Posts tagged property
Posted by JudgeNapolitanoFTW
Judge Napolitano discusses Natural Rights and why The Patriot Act is exactly the type of legislation the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to PREVENT! Courtesy of Campaign For Liberty.
Posted by F0x1214
Published on Feb 9, 2013
PLEASE SHARE – READ – SOURCES: http://www.fox19.com/story/21088630/t…
“It’s not about Left vs. Right… It’s about Liberty vs. Oppression”-Ben Swann
Former Presidential Candidate, Libertarian Author, and Constitutional Scholar, Michael Badnarick sits down with Gary Franchi to respond to the recent Gun Grab Hysteria.
More about WHDT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHDT
Like us on Facebook: http://Facebook.com/NextNewsNet
Follow us on Twitter: http://Twitter.com/NextNewsNet
Submitted by legalizeliberty
From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in Australia
Hi all, I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent.(Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, so the criminals still possess their guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in ‘successfully ridding Australian society of guns….’ You won’t see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note Americans, before it’s too late!
Photo added to original post.
By Heather Callaghan
“Our farm is basically embargoed. We can raise all the pigs we want, but can not move them out to our market. That cuts off cash flow, effectively starving the farm financially and the pigs practically.”
Bakers Green Acres made the news last spring as the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) went on a mission to eradicate heritage pigs, calling them a feral invasive species. This move would wipe out the entire small-scale farm whose animals pose no threat to typical hog species. New blockages from multiple government agencies are making it impossible to run the farm.
Mark and Jill Acres of Marion, MI decided to fight the Invasive Species Order but have not been allowed to have a hearing, and it’s been a year. So, after feeding all the Russian boar and Mangalitsa pigs ($200-300 per day) to keep them alive while in limbo, they decided to take them to slaughter. Isn’t that what the State wanted – wouldn’t that make them happy?
The MUST WATCH video below illustrates a dire situation that affects all of our food freedom. Many of us don’t hear what goes on with victimized farmers after the initial news hits – makes one wonder if these court cases are dragged out on purpose. But Mark lets us know in his Situation Report with rousing, patriotic words about our food and farming rights. He aptly compares these government actions to, as Jill said:
the Soviet blockade of Berlin post-WWII. They attempted to gain control of the entire strategic city forcibly by controlling the food and fuel the people could have…
Here are some points to know about Baker’s Green Acres’ situation compiled from their blog:
- These pigs needed to go to a USDA slaughter facility (unlike game hunting) and be certified healthy by an accredited veterinarian.
- Once in the kill facility, they cannot be released back to the farm – if unacceptable, they get disposed or transferred to another USDA facility.
- Michigan had recently rejected health paperwork for a fellow farmer and even threatened the license of the vet who certified them as healthy.
- This facility had processed their mangalitsas before, but now their name would be flagged because of the pending lawsuit.
- As they suspected, the USDA inspector had photos and forms flagging the outlaw characteristics.
- The Bakers wanted to avoid the possibility of the pigs being simply disposed of AND the family actually being charged a “disposal fee” as they would be deemed “feral.”
- Having them “tagged” on the kill floor would cost time, money and problems for both the Bakers and the plant.
- The inspector wasn’t unreasonable – he was practical and caught in the middle.
- In both cases, the State is making our veterinarians the enforcers by threatening their license to practice if they break rank.
- This isn’t just a move from the rogue DNR (allegedly working in tandem with Michigan’s corporate Pork Producers) – it involves farm agencies that raise animals for USDA slaughter like the MI Dept of Ag & USDA – but the DNR, that is supposed to oversee hunting preserves, public parks, and hunting operations has manipulated farm processing facilities, blurring the lines of authority significantly.
- “Our farm is basically embargoed. We can raise all the pigs we want, but can not move them out to our market. That cuts off cash flow, effectively starving the farm financially and the pigs practically.” Jill
We, the citizens of this country must stand up and stand together. The purposes of this government are in defiance of the people’s expressed will. This administration seems to go that way more often than not (reference the Canada to Detroit bridge issue and the handling of the ‘right to work’ legislation). This has all sparked a lot of discussion about what to do with the pigs, examination of any possible options, and several sleepless nights for the feeder of the pigs. Not exactly ‘holiday spirit’ stuff.
More details on the pending case: http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/michigan-dnr-going-hog-wild.htm
By Jacob G. Hornberger
It’s no big surprise. A gun massacre brings out the gun-control crowd, which loudly demands that gun control be imposed on the American people, as if that would have prevented the massacre in Connecticut.
It’s really a shame to have to trot out the same arguments exposing the fallacies of statist thinking, but, alas, it must be done.
First, murderers don’t and won’t obey gun-control laws. If they don’t comply with murder laws, they’re not going to comply with gun-control laws.
The people who comply with gun-control laws are peaceful, law-abiding types who are now denied the right to defend themselves from the murderers. Why do peaceful, law-abiding people obey gun-control laws while murderers don’t. Because the former don’t want to be convicted felons, while the latter don’t care.
After all, don’t forget that it was illegal for the shooter in Connecticut to carry guns onto school property. No doubt much to the surprise of statists, he didn’t say, “Golly, even though I want to murder all those children, I can’t do it because it’s illegal for me to carry my gun onto school property.”
Second, gun-control laws won’t eliminate guns from society, any more than drug laws have eliminated drugs from society. Given the millions of guns in existence, along with continued manufacture of guns all over the world, all that gun control would do is convert the business of owning guns into a black-market enterprise. That means gun gangs, gun cartels, robberies, muggings, and all the other things that come into existence with a black market. If you like the war on drugs, you’ll love the war on guns.
Let’s now address a more fundamental issue, one that statists can never consider given their inability to think outside the statist box in which they have been born and raised.
The Connecticut massacre took place in a public school or, to put it more accurately, in a government school. That’s a place where parents are forced by law to send their children. If they don’t send their children into this governmental system, they are arrested, charged, and incarcerated. They might even have their children taken away from them for “incompetence” or “abuse.”
Sure, there are two alternatives for parents — private schools and homeschooling. But for the vast majority of parents, those are not viable options. Private schools, which have to secure a license from the government to operate, are too expensive, especially for a vast number of families that also are required by law to pay school taxes even if they decline to send their children into the public-school system. Other parents do not feel competent to homeschool or are unable to do so for other reasons, such as the need to have two incomes.
So, that leaves a large segment of families being forced to send their children to these state institutions from the time they are six years old.
Along with the regimentation and indoctrination that comes with the government being in charge of children’s education comes another distinguishing characteristic: These institutions are mandatory gun-free zones. That is, teachers and principals are prohibited by law from carrying a gun onto school property. I’d be willing to bet that there is a 99 percent compliance rate because most teachers and principals don’t want to be convicted felons and they want to keep their jobs.
So, consider the situation: The state forces parents to send their children into state institutions in which there are already gun-control laws — that is, laws that make it illegal for people to carry weapons onto the premises. The peaceful and law-abiding people obey the gun law. The murderer, knowing that everyone is defenseless, doesn’t obey the gun law.
Now, obviously most parents aren’t going to even question the horror in this. That’s because public schooling is a part of their lives. They went to public schools. So did their friends. For them, public schools mean “freedom,” even though they have a hard time explaining how it is that public (i.e., government) schooling is a core feature of communist and socialist countries like Cuba, North Korea, and China.
So, does that mean that the solution is to let public-school teachers and administrators carry guns to school? Not for us libertarians. We have no interest in telling the state how to run its schools. For us, public schooling is an inherently immoral and destructive institution. It should be dismantled completely, in favor of a total free market in education. See The Future of Freedom Foundation’s book Separating School and State: How to Liberate America’s Families by Sheldon Richman.
A free market in education would put families, not the state, in charge of their children’s education. Some people would choose schools that are not gun-free zones. Others would choose schools that are. The same principle of freedom of choice would apply to a vast array of other things – schools that are general in nature and others that specialize in things like music, religion, math, liberal arts, or science. Some parents would choose to have their children be educated without schools.
But the point is that in a free market, people are able to get what they want, as compared to having the state force it upon them and their children. As things stand now, most families have no effective choice at all — the state forces them to send their children into a gun-free institutions where their children are defenseless against murderers.
As the gun-control debate gets ramped up once again, there’s another thing to consider: the permanent culture of violence that the U.S. military empire and national-security state have brought to our nation. For decades, we have heard about how U.S. forces abroad have killed wedding parties, families, old people, and, yes, children. Oftentimes, there is the standard expression of regret by U.S. officials, but a callous mindset of conscious indifference to human life has, slowly but surely, been inculcated into the American people, at least with respect to Muslims and Arabs.
Consider, for example, the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children whom the U.S. government killed with its 11 years of brutal sanctions against Iraq. When U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Madeleine Albright was asked by “Sixty Minutes” whether the deaths of half-a-million Iraqi children were worth it, she responded that yes, they were indeed “worth it.”
That mindset was really no different in the invasion of Iraq. When the bogus WMDs failed to materialize, U.S. officials said that their new primary objective was to bring “democracy” to Iraq. So, rather than exiting the country after failing to find those bogus WMDs, they stayed, killing countless more Iraqis. The mindset that justified the continued killing and mayhem was the same that undergirded the sanctions — that any number of deaths of the Iraqi people was considered “worth it” — worth the political goal of establishing “democracy” in the country.
How can that mindset of callous indifference toward the sanctity of human life not be transmitted to the American people, especially given the faith that so many Americans place in their federal officials?
For more on this, see my January 2011 article “The Banality of Evil,” which was written in the wake of the Arizona shootings and which applies just as well today.
Finally, let us never forget the primary reason that gun ownership is so important. It is an essential prerequisite to a free society because it enables people to oppose the tyranny of their own government. History has shown that when the military and the police have a monopoly over the ownership of guns, freedom doesn’t exist long in those societies. People must obey whatever edicts are issued by government officials and they must submit to whatever government officials do to them. As Judge Alex Kozinsky put it in his dissenting opinion in the case of Silveira vs. Lockyer, giving the government a monopoly over the ownership of guns is a mistake that people can make only once. It becomes too late to make it again because the deprivation of liberty becomes permanent given the inability of people to violently resist it. As our American ancestors understood so well, the right to keep and bear arms is the best insurance policy against tyranny.
This is what so Americans just cannot comprehend. Just today, in an editorial the Los Angeles Times extols China — yes, that brutal communist regime in which the government has a monopoly on the ownership of guns — for its gun-free society because Chinese children were able to survive a recent massacre in which the person used a knife, as compared to what happened in Connecticut, where no one survived the gun onslaught.
That editorial is amazing. For one thing, as I stated above, there is no way that the U.S. government could possible eradicate guns from society, as the Chinese tyrants have done, at least not without imposing the same type of horrible police state that the Chinese communist dictators have imposed on the Chinese people. More important, who wants to live under a brutal communist regime, one that is able to maintain itself in power precisely because people lack the means to violently overthrow it?
The Connecticut massacre is just one more sign of the aberrant welfare-warfare system that statists have foisted upon our land. The solution to the woes brought upon us by statism is not more statism. The solution is freedom, which is what libertarianism is all about, including the right to own guns, the right to educate one’s children without state interference or control, and the right to live in a free, peaceful, and prosperous society rather than a warfare-state empire.
Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education. He has advanced freedom and free markets on talk-radio stations all across the country as well as on Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and Greta van Susteren shows and he appeared as a regular commentator on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s show Freedom Watch. View these interviews at LewRockwell.com and from Full Context. Send him email.
It’s time to admit that we live in a false economy. Smoke and mirrors are used to make us believe the economy is real, but it’s all an elaborate illusion.
Out of one side of the establishment’s mouth we hear excitement about “green shoots”, and out of the other side comes breathless warnings of fiscal cliffs and the urgent need for unlimited bailouts by the Fed.
We hear the people begging for jobs and the politicians promising them, but politicians can’t create jobs. We see people camped out to buy stuff on Black Friday indicating the consumer economy is seemingly thriving, only to find out everything was bought on credit.
The corporate media does their best to distract us from seeing anything real. We see the media glorify Kim Kardashian who got rich by being famous, and became famous merely by being rich. She got front page coverage on Huffington Post this week because her cat died. Enough said.
Meanwhile the financial media makes the economy seem complicated and they ban anyone who speaks truthfully about the economy from their airwaves.
Is it any wonder why people are angry and confused about the economy?
With complete disregard for driver privacy, the Obama administration gave their consent to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to mandate black box event data recorders (EDR) be installed in all new cars in the US.
The NHTSA says that by September 2014 all car and light trucks will be equipped with EDRs that will silently “record the actions of drivers and the responses of their vehicles in a continuous information loop.”
The information recorded by EDRs includes:
• vehicle speed
• whether the brake was activated in the moments before a crash
• crash forces at the moment of impact
• information about the state of the engine throttle
• air bag deployment timing and air bag readiness prior to the crash
• whether the vehicle occupant’s seat belt was buckled
The NHTSA claims that “EDRs do not collect any personal identifying information or record conversations and do not run continuously.”
Advanced EDRs can collect detailed information about drivers and their driving habits; including the size and weight of the driver, the seat position, the habits of the driver as well as passengers.
The excuse is the EDRs gather information about car crashes in the moments leading up to the accident that manufacturers can use to improve their safety measures when constructing vehicles. However, the government regulation utilizes surveillance technology with policies that do not outline the expressed use of the data collected in the EDRs.
The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers is opposed to the US Congress requiring EDRs in all vehicles by legislation. Although they admit that “event data recorders help our engineers understand how cars perform in the real world but looking forward, we need to make sure we preserve privacy. Automakers do not access EDR data without consumer permission, and any government requirements to install EDRs on all vehicles must include steps to protect consumer privacy.”
A statement published in March of 2012 by the AAM clearly explains that the NHTSA is not concerned about protecting the privacy of drivers with regard to EDRs and leaves such issues to the elected officials on Capitol Hill. By passing the buck the NHTSA then reiterates their support of EDRs for surveillance use to assist auto manufacturers in the construction of future vehicles.
EDR information has become common place as evidence in lawsuits, criminal cases and high-profile accidents.
The Congressional legislation would not allow for an opt-out option and federal regulations would demand that automakers give over the data recorded on the EDR to federal agencies at their discretion. In fact, the NHTSA admits that they cannot “impose limits as how the information can be used and other privacy protections.”
Bosch Diagnostics, creator of the Crash Data Retrieval software, works with local law enforcement, government agencies and auto manufacturers to provide surveillance technology to the auto industry.
WHDT World News is available to 6 million viewers from South Beach to Sebastian, Florida and to 2 million viewers in Boston, Massachusetts via WHDN.
WHDT broadcasts on RF channel 44 (virtual channel 9) from Palm City and is carried on cable TV channels 44 (SD) and 1044 (HD) by AT&T, on cable channels 17 (SD) and 438 (HD) in West Palm Beach by Comcast, on satellite channel 44 (SD) in West Palm Beach by DIRECTV, and on WHDN-Boston which broadcasts on RF channel 38 (virtual channel 6) from the Government Center district in downtown Boston.
More about WHDT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHDT
A man who snapped photos of a brewing storm last month received a visit Friday from an FBI Agent, inquiring why he would want to take such photos.
Michael Galindo explained that he was simply volunteering for the National Weather Service.
And FBI Agent David Pileggi seemed to be satisfied with that response.
But Galindo was left wondering whether he now has a permanent FBI file.
“He told me, ‘you’re not a threat and you are doing a public service but just be careful next time,’” Galindo said in a telephone interview with Photography is Not a Crime.
The problem arose because Galindo happened to be taking photos near the Lyondell Refinery outside of Houston on September 13, even though he was never standing on the refinery’s property.
Someone from the refinery spotted him and called police, whom apparently arrived after he had left.
Police then contacted the local FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force, which bills itself as “nation’s front line on terrorism.”