The long-held monopoly on the practice of law by licensed attorneys has indeed served to protect individuals requiring legal services from malpractice, but it has also served to protect the State from true challenges to its authority and practices. Sometimes the system and its players are what should be lawfully challenged in court… but those beholden through tens of thousands of dollars in education investments to the good graces of judges may find themselves in a position where they cannot properly defend their clients. This is why in New Hampshire I believe RSA 311:7, the prohibitor on allowing lay individuals to represent individuals, should be eliminated and the NH Bar Association’s monopoly on the practice of law dismantled.
As many of you may already know, I am not a lawyer. I am a former law enforcement officer who has spent many hours studying law and listening to judicial oral arguments in efforts to better understand the American legal system and its function. In 2011/2012 I was authorized to represent a journalist named Jason Talley in front of the Cheshire County Superior Court for charges stemming from his mere possession (not use) of a camera in a common area of a court. Jason and I “won” the case together by attacking the system and individual judges for misconduct. A licensed lawyer who regularly practices law in front of these judges most likely would be apprehensive to do the same out of fear of retribution from the very people who can control their law licenses or liberty interests of future clients.
As it stands now, a person of “good moral character” can practice law in New Hampshire so long as they don’t do it “commonly.” What does “commonly” mean? It seems to mean whatever the judge of the day thinks it means.
I believe this prohibition needs to be struck down… and I believe this prohibition is in direct conflict with the New Hampshire Constitution, specifically Part I, Article 10. That’s right… it is my position that the NH Bar Association and NH Attorney General cannot monopolize and prohibit individuals from practicing law if they are intent on “reforming” the government through the codified Right of Revolution.
Recently here in the federal prison that I currently call “home,” there was a fight between two miserable, awful human beings known around the unit as the Nazi and the Swindler. Even more recently, Granite State Watch released a list of anti-democracy extremists; I am on that list, and it brought much joy to this, the eighth month of my eighteen month prison sentence, to know that I struck such a profound fear in them that even the rattling of my chains echoes in their minds. Of course, Granite State Watch is correct in their assessment; I am an anti-democracy extremist. When all the cards are laid on the table, it’s shown that they, too, are anti-democracy extremists. Most people are.
As politicians and law enforcement leaders spin their wheels trying to get ahold of the fentanyl crisis, those of us in the drug policy reform movement have long had the answer to solving the overdose issue: legalize, regulate, and educate. Treat drug abuse as it should be: a medical condition, not a criminal justice one.
To say that the Drug War has been an abject failure is to simply be a broken record repeating the message that we’ve been saying all along. President Joe Biden’s administration funded $42.5 billion dollars for drug control for fiscal year 2023. This was a complete waste of your money, just like all the years before it. Were the enforcement of drug laws making a difference the following overdose statistics would simply not exist.
The police keep doing the same thing they’ve always done… and the deaths just keep on rising.
New Hampshire’s legislature has again voted on a measure which would let the NH electorate vote in a referendum on independence from the U.S. In 2022, very similar legislation received:
– 13 votes by state reps.
This time, the bill received:
– 24 votes by state reps.
Initially it appears few mainstream media have reported the latter number or the increase. But you can see the vote here for confirmation; this is the legislature’s official channel:
The vote occurs at 5:08:00
Here is the report on the less-successful 2022 effort: https://www.wmur.com/article/new-hampshire-house-secede-united-states/39400488?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot#
Around that time, a scientific poll by SurveyUSA indicated 42% support for an independence referendum, among NH residents…another under-reported number:
New Hampshire State House
A constitutional amendment proposed this session (CACR 20) would give the people of New Hampshire the power to fight back against the dangerous and reckless spending of the federal government. In the last 100 years the U.S.federal government has only managed to balance its budget once! By comparison New Hampshire not only cut taxes, but even reduced it’s budget during a time in which all the other states were spending recklessly (that is during the recent economic shutdown that was COVID). As an independent country New Hampshire could do better and CAC20 would give the people the right to vote on an amendment that would declare independence if the federal government continues to increase our indebtedness.
Austin’s border militarization is wrong; so is U.S. interference. NH should divorce both governments.
(Above) New Hampshire independence advocates rally before a hearing on secession legislation (Photo by Joa Orga).
In a memorable sci-fi moment, elderly politician Chrisjen Avasarala warns interstellar envoy James Holden of danger. She expects a murderous local faction will try and get him on their side. “Do not,” she says, “put your dick in it.”
Those of us in America who advocate a “national divorce” should consider her advice – and historical precedent – before we “jump to the side…of Austin’s aPARtheid.” Every state and empire involved with this ugly confrontation will lie, steal, cheat and at least occasionally kill. That’s what states and empires do, even when they’re not trying to build the next Berlin Wall or accrue millions of destitute migrants at taxpayer expense. So how should Concord react? How should secession advocates react? It, and we, should let the non-aggression principle be the guide.
Jeremy Kauffman, Founder Of The Decentralized Blockchain-Based Free Speech Platform LBRY
I’ve spent a lot of time thinking since my arrival at Fort Devens to serve my 18 months of government-mandated vacation, and one of my favorite things to remember is that final week of Porcfest, where I spent time with my liberty family a mere two days before starting my prison sentence. I have, of course, been aware of certain issues that developed after that year’s final Porcfest day–notably, after the Soapbox Idol event. After all, I was there as a judge, and I saw it all first-hand, with better-than-front-row seats, and I really only have one question:
Is this how we treat heroes of the liberty movement?
To call Jeremy Kauffman divisive is as much of an understatement as calling me controversial, but on one point there can be no division or dispute. Jeremy built LBRY, a real-life tool that is immune to government censorship as no other platform has ever been, and from that spawned Odysee, a web-based front-end to the protocol that brought much of this unrestricted content to the masses. What Ross Ulbricht did to make drug use safter, Jeremy did to help protect information from overbearing states (and what state isn’t overbearing?). If this was his only contribution to bettering the world for liberty, I would argue that it is more than enough, but he has not been content to merely hand over a widely used censorship-resistant video and file sharing protocol and platform, has he?