|
|
|
|
The License Place Should
Say "McVeigh"
Sam Aurelius Milam III Here's an idea. Buy a small flatbed truck. Make sure it's currently licensed and insured. Make sure all required equipment is present and functioning. Make sure the tires are good. Make sure your driver's license is current. Load a half-dozen or so 55-gallon drums onto the back of the truck. Strap them down securely, so they can't move. Fill the drums with water. Get a friend with a video camera to follow you in another vehicle. Drive downtown and park the truck legally in a designated parking space, near a government building. Have the friend park nearby, close enough that he can videotape whatever happens but not so close that his behavior will be obvious to the cops. Sit in the cab of the truck and eat your lunch. If nothing happens after a while, go home and try a different location the next day. No matter how stupid the cops might be, they'll eventually notice that you're parked near a government building in a truck filled with 55-gallon drums of — something. Eventually, they'll act. When the SWAT thug orders you out of the truck, act puzzled and get out. When he demands to know what's in the drums, act puzzled and tell him it's water. When he orders you to explain why you're carrying all that water, act puzzled and tell him you're worried about the drought, and you want to make sure you don't run out of water. It isn't illegal to own a legally registered and insured truck. It isn't illegal to legally park it in a designated parking space. It isn't illegal to transport 55-gallon drums. Water isn't a prohibited substance. Eventually they'll have to let you go. The longer they take, the more of their time you can waste. Just act puzzled. After they let you go, get in your truck, drive downtown, and legally park it in a designated parking space near a government building. They'll have to go through the whole process again. They have to. They don't dare not do it. As soon as they stop checking you, that's when you just might show up with something besides water. You can force them to do it over and over again. Hundreds of times. There's no limit to the amount of police manpower and resources that you can force them to waste on you. Help Wanted
Letters to the
Editor
— editor
|
Very
good newsletter [February], as usual. Don G made a comment
about the unconstitutionality of the income tax [Letters
to the Editor]. The 16th amendment was supposed to circumvent
the former supreme court's decision. You might refer him to your
essay.
— Sir Donald the Elusive
I don't remember writing an essay on the Sixteenth Amendment. Did I? — editor
Dear Sam, ... Thanks for your last newsltrs, both excellent, as always. As to STRAY THOUGHTS, at the end, remember the fed/government MUST waste trillions of $, continuously and increasingly in order to keep the Fed Fraud alive. Fred Reed's article [page 2] was just great. That factual situation is magnified about 50 times inside the prisons. He hit it right on the head, since America now is essentially one big prison. So many brain deads are not told that, so they just assume it is not so .... — Anonymous
Anti-Capital Punishment Advocates Showing Up At Wrong PlaceJim Sullivan If the minority in the U.S. who oppose capital punishment sincerely wish to change the minds of the majority who favor state execution for 1st degree murder, one particular alternative prison sentence must be enacted in the various states. 'Life without the possibility of parole' has to be put on the books before capital punishment's proponents would even consider letting this form of punishment end. This is a well-known fact. What isn't known or understood, however, is: why are anti-capital punishment forces demonstrating at executions? It's too late then to make a difference. What this compassionate group of demonstrators should be doing is spending its precious time, money, and effort in lobbying state legislators to put the new prison sentence mentioned above into law in their jurisdictions. Then, and only then, will anti's have a chance of persuading proponents of capital punishment to change. Even if such legislation is passed, it won't be an easy matter to terminate capital punishment. Prominent figures in the corrections field believe strongly that to keep order in prison, it's necessary to have the possible punishment of death available. Also, capital punishment's demise will require passage by state legislative action. But politicians and the public will more likely let executions pass into history if there's a strong alternative that can be employed. Anti's, therefore, ought to concentrate on encouraging their state representatives and senators to put a bona fide 'life without parole' prison sentence in their penal code. Judges and juries will then have a viable sentence to mete out, instead of capital punishment. Why, then, aren't anti's already lobbying furiously for this new sentencing option? Perhaps a few are, but not in any high profile way. Could it be that most of the anti's believe 'life without parole' is not a fair sentence, either? That would seem to be the case. Do such people, who advocate incarceration rather than execution as punishment, feel that a convicted 1st degree murderer, sentenced to life in prison, deserves to get out after doing only a couple of decades, or less? That he or she probably won't kill again? That the felon has reformed, become a model prisoner, and now believes in the Creator? Well, those just aren't sufficient reasons for the capital punishment bunch. They include large numbers of people across the nation. And this group still wishes to see convicted murderers get the full punishment coming to them for their crime. It's interesting to note that a state like Michigan, having no death penalty on its statute books, is not clamoring for a 'life without parole' sentence as an alternative to its normal life in prison that may or may not mean 20 years behind bars. There doesn't appear to be any legislation in that state's hopper, either, for a new sentencing option. A true believer wanting dramatic change in a cause should be pragmatic and work where he or she can be most effective: in this case that's at the state house, not the big house. My observation is that nobody in the various opposing groups of activists really wants to solve the problem being debated. Instead, everybody just wants his group to dominate the other group. Solving the problem isn't the objective. The real objective is to use government to impose one's beliefs on others, who do not share them. The abortion issue is a good example. — editor
|
I'm
Coming Back As A Bear
Original Source Unknown. Forwarded by carolync. In this life I'm a woman. In my next life, I'd like to come back as a bear. When you're a bear, you get to hibernate. You do nothing but sleep for six months. I could deal with that. Before you hibernate, you're supposed to eat yourself stupid. I could deal with that, too. When you're a girl bear, you birth your children (who are the size of walnuts) while you're sleeping and wake to partially grown, cute cuddly cubs. I could definitely deal with that. If you're a mama bear, everyone knows you mean business. You swat anyone who bothers your cubs. If your cubs get out of line, you swat them too. I could deal with that. If you're a bear, your mate EXPECTS you to wake up growling. He EXPECTS that you will have hairy legs and excess body fat. "Yup ... gonna be a bear." (Hah! aS iF i'M nOt NoW...) Bush Blames Blizzard On Saddam
Freezing the Balls off a Brass Monkey
— editor
|
Buck Hunter Shoots Off His Mouth Dear Buck What do you think of the fragrance of Chanel #5? — Just Curious
Dear Just Curious My TV don't make no smells. Anyway, I just watch whatever channel has football. Acknowledgments
— editor
Frontiersman Cancellations — If you don't want to keep receiving this newsletter, print REFUSED, 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. You may also cancel by letter, e-mail, carrier pigeon, or any other method that gets the message to me. Back Issues — Back issues or extra copies of this newsletter are available upon request. Reprint Policy — 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 sources. 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. Submissions — 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. Payment — 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, U.S. postage stamps, prepaid telephone cards, and so forth. I will accept checks or money orders only by prior arrangement. I don't accept anything that requires me to provide ID or a signature to receive it. In case anybody is curious, I also accept gold, silver, platinum, etc. I'm sure you get the idea. — Sam Aurelius Milam III, editor
|
|
|