Can We Agree?

I have a proposition for you.  Something I hope we can agree on.

It goes like this: I won't use violence against you if you won't use violence against me.  In fact, I won't even use some face in a suit who sits at his perch in the District of Criminals as an agent or excuse to use violence against you.  At least, that is, if you agree not to do the same.

Heck, I won't even use violence against your neighbor, even if they are a little bit inconsiderate sometimes.  They don't deserve to be harmed just because they're a bit of a prick.

Can we agree on this?  Because if we can, there's really nowhere we can't go.  And quite honestly, if we can agree to this, it really won't matter what the sociopaths who fancy themselves our "rulers" do.  They can make all the ludicrous demands they want - if you and I agree not to harm one another on their behalf, the fact that they want power and war and death and control won't matter.

If we can't: Why not?  Under what circumstances - other than self defense or defense of other - do you think it is okay to use force on one another?  I'm seriously open to suggestions.  These ideas would probably be interesting to contemplate.

“I'm not scared of the Maos and the Stalins and the Hitlers.
I'm scared of the thousands of millions of people that hallucinate them to be 'authority,' and so do their bidding, and pay for their empires, and carry out their orders.
I don't care if there's one looney with a stupid moustache. He's not a threat if the people do not believe in 'authority'.”  -Larken Rose

A Killshot to Corruption in the Legal System

I've written a lot about many of the problems facing people today.  I usually try to offer potential paths to resolving those problems.  One of the biggest problems still at hand is the unjust use of "law" by power-drunk bureaucrats for nefarious purposes.

Largely due to indoctrination that takes place in the public schooling system, most people believe the best way to "be a good person" is to do exactly as you are told by figures of authority.  To "follow the law," be a good "law abiding citizen."  Obedience is touted as one of the best qualities a person can possess.  The only problem with this thinking is that, far too often, the color of "law" is used to wrongfully devastate the lives of innocent people who have harmed nobody, and likely never would have.

The kinds of "crimes" to which I refer include, but are not limited to:

• Collecting rain water on your own property
• Adding to or removing from the structure of your own home
• Developing your own land to include such features as a pond
• Growing a garden in your own front (and often back) yard
• Walking down a sidewalk while not white, then refusing to comply with a "peace" officer conducting a "random" stop-and-frisk
• Selling individual cigarettes, even after paying taxes on the whole pack
• Driving a vehicle down the road with cash in your possession
• Putting "forbidden" substances into your own body
• Growing certain plants
• Possessing (not harming people with) dangerous objects
• Selling raw milk to a willing consumer
• Paying someone for the pleasure of company they can "legally" give away for free
• Refusing to pay taxes to a system whose operations are morally repugnant to everything you believe in
• Dancing at certain national monuments
• Selling products to willing customers without the holy permission of local government
• Passing out information pamphlets at a court house to inform people of their well-hidden rights as jurors

While some of these might not officially be classified as "crime," the end result is the same: Someone is wrongfully deprived of their life, liberty, and/or property.  You could probably think of another list at least this long with actions you don't think should land people in cages.  The root cause of this problem is that society allows a small group of people to decide what is "right" or "wrong" for the rest of us.  These people can then "legalize" whatever brand of aggression they think they need to use against us to get compliance.  What I call "Armed robbery, extortion, a protection racket, and slavery," they call "Taxation."  What I call "False Imprisonment with a side of assault and battery," they call "Making an arrest."  The list goes on.

This abuse of "law" by those in power is one thing the rest of us can directly fight, and we don't even have to step outside the bounds of their bizarre power cult to do it.  However, we do need to stop trying to get out of jury duty.  Serving on a jury can be the single most effective thing you can do to put an end to the mass incarceration and punishment of otherwise peaceful people.

Enter Jury Nullification.  Did you know that you, as a juror, have the power to judge not only the facts of a case, but also the law itself, and its application?  If you find yourself being asked to help put someone in a cage, you owe it to that person to stop and consider whether you think they should be punished at all.  When you observe that about HALF of all incarcerated people in America are in prison on non-violent, victimless charges, it becomes clear that there aren't enough people stopping to consider this.

For me, the single most important factor in whether someone deserves to be punished is whether or not they caused actual harm to other people.  If there was no victim, how could there possibly have been a crime?  And even if you think the person on trial was the victim (as in the case of "drug" consumption), how does locking that person up make the situation right?

It is well within your power to make this world a better place.  Refusing to punish someone who should not be punished is one of the best places to start.

"One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." -Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.