Nemo Me Impune Lacessit

Sunday, 5 November 2017

Remember, Remember the 5th of November

Filed under: Principles, Reading, Viewing — Tags: , , — mikewb1971 @ 11:28 PM (23:28)

People should not be afraid of their governments.

Governments should be afraid of their people.


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. DC Comics, Vertigo Comics — V for Vendetta by Alan Moore, David Lloyd, et al.
  2. Warner Bros. — V for Vendetta

Advertisements

Wednesday, 25 October 2017

Stupidity, Insanity and Evil in LP Land, Part the Nth

Filed under: Politics, Principles — Tags: , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 5:23 PM (17:23)

Recently, Governor Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown (D-KKKalifornia) signed a bill making it no longer a felony to knowingly infect someone with HIV [1].

Whatever happened to government being the defender of our lives, liberties, properties and pursuits of happiness[2]?

Instead, government is becoming more and more a plunderer and pillager of that which it’s supposed to protect[3].

What particularly irks me about this is that there are some who call themselves “libertarians” who prefer to let the State (in this case, Moonbeam Brown) not only define their ethics and morality, but then insist that they’re the ones abiding by the Zero Aggression Principle

I guess this is what you get when you lower your standards and insist that “everyone is a Libertarian, they just don’t know it yet.”


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. Los Angeles Times — Knowingly exposing others to HIV will no longer be a felony in California by Patrick McGreevy

    CNN — California lowers penalty for knowingly exposing partners to HIV by Alaa Elassar and Laura Diaz-Zuniga

  2. The Declaration of Independence
  3. The Law, by Frédéric Bastiat

Thursday, 12 October 2017

Clearing the Bench New Mexico

Filed under: Networking, Organizing, Politics, Principles, Resistance — Tags: , , , — mikewb1971 @ 11:56 PM (23:56)

Getting tired of judges who view the federal and State Constitutions as their personal Charmin rolls where your liberty and property are concerned?

In New Mexico, if a judge seeking to be retained during an election receives less than 57 % of the votes cast in his / her retention race, than the judge in question loses his / her spot on the bench, and returns to the private sector.

Q: What, exactly, did they do to need cleared?[1]

A: What have they done to warrant retention?

The burden of proof isn’t upon us, We The People, to prove that they warrant removal, it’s upon them to prove that they warrant retention.

The intent here with Clear the Bench New Mexico is to develop something along the lines of Clear the Bench Colorado (CTBC)

Facebook page for Clear the Bench New Mexico — feel free to share the page with friends, family, whoever!


NOTE — This is a TENTATIVE list being posted here:

State Supreme Court — Charles W. Daniels, Petra Jimenez Maes

NM Court of Appeals — Henry Bohnhoff, Emil J Kiehne, Stephen French

2nd Judicial District (Bernalillo), Division XXV, Albuquerque — Jane Levy

3rd Judicial District (Dona Ana), Division III, Las Cruces — Conrad F. Perea

5th Judicial District (Chaves, Eddy and Lea), Division X, Roswell — Dustin K. Hunter

6th Judicial District (Grant, Hidalgo & Luna), Division I, Silver City — Timothy Aldrich

7th Judicial District (Catron, Sierra, Socorro & Torrance), Division III, Estancia — Shannon Murdock

Reference: http://www.sos.state.nm.us/2017-state-of-new-mexico-roster-revised-09-27-17.pdf


NOTES

  1. Question originally posed by Jennifer Sensiba here
  2. Approximate reading level – 15.4
  3. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook [page / profile] / Gab / Google Plus / Liberty.me / Liberty Society / Minds / seen.life / Tea Party Community / Twitter / VK
    2. Albuquerque Liberty Forum Facebook page
    3. Wood Chipper Facebook page
    4. Vote the Air Facebook page
    5. Vote the Air NM Facebook page
    6. Vote Dumpster Fire Facebook page
    7. KCUF Media Facebook page
    8. Absurdist Discordian Party of New Mexico Facebook page
    9. The Weekly Sedition Facebook page
    10. New Mexico Dissent and Expose Facebook page

Thursday, 28 September 2017

A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace, by John Perry Barlow

Filed under: Philosophy, Politics, Principles, Privacy, Technology — Tags: , — mikewb1971 @ 12:28 AM (00:28)

A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace

by John Perry Barlow <barlow@eff.org>

Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather.

We have no elected government, nor are we likely to have one, so I address you with no greater authority than that with which liberty itself always speaks. I declare the global social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us. You have no moral right to rule us nor do you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear.

Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. You have neither solicited nor received ours. We did not invite you. You do not know us, nor do you know our world. Cyberspace does not lie within your borders. Do not think that you can build it, as though it were a public construction project. You cannot. It is an act of nature and it grows itself through our collective actions.

You have not engaged in our great and gathering conversation, nor did you create the wealth of our marketplaces. You do not know our culture, our ethics, or the unwritten codes that already provide our society more order than could be obtained by any of your impositions.

You claim there are problems among us that you need to solve. You use this claim as an excuse to invade our precincts. Many of these problems don’t exist. Where there are real conflicts, where there are wrongs, we will identify them and address them by our means. We are forming our own Social Contract. This governance will arise according to the conditions of our world, not yours. Our world is different.

Cyberspace consists of transactions, relationships, and thought itself, arrayed like a standing wave in the web of our communications. Ours is a world that is both everywhere and nowhere, but it is not where bodies live.

We are creating a world that all may enter without privilege or prejudice accorded by race, economic power, military force, or station of birth.

We are creating a world where anyone, anywhere may express his or her beliefs, no matter how singular, without fear of being coerced into silence or conformity.

Your legal concepts of property, expression, identity, movement, and context do not apply to us. They are all based on matter, and there is no matter here.

Our identities have no bodies, so, unlike you, we cannot obtain order by physical coercion. We believe that from ethics, enlightened self-interest, and the commonweal, our governance will emerge. Our identities may be distributed across many of your jurisdictions. The only law that all our constituent cultures would generally recognize is the Golden Rule. We hope we will be able to build our particular solutions on that basis. But we cannot accept the solutions you are attempting to impose.

In the United States, you have today created a law, the Telecommunications Reform Act, which repudiates your own Constitution and insults the dreams of Jefferson, Washington, Mill, Madison, DeToqueville, and Brandeis. These dreams must now be born anew in us.

You are terrified of your own children, since they are natives in a world where you will always be immigrants. Because you fear them, you entrust your bureaucracies with the parental responsibilities you are too cowardly to confront yourselves. In our world, all the sentiments and expressions of humanity, from the debasing to the angelic, are parts of a seamless whole, the global conversation of bits. We cannot separate the air that chokes from the air upon which wings beat.

In China, Germany, France, Russia, Singapore, Italy and the United States, you are trying to ward off the virus of liberty by erecting guard posts at the frontiers of Cyberspace. These may keep out the contagion for a small time, but they will not work in a world that will soon be blanketed in bit-bearing media.

Your increasingly obsolete information industries would perpetuate themselves by proposing laws, in America and elsewhere, that claim to own speech itself throughout the world. These laws would declare ideas to be another industrial product, no more noble than pig iron. In our world, whatever the human mind may create can be reproduced and distributed infinitely at no cost. The global conveyance of thought no longer requires your factories to accomplish.

These increasingly hostile and colonial measures place us in the same position as those previous lovers of freedom and self-determination who had to reject the authorities of distant, uninformed powers. We must declare our virtual selves immune to your sovereignty, even as we continue to consent to your rule over our bodies. We will spread ourselves across the Planet so that no one can arrest our thoughts.

We will create a civilization of the Mind in Cyberspace. May it be more humane and fair than the world your governments have made before.

Davos, Switzerland


NOTES

  1. Original article
  2. On Freenet
  3. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook [page / profile] / Gab / Google Plus / Liberty.me / Liberty Society / Minds / seen.life / Twitter / VK / WordPress.com
    2. KCUF Media – Facebook / WordPress.com
    3. Extropy UnboundFacebook / WordPress.com
    4. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Google Plus / Twitter / WordPress.com

Monday, 25 September 2017

Freenet: The forgotten cryptopunk paradise, by “Draketo” / Arne Babenhauserheide

Freenet: The forgotten cryptopunk paradise

by “Draketo” / Arne Babenhauserheide

I planned to get this into a newspaper, but it was too technical for the Guardian and too non-practical for Linux Voice. Then my free time ran out. Today I saw Barret Brown report (freenet mirror) on his 5 years court sentence for quoting a Fox news commentator and sharing a public link. Welcome to Freenet: The forgotten cryptopunk paradise!

# Freenet: The forgotten cryptopunk paradise

A long time ago in a chatroom far away, select groups of crypto-anarchists gathered to discuss the death of privacy since the NSA could spy on all communications with ease. Among those who proposed technical solutions was a student going by the name sanity, and he published the widely regarded first paper on Freenet: A decentralized anonymous datastore which was meant to be a cryptopunk paradise: true censorship resistance, no central authority and long lifetime only for information in which people were actually interested.

Many years passed, two towers fell, the empire expanded its hunt for rebels all over the globe, and now, as the empire’s grip has become so horrid that even the most loyal servants of the emperors turn against them and expose their dark secrets to the masses, Freenet is still moving forward. Lost to the eye of the public, it shaped and reshaped itself — all the while maintaining its focus to provide true freedom of the press in the internet.

Table of Contents

A new old hope

Once only a way to anonymously publish one-shot websites into Freenet that other members of the group could see, it now provides its users with most services found in the normal internet, yet safe from the prying eyes of the empire. Its users communicate with each other using email which hides metadata, micro-blogging with real anonymity, forums on a wide number of topics — from politics to drug experiences — and websites with update notifications (howto) whose topics span from music and anime over religion and programming to life without a state and the deepest pits of depravity.

All these possibilities emerge from its decentralized datastore and the tools built on top of a practically immutable data structure, and all its goals emerge from providing real freedom of the press. Decentralization is required to avoid providing a central place for censorship. Anonymity is needed to protect people against censorship by threat of subsequent punishment, prominently used in China where it is only illegal to write something against the state if too many people should happen to read it. Private communication is needed to allow whistleblowers to contact journalists and also to discuss articles before publication, invisible access to information makes it hard to censor articles by making everyone a suspect who reads one of those articles, as practiced by the NSA which puts everyone on the watchlist who accesses Freenetproject.org (reported by German public TV program Panorama). And all this has to be convenient enough for journalists to actually use it during their quite stressful daily work. As a side effect it provides true online freedom, because if something is safe enough for a whistleblower, it is likely safe enough for most other communication too.

These goals pushed Freenet development into areas which other groups only touched much later — or not at all. And except for convenience, which is much harder to get right in a privacy-sensitive context than it seems, Freenet nowadays manages to fulfill these goals very well.

The empire strikes the web

The cloud was “invented” and found to be unsafe, yet Freenet already provided its users with a safe cloud. Email was found to spill all your secrets, while Freenet already provided its users with privacy preserving emails. Disaster control became all the rage after hurricane Katrina and researchers scrambled to find solutions for communicating on restricted routes, and Freenet already provided a globally connectable darknet on friend-to-friend connections. Blogs drowned in spam comments and most caved in and switched to centralized commenting solutions, making the fabled blogosphere into little more than a PR outlet for Facebook, but Freenet already provided spam resistance via an actually working web of trust — after seeing the non-spam-resistant forum system Frost burn when some trolls realized that true anonymity also means complete freedom to use spam bots. Censorship and total surveillance of user behavior on Facebook was exposed, G+ required users to use their real names and Twitter got blocked in many repressive regimes, whereas Freenet already provided hackers with convenient, decentralized, anonymous microblogging. Now websites are cracked by the minute and constant attacks have made it a chore for private webmasters simply to stay available, though Freenet already offers attack resistant hosting which stays online as long as people are interested in the content.

All these developments happened in a private microcosm, where new and strange ideas could form and hatch; an incubator where reality could be rethought and rewritten to reestablish privacy in the internet. The internet was hit hard, and Freenet evolved to provide a refuge for those who could use it.

The return of privacy

What started as a student’s idea was driven forward by about a dozen free time coders and one paid developer for more than a decade — funded by donations from countless individuals — and turned into a true forgotten cryptopunk paradise: actual working solutions to seemingly impossible problems, highly detailed documentation streams in a vast nothingness to be explored only by the initiated (where RTFS is a common answer: Read The Friendly Source), all this with plans and discussions about saving the world mixed in.

The practical capabilities of Freenet should be known to every cryptopunk. But a combination of mediocre user experience, bad communication and worse PR (and maybe something more sinister, if Poul-Henning Kamp should prove to be farsighted about project Orchestra) brought us to a world where a new, fancy, half finished, partially thought through, cash-cow searching project comes around and instead of being asked “how’s that different from Freenet?”, the next time I talk to a random crypto-loving stranger about Freenet I am asked “how is Freenet different from X which just made the news?” (the answer which fits every single time is: “Even if X should work, it would provide only half of Freenet, and none of the really important features — friend-to-friend darknet, access dependent content lifetime, decentralized spam resistance, stable pseudonyms, hosting without a server”).

Right now, many years of work have culminated in a big step forward for Freenet. It is time for Freenet to re-emerge from hiding and take its place as one of the few privacy tools actually proven to work — and as the single tool with the most ambitious goal: Reestablishing freedom of the press and freedom of speech in the internet.

Join in

If you do not have the time for large scale contribution, a good way to support freenet is to run and use it — and ask your friends to join in, ideally over darknet.

freenetproject.org

Since the focus of Freenet has been on the big goals, there are lots of low hanging fruit; small tasks which allow reaping the fruits of existing solutions to hard problems. For example my recent work on Freenet includes 4 hours of hacking the Python based site uploader in pyFreenet which sped up the load time of its sites by up to a factor of 4. If you are an interested software developer and want to join, come to #freenet @ freenode to chat, discuss with us in the freenet devl mailing list and check the github-project.

Welcome to Freenet, where no one can watch you read.


NOTES

  1. Original article [text-only version / PDF version]
  2. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs – Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook / Gab / Google Plus / Liberty.me / Liberty Society / Minds / seen.life / VK / WordPress.com
    2. Extropy UnboundFacebook / WordPress.com
    3. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / Google Plus / Twitter / WordPress.com
    4. New Mexico Libertarians Facebook group

Tuesday, 22 August 2017

Captain America and Spiderman, On the Rooftop

Filed under: Philosophy, Politics, Principles, Reading — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 10:52 PM (22:52)

Usually, the superhero genre doesn’t do much for me (mostly I wait for the movies to show up on TNT or FX[1]).

But when they[2] get it right, it’s pretty damn good.

I saved these scanned pages from a post made years ago on the calguns.net message board. They were scanned from The Amazing Spider-Man #537.

Considering the current socio-political climate, it seems as though the importance of standing up for one’s views, regardless of whether the whole world is against you, cannot be understated.


NOTES

  1. Why bother going to see them at the overpriced cineplex, with its overpriced snacks, uncomfortable seats, other moviegoers who are assholes, etc., when you can save a bundle by seeing it at home — you can have your food and drink of choice, start the movie whenever you want, pause or stop it whenever you want, and not have to put up with people you wouldn’t otherwise touch with a ten-parsec pole?

    Seriously, they can’t cut much from any of the Marvel or DC flicks — there’s no nudity, excessive profanity or graphic, gratuitous gore to speak of, and if they cut out the comic-book style violence, there wouldn’t be any plot left.

  2. In this case, J. Michael Straczynski of Babylon 5 fame, Ron Garney, Bill Reinhold, Matt Milla, Cory Petit, Michael O’Connor, and Alex Alonso.

Thursday, 20 July 2017

Quote of the Day for Thursday, 20 July 2017

Filed under: Economics, Politics, Principles, Quote of the Day, Reading — Tags: — mikewb1971 @ 4:07 AM (04:07)

It is my contention that this concept of spontaneous order is the central idea of the enlightenment, brought to a pinnacle nine years later by Adam Smith with his invisible hand and applied to life itself by Charles Darwin some decades later. If the English language can get along without a government, why do we so quickly assume that English society cannot organise itself?

To labour the point, today in London roughly 10 million people ate lunch. Working out just how much of each type of food to have available in the right places at the right time to ensure that this happened was a problem of mind-boggling complexity, made all the harder by the fact people made up their mind what to eat mostly at the last minute.

Who was in charge of this astonishing feat? Who is London’s lunch commissioner and why does he get so little credit? Why is this system not subsidised? How can it be so lightly regulated?

The protesters who gather to criticise free enterprise from time to time use Facebook and iPhones to arrange their protest, drink Starbucks and eat Pret, wear shirts and shoes, in some cases even use toothpaste and shampoo before setting out. They swim where they wish to in a sea of possibilities provided by free enterprise.

— Matt Ridley, Free Markets are Revolutionary, Liberating, and Democratic (Foundation for Economic Education [FEE])


Friday, 7 July 2017

Quote of the Day for Friday, 7 July 2017

Filed under: Politics, Principles, Quote of the Day — Tags: , — mikewb1971 @ 8:48 PM (20:48)

“You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause is improperly administered.”

— Lyndon Baines Johnson


Thursday, 15 June 2017

[LPNM] Policy Proposals 2017 v.1

Filed under: Politics, Principles — Tags: , , — mikewb1971 @ 3:53 PM (15:53)

Right to Own and Carry Weapons — “Gun Control is Using Both Hands” — “Molon Labe” (title cribbed from Joe Nichols)

  1. The LPNM calls for an amendment to the State Constitution changing Article II, Section 6 from

    “No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms.”

    to this —

    “No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms.”

  2. Call for legislative repeal or judicial overturning of NMSA:
    1. 30-7-2 prohibition against concealed weapons
    2. 30-7-8 prohibition against switchblades
    3. 3. 30-7-13 prohibition against carrying weapons on a bus

Or just call for the repeal or overturning of NMSA 30-7 in its entirety.

Here’s a partial list of my preferences for electoral policy[1]

  1. Enact uniform signature requirements for all candidates, regardless of partisan affiliation, or lack thereof. Every candidate for a given office should have to get the same number of signatures, and any registered voter should be able to sign any candidate’s nominating petition. No more of this bit about having to get signatures from only people registered with one party. End the current rule that if you sign more than one candidate’s petition, all of your nominating signatures are invalidated.
  2. End the practice of using tax dollars to fund the conventions and primaries of the “major party” organizations. Let parties pick their candidates however they choose.
  3. Leave the straight-party voting option off the ballot. If it does get put back on, then put straight “YES” and “NO” options for the bond issues and judicial retention spots on the ballot.
  4. Explicitly allow ballot selfies — basically, repeal NMSA 3-8-50 (A)(1).
  5. Eliminate all forms of public campaign financing. If you really want a form of candidate subsidies in place, let the parties do it themselves. Or set up a domestic non-profit LLC (something like a 501-c-3 under the current federal tax code). Make sure that its charter forbids its officers from lobbying the Roundhouse or any other governmental body, or from accepting any money from the public treasury. While you’re at it, make sure its charter also forbids its officers from making statements on any other issue while representing the organization.
  6. If you seriously want to give the candidates a hard time about campaign finance, don’t limit how much they can take from any one donor.
  7. I support electoral fusion — if someone can get nominated by both the LP and GOP, CP, whatever, more power to them.
  8. Parties should also have the discretion and right to reject prospective candidates based upon their stated principles, bylaws, whatever.

My position on eminent domain is that “just compensation” should be strictly defined as the property owner’s asking price. Otherwise it’s a no-go.

Monetary policy? I’m OK for you accepting whatever medium of exchange you want. If you want to play the currency speculation game, that’s cool, too, just don’t defraud anyone.

Other positions of mine — see here for examples

I think that further codification of the Dallas Accord is in order as a catch-all, something like this —

The Libertarian Party of New Mexico, its officers, its candidates, and its spokespeople, as well its affiliate organizations, their officers, candidates and spokespeople, shall refrain from calling for, endorsing or otherwise supporting any expansion of government at all levels, including but not limited to its expense, its intrusiveness, or its reach and power over the private sector.


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. Libertarian Solutions to Closed, Non-Competitive Elections

Monday, 8 May 2017

Public Protesting Has Limits

Filed under: Politics, Principles — Tags: , , , — mikewb1971 @ 6:01 PM (18:01)

In a recent article on NMPolitics.net, Heath Haussamen reported about a protest event at the Las Cruces Border Patrol station, where protestors were blocking the accessways in and out of the station.

The part that set me off was this snippet here —

“Midway through the protest about two dozen people, including Delgado-Martinez, blocked both entrances to the gated parking lot for employees at the Border Patrol station, preventing anyone from entering or leaving.”

For anyone other than sworn law enforcement, stopping someone from leaving a location without first having personally witnessed that person committing a felony is itself a felony crime —

30-4-3. False imprisonment.

False imprisonment consists of intentionally confining or restraining another person without his consent and with knowledge that he has no lawful authority to do so.

Whoever commits false imprisonment is guilty of a fourth degree felony.

http://tinyurl.com/NMSA-30-4-3

What is a felony as per New Mexico law, you might ask?

30-1-6. Classified crimes defined.

  1. A crime is a felony if it is so designated by law or if upon conviction thereof a sentence of death or of imprisonment for a term of one year or more is authorized.
  2. A crime is a misdemeanor if it is so designated by law or if upon conviction thereof a sentence of imprisonment in excess of six months but less than one year is authorized.
  3. A crime is a petty misdemeanor if it is so designated by law or if upon conviction thereof a sentence of imprisonment for six months or less is authorized.

http://tinyurl.com/NMSA-30-1-6

31-4-14. Arrest without a warrant.

The arrest of a person may be lawfully made also by any peace officer or a private person without a warrant upon reasonable information that the accused stands charged in the courts of a state with a crime punishable by death or imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, but when so arrested the accused must be taken before a judge or magistrate with all practicable speed and complaint must be made against him under oath setting forth the ground for the arrest as in the preceding section [31-4-13 NMSA 1978]; and thereafter his answer shall be heard as if he had been arrested on a warrant.

http://tinyurl.com/NMSA-31-4-14

It gets even better — apparently State Representative Bill McCamley (D – Las Cruces) joined Mr. Delgado-Martinez in committing felony-level obstruction of the accessways —

Later at that entrance, state Rep. Bill McCamley, D-Las Cruces, sat with other protesters blocking the entrance. When a man in a white pickup tried to leave, McCamley, wearing a black suit and red tie, stared him down. Delgado-Martinez sat next to him.

The man got out of his car. “I can’t leave?” he asked. He told the protesters he could arrest them before getting back in his truck and returning to the lot.

Here’s the YouTube clip embedded in the article —

Libertarians have learned over the years that you just can’t do whatever you feel like, at least without some sorts of consequences.

For example, we don’t block the entrances of post offices or other buildings while we’re gathering petition signatures or passing out literature.

And, as I’ve noted above, stopping people from leaving a building — unless you personally witness them committing a felony — is a felony crime itself.

Frankly, if I’m going to get a felony conviction, I want it to be for a damned good reason.

Still, this right in line with what we can expect from the “left” — they think that they can do unto others as they see fit.

NO, you can’t simply stop people from leaving a facility just because you feel like it.

NO, you can’t smash storefront windows and set cars on fire just because you feel like it.

NO, you can’t block traffic on the interstate by forming a human chain across the roadway just because you feel like it.

And there are potential consequences besides the legal ones — standing or sitting in front of moving vehicles just might piss off the drivers enough that they might run you over. There are YouTube clips available of Black Lives Matter protestors being run over while they were blocking a given interstate.

What if you’re blocking an ambulance carrying a patient who’s just suffered a stroke or a heart-attack? What will you tell them — “At least you have health coverage due to Obama” ?

I surmise that this is a big part of why elements of the “left” want to do away with the right to own and carry weapons, by hook or by crook — they want to be free to smash your storefront, set your car on fire or stop you from going about your business for whatever reason, without fear of consequences.


NOTES

  1. Published at The Libertarian EnterpriseNumber 921, 7 May 2017
  2. Approximate reading level — 13.2
  3. Reposted —
    1. Personal blogs and micro-blogs — Diaspora* / Ello / Facebook / Twitter / WordPress.com

Copyright © 2017 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepadqq.

Older Posts »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: