Posts
Here's an experiment I'm going to do; I'm going to give the Government of Manitoba a chance to show their true colors, to show what they really care about. Do they really care about helping people, or revenue generation? Many people I have talked to claim that the government is there to protect us, to serve and help us. This will be one small way to demonstrate that they aren't concerned about those things, they only care about extracting money from you.
Here is a letter I sent off to them earlier this week.
Dec 23, 2008
To: The Minister of Finance
RE: Image Capturing Enforcement System Offence Notice
Regarding the enclosed photocopy of your bill that was sent to my residence (I retain the original) about a supposed violation of the Highway Traffic Act on Dugald Road on Nov 22, 2008, at 18:19;
Being that I have no contract or verbal agreement with The Minister of Finance regarding fines and/or penalties for a violation of The Traffic Act, legislation that I did not consent to nor contract to follow, I have no obligation to pay The Minister of Finance any set arbitrary sum of money that the people calling themselves the Province of Manitoba may decide that I owe to them. If proof of obligation, such as a signed service contract, can be shown to me then I would happily remit payment.
Recognizing of course that men with guns back-up your coercive, violent system, and that I risk being put in a jail cell for not participating in your system; removed from my young family that depends on me for financial support; I make a counter offer.
I do not have any interest in giving my money to the Province of Manitoba, so in the spirit of the Christmas season I will donate $250 to The United Way in lieu of your demands of $190.80.
If these terms are acceptable to you and your organization, please respond by registered letter by Friday, January 11th. I will send a copy of the charitable donation receipt to your organization as a proof of the donation, and will consider the matter settled.
What ever action your organization decides to take will be publicized in local media; I will assume that a non-response from your organization means that you comply with my request and I will proceed accordingly.
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Sunday, December 21, 2008
A Drug Warriors Response
Yet another recent story in the news about the perils of the black market trade of prohibited drugs; this time hidden in a monopoly game.
What was most interesting were the comments left by poster "Swizzler". I left a comment early on that said this...
"Repeal drug prohibition and cops will spend their time going after violent criminals instead of people wanting to get high."
Swizzler responded later on with these comments.
"For those posting here that are condoning the use of Heroin, go to hell, and take your stupid useless brain with you. These are highly addictive drugs, that are harmful to more than just the user. While I can accept there are some drugs that are better left un-prosecuted, Heroin, Cocaine, Oxy-contin, and meth need to be wiped off the face of the earth. There is no good that comes from these drugs. If fools like you would help get these drugs off the streets the police would have more time to go after violent criminals, but guess what??? The violent criminals today are usually involved with....Heroin, Cocaine, Meth and Oxy-contin, so I guess the police are going after the right people, they just haven't caught up to you yet!"
Pretty typical of a drug warrior; someone who loves the war on drugs, and would probably consider themselves pretty straight, even considering that they themselves are probably drug users, such as caffeine and alcohol.
This is the response I left for Swizzler.
Swizzler, history lesson for you. When alcohol was prohibited in North America, you had violent gangster like Al Capone running the manufacturing and distribution of it. Once prohibition was repealed, the crime associated with the black market trade of that product disappeared. The same would happen by ending drug prohibition.
"For those posting here that are condoning the use of Heroin"
I don't condone or encourage drug use, I advocate people being able to choose what to put into their bodies, be it alcohol or cocaine.
"Heroin, Cocaine, Oxy-contin, and meth need to be wiped off the face of the earth."
And how is that working out so far? There is a market for these things, so there will always be a supplier, no matter how many of them you take off the street.
"If fools like you would help get these drugs off the streets"
If they were not prohibited, they would be off the street overnight.
"violent criminals today are usually involved with....Heroin, Cocaine, Meth and Oxy-contin"
See my earlier point about Al Capone, you are creating a market for them to thrive in when you support drug prohibition.
"they just haven't caught up to you yet!"
Yes, we're all heroin users, geez, use some critical thinking please.
Of course this poster ends off their post assuming that since we advocate drug freedom that we must be user or dealers ourselves. To have freedom for yourself, you need to allow your neighbor to have freedom, and that includes making choices that we ourselves might not make. That is Libertarian principles in action, and is how a just, free society can exist.
What was most interesting were the comments left by poster "Swizzler". I left a comment early on that said this...
"Repeal drug prohibition and cops will spend their time going after violent criminals instead of people wanting to get high."
Swizzler responded later on with these comments.
"For those posting here that are condoning the use of Heroin, go to hell, and take your stupid useless brain with you. These are highly addictive drugs, that are harmful to more than just the user. While I can accept there are some drugs that are better left un-prosecuted, Heroin, Cocaine, Oxy-contin, and meth need to be wiped off the face of the earth. There is no good that comes from these drugs. If fools like you would help get these drugs off the streets the police would have more time to go after violent criminals, but guess what??? The violent criminals today are usually involved with....Heroin, Cocaine, Meth and Oxy-contin, so I guess the police are going after the right people, they just haven't caught up to you yet!"
Pretty typical of a drug warrior; someone who loves the war on drugs, and would probably consider themselves pretty straight, even considering that they themselves are probably drug users, such as caffeine and alcohol.
This is the response I left for Swizzler.
Swizzler, history lesson for you. When alcohol was prohibited in North America, you had violent gangster like Al Capone running the manufacturing and distribution of it. Once prohibition was repealed, the crime associated with the black market trade of that product disappeared. The same would happen by ending drug prohibition.
"For those posting here that are condoning the use of Heroin"
I don't condone or encourage drug use, I advocate people being able to choose what to put into their bodies, be it alcohol or cocaine.
"Heroin, Cocaine, Oxy-contin, and meth need to be wiped off the face of the earth."
And how is that working out so far? There is a market for these things, so there will always be a supplier, no matter how many of them you take off the street.
"If fools like you would help get these drugs off the streets"
If they were not prohibited, they would be off the street overnight.
"violent criminals today are usually involved with....Heroin, Cocaine, Meth and Oxy-contin"
See my earlier point about Al Capone, you are creating a market for them to thrive in when you support drug prohibition.
"they just haven't caught up to you yet!"
Yes, we're all heroin users, geez, use some critical thinking please.
Of course this poster ends off their post assuming that since we advocate drug freedom that we must be user or dealers ourselves. To have freedom for yourself, you need to allow your neighbor to have freedom, and that includes making choices that we ourselves might not make. That is Libertarian principles in action, and is how a just, free society can exist.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Consequence of Prohibition
Many people think that "Prohibition" ended in the early 20th Century; they are wrong.
While alcohol prohibition ended then, there is still prohibition in North America and other places around the world when it comes to marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and a number of other substances.
Prohibition creates a black market, which is inherently risky and dangerous. A clear example of this is demonstrated in a recent Winnipeg case.
Court to deliver verdict in police shooting
Daniell Anderson was a drug manufacturer. Police had a warrant to enter the home he shared with his parents and when they arrived at 11PM to serve the warrant they entered the home and were fired upon by Daniell, who claims he though that it was a home invasion. 3 of the officers were shot, with one seriously injured.
Some of the question is if he really did believe it was a home invasion, but I am going to set that aside for now since it isn't relevant to the point I'm making.
It is simple; if the product he was making wasn't prohibited then there would have been no police entering the residence to stop him, thus not getting shot. In fact, if it was legal, he probably wouldn't be making out of his home at all, instead it would be made by a large company that sells their product in stores, just like with alcohol, cigarettes and aspirin.
Also, when is someone allowed to defend themselves, or their home? Possibly the police were yelling "Police, Open UP", but that is no guarantee that the people entering your house are the police. Someone trying to hurt you, such as a rival drug suppler, might do the same thing in order to get into the home.
This is a consequence of the black market; you do not see turf wars over legal substances, you see free market competition for market shares, with companies like Molson and Labbats.
A poster on the comments section for the main story asked me; "So, are you suggesting that drugs be legalized?"
I responded that drugs already are legal; alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, etc. It's only drugs that are prohibited that are in the black market which results in incidents like this.
No prohibition = no black market = less violence and crime
While alcohol prohibition ended then, there is still prohibition in North America and other places around the world when it comes to marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and a number of other substances.
Prohibition creates a black market, which is inherently risky and dangerous. A clear example of this is demonstrated in a recent Winnipeg case.
Court to deliver verdict in police shooting
Daniell Anderson was a drug manufacturer. Police had a warrant to enter the home he shared with his parents and when they arrived at 11PM to serve the warrant they entered the home and were fired upon by Daniell, who claims he though that it was a home invasion. 3 of the officers were shot, with one seriously injured.
Some of the question is if he really did believe it was a home invasion, but I am going to set that aside for now since it isn't relevant to the point I'm making.
It is simple; if the product he was making wasn't prohibited then there would have been no police entering the residence to stop him, thus not getting shot. In fact, if it was legal, he probably wouldn't be making out of his home at all, instead it would be made by a large company that sells their product in stores, just like with alcohol, cigarettes and aspirin.
Also, when is someone allowed to defend themselves, or their home? Possibly the police were yelling "Police, Open UP", but that is no guarantee that the people entering your house are the police. Someone trying to hurt you, such as a rival drug suppler, might do the same thing in order to get into the home.
This is a consequence of the black market; you do not see turf wars over legal substances, you see free market competition for market shares, with companies like Molson and Labbats.
A poster on the comments section for the main story asked me; "So, are you suggesting that drugs be legalized?"
I responded that drugs already are legal; alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, etc. It's only drugs that are prohibited that are in the black market which results in incidents like this.
No prohibition = no black market = less violence and crime
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Why Do We "Need" The Feds?
In what was an expected move, the Governor General (the Queens rep in Canada, yes we still defer to the Queen in a supposed sovereign country) has suspended Parliament at Stephen Harper's request in order to save his ass.
Here's a simple question, what other business can close down for seven weeks, yet you are still forced to pay for it? If MTS closed for 2 months and you had no tv/call/Internet, yet they sent you a bill for the full amount you usually pay, would you be upset? Might you get rid of MTS and use a different service provider, one that didn't try to rip you off?
Why are you still paying these federal Members of Parliament? They are taking a 2 month, self-imposed, paid vacation, at your expense, and you have no choice in leaving them for another provider. Sure, you can vote for someone else in 4 years, but you still have the same monopoly provider, the government.
If the country can run just fine for 2 months without them, then why do we need them at all?
While these MP's may be active in their riding during this time; listening to lobbyists, thinking of ways to control your life, they aren't actually doing anything if Parliament isn't sitting. In fact, Parliament is only required to sit once per year.
Wow, they sure are earning that money that they vote for themselves.
Here's a simple question, what other business can close down for seven weeks, yet you are still forced to pay for it? If MTS closed for 2 months and you had no tv/call/Internet, yet they sent you a bill for the full amount you usually pay, would you be upset? Might you get rid of MTS and use a different service provider, one that didn't try to rip you off?
Why are you still paying these federal Members of Parliament? They are taking a 2 month, self-imposed, paid vacation, at your expense, and you have no choice in leaving them for another provider. Sure, you can vote for someone else in 4 years, but you still have the same monopoly provider, the government.
If the country can run just fine for 2 months without them, then why do we need them at all?
While these MP's may be active in their riding during this time; listening to lobbyists, thinking of ways to control your life, they aren't actually doing anything if Parliament isn't sitting. In fact, Parliament is only required to sit once per year.
Wow, they sure are earning that money that they vote for themselves.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Excessive Force?
A man in The Pas died after police subdue him with pepper spray.
The estranged wife of the man, who called the cops to get him to leave her house, says that the police used excessive force. But we'll never know, because it's her word against theirs.
3 things learned from this incident...
Lesson 1: You aren't allowed to defend yourself when being attacked by the police, even if that attack is unwarranted or excessive
Lesson 2: If you care about your loved ones, don't call the cops, handle it yourself
Lesson 3: Videotape all interaction with government representatives, especially the police.
The estranged wife of the man, who called the cops to get him to leave her house, says that the police used excessive force. But we'll never know, because it's her word against theirs.
3 things learned from this incident...
Lesson 1: You aren't allowed to defend yourself when being attacked by the police, even if that attack is unwarranted or excessive
Lesson 2: If you care about your loved ones, don't call the cops, handle it yourself
Lesson 3: Videotape all interaction with government representatives, especially the police.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)