"Posterity, you will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in heaven that ever I took half the pains to preserve it." -John Adams


Welcome to Patriot's Lament. We strive here to educate ourselves on Liberty. We will not worry ourselves so much with the daily antics of American politics, and drown ourselves in the murky waters of the political right or left.
Instead, we will look to the Intellectuals and Champions of Liberty, and draw on their wisdom of what it is to be a truly free people. We will learn from where our Providential Liberties are derived, and put the proper perspective of a Free Individual and the State.
Please join us!

Sunday, December 27, 2015

Legalized Theft

I had a discussion the other day on the Patriot's Lament radio show on the word "theft." The discussion was about the city of Fairbanks upping the amount of forfeitures it needed to fill the gap in the city budget.
I claim that asset forfeiture is theft. A caller to the show said while I might think it is theft, the city council says it is not theft, as long as it is doing the stealing.
So if a city, State, or any legislature concludes that what it does is not theft, does that mean that it is not?
If I punch someone in the nose, can I claim that it is a nostril love tap?
If I murder someone, can I call it a long sleeping spell?
Can a body of individuals change the Law of Nature, to justify its perceived needs?
Is theft always theft?
If a starving person steals food from an open kitchen window, isn't it still theft? Whether the person who was stolen from wants to receive restitution from the thief is not the concern here. Whether the starving person really needed the food more than the owner of the food doesn't matter either.
It is still theft.
It's the question that is not really all that old: if a government steals, is it really theft? Is the State held above the Law, rather than to a higher standard of the Law?
I say it is not that old of a question because in the past, it was well known that even the King himself was not above the Law.
From William Blackstone:
"For as God, when he created matter, and endued it with a principle of mobility, established certain rules for the...direction of that motion; so, when he created man, and endued him with freewill to conduct himself in all parts of life, he laid down certain immutable laws of human nature, whereby that freewill is in some degree regulated and restrained, and gave him also the faculty of reason to discover the purport of those laws."
 
And the Founding Fathers of America saw it quite simply, from Thomas Jefferson:
"Man has been subjected by his Creator to the moral law, of which his feelings, or conscience as it is sometimes called, are the evidence with which his Creator has furnished him .... The moral duties which exist between individual and individual in a state of nature, accompany them into a state of society, their Maker not having released them from those duties on their forming themselves into a nation."

In other words, just because man leaves the State of Nature and joins others in the State of Society, he is still held to the same Law as he was in the State of Nature, such as, do not Steal.
The very reason man leaves the State of Nature to join society is to protect his very property from theft, among few other things.
 Stealing violates the Law of Nature as its violator must take property that is not his from another person who has the rightful or higher claim to that property.
Simply being elected to an office does not grant the elected person special privileges, most certainly not the privilege to steal.

Otherwise this would mean that slavery would be legal and just. For we are talking about the very Right of Self Ownership when we speak of theft, and more so theft by the State.
If the State, or even some puny individual at a lowly city council, can steal from you legally, then that lowly city council claims ownership of your very body, and claims ultimately that you are its slave.

So, the real discussion over things such as asset forfeitures is not whether it hurts the poor at a higher percentage than others, it's not whether the State is too liberal in using the so-called law, it is not whether due process is violated or not, and I agree in the affirmative to all the above; the real discussion is whether or not it is theft.

And if it is, then this should be the focal point of our discussion.
It is theft.
Individuals using the State claim to be above and outside the Law, and choose to steal from their neighbors. They call it "legal" and the "law," but it is just theft, plain and simple.


                                                                       ______

Now I want to briefly speak to the Fairbanks City Council, that wretched gang of thieves, and enemy of a free people.
I am quite happy that you have been so forthcoming in telling the people of Fairbanks that you consider yourselves above the Law, and also that you consider the people of Fairbanks to be your slaves.
It has to be this, or otherwise you have to admit that you are simply thieves of other men's means.
The fact that you PUT INTO YOUR NEW BUDGET, additional monies you have not even yet stolen from us, through fines and asset forfeitures, by doing so you have opened many people's eyes to what you really are:

You are an enemy of the Poor.
You are an enemy of Justice.
You are an enemy of The Law.
You are an enemy of Righteousness.
You are an enemy of the People.
You are an enemy of God.

While Justice on this earth may not seem to always come swiftly, Justice will indeed come.

But don't take my word for it.


Whenever the Legislators endeavour to take away, and destroy the Property of the People, or to reduce them to Slavery under Arbitrary Power, they put themselves into a state of War with the People, who are thereupon absolved from any farther Obedience, and are left to the common refuge which God hath provided for all men against force and violence. ... [Power then] devolves to the People, who have a Right to resume their original Liberty, and, by the Establishment of a new Legislative (such as they shall think fit) provide for their own Safety and Security, which is the end for which they are in Society." John Locke










  

3 comments:

  1. "Simply being elected to an office does not grant the elected person special privileges, most certainly not the privilege to steal."

    The problem as I see it, is that so many believe they can confer a right that they as an individual do not have (the right to steal)to another, in this case government. The problem remains how to prevent the thievery.
    Also, I would point out, your definition of asset forfeiture equals theft includes all property taxes.
    When the thieves (government workers and those people (including business) dependant on government)outnumber the victims, what can you do? Move? You can't run away anymore, as my forefathers did. Stand up and fight? Who? How? Most people are so in love with government or so afraid to be without it that I, quite frankly, see no solution in sight. Any ideas?
    I've been waiting for the collapse for about forty years now but I'm not gonna continue to hold my breath, lol.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I hear what you are saying for sure, although I do think the collapse is coming, things we see an imminent always take longer than what we think they will.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Want To Boost Your ClickBank Traffic And Commissions?

    Bannerizer makes it easy for you to promote ClickBank products by banners, simply go to Bannerizer, and grab the banner codes for your favorite ClickBank products or use the Universal ClickBank Banner Rotator Tool to promote all of the ClickBank products.

    ReplyDelete