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
