Laws frequently only cause harm

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for February 7, 2018)

Laws can’t solve anything, and often destroy things which worked. Sometimes this is due to the unintended consequences of trying to stop something which might actually be harmful, but more often it is due to the person who made the rule simply not understanding how things work in the real world.

Being harmed by laws is probably more common than being helped or protected by them. It’s a consequence of meddling; one I have personally experienced.

Years ago I was looking for a job after moving across the country. I had checked the “help wanted” ads, and they were all for huge corporations with horrible working conditions I wasn’t anxious to endure. So, I set out to explore the area and see what else I could discover. I checked out businesses I thought I’d like to work for. Mostly small family businesses, since those are the ones where I’ve always fit in best.

There were so many little shops which looked interesting. Some in industries I had experience with. But I kept running into the same problem.

One day, for example, I found a dim and dusty sporting goods store. It was obvious they didn’t have time to clean or arrange their inventory, yet they seemed to care about their customers. They were friendly and likable, and I knew I could help them. I really wanted the chance to show them I could benefit their business.

Unfortunately, like all the small businesses I spoke to, they couldn’t afford to hire an employee. They couldn’t afford to pay anyone “minimum wage”, nor could they afford all the other costs– taxes, paperwork, insurance– associated with legally having an employee.

I wasn’t ready to give up so easily, since any money was better than none.

Outlaw that I am, I begged to be allowed to work “under the table” for an amount agreeable to both of us, but they weren’t willing to risk being caught making a mutually acceptable, consensual arrangement with me that violated “laws”. “Laws” which hurt us both.

I was protected out of a job by not being allowed to work where I wanted, for an amount someone was willing to pay. When I think of all the people like me who are priced out of the job market by rules they don’t want and which hurt them in the long run, I get angry at those who pretend to care about people while hurting them for their own good.

–
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com

Follow me on Steemit

Common sense gun deregulation needed

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for February 28, 2018)

 

It’s time to take a hard look at America’s gun laws. In fact, it’s over a century past due. How many more innocent lives will be snuffed out before people demand change? Before they demand politicians stand up and do what’s right?

I’m talking about common-sense gun deregulation.

Anti-gun “laws” can’t make anyone safer– except those who prefer victims who can’t fight back effectively. Every gun regulation is a violation of the rights to life, liberty, and property. America has compromised its way into this problem.

No one has the right to regulate guns (or other weaponry), nor can anyone invent this right through power or popularity. Attempting to do so anyway is ethically as bad as shooting up crowds.

Put government back in its tiny box through common-sense gun deregulation.

It’s time to end background checks and to get over the idea that some people can be prohibited from owning guns.
It’s time to abolish every “gun free” zone.
It’s time to get rid of “laws” controlling who may carry what weapon, where, and in what way, including licensing schemes. Slaves depend on others for defense; free men and women don’t.

It’s time to stop pretending anyone has the right to decide what type of gun, which gun accessories, or how many rounds of ammunition someone else needs. It’s no one’s business unless someone is making a credible threat to harm innocent people.
It’s time to stop pretending my rights are up for grabs whenever someone other than me commits an act of evil.

It’s time to stop acting like liberty is subject to the opinions of emotionally immature and intellectually deficient protesters.
It’s time to stop pretending you want to outlaw guns when you are willing to let the police and military keep theirs. You aren’t against guns, you just want government to have them all. How would you enforce any gun ban, if not with guns?

It’s time to abolish the BATFE. It’s a criminal gang from the ground up and has been from the day it was established. End it, without transferring its “job” to another criminal gang like the FBI.

It’s time to encourage everyone to accept their sacred responsibility to be properly armed every day, everywhere they go. It’s time to fire and sue any government employee who questions any person for exercising this absolute, universal human right.

Get government out of the scam of making up rules concerning guns. The cost of ignoring this problem one more day is too high.

–
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com

Follow me on Steemit and Medium

Reduce the misery

I believe in reducing unnecessary misery. That’s why I don’t want you violated even if I was violated in the same way in the past.

This is a HUGE stumbling block for so many people.

They were forced to get up painfully early to go to school under the pretense of “education”, so everyone else must suffer the same indignity.
They were robbed using the excuse of “Social Security”, so now it’s everyone else’s turn to be robbed for the same excuse.
They have lowered themselves to be licensed by The State to do various things humans have a right to do, so everyone else must do the same.
They (or their forebears) “immigrated legally” (or, more likely, before there was any such silly concept as “illegal immigration“) so everyone else should be forced to jump through the same hoops.

Seriously, if I thought that way I would say that because I lost my daughter, everyone else should be forced to suffer the same agony. If that’s not evil, I don’t know what is.

Reduce the misery in the world; don’t perpetuate it. Don’t share it. Don’t demand it.

–
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com

Follow me on Steemit

Christmas good holiday for outlaws

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for December 20, 2017)

Christmas is a good holiday for outlaws.

No, not for criminals. For outlaws. What? You don’t know the difference?

Let me explain why outlaws are not your enemy and why Christmas is a great outlaw holiday.

The difference between an outlaw and a criminal is that the outlaw breaks bad laws, never throwing the first punch and never taking or damaging anyone else’s property. Everything is through mutual consent. Criminals, on the other hand, attack the innocent and steal, vandalize, and trespass.

Who is an outlaw? The public school principal who has the assembly stand to be led in prayer at an official school function is an outlaw. So is the neighborhood drug dealer who peacefully ignores prohibition. The preacher who feeds the homeless is an outlaw in many parts of America. As is the activist who educates jurors about their responsibilities– against the wishes of the court.

I would argue that Jesus was an outlaw, although those who desperately want to legitimize government might claim he only pushed the envelope– going as far as he could without technically breaking any laws. Which is a very “outlaw” thing to do.

In the classic Rankin/Bass Christmas special “Santa Claus is Comin’ to Town“, Kris Kringle is an outlaw who violates the Burgermeister’s toy prohibition.

Christmas is a wonderful excuse for “strawman purchases”, where you buy something government wants to track, then give it to someone government didn’t scrutinize and approve as worthy to own it.

People get sneaky around Christmas; hiding gifts, being “secret Santas”, snooping under the tree.

It isn’t mandatory to celebrate the holiday any specific way, or to celebrate at all. It’s anarchy! That’s what makes it fun, and what makes it work.

As mentioned above, some people use the holiday season as an excuse to feed the less fortunate– without a food preparation permit or a restaurant license. And somehow, no mass poisoning occurs. Sometimes, arrests do result, though. Such arrests are an example of a much greater wrongdoing.

Author and founder of The On Line Freedom Academy (tolfa.us), Jim Davies, refers to government employees who impose and enforce these harmful laws as “kriminals”. They are a special kind of criminal. Their harm may be legal, but it’s neither right nor ethical.

In various times and places, even Christmas itself has been outlawed, which seems to mean only outlaws would have been the ones celebrating it.

This Christmas, if you feel so inclined, be a good outlaw, not a criminal or a kriminal. Merry Christmas and happy holidays!

–
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com

Follow me on Steemit

Moving toward liberty

I am an absolutist and I’m also a gradualist.

Yes, really.

I know what liberty is, and nothing else will do.

But, as long as something is moving in that direction, I think it’s sort of a good thing, even if it doesn’t go far enough, fast enough.

But that doesn’t mean I will ever take my eyes off the prize, or that I’m going to make excuses for the bits of slavery that are left. And I’m certainly never going to reject liberty as being “too extreme”, in order to make people who fear it more comfortable. They are cowards or equivocators and they need to be ashamed.

For example, I am glad “concealed carry permits” are so popular, and have encouraged more people to be armed, but I’m not going to pretend concealed carry permits are a good thing, being a complete violation of the right to own and to carry weaponry without asking anyone’s permission. “More armed people” is heading in the direction of liberty, but tying it to permits is unnecessary and harmful. So, will I advocate for more types of permits, or expanded permits? No. But will I scold people who have the permits? No.

I don’t believe in Utopia. But I do believe in “better than what is”, and that’s where I want to go. There will still be problems. There will still be bad guys and people throwing their support behind bad guys. Not me, though.

People who are natural gradualists don’t appreciate that I won’t pretend a tiny improvement is enough. They’ll never stop complaining that “the perfect is the enemy of the good” and settling for any tiny crumb– or even moves in the wrong direction that feel right to them. Gradual is better than nothing, except when it is actually nothing.

–
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com

Follow me on Steemit

Violation can’t justify more violation

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for October 25, 2017)

In the aftermath of any mass shooting, it is disheartening to see well-meaning people express their outrage over innocent people being violated by immediately demanding politicians violate innocent people.

I understand feeling “something must be done”, but I can’t support any plan which violates people’s indispensable rights. The horror of someone violating people can’t justify violating more people.

No one has the right to murder, and very few gun owners commit murder. No one has the right to create anti-gun “laws”, yet every government does. It is wrong to violate people who have harmed no one. People clamor for more laws, even as the attempt is doomed to fail and will only make mass murders easier to commit.

Each and every person has an absolute human right to own and to carry any kind of weapon they see fit, everywhere they go, openly or concealed, without asking permission of anyone. This right can be respected or it can be violated. Rights aren’t subject to majority opinion, feelings of fear, or claims of necessity. Rights don’t come from the Bill of Rights– abolish the amendment and the right remains unchanged.

Of all the unpopular rights, the right to free speech is probably the most dangerous when misused. If you disagree, you might want to take a closer look at history. Yet, no one has the authority to prohibit or place limits on speech, even if governments pretend they do. You will always have the absolute right to speak your mind regardless of any law.

Governments have no authority to limit any right; by doing so they only delegitimize themselves. Creating or enforcing anti-gun “laws”– commonly and incorrectly called “gun control”– is a serious crime; no better than committing a mass murder.

People who have no moral objection to murdering will happily ignore another anti-gun “law”. Imagining otherwise is a fantasy. Only people who have no intention to murder will be affected. The more anti-gun “laws” you make up and enforce, the more you empower murderers, and the more victims you serve up for their pleasure.

Author Robert A. Heinlein observed “An armed society is a polite society”. A related truth is that an unarmed society, where only the police, military, and freelance criminals remain armed, is not a society at all. It is a prison. A slaughterhouse. I refuse to endanger you just to make myself or anyone else feel better. I will not appease bad guys of any sort. Not ever.

–
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com

Follow me on Steemit

Same language, different thoughts, no communication

I’m talking about when a discussion gets bogged down because of the different ways people use words, and different definitions… and it results in no communication taking place. No fun!

And I really do try. Normal dictionaries are no help. You can always find a definition somewhere that fits your thinking, and is contrary to the other definitions. Probably under the same entry.

So when this happens I tell them what a word means to me. I link to the “dictionary post” entry. I try to explain what I mean by the word, contrasted against what they mean by the word. Just as a way to get us talking about the same concept, even if we use different words. Deaf ears. They invariably refuse to listen.

For example, to me a right is anything you can do without violating another person, therefore you need no permission to do it. Anything. There are lots of ways to expand that thought, of course, but that’s the basic point.

And then I attract attention from people who want to argue over privileges while calling them “rights”. Or they want to change rights into privileges by allowing government (or some other gang) to hand out licenses for engaging in that behavior. Ugh.

Yeah, I realize almost no one out there “gets” rights. Too much conditioning, I suppose. Too much belief in “authority“.

Sorry, but if it can be lost or taken away, it isn’t a right. A right can be violated, though, but that’s not the sticking point they usually want to focus on. They simply can’t get over their point debating how and when rights can be lost or removed, to justify violating people’s rights in one way or another. Because that’s where it always leads.

And this same tactic goes on over many other concepts as well. It is frustrating.

–
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com

Follow me on Steemit

Arbitrary rules are harmful

The world is choked with rules. Some rules are a good idea; most are utter nonsense.

Some are so arbitrary that it is hard to imagine how they were ever dreamed up in the first place. Sick minds need to stay busy, I suppose.

I despise arbitrary rules.

Arbitrary rules are always harmful, on some level.

Even the ones you agree with.

If nothing else, they cheapen all the rules– including those which aren’t arbitrary at all.

Once you run into enough arbitrary rules, and other harmful rules, you get to the point where a rule like “Do not push button” loses impact. You may push the button just to see what happens.

And then those who pollute the world with arbitrary rules will be shocked that you didn’t listen to this sensible rule hidden among the jungle of harmful arbitrary rules.

Stay in the habit of evaluating each and every rule you encounter. Follow or reject them based on reality, not on whether someone decided to make them up and impose them on others.

–
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com

Follow me on Steemit

Property rights preserved– accidentally

Once upon a time, a long ways from here…

I lived in a nice little house right on the river. This was in a place with more actual liberty, and I enjoyed that liberty a lot. I wore a gun openly probably 75% of the time– or more. And I carried concealed 100% of the time. I also wore buckskin clothes along with my Bowie knife most of the time, not that it matters.

One day, a gravel truck and front-loader (is that what they are called?) rumbled down my driveway and into the river, and started loading up on gravel. I didn’t own the riverbed, so I didn’t get too bent out of shape over it. It was pretty noisy, though, and my wife-at-the-time did medical transcription from home and was having a hard time hearing the dictation through the earbuds over all the noise. Plus, the gravel truck began tearing up my driveway.

So, I went out to talk to the guy. I was nice and told him the problems I had with his operation. I suggested some compromises that I thought would work for both of us. He wasn’t amenable. He got very excited and angry and started saying he had all the permits (or whatever) to collect river gravel, and it wasn’t my property, he had the right-of-way, etc.– I actually wondered if he was going to shove me or something. I went back in the house.

The next day I was out in the yard messing around (I pretty much lived in the yard) when the truck came back. But this day, as usual, I had my gun on my hip– not because I was thinking of him or anything, but just because that was how I dressed most of the time. I nodded at him, then went back to whatever I was doing.

He sat in the cab of his truck looking at me for a couple of minutes, then left. The next day the front-loader was gone from the river bed and I never saw him again. When he left without doing any loading, I wondered what was up. Then I remembered my gun.

I wondered if he thought I was wearing the gun as a threat to him. I’m just glad I had gone out of my way to be polite when I spoke to him the day before. His quick exit made me wonder if his “permits” and whatnot were maybe not as ironclad as he had claimed. Not that I really cared one way or the other. The problem was solved and never cropped up again. Of course, it could have gone differently.

Me, from around that time

–
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com

(Steemit link)

Statism’s made-up concepts, words, and delusions

Most “crimes” aren’t wrong. They certainly aren’t unethical, and are probably not immoral, unless the State’s opinion colors your morality– in which case your “morality” is less than worthless to me.

Most “crimes” are actually just testimony to the fact that your society permits too much government.

Things such as “smuggling”, “money laundering”, “drug dealing”, “speeding”, “truancy”, “tax evasion”, doing things without a “license” or “permit”, “resisting arrest”, and a host of other “crimes” can’t possibly be wrong.

In fact, as you may notice, the believers in government had to make up words to make the acts sound different from what they really are, just so they could declare them “crimes” and initiate force against (or steal from) those they catch doing them.

In the same way, they had to make up words like “arrest“, “fine”, “execution”, “eminent domain”, among countless others, to hide the actual wrongs they commit behind these misleading words.

(Those who complain that I make up words and definitions seem to give the Church of State a pass for doing the same thing, but they do so in order to hide the truth from scrutiny rather than to open it to the light of day for all to see.)

You can’t remain ethical and be “law abiding”. It’s simply not possible. Not even if it were possible to simply be “law abiding”, which it isn’t. Too many “laws” are contradictory, and you don’t know what all the “laws” are– no one does. Or can.

Once you see the acts on both sides for what they are, and stop seeing them through the dark lens of statism, you’ll start losing your religion— at least you will if you were previously a believer in government.

You’ll no longer be automatically suspicious of those targeted by “laws“. You’ll stop believing that if a person has been arrested they must have done something wrong. You’ll stop automatically believing that prison inmates deserve whatever they get.

You’ll also stop being able to honor or support those who prop up the State with their acts of archation on its behalf. You’ll stop seeing cops and politicians as “good guys” or role models. You certainly won’t want to see loved ones taking this path.

This won’t win you friends. But the few new friends you find, and the few old friends you manage to keep, will be higher quality than those you lose.

For me, it has been worth it. You’ll have to decide for yourself whether it is worth it for you.

I don’t accept the State’s definitions, concepts, made-up words, or delusions. I don’t believe in its “goodness” or “necessity”. I’m an ethical outlaw. I wouldn’t have it any other way.

I’m nowhere near this noble

–

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. 
Any donations or subscriptions are GREATLY appreciated! Thank you.

(Steemit link)