THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 286, August 29, 2004
"Our society undoubtedly over-reacts to naked breasts"
Regarding Mr. Totty's letter of 22 August 04/TLE 285
Mr. Totty has it backwards. It is not the civil court that needs to be eliminated, but the criminal court, if not all courts. When some person harms another, the harmed person must be due restitution. When there is no injured party ("drug crimes", prostitution) there is no crime. When the injuring party is placed in jail, everybody loses.
To paraphrase Mr. Totty, "... if there is to be any recompense for a criminal act, then what better place for that to happen, than ..." in binding arbitration which eliminates government interference? And, if you can't prove damage, then the party initiating the suit, gets to pay for everyone's lawyers, the arbitrator, and potentially, damages for false suit.
Dear Mr. Ed/Editor/Ken, and Ron,
However, I would add only one other thing, regarding the amending article under discussion, and that is that it speaks of the peoplenot just once, but three separate times.
Whocolloquially speakingis the 'militia,' if not the citizens of a state? Thereforeand thereforthe people are.
What is a state, if not the collection of the people resident therein? You can't have a state without people.
A free state then, is a collection of 'free' people.
Ergo, a free stateconsisting of a free people, must be able to defend its free existence, and for that, those free people must form an aggregate called a 'militia,' being comprised of those free citizens.
Finally, since a militiaagain in the colloquial sense, is meant to be formed on a moment's notice, those self-same citizens must have their arms ready, and not stored behind steel doors, in some concrete structure which an enemy could well overwhelm, and wreak havoc in the process.
Since the people are the state and the militia, you can't have either a free state, or a well regulated militia, if the people aren't free to keep and bear arms.
Re: "Necktie Party", by L. Neil Smith
I enjoyed reading your recent article. The ending part (regarding the RINOs) reminded me of when I ran for state rep a few years back as a Libertarian. I was up against a very popular Democrat and a cocky Republican.
During my "campaign" (very small), I knew I had two options: run to win (by keeping to safe / uncontroversial positions) or run to spread the ideas of freedom. The choice was simple and very apparent in both my published editorials and the locally televised debate.
A reporter asked this "unbiased" question:
While the other two started talking about allocating more funds, I stood up and said "Ummm, no"? Most in attendance reacted as if I had just sworn in church (BTW, I live in Mass?
Another reporter, who had interviewed me earlier in the day and seemed to get my views better than any other reporter, began her question:
At this point, she paused and realized the question would be first directed to me? She added a couple of words in preparation for my response:
My response began with:
While most walked away disgusted, several approached me after the debate to ask for more information about freedom.
I was immediately rewarded because that was my whole reason for running.
At any rate, keep up the good work!
A Formal Statement from Jeffrey L. "Hunter" Jordan, regarding his arrest and legal proceedings in Ashland County, Ohio:
As you may well have heard by now, my lawyers and I concluded a plea bargain with the Ashland county prosecutor's office Friday 8/20. The reason that this is the first you have heard of it is complete secrecy was part of the deal, for reasons which completely escape me. Be that as it may, everything went off without a hitch. The settlement included no jail time (well, technically a suspended sentence), a year's unsupervised probation, a $500 fine, and $300-odd dollars in court costs. All of my seized property is to be returned; specifically including my pistols, ammo, rifle, swords, and electronics.
So that there is no misunderstanding on this, everyone should be aware that I consider this settlement at best a damn fine fighting retreat, not a victory. The vitally important philosophical and legal points involved in the case are going to go unstated. From a personal and practical standpoint this is a very good result, but from a long-term viewpoint of preserving freedom this is a far less than optimal outcome. But I have a pretty strong aversion to ignoring the advice of people I am paying large sums of money for their expertise, and the unanimous opinion of the legal team was to accept this deal. This is by no means the end of the legal struggle, but it does mark the end of my own personal jeopardy.
Let me take this opportunity to as publicly as possible thank my lawyer, Jim Brightbill, for all his hard work, and congratulate him on securing such a favorable deal. It has been a long slog through a lot of twists and turns, but we made it. Let me also thank the other members of the legal team; I am only going to mention my sister, Brenda, by name because I haven't cleared mentioning the other five with them. The thanks are no less heartfelt for being safely anonymous. And she deserves special mention as the one who was there for me when I had only one phone call to try to begin fighting back in a very bad situation. She and the rest of my family and close friends have given me the emotional support that is so essential in a situation like this, and there is no way I can ever thank them enough.
Carl Bussjaeger deserves special mention for his tireless work in speaking out when I was muzzled. It's been frustrating at times, brother knight, but you hung in there and never gave up, even when the only answer I could give you was "I can't talk about that". Special thanks to all my friends both old and new, who went out of their way to offer every sort of support imaginablefrom JR & EC who took me out to dinner, movies, and banana splits more times than you can believe, to DB & ES who called periodically to make sure I was holding up and keep me posted on what the activist community was doing, EL, JL, & SC for all your behind-the-scenes work, Louis James & Sunni Maravillosa for dropping everything to kick things off back when this all started, FreeMatt & Charlie for scaring the hell out of me in my hotel room that night, "Mama" Sue for both publicity and personal support, all the members of LRT & TCF who jumped in whenever needed, and Angel Shamaya, Aaron Zelman, and Claire Wolfe for consistent and pr [....]
I am going to attempt to individually mention all the fine organizations that rallied to my side. FMN, JPFO, ISIL, FIJA, KABA, GO-NH, GOA, AFA, LRT, RRND, TPoL, TCF, the Mental Militia, FSP, FSW, and likely dozens of others I am forgetting. One of the great strengths of the freedom movement is that we all pull together when the chips are down, and my case certainly exemplifies that spirit.
Last, and most especially, I want to thank all those people who didn't know me before this all started who understood the important principles involved, and opened their hearts and helped out in every way imaginable. The financial support has kept me alive, and I even yet can't talk about just how effective your letters and commentary has beenkeep it up, gang. You deserve the kudos for getting us to this first important milestone in this particular skirmish of the war for freedom. I personally promise you that the team that has been assembled to spearhead the "Free Hunter" effort is only beginning to produce results. We're not yet finished talking with Verizon, and there are a lot of other possibilities for action that we're exploring.
Jeffrey L "the Hunter" Jordan
Dear Mr. Ed/Editor/Ken,
Re.: (1) "Necktie Party", by L. Neil Smith
No, they won't come to take your firearms away.
That would be way too blatant, and too messy.
Rather, what 'they' will do, is declare you insane, or in need of 'medication.' (2)
Then, when you are safely placed in a padded cell, and 'medicated,' then they will quietly take away your firearms, because you won't be 'there' to offer any kind of resistance.
The cops will have that smug grin on their faces while it is happening, and will likely be joking about 'another flunky being medicated.'
Yeah, their jobs will be sooooo much easier.
Of course, then you will be declared unfit to possess.
As L.Neil Smith recently inferred in the TLE (1), the law is like a sieve: The size of the holes determines just what is acceptable.
Acceptabilty depends upon which side of the law you're on.
Now, just shut up and take your 'government approved' drugs.
PERMIT? WE DON'T NEED NO STINKIN' PERMIT
NEW YORKWhile some political groups continue to 'negotiate' with the City of New York for permits to protest next week's Republican National Convention, Libertariansincluding a presidential candidateare preparing to open up a whole new can of worms in the Big Apple.
"If you ask for permission to protest, you deserve to be told no," says Manhattan Libertarian Party chair Jim Lesczynski. "The First Amendment guarantees our right to peaceably assembleand we're going to do so" on Central Park's Great Lawn at noon on August 29th. The city has denied permits to groups which have applied for permission to gather in the park, attempting to move them to more distant, and less visible, locations.
"There's an old sayingit's easier to get forgiveness than it is to get permission," said Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian Party's presidential candidate, during a campaign strategy teleconference. "I've got permission. By definition, where I am standing is a free speech zone. We don't need permission to protest, but George W. Bush needs forgiveness for his mistakes. We're gathering to offer him that forgiveness ... if he's willing to ask us for it."
Among those mistakes, says Badnarik, 50, of Austin, Texas, are the war in Iraq, the PATRIOT ACTand the whole concept of "free speech zones" for protesters. "America itselfthe whole countryis a 'free speech zone,'" he says. "That's what the First Amendment means, or it means nothing. We're going to find out which in Central Park. We're going to find out whether President Bush and Mayor Bloomberg believe in America or not."
While Badnarik is considered a long shot for the presidency, polling shows him determining the election's outcome in a number of "battleground" states, including closely watched New Mexico, where his support stands at 5%.
The Manhattan LP has a longstanding reputation in New York and in the Libertarian Party as an "in your face" activist group. Previous Manhattan LP initiatives have included "Guns for Tots," in which Libertarians handed out toy guns to the city's schoolchildren to protest a proposed ban, and the "Great Cigarette Giveaway," which provided New Yorkers with free smokes to counter the city's massive 2002 cigarette tax increase.
Badnarik is also expected to debate Green Party presidential nominee David Cobb during his visit to the city. The Libertarian Party is America's third largest political party, with more than 600 Libertarians serving in elected and appointed office at the local, state and federal levels.
Stephen P. Gordon
Do-Overs and a Ghost Runner on Third....
There is apparently no limit to the insanity in California. For the umpteenth time in the long and sordid tale of AB-50, the California Assembly voted on the bill and the bill lost by a 35-36 margin.
That was voting by the rules.
But the rules seem to matter very little in Sacramento. Shortly after voting to send the fifty caliber ban to a well-deserved grave, California Democrats called for a "re-vote" and we watched as a handful of Democrats pressed the vote button at their own desk, then calmly walked to the empty desk of another member of the Assembly and voted a second time. This, we learn, is what California Legislators call "Ghost Voting." Nobody there is shocked because "they do it all the time."
Ah, I see...
As an American whose last "do over" was somewhere around the third grade, I was stunned.
What they casually call "ghost voting" seems to me like a complete abrogation of the whole voting concept. So who gets two votes? Does anybody get three? What can California residents hope for when their fundamental system of government has been reduced to a series of childish games?
These questions will boggle the rational mind until Californians decide to trust the reins of government to those who believe in silly, outdated ideas like rules and procedure, or "one equal vote for all." That matter is beyond our hands. What is before us is the last step on AB-50's road to becoming the greatest farce put into state law.
We are turning our attention to the new Governor of California, called to office by Californians sick of that very "status quo" and "politics as usual" mindset. This will be a chance for Governor Schwarzenegger to step up to the plate and put the fiscal needs of every tax-paying citizen ahead of backroom deals and wink-wink do-overs. We know he is strong, sharp and savvy. Let's see if he is also faster than AB-50's ghost runner on third base.
If you have been waiting for the "right moment" to take action, this is your last chance.
If you have fought tirelessly to defend your rights in California, it's gut-check time.
Please contact the office of Governor Schwarzenegger by email, fax or by phone and urge him NOT TO SIGN AB-50.
For the record:
The Governor announced his "10 Point Plan" for California's economic recovery.
In that plan he states critical elements to be (using his numbers):
Point 2: Freeze spending and launch an audit of the state budget. Yet the Assembly passed a new budget item (AB-50) which contains a multi-million dollar "PR campaign" to warn citizens of nonexistent "dangers" that have never occurred.
Point 3: Call the Assembly into special session to make further spending cuts and reduce the budget imbalance. Cuts are expected to hit the elderly, children, education, highways, prisons and transit. In spite of this, the Assembly passed a multi-million dollar bill to outlaw a rifle that has never been used in a crime in the state.
This is IT Folks, we are doing all we can but much is up to you.
Contact the Governor TODAY and urge him not to sign AB-50.
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
To send an Electronic Mail:
Fifty Caliber Institute
What if you are successful in electing the lesser of two evils? Sure, you avoid the greater evil for a few years, but you cause even more good-natured people to reluctantly support your version of greater evil in the future, and you are still stuck with lesser evil in the present. You are perpetuating a vicious cycle that has you suffering greater evil about half the time for all of eternity.
Jeffry R. Fisher