Bill of Rights Press

L. Neil Smith's
Number 450, January 6, 2008

"The only reason anyone ever has for wanting to
steal your guns is that they're planning to do
something to you your guns could prevent."

  Table of Contents Contents Next Next

Letters to the Editor

Send Letters to
Note: All letters to this address will be considered for
publication unless they say explicitly Not For Publication

[Letters to the editor are welcome on any and all subjects. Sign your letter in the text body with your name and e-mail address as you wish them to appear, otherwise we will use the information in the "From:" header!]

Letter from A.X. Perez

Letter from Nydra

Another Letter from A.X. Perez

Letter from Kaptain Kanada, a.k.a. Manuel Miles

Yet Another Letter from A.X. Perez, with Replies from John Taylor, L. Neil Smith, and A.X. Perez

Letter from John Taylor with Reply from Doug Newman

Letter from J. Martin

Darwin Award Apocrypha

To this date I have found no 100% reliable account of a deranged shooter attacking a group of people he could reasonably be expected to know were armed. this was on an "unofficial" list of Darwin Award winners, most of the stories listed are at best apocryphal and others flat out fictional.

In other words the story about the robber who got into a gunfight with a gun shop full of cops is most likely a lie. Even if it is true it is considered an example of a person so stupid at a genetic level that his death improved the gene pool and helped raise the average IQ of Homo sapiens.

Mass murderers, own their own hook or state sponsored, sane or insane, go after unarmed victims. Those who face armed resistance, even by one person, fail to run up the body counts they seek.

Even the one probably fictional exception I have found only proves the rule, and this person qualifies as too stupid at genetic level to be allowed to breed if he even exists.

Policy makers who insist on creating no gun zones are just genetically unfit, unfortunately they impose their counter-evolutionary folly on others instead of facing the consequences themselves.

They deserve the death described in the busted urban legend that the author of the list I'm referring to gave first place.

A.X. Perez

Re: "Letter from Dave Earnest With Reply from L. Neil Smith"

For a moment, reading your story about the ugly women, I thought you were talking about the Republican candidates vs. Ron Paul.


Re: "Letter from Dave Earnest With Reply from L. Neil Smith"

Back in 1980 when the now defunct USSR invaded Afghanistan, used Yellow rain poison gas on its people, dropped booby-trapped toys on refugee routes for children to find and generally behaved in a manner that makes Abu Graib and other current US enormities in the War on Terror look downright humane, Bella Abzug, a liberal Democrat, made a statement to the following effect:

It's ok if the Soviets invade a backwards country like Afghanistan. they don't have a women's rights movement or anything.

I never could figure out why the women of Afghanistan deserved to be raped, murdered, mutilated, run out of their country and watched their men and kids get mutilated and murdered for having the audacity not to have a women's rights movement. Since Ms. Abzug is now deceased I am not likely to get an answer. Maybe in the next life. I'm sure that a God who can forgive John Newton his 10,000 Africans (See the movie Amazing Grace, available from can forgive Ms. Abzug that comment, so perhaps I'll even run into her on the other side of the Pearly Gates to ask.

Meanwhile, ugliness is a spiritual quality that reshapes a woman's features over time. I'm sure that there are mean spirited replicat women in both wings of America's ruling party whose true spiritual ugliness has come out in their faces, just as their are kind and generous women in both wings whose generous spirits have shows in their countenances.

A free society will have more of the latter than a statist tyranny.

I'm pretty sure that the same thing can be said about men, but since I'm more interested in female beauty...

Perhaps a spiritual sister in the freedom movement would care to add her opinion.

As a totally unrelated aside (or maybe not) have you ever noticed that during his term in office Slick Willy surrounded himself with people who were much shorter and/or much uglier than himself? One more reason to oppose his distaff partner's bid for the Presidency, the people she'd bring with her if she follows he old man's example could ugly our nation out of existence.

A.X. Perez

Re: "Letter from Dave Earnest With Reply from L. Neil Smith"


I read with amusement your letter to TLE. Further to L. Neil Smith's reply to you, I bring to your attention Miss Donna D'Errico, who has officially endorsed the only libertarian standing for the US presidency, Dr Ron Paul.

Donna D'Errico

Peace and Liberty,

Kaptain Kanada, a.k.a. Manuel Miles

Seriously Speaking

If you know me at all you should know that I am rarely serious. It is my observation that through the millennia mankind has created too many messes by taking things too seriously. However, now that 2008 is here it behooves us to settle down to business.

Robert Heinlein one time wrote that you may not know what you want to vote for, but you probably know what you want to vote against.Those office holders who voted in favor of any gun control law, the current revision of NICS excepted (since they may have been deceived about it being pro gun) should be voted against. Those who voted in favor of the Feingold McCain Campaign Finance Reform Act (AKA rig the Game in Favor of the Incumbent Act), should be voted against. You've got your own pet peeves so you know who to vote against.

With so many primaries coming up on Super Tuesday it will become harder to winnow candidates. It would have been nice to know if one should vote in the Democratic Primary or the Republican to block which candidate from New York. Perhaps in the old days one or the other would have knocked out of the race by the time your state's primary came up. Those of you more active in state level Party activity should start pushing for spreading out the primaries again.

Meanwhile, I'm not sure who I want for president (well actually I do, but...), but I surely know who I don't want. I'm sure most of you share this attitude. If we can't get the person in we want, we can block the people we don't want.

Of course, I'm reasonably sure that most of you are thinking the same thing and that I'm simply articulating what's going on in your head. Use your vote in the primary wisely.

A.X. Perez

To Which John Taylor replied:

The whole voting issue notwithstanding, I submit that any erected (sic) official who votes in any way, shape, or form either for or against a "gun control" bill, wheter it reads as "pro" or "anti", has commited a violation of his sacred oath, has commited a violation of the Constitution, and has commited a violation of the principles of liberty. Any such offender should be drummed out of office, tarred and feathered, run out of the Potomac fever swamp on a rail, and, in the case of instigators or co-signers of such legislation, should be summarily executed.

Now you have to understand that it's the holiday season, and I'm full of good will toward mankind. Otherwise I might take a truly harsh position.

John Taylor

And to which L. Neil Smith replied:

> Otherwise I might take a truly harsh position.

Feel free, John. The tradition of "peace on Earth, good will toward men". I suggest that this does not apply to the upper parasitic class.

Happy Zagmuk!

L. Neil Smith

And to which A.X. Perez replied:

I still claim that weapons legislation such as bans on Katrina-style seizures are legit, as implementing legislation to support 2nd Amendment.

First we concentrate on trying to peacefully getting rid of bums who think Bill of Rights(the whole thing, not just the 2nd) is optional. Then we try edumacate those politicians who living with years of tyranny have confused. Those who will not mend their ways can then be dealt with in an appropriate manner. Something involving a ten yard head start for the border is about right. Treason trials and appropriate court imposed punishment for the slowpokes or the one's who think that we're kidding.

Fortunately for the more punitively minded among us, the truly evil among these bums can be trusted to violently resist lawful, peaceful change.

Meanwhile, all kidding included, let's make do what we can to block the worse from getting into office. It would be nice to choose between the greatest of goods than the least of evils for once, However, I am inclined to believe that suggesting this possibility may have been the beginning of a long year of exceptionally dry jokes.

A.X. Perez

In Re : "Spitting on the Troops... 2007 Style" by Doug Newman

I leave it to two-time Medal of Honor recipient General Smedley Butler, USMC to provide a succint and forthright assessment, one which I believed before I read it and am now convinced even more so of its rightness:

"War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.

I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket...."

For more on one of my all-time heros, see

or just search on "smedley butler quote on war" in your favorite search engine.

John Taylor

To which Doug Newman replied:


Thanks for writing. I am very familiar with the Smedley Butler quote. Classic stuff from someone who has seen as much was as anyone. Check out this quote:

How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?
—Major General Smedley Butler, USMC

Doug Newman

[General Butler's book is "reprinted" (via links) in this issue—Editor]

Re: "A Horrible Idea" by L. Neil Smith

I think a more libertarian thing to do would be to stop flirting with threatening others with laws, and instead figure out how to invent, promote, hire, or reward the invention of a thermal depolymerization plant that can hide in a garage.

How about the "Eeccchhh prize" for the first machine that can process residential garbage, sewage, and lawn clippings into something that will power a stock automobile, yet not be casually detectable from the street due to odor, noise, waste heat, electric consumption, etc. This machine should be practical to buy or be built by handy people of ordinary means.

I'll start by pledging $1,000.

J. Martin

Help Support TLE by patronizing our advertisers and affiliates. We cheerfully accept donations!

to advance to the next article
  Table of Contents
to return to The Libertarian Enterprise, Number 450, January 6, 2008

Big Head Press