21, 2013 at 6:38 am

            Sure enough you assert the “they’re not playing nice therefore it ain’t Libertarianism” card.Clover

            • May 21, 2013 at 9:50 am

              More non sequiturs, Clover/Troll.

              I replied carefully, point-by-point, explaining exactly why such a thing as mandatory insurance represents an affront to human rights.

              You respond with… nothing.

              The only reason I even bother with you, Troll, is for purposes of intellectual-ethical vivisection. To expose the animal mindlessness of creatures such as yourself.

          • Hot Rod
            May 21, 2013 at 7:29 am

            You know I’d choose Somalia any day over Stalin USSR as an individual. Its kind of hard to walk your way out of huge and all powerful nation state when you’re sent to Siberia to linger.

            Why don’t we all face it that Gil is somewhat right. The averages will always choose supression and slavery. Give them a ballot box and they’ll do what slaves always do and that is meet their own mediocricty. And if it were that simple that the voting averages would decide, I’d roll over and except big daddy government or run like hell (which I might still do if I can’t get enough quality people like you on board). For sure the natural path of mankind in averages is to put dog collars on themselves and others. It doesn’t matter if that is in small gangs in Somalia or big ones like in USSR, because its about freedom and intelligences of natural order not why dog collars would be good in Somalia to taper the smaller dog collars already there by non-monpolistic gangs. And freedom sadly is non-existent in places like Somlia like past USSR because of liars, hacks, usurpors and cheaters whether they wear a government uniform or red and blue colors. But some people fail to see the hypocrisy in their own thinking. To them there really is a difference between tyrants of gangs called government and local little non monopolistic ones. You can’t have higher society lacking the natural order formation that comes from the 4% (I’ll describe later) when these people accept their own role as being a toilet receptical for useless turds of life. I call the opposition tare of the earth and they are worth less than worthless, and they are the same evil between crips and bloods and democrats and republicans as their game is the same and their crop the same as well. Total manipulation and domination and control over the soul, fruits, and beliefs of the 4%.

            The 4% are the Paretos Principle and those 4% are the ones who create 64% of things that actually matter. I’m not talking the 4% who own 64%, I’m talking about the 4% who think outside the box and can invent and so create 64% of anything new that matters to humanity.

            But its simply not true that average means anything. Society does what the 4% of creators decide it to do. If those 4% let the averages or leaders for deconstruction/subjugation like Gil have their way they can live in absolute tyranny or in despair, and peasantry. You the 4% that create 64% are the final arbitrators how everything turns out here as everywhere else through all of time. You’re the liberators sent by God himself. You are the ones who can cut chains of bondage with your good words and works. Not government, not the people, and not educated elite can do one thousandth of what you can do simply by commiting to the truth and its strength.

            And all we have to do to let evil win is do nothing (Paraphrase from someone else). Its true that because you yearn for truth and honesty and freedom and all good works for mankind, you the creators are the engine of the future and your beliefs and works will change everything or your lack of that desire will create its opposite the natural path of least resistance to the underworld of Gil.

            Gil knows your importance, that is why she tries so hard to convince you she is right and steal the your soul of creation even though she is the joke to most in here. She needs you to do her bidding because you really do matter. But this site isn’t about Gil’s vision of slavery and demonism ego or about the benefits of dog collars, its about convincing you that 4% that your investment in freedom will make you all richer and reward humanity as well. Its so simple by being liberators you’re already in charge by the highest power. And when humanity is rewarded a greater intelligence will reward by enriching you too. So understand this a war for your mind (soul if you want to call it that) not just your fruits and works. If they (the Gil’s) can’t convince you of your place of slavery, then they will next convey you’re insignificance to the power of a worldy god of government. Both are pathetic attempts to subjugate your obvious talents and gifts so they can have their Jezebel way with you. Its their world or its our world, but we are much more powerful then they will ever admit outwards. Go ahead Gil and show us how much you need us by continuing to spend all your might and time in here. Do you really believe your games can match to wit of truth and intellectual freedom and growth? Good luck if there is such a thing.

            Hot Rod

            • May 21, 2013 at 9:30 am

              Morning, HR!

              It’s probable that Gil is right; the track record thus far confirms it almost absolutely. It may well be that – outside of small, self-selected groups of like-minded people, a truly voluntary society is either not possible or practicable. The “law of averages” inevitably prevails.

              And yet, I still rake the leaves every fall. Even though I know I’ll have to do it again. But I do it, because I like to see the yard looking good – if only for a few months.

              I guess I look at life – and human society – the same way. We try to make the best of it for the duration of the time we’re here.

              It’s the best we can do – and maybe the only thing we can do.

          • BrentP
            May 21, 2013 at 1:34 pm

            Gil, Not playing nice is the reason for a state with the monopoly on legal violence. If there weren’t a state or that mythical limited government then the bad actors would face violent repercussions for their actions. Thus they create or take over governments and things like governments with their pals. This protects them from the natural consequences of their bad deeds.

            Furthermore towards your earlier comment, just because there is one dominating gang of thugs doesn’t mean it without violence. In fact in the USA society is disappearing and government violence is more and more maintaining order. Using violence is unsustainable in the long run. When the only reason not to do wrong is because some enforcer will unleash violence upon you, the society is already dead.

          • methylamine
            May 21, 2013 at 1:37 pm

            @Hot Rod:

            Excellent posting, sir!

            Absolutely right. It’s the chief reason for my optimism; they are nothing without US, the creators.

            They hate our creativity; in fact it’s one of the factors leading me back toward seeing things from a more spiritual point of view…light/dark, good/evil. Their evil is so palpable, so cunning and patient over centuries.

            They hate it because they can’t have it but they NEED it.

            Withdraw consent. Fight smart; I’m not going out in a shooting match, but I’ll throw sand in the gears every chance I get.

            If you know anyone who works for the State–shun them. It’s hard to do, I know; a neighbor who was quite friendly works for city government, and I’ve told him why I can’t associate with him anymore. It was hurtful, but necessary. Of course he’ll be the perfect snitch now…but there’s no risk-free fight for freedom.

          • Gil
            May 21, 2013 at 3:14 pm

            “knows your importance?”

            More like “knows your impotence” as in you complain how the U.S.A. is going in the opposite direction you like but there’s not a single thing you can do about it.Clover

            On the other hand, Somalia shows that peace and harmony don’t suddenly emerge just because the government disappeared. Furthermore, methyl, Libertarians are hardly the creator class of society otherwise you could all emigrate to another country and the U.S.A. would go to crap overnight.

          • Gil
            May 21, 2013 at 3:24 pm

            To go back to original point: why should someone who can’t restitution be forced by any entity to work it off in jail or pay it back at a rate that is onerous? Sure, it possible to have a bingle where paying the costs outright would be cheaper than getting insurance. But if insurance ought to be optional then paying restitution should be either optional or at least the payer sets the rate at which they will pay for the losses.

            Clover

            • May 21, 2013 at 4:15 pm

              Clover/troll –

              A person responsible for damaging the property of another, or causing him harm, is morally obligated to make restitution. I have no issue with wage garnishment, “working it off” – even jail, if need be.

              What I do take issue with is your Cloveritic “group guilting” – and punishment. That is, because “Smith” acted irresponsibly and caused damage I am to be treated as presumptively irresponsible and presumptively punished (in this case, forced to buy insurance).

              Fuck that.

              It’s this simple, Gil/Troll: You have no right to do anything to me unless I first do something to you. The principle of self defense. It works both ways – and it’s morally righteous because no one who doesn’t give cause is punished or restricted.

              The fact that you “worry” I might cause damage to a theoretical “someone” and then not honor my responsibility to pay is insufficient justification for shoving a gun under my chin and telling me I must buy insurance… or else.

              You’re a collectivist thug, Gil/Troll.

          • BrentP
            May 21, 2013 at 6:01 pm

            Government did not disappear in Somalia. It changed forms.

            Furthermore there was a time, not all that long ago, that if the federal government disappeared and nobody said anything to tell the people, they would have not noticed.

          • Gil
            May 22, 2013 at 4:08 am

            Well if you don’t think there’s a duty to get insurance in case you cause more harm than you can afford to pay then you have no real duty to pay restitution anyway. As said you would morally persuaded by others to pay restitution but they cannot force you. Anyone who can threaten you to force payment out of you is either government or some rogue force aspiring to be government.Clover

            • May 22, 2013 at 9:32 am

              Clover/Troll:

              Then perhaps you have a “duty” to go in for regular psychological evaluations. “Just in case” you might go off someday and hurt someone.

              And, surely, you have a “duty” to exercise every day – and maintain a fit body weight – since otherwise you might just impose costs on “society.”

              I think you have a “duty” to allow the cops to search your person/home at random at any time. “Just in case” you’ve kidnapped a small child. In fact, you have a “duty” to carry insurance “just in case” you do harm a “child.” Or hell, an adult.

              You might harm anyone at any time. Right?

              You are a true-blue collectivist thug – down to the your choice of words. It’s appalling.

              You assume everyone is presumptively guilty of having caused some harm – and insist they be pre-punished accordingly.

              Again: Bugger off and leave me the hell alone unless and until I have caused you or some other person an actual harm.

          • DownshiftFast5to1
            May 22, 2013 at 6:28 am

            du·ty

            1: conduct due to parents and superiors

            That’s a whole different thing than a moral obligation.

            Mindless people blend the two meanings and see no distinction, it’s easy for them as they are frequently, feverishly and relentlessly, ‘Working Toward the Führer’

            http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1999/mar/18/working-toward-the-fuhrer/?pagination=false

          • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
            May 22, 2013 at 10:38 am

            “Well if you don’t think there’s a duty to get insurance in case you cause more harm than you can afford to pay then you have no real duty to pay restitution anyway”

            That’s just scary how that mind.. er.. “works”. I’d like to see that argument used in front of a judge and jury (CLANG! Mind yer fingers).

            There really only needs to be one law:

            No harm is to be caused to any person’s life, liberty or property. Any actual and non-imagined harm caused, must be compensated to the satisfaction of all parties concerned.

          • Eightsouthman
            May 22, 2013 at 1:27 pm

            eric, I’ve been thinking about this for a couple days and haven’t stepped in so here is my two cents(on the insurance/restitution debate). People who are much better off than nearly everyone else probably already realize they’re not going to drive into a “level playing field” when they’re driving their $150,000 auto on the street with literally millions of people who couldn’t afford to repay them with insurance and restitution both for the damage they might inflict on that expensive auto. While I’d hate to run over that Enzo or even that Mercedes, it could happen. I had no intention of running over a couple of new Chevy pickups either but it was a split second decision and my brakes didn’t work properly I finally figured out years later when they did the same thing twice in one week, one of those good old anti-lock things that restricts the amount of brake delivered to a ridiculous level of non-braking. I could have legally run over this guy and his girlfriend, both really young in this tiny car or whipped into the other lane where traffic was stopped. I never thought of not avoiding them as it would have meant the death of the driver and probably his girlfriend also since I was doing 40mph in a 40 zone. I’d do it again if it happened again that way. But what if it had been that Enzo sitting there? My small insurance(I buy the minimum since it’s forced on me and I can’t really shop for competitive rates)wouldn’t begin to cover the costs and neither would taking everything I own which they couldn’t do in Tx. I must have my wrecked vehicle to work and can’t be denied my land I make a living from so that leaves all the money I “might” have but don’t. I hope people with the means to buy vehicles such as the high-end type realize that situation exists for almost every driver out there.

          • Gil
            May 23, 2013 at 2:42 am

            Perhaps a Libertarian scenario of restitution can be found from an early episode from “The Simpsons”. Bart is hit by Mr Burns car and when all is said and done it is determined since Bart lost virtually no income during his injury Mr Burns wasn’t liable to pay the Simpsons family a thing.Clover

            • May 23, 2013 at 9:44 am

              Clover/Troll –

              Non sequitur. Again.

              Whether someone else fails to conduct themselves responsibly is irrelevant (ethically) as regards the question: What may you ethically do to me?

              If Mr. Burns harms Bart (or damages his property) then Mr. Burns owes Bart restitution. But Barney does not owe anyone a goddamn thing.

              Simple. Equitable.

              Concepts beyond your collectivist ken.

          • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
            May 23, 2013 at 12:21 pm

            “..Bart is hit by Mr Burns car..”

            There goes another beautiful theory about to be murdered by a brutal gang of facts:

            Holy fuck Gil – that means I can beat you to a pulp for nothing but if you’re not earning an income you get zip?

            You’re a C64 with a broken program – garbage in, garbage out.

          • Gil
            May 24, 2013 at 2:02 am

            It could then argued that Mr Burns was exempt from paying the Simpsons anything because Homer was exposed trying to defraud Mr Burns and thus Homer was getting off light by getting nothing as opposed to being counter-sued.Clover

            On the other hand, Revolution, courts do take into account lost income when someone is injured hence a hobo getting beat up loses no income. If anything if a taxpayer beat up a hobo on welfare then the hobo owes him. Then again if you see a person beating up someone else then since the attacker is not harming you, you are initiating harm on the attacker, doubly so if the fight occurs on the attacker’s private property.

            • May 24, 2013 at 9:49 am

              Clover/Troll:

              “It could then argued that Mr Burns was exempt from paying the Simpsons anything because Homer was exposed trying to defraud Mr Burns and thus Homer was getting off light by getting nothing as opposed to being counter-sued.”

              And how is this relevant to the question of mandatory insurance? More non sequiturs. Neither here nor there.

          • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
            May 24, 2013 at 8:08 am

            That’s just stupid Gillyweed. Your ideas make a complete mockery of the law when it comes to personal injury, pain and suffering, property damage and justice. Dare you to argue like that in court without getting shocked looks.

            My exGF couldn’t walk and chew at the same time, but she’d be WAY ahead of you in understanding the basic tenets of common and inalienable rights.

            As per Alien 3, I think I’ll call you “85”. Please don’t force me to revise that number lower.

        • Rog
          May 15, 2013 at 1:46 pm

          @old hick….

          Do you have an original thought in your head? Talking points don’t count.

        • May 21, 2013 at 2:41 am

          That’s right, Old Pri.. I mean Di… oops (snicker) Hick! People are generally untrustworthy, so your pointy headed logic is to take some of those generally untrustworthy people and put them into positions of power to keep people from being generally untrustworthy.

    • Boothe
      May 14, 2013 at 5:15 pm

      Ed, Methyl, Eight – I brought up Ol’ Stickier Shit to my wife and gave her a brief recap of his mental diarrhea. She made the observation that if he was old enough to have worked 50 years and still had time to “get his ass shot off” in Vietnam, he would probably be computer averse or even computer illiterate due to his age. I agree. He/she/it is probably just some pimply faced, taxfeeding, punk-ass little troll sent here with a state sanctioned “handbook of responses” to disrupt and divert. Ed’s right; let’s not feed the trolls.

      • Ed
        May 15, 2013 at 12:56 pm

        “She made the observation that if he was old enough to have worked 50 years and still had time to “get his ass shot off” in Vietnam, he would probably be computer averse or even computer illiterate due to his age.”

        True, that. Slimy like a slug so he thinks he’s slick.

      • Larry
        May 15, 2013 at 1:52 pm

        Boothe – I have worked 50 years of my life and served during the Nam war but was fortunate — I didn’t have my ass shot off. Furthermore, I am very computer literate having worked as a software engineer for 25 of those 50 years of my working life. I think you are right, OHS is probably a pimply face little troll. Eric is correct when he says, “despicable”. The only thing I would add to this conversation is, being a good libertarian, I will not INITIATE violence.

        • Ed
          May 15, 2013 at 2:09 pm

          “The only thing I would add to this conversation is, being a good libertarian, I will not INITIATE violence.”

          Good point, Larry. I’m with you there.

        • Boothe
          May 15, 2013 at 11:22 pm

          Right on Larry. I thought about that and realized that my uncle was of service age during the Korean “conflict” and worked over 50 years as an electrical engineer. He too is highly computer literate at 82. But you gentlemen are the exception rather than the rule in your age group I’m afraid.

    • Texas Chris
      May 15, 2013 at 11:22 am

      So, what law is it that YOU disregard? You totally missed the point, schmuck.

      Cops aren’t “peace officers” any more. They’re armed nannies looking for a fight, and any resistance to their unlawful authority will set them off.

    • Skeptic
      May 15, 2013 at 2:51 pm

      Yeah, that’s like saying if you don’t have anything to hide then you won’t mind a search, or a drug test, or a list of your telephone calls, or the websites you’ve visited, or your emails.

      I figured my mother was the only one that could tell me to wear my seat belt. She passed away awhile back. Dad wouldn’t tell me to because he didn’t wear one either. The state has no vested interest. They should only step in when you are powerless to help yourself or to inform yourself.

      • Ed
        May 16, 2013 at 11:14 pm

        “I figured my mother was the only one that could tell me to wear my seat belt. She passed away awhile back.”

        Yes, good point. As Cedric the Entertainer says, “I’m a grown-ass man”. I don’t need to be told what to do and won’t obey anyway. I especially won’t obey some skinhead young’un in a silly looking costume who’s the age of my grandkids.

    • Paul
      May 15, 2013 at 3:26 pm

      Yes, keep to the flock, mind the shepherd. Freedom is Slavery, War is Peace, Ignorance is Strength.

    • Tim from the Bay Area
      May 15, 2013 at 4:07 pm

      What business of the .gov is it if i wear a seatbelt or not?
      Yes i know the argument is becuase it saves public money when a non seatbelt wearer with no insurance gets his guts spilled and the county hospital has to patch him up. So charge him with that. Why does that have to infringe on MY rights to my body ? Changet eh law thats says if you have no health insurance the county hospital wont fix you up for free. This is the same nonsense as a helmet laws. yes you SHOULD wear a helmet or seatbelt and your odds of surviving an accident are much higher if you do, ultimately who cares besides the person who could potentially die and his family ? Not mine or yours if he chooses to, as a fully informed adult not to wear a sealt belt or helmet. God damn this infuriates me.
      have a good life you little statist boot licker.

    • G3Ken
      May 15, 2013 at 4:11 pm

      You don’t seem like you really think it’s a shame, which makes you “appear” pretty damned despicable in my book.

      Secondly, you are obviously a product of this coutry’s failed public school system. Otherwise, you would KNOW it’s not only a juror’s OBLIGATION to judge not only the defendants actions, but the merits of the law in question. I would not want someone like you on any jury in America. You are the epitome of the “It’s the law, so I cannot think for myself American”.

      I remember when TPTB implemented the seatbelt law. People were up in arms and I was not yet enlightened and wondered why. We were told it would NOT be the sole pretext to a traffic stop, but it is a prime example of why ANY power given to the government is abused.

      Should he have run? Obviously a stupid move, but I’m not black. Police do not act the same towards black people as they do to white folk. I know that because I played hockey for years in a league run for and by cops. Whatever the reason, unless he posed an imminent danger to the man in costume (which is how I always refer to them now), deadly force was not warranted and this cop belongs in PRISON, period.

    • semi-detached
      May 15, 2013 at 4:31 pm

      It’s amazing you treat this man’s death as an aside, as if death is so undeserving of acknowledgement.

      So tell us, how many times did daddy touch you to get you this way?

    • madmax2020
      May 16, 2013 at 1:01 am

      @Old Hickory Switch. You must be a cop or related to someone in “law enforcement” to make such an ignorant statement. I know cops typically aren’t too bright but you are a special kind of stupid. “It’s the law so you have to follow it.” You would have fit right in with the nazi’s during WWII where it was the “law” (legal) to murder Jews. If you are a cop I hope someone takes your stupid ass out.

    • LittleBoPeep
      May 17, 2013 at 2:51 am

      Youre a boot licking retard. When the Nazis declared all women married or not had to submit to the pleasures of the officers, you would have fluffed them first.

    • Doc
      May 19, 2013 at 10:22 pm

      Missing posts: This website, even though touting itself as “libertarian” is controlled by Google. Maybe the authors didn’t intend for that, but when they signed up for adsense and analytic, they failed to read the fine print.

      This is why some of your posts don’t post.
      Or….
      Lying libertarians just want to be In Charge, just like Democrats and Republicans. (Which I think is more likely)

      • May 19, 2013 at 10:27 pm

        Doc,

        I have no clue what you’re talking about… the only posts that don’t get posted are those from spammers. New posts from new people are held in moderation until approved – but unless they’re incoherent/profanity laden, they get through.

        • May 19, 2013 at 10:40 pm

          You don’t accept posts from TOR posters because you and your pig friends can’t figure out who posts them….or if they speak a truth YOU don’t want heard.

          I know “Doc”. He told me about this article (he emailed me your URL)I tried to post and was rejected. It was either because you didn’t like me speaking the truth or because you don’t accept posts sent via TOR.

          So which is it? Don’t like privacy or don’t like differing opinions?

          • May 20, 2013 at 12:10 am

            Hi Free,

            What’s a TOR poster? I’ve never heard of that.

            As I explained to “Doc” – anyone (any real person) can post and I do not block or delete posts unless they are spam generated by bots or just personal insults. I welcome differing opinions – just not “fuk you, you are a dick’ (and so on).

            PS: This is one of the few sites that will never demand you “sign up” via Facebook or any such thing. So, yeah, I do like privacy. A great deal, in fact.

            Sheesh!

          • BrentP
            May 20, 2013 at 12:21 am

            It sounds as if they are trying to post comments via some sort of proxy to hide their IP. Odds are some spammer or perhaps one of the abusive trolls at some time did the same and thus the IP of the proxy got banned.

          • Ed
            May 20, 2013 at 1:20 am

            eric, doc/freeburn is a troll of the libertardian variety. One asshole using two names. They roll in here anytime your article gets linked on another blog.

            Nothing to worry about. Same shit, different day.

            • May 20, 2013 at 9:23 am

              Thanks, Ed –

              I let one of each through – let’s see what happens!

          • May 20, 2013 at 3:17 am

            I can’t speak for Doc, he may well be a troll, though I don’t believe he is. I am an American living in China, and posting via TOR, which was explained to you by another poster. I may well be a troll as well, and if I appear as such, you have the right, of course, to ban me. I understand that your moderators have to look over each posting to see if it’s real or not. I guess I’ve just been spoiled reading Doc’s email list and forgot that some Americans just don’t quite *get* freedom. But it’s OK. I’m a free market anarchist and salute your right to run your list however you see fit.
            As to posters like Ed & even you Eric: You’re not “hiding” behind a “fake” name? That too is your right, as well as it’s your right to broadcast your IP address all over the web so that anyone can see it.

            America is nice because you don’t yet have to worry about such things, but here in China one must be very careful what one says.

            I fear my former home (America) is heading down this same path, and when it does you & Ed and millions of other Americans will be caught with your pants down and your ass exposed.

            I also use PGP, another tool that some Americans call paranoidware, and that’s OK too…until your masters in DC decide it’s a hate crime to post some diatribe against the president…

            You can write me here: freeburned@tormail.org, but if it’s not encrypted and signed (with PGP or similar) I won’t reply. MIT has a keyserver: http://pgp.mit.edu

          • Ed
            May 20, 2013 at 4:00 pm

            “I let one of each through – let’s see what happens”

            Pretty predictable, actually. Being fed, they will hang around, using all manner of names, making all manner of claims, and hoping for more scraps.

            Trolls can’t conceive of anyone participating in a discussion in order to share ideas, or to entertain each other with humor. They can’t conceive of anyone actually wanting to communicate with others in the spirit of expanding public dialogue beyond the limits of our imposed mainstream media “common knowledge”.

            They have to disrupt, sow discord, provoke and try to shut down discussion. For some, it’s a paid occupation and for others, it’s a means of entertaining themselves.

            They’re able to engage in this practice much more freely online than in person. Being as rude in person gets them ostracized or subject to an ass whipping.

            Some people enjoy engaging the assholes, some don’t. Managing participation and editing threads is a nightmare, and I don’t envy anyone the job of doing it. Bravo to you and dom for not doing it. Discussion is better without moderation.

          • Jean
            May 21, 2013 at 4:02 pm

            TOR is an anonymous browser, which allows users to hide who they are WRT IP (and maybe more, I haven’t tinkered.)
            Useful to people in China and UAE etc as it can get around some filters (not all).
            I don’t use it – too much hassle, especially given what I’ve posted non-anonymously. I don’t have the resources to disappear, I have to hope for the best.

        • Mike in Spotsy
          May 19, 2013 at 10:58 pm

          Hi Eric. I haven’t posted in ages (lots of stuff going on in my life), but have tried to keep up by reading most of the posts. It’s quite clear that a lot more people than normal have been coming in lately to disrupt the discussions. Seems that some organization or other is very much worried about your site.

          • Doc
            May 19, 2013 at 11:39 pm

            Eric blocks posts from anonymous posters. If one wants to post and doesn’t want their IP showing up here, for whatever reasons, Eric (and his Google software) blocks them. This is so the government can read your words and make you disappear in the middle of the night. Way to smear the name of libertarians, “Eric” or whatever your name is.

            • May 20, 2013 at 12:01 am

              Doc,

              No, I don’t block anonymous posters. An anonymous post might be briefly (an hour or so, max) held in the moderation queue – but so long as it’s not spam, it isn’t blocked. The only posts that get deleted are posts from bots (spammers) and from people who are incoherent or just hurling abuse (e.g., fuk you.. you r a dick)

              And: My name is Eric, “Doc” … Eric Peters. I’m not hiding behind a fake name like “Doc.” Every column, every post, is signed. My name. Not an Internet handle like “Doc.”

              What’s your issue, “Doc”?

          • May 20, 2013 at 12:02 am

            Hi Mike,

            Yeah – take a look at “Doc’s” posts!

          • Ed
            May 20, 2013 at 1:32 am

            eric, Tor is an onion router software with a browser that lets you surf the net without being tracked.

            Maybe the trolls are trying to be slick by using it in order to keep from being banned on a forum they want to disrupt.

            If so, they’re being too clever by half. Looks as though they’ll just have to keep using those facebook login sites where every third participant is a troll.

            The boy’s got a point on his head and he thinks he’s sharp. Shot his own little pink dick off trying to be slick and now he comes here to whine about it.

            Ahaha. I love it.

        • Doc
          May 20, 2013 at 3:30 am

          Thanx FreeBird or Burned. LOL
          Yeah Eric, I post with a fake name. I don’t use my real name anywhere on the web (except when I buy stuff off Amazon or access my bank or credit card accounts.
          I read all the horror stories about how everything you put on the web stays there forever, and I may want to come out of hiding, uh, I mean retirement and get a real job some day, and I don’t want any prospective employer finding photos of me humping a dead goat or anything, so I use fake names. I don’t use “sock puppets though…that is, I don’t have long-winded conversations with myself using different names.
          My friend FreeNerd loves his PGP and all that cloak & dagger shit. Hell, maybe his really IS in China. (I think he’s in Montana with the rest of the paranoids, but that’s just me I guess.)

          But he’s right about one thing, I sure don’t censor my list! Too damned much trouble. Instead I assign various posters the ability to manage it if they so choose. I guess they’re as lazy as me because I still see spam every so often.

          Anyway, there’s a link to it on my name above.

          Oh as well as being Freebirth, I’m also Ed, semi-detached, LittleBoPeep, G3Ken, and others. Prove I’m not!

          • Tor Munkov
            May 20, 2013 at 4:12 am

            Doc is also uhclem who spam posted about “vaping” on this page.

            A shill and an authoritarian who whines on his fakeass page about the cyberpigs not helping him get his money back from X10.com.

            Qui dormierit cum porcis vigilat olentes sicut lardum.

          • May 20, 2013 at 6:08 am

            True enough, Tor Monkov, although I’m not 100% on that “fakeass” page.
            I am uhclem & doc @ you might be able to guess the domain.
            Try it.

          • May 20, 2013 at 9:26 am

            Ok, Doc –

            I have no problem with you (or anyone else) using an Internet handle rather than your real name. I understand the reasoning.

          • Hot Rod
            May 20, 2013 at 5:23 pm

            It’s hard to believe just how polite people in Montana can be. Young people opening doors for older people. Go to Billings a town in Montana and tell me that the people there aren’t the nicest. I’ve always said it before niceness and being gentile is a sign of intelligence. Dumb and rude people always get it ass backwards, until those same nice people get fed up with the B.S. and hand them their head and ass back. I like Montana and I like Nevada, they may be the best states in the U.S. both in terms of entrepeneurs and quality of life.

            As far as being paranoid, I don’t believe one can be too paranoid these days. Using tor or pgp is recommended if you want to be anonymous, personally I’m somewhere between totally private and somewhat open. I fear that when people have to speak in soft tones to avoid ridicule, condemnation, or/and jailing then its too late to change the course of tyranny. Natural leaders are people who know the consequences and stick their head above ground anyway. Its probably a sign of atruism and I’d bet if you met these people they’d be just like the people I’m talking about in Montana.

            Have a nice day Doc and please do whatever makes you most comfortable here.

            Hot Rod

          • May 22, 2013 at 5:42 pm

            Thanx Eric & Hotrod. I had almost given up on y’all. I appreciate your words.

    • Julie
      July 2, 2013 at 4:43 pm

      So, are you advocating that the murder was justified because the man ran away from a cop? Are you suggesting that murder is an ethical and moral solution to running away?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *