Comments on Pro Libertate: How to Deal With Taxmen and Other Thieves

I agree with David. And I have to say that the ...

2009-06-15T09:13:36.702-06:00

I agree with David.

And I have to say that the author's take/spin on how this story actually played out are extremely warped.

Nevermind the fact that it's never ok to run someone over with your car. Never.

As a follower of Jesus, I hope you'd also know...

2009-06-15T06:20:17.876-06:00

As a follower of Jesus, I hope you'd also know that murdering another is never right--"appropriate to use lethal force on a carjacker"--"CJ is no better than a carjacker"--

You think it's ok to "murder" him?

Also, as a follower of christ (hah!) you think that you have a right to not pay taxes?

"render unto Jesus".

What a horrible representation of Christ. Maybe you should spend some time with your bible.

The "person who stood in the way of [the driver's]...

2007-05-02T01:13:00.000-06:00

The "person who stood in the way of [the driver's] car" was bent on STEALING that vehicle. It matters not one whit that the local government supposedly authorized him to do so. He got hurt, just as any other carjacker would have. This is covered under "assumption of risk," as far as I'm concerned.

There is nothing "distorted" of this view of taxation; it is as American as the Boston Tea Party or the occasional bouts of righteous violence that greeted Royal Tax Collectors in the early 1770s. We're badly overdue for a revival of this element of our storied patriotic heritage.

What is genuinely distorted is the notion that government enactments supposedly sanctifying theft are "laws" in any sense that moral people should respect.

As the recent slaughter at V-Tech illustrates, government doesn't do a damn thing to protect us, although its pestilential agents excel at finding creative ways to plunder us. The question is: Who will protect us from our supposed protectors?

Wait... when you decided to live under the protect...

2007-05-02T01:04:00.000-06:00

Wait... when you decided to live under the protection of the United States, you agreed to abide by certain laws am I not correct?

Paying taxes is one of those laws. Heck, why not throw these people into jail instead of impounding their cars? What this woman did was just as immoral and illegal, she ran over this person who simply stood in the way of her car, she could have backed up, asked the person to move, or well anything else. But intentionally run this person over? (There is a video available, have you not seen it?)

Sir, your views on freedom are somewhat distorted.

This will present a perfect opportunity for jury n...

2007-01-24T16:14:00.000-07:00

This will present a perfect opportunity for jury nullification – and nothing less than this will suffice.

I agree, but again the commoners in said jury have to be of a hardy lot, knowledgeable in the law, constitution, and their important role in the justice system. Not surprisingly, most commoners don't fit that profile and are an ignorant lot on the whole. I mentioned this in your Police Perjury, and Burglars with Badges comment thread:

Whatever happened to jury nullification? Oh yeah, for that to happen requires informed, honorable, and constitutionalist-minded commoners composing the jury rather than the aforementioned.

While you're fascinated (or alarmed, it's hard to distinguish sometimes) with "the State" itself, the culture elsewhere is rotting at an ever faster pace in so many other areas of life. I ain't worried about it as I believe America is today without a doubt (probably been for some decades morphing into one in fact) a farrago and a farrago nation is doomed to wither and die.

On that note, why the growth of the State, that we see increasingly flexing its muscles upon the hapless, should be a surprise to anyone is puzzling to me.

It should be a no-brainer.