Comments on: Money vs. Obedience

By: AnarchoJesse

AnarchoJesse — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 06:46:47 +0000

LRS, if the case were that we lived in a dictatorship, would you recommend the same course of action? Using the system that exists to eliminate the system that exists? The only reason I ask is because any methodology which claims validity must be universally applied in order to be true.

So– would you recommend that if the case were that this were a dictatorship we become dictators to change the system?

By: elkheart

elkheart — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:11:05 +0000

Sorry, Vesuvious…I just today read your post #77313, above. You’re right. My bad. I’ve still got that “100% polyester, Made in China” “american flag”…missed the flag-burning due to last minute scheduling conflict…*That’s* the issue…To those who favor the Constitutional Rape of outlawing flag burning, would a “made in China” U.S.Flag be covered? Is it an *AMERICAN* flag, if it’s *MADE IN COMMUNIST CHINA*???…I don’t think so…&Personally, I find jesse’s arguments about as “rock-solid” as TALCUM POWDER…but, I always read them, always think about them, and I’m glad that jesse does what he does, & writes what he writes. “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend you right to say it.”…that’s how I feel about jesse. Who says we all have to think alike, just to get along??? Hell, I don’t always agree with *myself*!!!……

By: Phil

Phil — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 20:46:36 +0000

It’s good to stand against facism but to arrogantly defy a judges court proceedure and not sit when directed to shows a flaw in personality that many activist often exhibit. Wisdom, for most often cures this youthful and rather comical yet fruitless trait.

Also very wise words from LRS above. Hit the nail on the head.

LOL

By: LRS

LRS — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 17:43:04 +0000

Question. Why is everyone so hard on the enforcers of the law? The police are suppose to police the public to insure the laws are being followed. It would be irresponsible of them to pick and choose which laws they are going to enforce. (granted, it does happen, but they should enforce all laws without prejudice). The judge is supposed to judge whether or not the laws have been broken, to assign guilt/punishment based on the law. It would be irresponsible of them to pick and choose what laws they are going to enforce. (granted, it does happen, but they should enforce all laws without prejudice). They do not have the authority nor the right to disregard a law because the accused does not agree with it. Everyone who breaks the law has a rationale for breaking it.

If you want to change the laws you need to follow the guidelines set forth by the constitution to change the laws. Petition the lawmakers for a change in the law. If the people of this city/county/state/country agree with your ideas on how a community should be required to behave, the lawmakers will have no choice but to listen. They are the representatives of the people and are required to respond to will of the people. If they disregard the will of the people they will be voted out and replaced by someone who will respond to the will of the people. Most politicians love there jobs(power)and will not risk being replaced.

The big issue is whether your ideas are the will of the people. We live in a country where majority rules or at least the appearance of majority. You must be willing to gather the petitions, promote it in public and pressure the lawmakers for change. You must be willing to see it through the process. There is no way to side step the process. You must attend the meetings, contact your representatives/councilmen, overwhelm them with the idea that this is what the public wants.

Do you know how many motorcycle helmet laws have been revoked or modified or denied because a bunch of bikers got together and approached the lawmakers (not the law enforcers) and overwhelmed them with idea that this is what the (interested) public wants? All of them.

It works when you follow the process set forth by the constitution.

So who is going to take the lead and see about getting the ordinance, that pertains to the couch on the lawn, appealed? Who is going to be willing to attend the meetings, rally the (interested) public, and see this through to the end? And when it is appealed or found that this it what the majority wanted, move on to the next law or ordinance and do it all over again.

Don’t waste your energies martyring yourself for the enforcers. It is a waste. Like the enforcers, you are trying to get them to obey your will for your own reasons. The problem is you do not have power nor authority in these arena. The enforcers do. Change to the arena in which you do have power. Focus your energies on changing the laws not rebelling against them. Lawmaking starts with the people. You may find that the ease in which these laws and ordinances were established, will be the same in getting them modified or revoked.

By: Kyle M

Kyle M — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 22:08:59 +0000

Goog strategy, offering the $240 to the local food bank. The judge probably wanted to get this thing off his docket ASAP. The amount of bad press this got for a measly $120 profit will have the enforcement agents think twice about trying to using their ordinances to collect money from Ian. Giving the Judge a way to save face is key. He’ll jump at it to avoid the other option which is the laying bare of certain facts.

So the money isn’t going into their pockets. I agree with Zeus that the recipients of food bank will probably see very little of it. But how much will the City of Keene see? Zero dollars. Isn’t that what you wanted Ian?

By: Vesuvius

Vesuvius — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 08:08:42 +0000

Jesse is incapable of giving a short and succinct answer and usually delivers a dissertation. And that is why his arguments almost invariably are rock-solid. And we missed you at the burning Elkheart. Weren’t you supposed to bring a Chinese made American flag? I waited and waited for the Masked Patriot to patrol central square in an ever tightening circle. What a tease.

By: Zeus

Zeus — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 01:42:20 +0000

Totally not cool, dude. It’s one thing to have a problem with his philosophy and his methodology. Just posting insubstantial insults is just plain douchebaggery.

By: elkheart

elkheart — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 01:10:34 +0000

You are correct Patrick, Starchild is trolling because that’s what trolls do. So what? At least it stimulated another spewage of intellectual gobbledy-gook from the frothing cranium of anarchojoke-ass dude…That’s aways amusing. Watching jesse trying to lift the stone too heavy to be lifted which he has created in his mind, actually is “shits & giggles”…literally…*GIGGLESHITS*…(Your valiantly futile struggle continues to inspire us all. Keep writing, jesse, you’ll make sense of yourself someday, I’m sure)/

By: fred

fred — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 04:50:20 +0000

Is the couch still in the yard?

By: Zeus

Zeus — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 15:00:21 +0000

What I’d really like to know is what this all accomplishes. This was a waste of $240 that could have been used for something more productive in Ian’s life or the lives of those he would have otherwise spent it on. Instead, it’s going to go to a charity which will likely keep most of the money while a pittance actually makes it to the intended recipients.

If those of us who know what the government is and what it does spend all our efforts on antagonizing local bureaucrats and paying the price for doing so, how exactly is that going to bring us liberty in our lifetime?

Wouldn’t it be more practical to spread the message of freedom to those with open minds and preparing to not only survive the inevitable economic collapse coming in 2009 but to thrive and consolidate with like-minded individuals?

Arguing with Burke and his ilk seems like a big waste of time. He and the others will be gone as soon as the structure that supports them crumbles from a lack of funds in the very near future. Your true enemy then will be the armed statist groups that rise up to replace them and their cloak of legitimacy will be much more transparent.

Unlike them, who either have no idea what is coming or are still clinging to the notion of the gravy train lasting forever, pro-liberty activists like yourselves recognize the coming collapse and still have months to prepare for it and what shall come in its wake.

Why not take advantage of that rather than fighting these useless little tiffs with inconsequential bureaucrats?

Judging from some of the talk between Ian and OTN Sam on FTL, playing “pro se” attorney and using questionable legal theories to harass these bureaucrats is great for shits and giggles entertainment but not for achieving liberty in our lifetime.