Dried Psilocybin Mushrooms, photo from Northspore.com
Thanks to the efforts of activist group Decriminalize Nature, cities across the United States have decriminalized the possession of mushrooms containing psilocybin. From Oakland, CA to nearby Northampton, MA, city councils have voted unanimously to direct law enforcement to essentially ignore people who possess psychedelic mushrooms. Plus, the entire state of Oregon legalized shrooms via a ballot initiative in 2020.
Thus far, however, no state has yet decriminalized psilocybin mushrooms via the legislative process. Perhaps New Hampshire will be the first with HB 1349, a bill that proposes to make the possession of up to 12 grams of psilocybin mushrooms a mere violation with a $100 fine, instead of a felony.
It’s easy to be skeptical that such a change can happen here in New Hampshire, given the state was slow to decriminalize cannabis, but finally did in 2017. However, the tide is shifting on the issue of psilocybin mushrooms. The reason that city councils are voting unanimously to decriminalize shrooms is because they really do help a lot of people with serious mental problems like PTSD and depression. The studies on this are numerous and growing. It is hard for city councilors to deny retired military veterans who testify that psilocybin has cured them of PTSD, or people with terminal diseases who will testify that psilocybin has helped them be at ease with death. Plus, it has long been known that psilocybin mushrooms are safe to use, even compared with cannabis.
Drug Harm to Society and the User
As I pointed out in my testimony in front of the state house Criminal Justice committee on Wednesday, the most relevant thing they should consider is that the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled in December of 2020 that using psilocybin mushrooms for religious reasons is legal in New Hampshire. Jeremy Mack was arrested for possession of psilocybin mushrooms and convicted in Superior Court. He appealed, arguing it was his right, as a member of the Oklevueha Native American Church to use psilocybin as part of his religion.
In a UNANIMOUS decision, the NH supremes overturned Mack’s conviction, pointing out that the New Hampshire constitution has stronger religious freedom protections than the United States constitution. While the US constitution protects the right to religion, the NH constitution protects your right to worship God how you choose:
Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and reason; and no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious profession, sentiments, or persuasion; provided he doth not disturb the public peace or disturb others in their religious worship. -Article 5, NH Constitution Bill of Rights
Given this amazing court decision, the religious use of psilocybin mushrooms is already fully legal in New Hampshire. Now the legislature should catch up and stop the police from even arresting psilocybin users at all, by passing HB 1349. I am optimistic for its chances. At the hearing on Wednesday, the only person who spoke against the bill was a drug warrior from the NH State Police, who trotted out the usual scare tactics of “DANGER” and “THE CHILDREN”. Though by pointing out that his kids told him shrooms are available for sale in their school, he inadvertently admits the abject failure of his precious War on Drugs.
On Tuesday a democrat in New Hampshire’s house introduced a bill in support of free software. The House Bill (HB) 1273 would be a step forward for software freedom. It proposes to help protect the user freedom of New Hampshire residents in a number of important ways.
Prohibits the state government from requiring residents to use proprietary software, whether in remote court appearances, tax filings, standardized test-taking, coursework in public schools, or matters relating to any state benefits
Forbid employers from using non-compete clauses to prevent their employees from contributing to free software
Prevents state agencies from mandating the use of non-free JavaScript
Prohibits NH law enforcement from participating in the investigation or prosecution of copyright claims brought by proprietary software developers against free software developers
Forms a state commission to promote the use of free software in state agencies
Now much of the legislation is a bit wishy-washy with no real teeth, but there are some parts that in theory if passed could have a beneficial impact on our freedom. Other parts could be a little more problematic for those who are libertarian and do not believe in the use of violence to achieve social and political objectives (outside that of a defensive nature anyway). Fortunately most of the bill is tailored toward government and is more defensive in nature than not. Some not so great parts would likely also not have much real world impact.
One part in particular should get libertarians everywhere excited. While it probably was not intended by the legislator proposing the bill, a democrat, it would none-the-less be an amazing step forward in reducing the harm of violent thugs in government. The bill would ensure that users have the right to access the source code for any device utilized in the creation of evidence. This would in effect result in evidence being thrown out whereby the government could not produce the source code to the device that created it. Evidence from such devices as radar guns would no longer be valid in court for all practical purposes. The reason for this is that the suppliers of such devices will not release such source code and thereby prosecutors won’t be able to comply with the law. Before the socialists get upset by this though it’s something everyone should be concerned about. It’s already well known that these devices are full of bugs and this would likely result in evidence being invalidated everywhere if the code were released- not just in NH- and so the device manufacturers would never want to do this short of significant improvements to the code. The solution is to pass this in more states and force manufacturers hand-else let this stand as a means of eliminating a law that should not be in that there is no party that can actually show injury.
To have any real chance of seeing this pass the legislation would likely need to be significantly trimmed. Some parts are problematic such as the forbidding of employers from using non-compete clauses to prevent their employees from contributing to free software for instance. This would likely be unpopular with many state legislators who otherwise support software freedom while also supporting ones right to negotiate a contract free of government interference. Maybe there is a way to put this into law that were more freedom-focused, like letting such terms be unenforceable via law, but either way much of the legislature isn’t going to want to interfere in the private affairs of employee-employer relations either way. I suspect this is likely to have little impact in either case given non-compete clauses within the free software world are already taboo and many of us (myself included) would not sign (or require it) such in an employment contract.
One interesting aspect of the bill is that it would prohibit NH law enforcement from partaking in investigation or prosecution of copyright claims against free software developers. While I can in good conscious support this and would go farther to argue for the elimination of copyright it’s unclear to me where this is currently an issue. Maybe it’s connected to the breaking of digital restrictions such as would be the case with something like DeCSS. A free software program that breaks encryption on commercial DVDs. This falls under copyright law and might be prosecuted by state agencies although that said it’s normally a federal offense. State law enforcement can generally however prosecute federal crimes as I understand it or otherwise partake in federal investigation and prosecution thereof. Of which is more common I do believe with civil asset forfeiture cases.
In spite of some of the issues with the legislation a small contingent of libertarians showed up to more or less in support the legislation as well as others from the free software community. One Jon “maddog” Hall, the Board Chair for the Linux Professional Institute, for instance came out and spoke in favor of the legislation.
Jon “maddog” Hall is the Board Chair for the Linux Professional Institute
The main theme surrounding the hearing seemed to be that of software security and the cost of implementation. New Hampshire’s head of IT for instance also spoke from what appeared to be a purchased lobbyist point-of-view. Declaring more or less that it would be of significant burden and cost to transition to free software (while saying they’re already using free software humorously). The opposing side of course pointed out the truth in that there is always a cost to migrate from one release of a program to another, but it’s not significantly different from that of migrating to free software. Not to mention that while free software isn’t about price, but the liberty, security, and control, this twisting and confusing of the bill was quite disingenuous. The long term costs are reduced as no license agreements need be acquired. Commercial support is generally available too despite the head of IT trying to confuse the reps by comparing commercial software to free software. These are for all intensive purposes one and the same. You can acquire commercial support from Redhat for instance for free software and even much of Microsoft’s own code is based on free software. This bill was about libre, not gratis where libre means freedom, and gratis means price.
While the head of NH IT argued against free software on the basis of features, commercial support, and security the reality is these are more often than not mute points given features can be added to free software unlike the proprietary software he favored. Security bugs can be fixed not at the whim of a particular company, but that of either, you, the community, or the commercial entity you contract with for said free software (example: Redhat). Yes- you can buy free software and many companies do. Just because something is libre doesn’t mean you can’t or shouldn’t pay for its development/support. And unlike proprietary software free software can be seen, read, and audited by third parties with or without the consent of the company producing it (once released). These are the things that ensure security- not anti-virus software or proprietary software vendors of which the former is a kin to putting up a fence and expecting it to stop ants from coming onto your property. The head of IT didn’t stop there- even implying that free software was insecure through association with Bitcoin. While not said outright during the hearing he referenced recent socially engineered attacks on municipalities. Somewhat recently there were reports of municipalities being ‘hacked’- which were in reality social engineering attacks primarily involving the traditional banking system. It was only after the attacks occurred and the money paid by employees of the municipalities to criminals overseas that said money was utilized to purchase Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies. If there is a flaw- it’s not the software- and it’s certainly not the result of it being libre.
In September, Free Keene covered the filing of a first-ever constitutional amendment to declare peaceful independence from the United States federal government. Now, that bill has been officially assigned a bill number, CACR 32.
As reported today by the NH Exit blog, the next step is the bill will go before a state house committee for public hearing. In a historic first for all 50 states, people of New Hampshire will have a chance to speak to the state reps about secession – whether for or against.
If passed without amendment by 60% of the NH House and Senate, CACR 32 will appear on the ballot with the following wording:
Are you in favor of amending the first part of the constitution by inserting after article 7 a new article to read as follows:
[Art.] 7-a. [Independent Nation.] New Hampshire peaceably declares independence from the United States and immediately proceeds as a sovereign nation. All other references to the United States in this constitution, state statutes and regulations are nullified.
To pass, it must receive at least 2/3rds of the vote. Visit the NHexit.US post for the full story.
In a strong unintended endorsement, the New Hampshire democrats had yet another online meeting tonight to expose the Free State Project‘s migrants for infiltrating the republican party, winning dozens of state house seats, and our various other tremendous successes.
Despite claiming our numbers are small, the entire video conference – put on by former state reps, at least one of whom migrated to NH – was all about how well-organized our decentralized freedom migration has been. The statists are extremely concerned about the Free State Project, as evidenced by the fact that they have held multiple such meetings like this over the last several years. They used to be held in person but now they are too frightened of catching a cold to meet in real life, and it’s easier to keep the liberty activists out of the discussion this way.
The former state reps giving the presentation believe that there’s some secret big libertarian money funding activists to move here, which is totally false. Otherwise, they have clearly done a LOT of homework to learn as much as they can about this movement, because it is working. We are a peaceful threat to the status quo and they hate that liberty is rising in New Hampshire.
Thankfully, YouTuber and NH resident Dr. Karlyn Borysenko live streamed the event on her channel for hundreds of live viewers, so you can watch the democrats’ whole presentation. It’s basically a 90-minute promo piece for the Free State Project.
Nowhere else in the other 49 states are the people in power actually worried about libertarian activists. The reason they aren’t concerned, is because libertarians are completely ineffective. The reason we’re so ineffective elsewhere is because there are so few of us, spread across the entire country. That’s the reason the Free State Project was formed. It was a good idea and two decades later it’s a proven success. The statists are very, very scared.
Normally, the Keene mayoral primary is pretty uneventful. This year, however, according to the Keene Sentinel, a major bombshell just dropped regarding one of the three candidates, 66-year-old Mark J. Zuchowski, a newcomer to Keene politics.
Zuchowski has been accused of stalking by city clerk office worker Heather Fitz-Simon. Though Zuchowski hasn’t been charged criminally in the matter, he has been no-trespassed from Fitz-Simon’s home and is facing a hearing on a stalking petition brought by Fitz-Simon on October 6th at 2:30pm in Cheshire Superior Court. According to the Sentinel story, Zuchowski spent inordinate time hanging around the city clerk’s office, rambling about his dead mother and shaking a seltzer bottle, then explaining to Fitz-Simon his habit of creepily watching a young woman who works near his home. Zuchowski allegedly emailed city staff about his observation of the woman, explaining he’s watching her daily to make sure she is able to get inside her workplace safely. He emailed Fitz-Simon inviting her – a married woman – out on a date, later claiming it was only to discuss his campaign.
If all Zuchowski did was make a awkward pass at a city employee, that wouldn’t be so bad. However he then showed up at Fitz-Simon’s house, blocked the driveway with his car, took photos of the home, and rung the doorbell, allegedly multiple times. When police were called, he was given a no-trespass order and still didn’t leave immediately. He tried to claim he was just looking to see if Fitz-Simon had received his email invite, bizarrely excusing his photographing the home by explaining he thought he’d been there before while apartment hunting in the past. He claims he wanted to give her a small pumpkin and a note complimenting her appearance and reiterating his invite to an antiques show.
Obviously, there are two sides to every story, but I can personally confirm the dude is weird. When I was filing to run for at-large city council in early September, Zuchowski was in the clerk’s office being overly-friendly with the city staff. He was acting like he belonged there. Since he’s relatively new to town, I only know it was him because he introduced himself to another person who happened to walk into the office at the same time. At the moment, I chalked his behavior up to being a little-too-enthusiastic about being the next mayor, though he did strike me as odd at the time.
Mark J Zuchowski, Alleged Creep
Plus, check out the rambling twenty-four page bio he submitted to the city clerk’s office regarding his campaign for mayor of Keene. On just the first page he explains he feels like he has a father-and-son relationship with current mayor George Hansel and excoriates Hansel for attending protests last summer during the governor’s “stay at home” order, then uses math formulas to calculate how protestors violated social distancing. Apparently, Zuchowski was an engineer prior to retiring to Keene from his original home in Massachusetts. He worked for defense contractors developing weapons for the military to murder innocents around the world, yet claims to be a lifelong Christian.
In a post responding to the news about Zuchowski, DiMezzo said, “Look, when you’ve made someone uncomfortable, you should notice that, and stop making them uncomfortable. The only misunderstanding here is that you’re a creep who is creepily creeping on some chick, and you refuse to recognize that. Stop being a creep.” Zuchowski claims the whole situation is a misunderstanding. The primary election is this Tuesday, October 5th. One of the three candidates will be eliminated Tuesday and two move on to the November 2nd general election.
Please come out Tuesday and vote for Aria DiMezzo. Polling place information is here on the City website. You can register to vote at the polls if you aren’t registered yet. Remember voting in a primary means your vote counts even more than normal, since almost no one ever bothers. You can get more information about Aria at the Reformed Satanic Church blog, of which she is the High Priestess and her official campaign website, KeeneQueen.com.
Thanks to two heroic state representatives, New Hampshire has now taken the lead nationally in the independence movement. Yesterday, five-term state rep Mike Sylvia filed the text of a constitutional amendment that would, if passed, declare independence from the United States:
“Are you in favor of amending the first part of the New Hampshire Constitution by inserting, after article 7, a new article to read as follows:
[Art.] 7-a. [Independent Nation.] New Hampshire declares itself as independent from the United States and peaceably, immediately proceeds as a sovereign nation. All other references to the United States in this constitution and state statutes and regulations are nullified.”
To pass, it must first receive over 60% of the vote in both the state house and senate. If it does, it will then be placed on the 2022 ballot and then must receive over 2/3rds of the vote to be enacted. If so, it goes into effect immediately. There would be no political games like with United Kingdom’s “Brexit” from the European Union, which took several years to hammer out after the vote. New Hampshire will instantly declare our independence and nullify all standing agreements with the federal government gang. Compare this to the thus-far unsuccessful attempts in other US states.
In recent years, secession movements around the country have sprung up and made headlines in California and Texas, but with very little legislative support. In Texas, a state rep filed a bill this year that if passed, would merely have placed a non-binding referendum on the ballot for Texas voters to register their opinion on whether the Texas legislature should begin an arduous process of figuring out how to leave the United States. This bill’s filing resulted in plenty of media coverage and discussion, however, it died before even receiving a committee hearing. A key reason that New Hampshire was chosen as the destination for the Free State Project is that EVERY bill gets a public committee hearing, no matter how much support it has from the state reps. Most states are like Texas, where it’s a political game whether a bill even gets a hearing.
New Hampshire Independence
In California, a left-leaning group called “Yes California” has been trying for years to get an independence question on the ballot by gathering the hundreds-of-thousands of required signatures. If passed, the measure would require the legislature to declare independence from the US and become its own republic. So far, they have been unsuccessful despite garnering significant media coverage. Currently their website is offline, though their Twitter is still active. Even if they do get the question on the ballot and it passes, they may not survive the inevitable court challenge given the CA state constitution provides that California, “is an inseparable part of the United States of America.”
While I want to see both Texas and California exit the United States, it’s clear that with the filing of this constitutional amendment bill – called in NH a “CACR” or, “Constitutional Amendment Concurrent Resolution” – that New Hampshire has taken the clear lead in the race to see who will leave the union first. Plus, unlike California, the NH constitution clearly protects the “Right of Revolution” in Article 10 and “State Sovereignty” in Article 7 of the NH Bill of Rights.
Representative Sylvia, in an exclusive interview with Free Keene, had this to say on why he filed the proposed amendment, “The people of America have forgotten their history, if we take the time to look at our roots we can see that our constitutions have received ‘lip service’ for far too long. While I can not change the direction of the federal government, I can hold up the New Hampshire constitution and demand that we honor its clear directives. Article 10 reads in part, ‘whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government.'”
The 2018 liberty “Legislator of the Year” representative Sylvia is joined by freshman state rep from the Keene area, Matt Santonastaso as the co-sponsor of the amendment. Other state reps have been approached and have expressed support and a full list will be released when the amendment is assigned a CACR number and moves onto a committee.
NH Independence NOW!
The process is just beginning, with Sylvia submitting the proposed text to NH Legislative Services on Monday. It may take several weeks for them to officially draft the CACR and send it back to Sylvia for final approval. It then is assigned to a committee which will then hold a public hearing sometime in early 2022. What happens from there is up to the committee and will largely depend on how much public support the amendment receives at its hearing.
Even if it doesn’t pass this time, it will get many conversations started about the evil federal government and why peacefully declaring independence is the best solution. Minds will be persuaded and changed. Many media and political attacks will be brought against us, as the power-seekers will be desperate to keep the status quo. Potential migrants to New Hampshire will be energized and make-the-move.
To help the movement, you can contact your local state reps in support of the amendment, connect with other supporters online, and more. Visit the “How You Can Help” page on NHexit.us for a full list of ideas.
