Patriot's Lament with Stephan Kinsella

The great Stephan Kinsella joins us to talk about one of my favorite topics, Law. What it is, what it isn't.

I personally think political law, or legislative law, is crap. But, you can make up your own mind.

Check out all of Stephan's work HERE . His site is full of great work for the Libertarian cause.

Thanks again Stephan

Patriot's Lament April 27, 2013: When The Bomb Went Off and Onerous Gun Laws

Matt Want joins us again, and along with Claudio, we discuss the Boston bombing, and more to the point, the terrorist State, and the actions that they took in shutting down Boston.
It's funny, Boston went along with its life after the bombing, it was actually the State that shut it down looking for the accused bomber.

Old war or new? "There is nothing new under the sun"

How true these words are.

The old war, Liberty vs. the State. Whether man can or should be free to do with his Life, Liberty and Property as he sees fit. Isn't Property all these 3?
The State, particularly the U.S. state, sees itself as the ultimate arbiter of all these things that the founders of this people took for granted as the basic Rights of man.
But how?
Isn't every politician voted into office but a mere mortal?
And yet these, these treacherous beings of the State, claim that some certain people are not worthy of Rights that others have.
Hmm.
The Japanese internment?
Who are these, mere mortals that will face the same judgment that all men will face, to decide what is right for you and for me?
Randy Weaver?
Waco?
Boston?
Our Liberty, the basic ones, the Unalienable ones, that De La Boetie and Locke showed for the world to see 300, no 450 years ago, that could not be infringed save the minimum tacit support of a people.
And at whose cost?
Those same people.
The Leviathan State of America routinely devours even the most basic human Rights that a person has.
The TSA? Airport security, what kind of people subject themselves to such ridicule, only to be told, "you don't have to fly."
And who are these gods that claim the right to hold you and touch you and prevent you from travel?
Mere men, most that were jobless before they became TSA "agents."
Law Enforcement officers are caught daily on camera beating, shooting, and abusing all manner of men, women and even children. The only "peace" they are concerned with is the peace of the State. Who are these brave Combatants that "risk their very lives" as they march into a protest of unarmed, sitting people, clubs swinging? Just other people. No more.
 We have a State department that has decided what things are not to be on the Internet. Every sort of filth is allowed by these gods, but not simple plans to build an even more simple gun. They claim ownership of these plans and say that mere mortals cannot have them.
Who are these gods in the State department? Just a bunch of people.

The Tyranny goes on and on; we live in a Corporate State that is literally feeding off the wealth of the people who live within its borders, in a way that has never before been seen in history. Their standard of living continues to rise and rise, while the sheep continue to feed them, and live on less, and are beaten and killed for asking why this is.
But I do think their time is short. Very short. The frantic way the State is increasing its militaristic approach on its "own people" tells me they are very afraid, and know their time draws to an end.

Psalms 3
 O Lord, how many are my foes!
    Many are rising against me;
² many are saying of my soul,
    there is no salvation for him in God. Selah^[a]

³ But you, O Lord, are a shield about me,
    my glory, and the lifter of my head.
⁴ I cried aloud to the Lord,
    and he answered me from his holy hill. Selah

⁵ I lay down and slept;
    I woke again, for the Lord sustained me.
⁶ I will not be afraid of many thousands of people
    who have set themselves against me all around.

⁷ Arise, O Lord!
    Save me, O my God!
For you strike all my enemies on the cheek;
    you break the teeth of the wicked.

⁸ Salvation belongs to the Lord;
    your blessing be on your people!

Our Enemy, The State

I know I have used this headline before, but, read the story and you will more than likely agree, it's the correct heading.
From Will Grigg's Pro Libertate:

Police Chief Ed Flynn of Milwaukee believes that his department is at war with the gun-owning public. In his February 27 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Flynn claimed that “in the last 20 years we’ve been in an arms race” with private citizens who supposedly out-gun the police. 

Flynn testified in support of a proposed federal ban on so-called assault weapons. But in the past he has made it clear that he considers a Mundane carrying a firearm of any kind is an unlawful enemy combatant subject to detention and forcible disarmament. 

“My message to my troops is if you see anybody carrying a gun on the streets of Milwaukee, we’ll put them on the ground, take the gun away, and then decide whether you have a right to carry it,” Flynn said a few years ago in response to a statement from Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen recognizing that residents of the state have a right to carry firearms openly. 

Grigg goes on to quote the great Albert Jay Nock; ""Everyone knows that the State claims and exercises [a] monopoly of crime ... and that it makes this monopoly as strict as it can…. It punishes private theft, but itself lays unscrupulous hands on anything it wants, whether the property of citizen or of alien.... Of all the crimes that are committed for gain or revenge, there is not one that we have not seen it commit – murder, mayhem, arson, robbery, fraud, criminal collusion and connivance."

Read the whole article here. http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2013/02/ed-flynn-milwaukee-crime-lord-citizen.html

 

Law abiding citizen

I am sick of the term "law abiding citizen" and I am especially sick of it when used in reference to gun rights and gun control.
What does having the Right to defend yourself have to do with some State deciding whether or not you deserve that right based on how law abiding you are to its edicts and proclamations?
If the State says that guns are now illegal, and to own one would be to break the law, are you going to be a law abiding citizen then? What if the State, which is nothing more than a gang of thieves, is unethical; am I still supposed to be a law abiding citizen?
My Right to defend myself, my family, and my property predates the State. The 2nd amendment didn't invent the Right to be armed, it was already known that one had the Right to be armed.
What gives an illegitimate State the Right to say that only "law abiding citizens" can be armed? Abiding by what laws? Whose laws? The State's arbitrary law that merely is intended to enslave us?
Quit using that term. It's another way of saying law abiding serfs.
 Boot licking slaves.
You think when the colonist revolted against the King he thought that they were law abiding citizens? Should they have been disarmed because of it? Should they ever have been allowed to be armed?
Following the regulations, statutes and political laws of a State has nothing to do with the Right to be Armed.
Our Right to be armed is specifically to resist an overpowering and corrupt State; secondly, for personal self- defense, and lastly to be able to feed ourselves by hunting.
We know why Patrick Henry cherished the rifle.
An armed people.
Not a "Law abiding citizen".

Let your vote always be, "NOT GUILTY"!

New Hampshire actually did something almost completely right. Jury Nullification.
Now people, make a real change and NULLIFY the State.
This is excellent. I hope the folks of New Hampshire jump on their newly found, but always their Right to do, shut down the State.
Good to see most of the comments are positive towards it too.
A reminder, this "law" isn't giving anything to the Jury that they didn't already have, maybe it will just help to wake a few jurors up.
Pay close attention to the one dissenting vote, some commie statist who thinks that the state and its law is god, and of course it is, she is the one who makes "law". "Makes law". Hah. If a man can make law, it's no law you should follow.

New Hampshire Nullification

"We are bound, you, I, and every one to make common cause even with error itself, to maintain the common right of freedom of conscience," Thomas Jefferson to Edward Dowse, 1803

 The great object of my fear is the Federal Judiciary. That body, like gravity, ever acting with noiseless foot and unalarming advance, gaining ground step by step and holding what it gains, is engulfing insidiously the special governments into the jaws of that which feeds them." -- Thomas Jefferson to Spencer Roane, 1821.

"By the bill of rights of England, a subject has a right to a trial by his peers. What is meant by his peers? Those who reside near him, his neighbors, and who are well aquainted with his character and situation in life." Patrick Henry, (Elliont,The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, 3:579).

"Why do we love this trial by jury? Because it prevents the hand of oppression from cutting you off...This gives me comfort - that, as long as I have existence, my neighbors will protect me."Patrick Henry (Elliot, 3:545, 546)  

 "Jury lawlessness is the greatest corrective of law in its actual administration. The will of the state at large imposed on a reluctant community, the will of a majority imposed on a vigorous and determined minority, find the same obstacle in the local JURY that formerly confronted kings and ministers."US v. Dougherty

End the Empire

What if D.C. IS the world government Christians say that they're afraid of?

By Michael Rozeff

The empire has put in place the pseudo-legal "laws" that it needs to repress dissidents within America. It will use these "laws" and executive orders in order to quell restiveness and resistance among Americans. The reason for the domestic suppression is because the empire cannot expand overseas if its domestic population is not under firm control. The driving force in domestic suppression is the goal of world empire. This is why lovers and supporters of liberty should strongly condemn all of the many U.S. actions to expand empire.
The idea that I've just expressed is not widely known, much less accepted. So I'll repeat it again. The U.S. wants a world empire and is actively trying to achieve that aim. That's its number one priority. In order to achieve that, it needs a cooperative, compliant, and productive population and one that does not resist that aim. That is why the government has been putting measures in place that are repressive and destroy judicial rights.

According to an Iranian analyst who specializes in Russia, the Russians now understand what the U.S. is after. It has taken them a while for this to penetrate. He writes of the Russians
"Russian analysts maintain that the current foreign policy of the United States is based on two theories: 'ultimate realism,' and 'new liberalism.' As a result, the Americans actually believe that world countries are simply divided into the United States’ friends and enemies. Hostile countries, therefore, should be weakened and their presence in global and regional strategic arenas should be limited and even suppressed in political, economic and cultural terms.
"The new liberalism also claims that all wars break out between non-democratic states. Therefore, all countries should go through an American style democratization process and if needed, military means such as preventive war, can be used to achieve that purpose.
"As a result of the above arguments, Russia believes that the current political developments in the Middle East and North Africa are steered by the United States. Moscow firmly believes that a new wave of the world order has been initiated by the United States in order to create a new version of the past unipolar world system. The main targets of this wave, Moscow maintains, include North Africa, the Middle East, Iran, Eurasia, and finally China and Russia."
The U.S. supports radical Muslims and al-Qaeda operations when they stir up trouble in Muslim populations in regions near and in Russia so as to weaken Russia.
Readers will recognize that the doctrines described as applicable to the U.S. foreign policy are the Bush Doctrine and associated Bush and neoconservative ideas. The Obama administration has continued these policies. It has expanded them, innovated within them, and intensified them.
9/11 was a first class disaster for America's future due to the political forces it has unleashed and facilitated. Bin Laden is dead but he is getting his revenge as the U.S. government destroys American values in the name of those very values. I cannot think of a more insidious subversion.
The current election offers no choice on this central issue, which is not even seen as a central issue.
End the Empire.

For those who say," Why, that's unconstitutional"!

So, what do they care?

Better figure it out quick. If your Rights come from a piece of paper, you're screwed, you only got like 2 or 3 Rights left. LOL

Anarchast Ep. 25 with Josh Luther

In this episode of Anarchast, we talk with Josh Luther in beautiful Acapulco, Mexico.

- Josh's road from Marxism to Anarchism
- Ron Paul
- Law and Anarchism

Ron Paul responds to Panetta

Today, Ron Paul responded to Panetta and his disregard for the Rule of Law.

Ron Paul comments on War Powers.

You won't hear anything from the 3 goons on this. They, like the King, want the power to go to war unchecked.

A few quotes from John Locke

"Whenever violence is used, and injury done, though by hands appointed to administer justice, it is still violence and injury, however coloured with the name, pretences, or forms of law".

"Everyone has property in his own person. This nobody has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his."

"For a man's property is not at all secure, though there be good and equitable laws to set the bounds of it, between him and his fellow subjects, if he who commands those subjects, have power to take from any private man, what part he pleases of his property, and use and dispose of it as he thinks good."

"And thus the community perpetually retains a supreme power of saving themselves from the attempts and designs of anybody, even of their legislators, whenever they shall be so foolish, or so wicked, as to lay and carry on designs against the liberties and properties of the subject." 

"For there are no examples so frequent in history, both sacred and profane, as those of men withdrawing themselves, and their obedience, from the jurisdiction they were born under, and the family or community they were bred up in, and setting up new governments in other places...."

I really like the last one, VOTE WITH YOUR FEET!

Some thoughts

The Israelites had it made. Think of it, God was their King, they only had Judges that would listen to their legal problems and they only dealt in matters that involved the individual vs. other individuals, and in matters that involved God's Law.
Eventually, they cried for a king, and why not...every other Nation had a king, why couldn't they??!!
Samuel tried to discourage them, and reminded them that a king would bring taxation, military conscription, and the potential for tyranny. But they demanded it anyway.
It's interesting that God tells Samuel to give them a king, and says that in this request, they are rejecting Him, not Samuel.
We could say that God saw the people wanting someone to rule over them instead of individually ruling over themselves as a rejection of Him.
And look what they got.

Fast forward several hundred years, and God's law is given to us in a nutshell, "Love the Father with all your heart, and love your neighbors as yourselves."
That's it.
We could have a perfect (as perfect as man can be) society based on those two laws. If you love your neighbor as yourself, what need is there for any law anyway? Based on that Law alone, you could truly live free.
We are never told to force this law on anyone, but to spread the "Good News."  And in part, the Good News is that man can live free, free from bondage and slavery.

Fast forward to today. Today we have people who want to use this "Good News" to enslave a free people.
Of course, it's for your own good, and for the good of society, but it requires that individuals conform to a certain idea that THEY decide is right.
Does "love your neighbors as yourselves" mean to support laws made by a government you know to be evil but that throws people in jail for not following their own personal beliefs?
So then it is ok?
"Well, even though I know this government to be  evil, and that it sanctions the murder of the unborn, and murders the innocent at will, that it steals from our posterity worse than the most villainous mobster, I will support it when it is in line with one of my moral beliefs."
Really? Are you willing to let a murderous, thieving government be your "moral compass" when it passes a law that fits into your own moral code, even when that law is punishing someone who is harming none other than himself, or, more often than not, no one at all??
Where in the Bible are you told to support government-sponsored "moral laws" that merely image what you deem to be good? If you are willing to allow the government to be your moral compass, you cannot pick and choose which morals you will decide to be right. The government has and does decide that for you. I hate drugs. But I see no biblical authority to force others to not use them. I like to have an alcoholic drink, but I know some "Christians" think that it is wrong. What authority do they have to force their belief on me?
None. 
Yet we see the religious ones clamoring for the government to legislate their morals on others. Because it is "right." They allow themselves to be blinded by the fact that some day, that same government could decide that the views they hold should be illegal, and what recourse would they have then? They already had everyone who they disagreed with locked up, so who is left to defend them?
They have told God, "give us a king," and they pay the consequences of their desires, forgetting that in supporting this king, they have rejected God.