Frontiersman, February 1996

Notice:
This issue of the Frontiersman contains contact information that is out-of-date. For current contact information, click here.

Our Government's Dirty Little Secret
by John H. Webster
http://www.vikora.com/CWS/jwebster/
Don't bother asking your congressman, your mayor, the police, or your city newspaper. They know it but they are the ones that are actively hiding it from you. They have too much invested in the status quo to tell you the truth.
Instead, ask the survivors of the Waco Siege; ask Randy Weaver or the widow of Donald Scott. Ask anyone whose life has been destroyed or whose family has been forever torn apart by an anonymous tip and overzealous police. Or you could ask me about my personal experience.
What we will tell you is that today in the United States, individuals no longer have any rights at all. Our Bill of Rights is now little more than a historical artifact; the remnants of an experiment long ended.
What we have left is a supposedly "benevolent" police state enforcing laws of political correctness. Today judges look the other way when police falsify evidence to get the "bad" guys. Today undercover police use active entrapment to efficiently catch the potential criminal for violating thought crimes supposedly before he would break the law on his own and do real damage. Today, the public defender's real job is to get you to accept a plea bargain and to make you feel good about it even though you are innocent.
Technically, the Bill of Rights and our other Federal and State constitutional "protections" are still there but the federal, state and local law enforcement agencies can simply use procedure that circumvents them. For example, by working with a Federal crime task force the local police can use the Feds to get around certain State laws designed to protect the innocent — The Federal agency being immune to State law. The Feds might hold on to evidence that the police don't want to reveal in response to the defendants motion of discovery in a State court. Furthering "Justice" through the hiding of evidence, interesting concept.
Another trick of police is the use of a "Confidential Informant". This concept was supposedly created to allow the sealing of court documents that contain the name of an informant whose life would be placed in danger if his identity came out in court. It later was expanded to allow the details of any "ongoing investigation" to remain hidden. Today, it is used to hide all kinds of illegal police activity that they don't want the public to know about.
For example, when the police want authorization for a search warrant, wire tap, or arrest warrant they simply make up a fictitious reason, include the name of the "confidential informant" (who really is just another police officer) who supplied the information, then get a sympathetic judge to seal it. The warrant is authorized yet the lies in the document will never see the light of day, much less ever be questioned.
One of the most powerful tools of our police in their "War against Crime" is the ability to alter evidence and get away with it. If the police "know" that a person is guilty but don't have the evidence, instead of letting him go free they would much rather manufacture the needed evidence. The "Justice" system looks at the police officer who does this as simply "Creatively doing his job".
And finally, the keystone that allows all of these blatant violations of our rights to go on unchecked, the infamous plea bargain. Imagine yourself, the victim of an illegal police entrapment scam, arrested for committing thought crimes. As a defendant you have been denied a reasonable bail and kept in jail because the charges are so heinous (you are considered a threat to society) and you would most likely flee. You have been kept in jail now for almost a year waiting for your trial, what with various motions and extensions of time on advice from your public defender.
Now comes the moment of truth, if you went to trial you would be facing over ten years in prison; or you could accept a plea bargain and be home tonight (somehow you would no longer be a threat to society, I guess). You know you're innocent but you also know the police have fabricated evidence and lied under oath and you don't know whether or not you can prove it.
Our "Justice" system depends on the defendant accepting the plea bargain, not just to prevent a flood of defendants going to trial, but to allow the violations of the rights of the defendants to be covered up. With the acceptance of the plea bargain the defendant looses his rights of "Discovery", the sealed documents can remain hidden, the police can hold onto and eventually destroy altered evidence, and the unconstitutional laws and procedure used to catch the "criminal" of thought crimes can remain untested in higher court.
And most important, the police and our "Justice" system can show off their high conviction rate to the public making it easier for the police to get those additional laws in place that would give them still more power to better enact their form of "Justice".

If you started eliminating laws purely at random, you'd have about a 99% chance of improving things.

— December 13, 1978, Milam's Notes

Social Security Options
by Dante DeAmicis

There's been a lot of talk about who is in favor of saving and who is in favor of destroying Social Security. Let's review the options.

1.		Declare it bankrupt and let workers put that money in government approved private plans. Those receiving payments now can sop up the crumbs 'til it's gone.
2.		Save it, which means something like increasing the combined payroll deductions from around 15% now to 20%, increasing the retirement age to 70, and decreasing the benefits with no cost of living allowances.
3.		Give everyone exactly what they put into it, which is for most people much less than they were promised. Those who have already pulled out more would not have to pay back the difference. Even this would require a huge transfer from the General Fund.
4.		Pretend that those who are sounding the alarm of impending disaster don't know what they are talking about and we can more or less go on like we are forever.

It appears that the overwhelming majority of people prefer number 4. Reality is not an option for most people.

Dante presents some interesting options. I can suggest some additional alternatives. For example, a variation on his option 1 is that there's no reason why private plans need to be approved by the government. There are endless variations on option 2. Option 3 might be modified by requiring people to repay excess disbursements. Another option, not mentioned by Dante, is to leave Social Security in operation in its present configuration with the exception that participation would be voluntary. I'm sure that some of my readers can think of other options.

In June of 1984, I terminated my Social Security number. Today, I do not participated in activities that require one.

— editor

Thoughtcrime
by Sam Aurelius Milam III

When I was a child, one of my elementary school teachers explained the legal difference between thought and action. No punishment, she explained, could be administered for merely talking about something, however heinous the contemplated action. Only when some harm was actually done to someone was there a cause of action. Until then, she explained, anyone could say, advocate, or plan anything. Verbal activities, in and of themselves, cause no harm and are therefore not actionable. I don't remember the date for sure, but I received this instruction sometime during the early or middle 50's, in Bexar County, Texas. During that same era, I sang along with the lines of a popular song of the time: "You can't go to jail for what you're thinking, matter of fact, neither can I! Just standing on the corner, watching all the girls go by."

Today, things are fundamentally different. Today, the police in Pacific Grove, California, arrested a group of alleged conspirators for planning to rob a McDonald's restaurant.¹ No harm had yet been done. No money had yet been taken. They had merely planned it. Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman was recently condemned to life in prison for plotting to destroy various buildings, bridges, and tunnels.² He didn't do it. He merely planned it. This reveals a fundamental change in the nature of government. It isn't a change in degree but a change in kind. Today, the space between your ears is no longer your own. Today, you can indeed go to jail for what you're thinking.

As reported by KSBW Action News 8; Salinas, California; 6:00 PM edition, Wednesday, January 10, 1996

ITN World News, Thursday, January 18, 1996. Also see the article Criminal Procedure in the March, 1995 issue of the Frontiersman.

Virus
by Sam Aurelius Milam III

Are you tired of receiving all that junk mail? Here's a way to solve the problem and get just a little satisfaction at the same time. This idea is one of those rare instances when you can truly "use the system against itself".

When you receive junk mail from Company A, save it. When you receive junk mail from Company B, it's time for action. Go find the Company A junk mail and open both sets. Find the return card from each one. If there's no return card, use your address label from the envelope. In either case, mark a change of address for each company. On the blurb from Company A, change your address to the address of Company B. On the blurb for company B, change your address to the address of company A. Mail the changes of address. From then on, Company A will send your junk mail to Company B, and vice versa. This is, in effect, a junk mail virus. Every time one of the companies sells its mailing list the virus will reproduce. The junk mail advertising system has no antibodies against the virus. Consider: mail at each company is received by some clerk who will find it much easier to simply trash the unwanted stuff than to send a notice cancelling it. Your phoney addresses will multiply and circulate for all time to come, or at least until the companies go broke from sending useless junk mail to each other.

Second Amendment, Second Thoughts
by Sam Aurelius Milam III

A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

— Second Amendment, U.S. Constitution

According to the Second Amendment, the purpose of keeping and bearing arms is provide for a well-regulated militia. The purpose of this well-regulated militia is to defend the security of a "free State", whatever that is. A militia defending the state is very different from an individual defending himself, his property, or his liberty. Page 3 Box

In fact, governments generally regard armed individuals as a threat to the security of the state (free or otherwise). Thus from the point of view of government, any construction of the Second Amendment which allows just anybody be armed is inherently self-contradictory.

The amendment also provides that armed people can be regulated as a militia. The use of the word regulated in the amendment, in and of itself, ought to have caused the amendment to be rejected in it's entirety. Regulation is fatal to any right. The use of the word in the Bill of Rights is repugnant to the concept of rights.

With regard to militias, the word is one of those with a long and checkered past. It has many meanings. One in particular seems apropos to constitutional matters in America.

militia .... 2. In the United States, the entire body of citizens liable to be called upon to do military duty ....

— Webster's Universal Dictionary of the English Language [1910]

Using this definition, only draft-aged people who are citizens, who are in good health, who aren't homosexual, who don't have a drug problem, and who've registered for the draft have a right to be armed. If women aren't subject to the draft, then only men can be armed. A different definition, of which there are several, will indicate a right to bear arms for a different group of people. Even with the 1910 Webster definition, a different meaning of citizens, or of military duty, or of called upon will protect the right to keep and bear arms for a different group of people.

The well-regulated militia provision of this amendment defeats the alleged right in another way. There is no mention of who will regulate the militia, and thereby the keeping and bearing of arms. There is no definition of what constitutes necessary and sufficient regulation. Ultimately, the government does the regulating and the government decides how to do it. No wonder US citizens have been disarmed. The most generous assessment of this amendment reveals it to be self-contradictory. A more practical assessment makes it seem a lot more like a complete joke.

The only way to have a right is to exercise it. Merely "demanding" it is a waste of breath. If Americans want the right to bear arms, then they must end their pathetic reliance upon a flimsy guarantee written upon an even more flimsy piece of paper. Instead, they must carry guns around with them. Whether or not they can get away with it is a pretty good test for the existence of the right. That is, if Americans are not permitted by government to carry weapons whenever and wherever they choose, then the right is gone. In that case, it's time for Americans to make a tough decision. Either they must be content with a gun privilege, regulated by government, or they must begin whatever measures are necessary and proper to reclaim the right. Neither choice is very appealing.

Buck Hunter Shoots Off His Mouth
Dear Buck
What's the best thing that I can do to keep a husband happy?

—Hopeful Young Lady

Dear Hopeful Young Lady
Yours, or somebody else's?

Frontiersman
435 South White Road
San Jose, California 95127

Produced at Mere Keep

Enlightenment isn't a destination.
It's a Journey.

MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET
(Author unknown — Contributed by Nancy Milam)

SECTION I — IDENTIFICATION

ELEMENT:		Woman
SYMBOL:		WO₂
DISCOVERER:		Adam.
ATOMIC MASS:		Accepted as 118 Lbs., but known to vary from 110 to 550.
OCCURRENCE:		Copious quantities in all urban areas.

SECTION II — PHYSICAL PROPERTIES

•		Surface usually covered with a painted film
•		Boils at nothing; freezes without reason
•		Melts if given special treatment
•		Bitter if incorrectly used
•		Found in various states, ranging from virgin metal to common ore
•		Yields to pressure applied to correct points

SECTION III — CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

•		Has a great affinity for gold, silver, platinum, and precious stones
•		Absorbs great quantities of expensive substances
•		May explode spontaneously without prior warning and for no known reason
•		Insoluble in liquids but activity greatly increased by saturation in alcohol
•		Most powerful money-reducing agent known to man

SECTION IV — COMMON USES

•		Highly ornamental, especially in sports cars
•		Can be a great aid to relaxation

SECTION V — SCIENTIFIC TESTING

•		Pure specimen turns rosy pink when discovered in the natural state
•		Turns green when placed beside a better specimen

SECTION VI — HAZARDOUS PROPERTIES

•		Highly dangerous except in experienced hands
•		Illegal to possess more than one

If you don't want to keep receiving this newsletter, print RETURN TO SENDER above your name and address, cross out your name and address, and return the newsletter. When I receive it, I'll terminate your subscription.

Back issues or extra copies of this newsletter are available upon request.

Permission is hereby granted to reproduce this newsletter in its entirety or to reproduce material from it, provided that the reproduction is accurate and that proper credit is given. Please note that I do not have the authority to give permission to reprint material that I have reprinted from other publications. For that permission, you must go to the original source. I would appreciate receiving a courtesy copy of any document or publication in which you reprint my material.

I solicit letters, articles, and cartoons for the newsletter, but I don't pay for them. Short items are more likely to be printed. I suggest that letters and articles be shorter than 500 words, but that's flexible depending on space available and the content of the piece. I give credit for all items printed unless the author specifies otherwise.

This newsletter isn't for sale. If you care to make a voluntary contribution, you may do so. The continued existence of the newsletter will depend, in part, on such contributions. I accept cash and postage stamps. I don't accept checks, money orders, anything that will smell bad by the time it arrives, or anything that requires me to provide ID or a signature to receive it. In case anybody's curious, I also accept gold, silver, platinum, etc. I'm sure you get the idea.

— Sam Aurelius Milam III, editor

Back to the Frontiersman Directory

Back to the Beginning of This Issue