Frontiersman, August 2011

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This issue of the Frontiersman contains contact information that is out-of-date.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

Frontiersman, August 2011

Signaling for a U-Turn
Sam Aurelius Milam III
While I was recently sorting through some old files, I came across an article, How Mad is MADD? It's Insane!, that I published in the February 1997 issue of this newsletter. As I perused the article, I realized that the data presented in it remain as relevant today as they were then. I expect that the numbers are larger now but I doubt that the relationships between them have changed much. After some consideration, I decided to revisit the subject.
The data presented in the old article were based on a study that had recently, at the time, been concluded by the Centers For Disease Control. The results were reported on an NBC news program¹ as "disturbing" and "shocking". NBC's Robert Hager reported that there were, according to the study, about 1 1/2 million alcohol-related arrests each year in the USA but a mere 17,000 alcohol-related deaths per year. The next day, NBC reported 100,000 alcohol-related deaths per year² so that number is in question. Whatever the case, the part of the report that was cited as shocking and disturbing was the estimate that there were over 123 million undetected incidents per year of drunk driving. Those undetected incidents reportedly did not result in deaths, accidents, or even arrests. Mr. Hager described the number of undetected incidents of drunk driving as being "a huge number compared to those arrested or causing an accident". Mr. Hager was right about one thing. It is shocking and disturbing, but not for the reasons that he reported.
Nobody seemed to notice the obvious conclusions to be drawn from the reported data. Using the 17,000 figure, there were about .014% as many alcohol-related deaths as there were drunk drivers. Fewer than 1.2% of drunk drivers even came to the attention of the cops. Thus, the study reveals a far different problem than its authors tried to claim. When you consider that such a tiny fraction of drunk drivers actually caused a problem, then the reasonable conclusion is that drunk driving isn't really very dangerous. To me, drunk driving appears to be not much more of a risk than a thunder storm, a high fat diet, or an office affair.
In spite of such obvious conclusions, the anti-drunk driving activists have pressed ahead with their obnoxious agenda. Driven by their passionate and mindless hatred of drunk drivers, they've imposed upon everybody a police authority manned by strutting, armed gestapo-style thugs who roam the roads and highways at will, dispensing repression and exacting tribute. The activists have promulgated the lunatic notion that statistical predictions of the likelihood of an accident are applicable to individual drivers. In that regard, see my article Increased Public Awareness, in the January 2010 issue. The activists have glossed over their atrocious agenda with glib slogans presented in the government media as being in the public interest. They won't be dissuaded by the facts and they won't tolerate any opposition.
Meanwhile, Americans have submitted to the lunacy. They've surrendered their rights to be presumed innocent, to refuse to incriminate themselves, to remain silent, and to travel. They've received, in exchange, the privilege of having a driver's license. They've given up their right to own cars. They've received, in exchange, the custody of registered vehicles that they own in name only. The vehicles are actually owned by the government.
It's time for Americans to realize that the relentless persecution of drunk drivers is merely another facet of the larger agenda of behavior control via licensing, a part of the government's overall plan to impose its jurisdiction onto everybody. The doctrine that supports my positions is presented on Pharos. I suggest that you study the doctrine, position yourselves, and then divest yourself of the repressive burden of government licenses. A termination of your driver's license is a good place to start.

NBC Nightly News With Tom Brokaw, Tuesday, January 7, 1997

NBC Nightly News With Tom Brokaw, Wednesday, January 8, 1997

Please use the enclosed envelope to send a contribution. I prefer cash. For checks or money orders, please inquire.

For PayPal payments, use Frontiersman@manlymail.net.

August 2011

Frontiersman, ^c/o 4984 Peach Mountain Drive, Gainesville, Georgia 30507

Page 1

Losers Weepers
Sam Aurelius Milam III

You can trace the history of every piece of land back to the guy who stole it.

—Harlan Ray Putnam
Department of Economics
Texas A&M University, Spring Semester, 1967

Anywhere in the world that anybody owns land, the legal ownership of that land can be traced back to whoever most recently stole it. The best possible scenario for such acquisition of the land is that it was unoccupied when the thief took possession of it. More likely, the land was occupied and the thief killed the previous owner, or drove him away. Either way, the land didn't belong to the thief before he took possession of it. His possession of the land relied either on his ability to take the land from somebody else or to forcibly defend his occupancy of the land, later, from somebody who wanted to use it for something. Either way, the thief's occupancy of the land relied on force.

Eventually, the thief or his descendants sold the land. The sale was regarded as legal because, somewhere in the sequence of events, a bureaucrat had waved a magic wand and the stolen land became owned land. The thief or his descendants came to be acknowledged as the legitimate owners of the land.

It appears that we're faced with a dilemma. We must decide whether or not we want to regard theft as a legitimate form of land acquisition. There are only two possible conclusions.
•

If theft is a legitimate form of land acquisition, then the people who own land today legitimately own the land because the possession of the stolen land was legitimized somewhere along the way. If that's true, then what happened once can happen again. That is, anybody who's capable of stealing the land from the present owner has just as much right to do so as did the previous thief. The possession of the stolen land by the new thief can then be legitimized into ownership, just like it was for the previous thief. The new thief will then become the legitimate owner, just like the previous thief did.
•

If theft isn't a legitimate form of land acquisition, then all present land owners bought stolen land. Their titles to the land are therefore void from their inceptions, and of no legal effect. Thus, their land is up for grabs by anybody who's capable of taking it away from them.

So, it turns out that our position on the legitimacy of theft as a means of land acquisition is irrelevant. Whether we consider theft to be a legitimate form of land acquisition or not doesn't matter. The result is the same either way. Our long history of brutality and aggression has outdone us. We're hoist with our own petards. The fact is that there isn't anyone, anywhere in the entire world, who has a legitimate reason to complain if he gets kicked off of his land. Either somebody else has just as much right to steal the land as did the previous thief, or the present owner doesn't legitimately own the land anyway. Either way, it's all up for grabs by anybody who's strong enough to take it.

That considered, land ownership turns out to be problematic at best. Thousands of years of human progress and nothing has changed. You can still march out and take whatever you're strong enough to take and it's yours for as long as you're strong enough to keep it. Nobody owns the land. Nobody can own the land. Nobody will ever own the land. If nothing else, it's a good argument in favor of having every kind of weapon from Glocks to RPGs in every home. We might not be able to keep our homes unless we're able to defend them.

The Laws of Work
Original Source Unknown. Forwarded by David, of Idaho Falls, Idaho.

• If you can't get your work done in the first 24 hours, then work nights.

• A pat on the back is only a few centimeters from a kick in the butt.

• Don't be irreplaceable. If you can't be replaced then you can't be promoted.

• It doesn't matter what you do. What matters is what you say you've done and what you say you're going to do.

• After any salary increase, you'll have less money at the end of the month than you did before.

• The more crap you put up with, the more crap you're going to get.

• You can go anywhere you want to go if you look serious and carry a clipboard.

• Never delay the ending of a meeting or the beginning of a cocktail hour.

• The people who go to conferences are the ones who shouldn't.

Please use the enclosed envelope to send a contribution. I prefer cash. For checks or money orders, please inquire.
For PayPal payments, use Frontiersman@manlymail.net.

Page 2

Frontiersman, ^c/o 4984 Peach Mountain Drive, Gainesville, Georgia 30507

August 2011

Letters to the Editor
Dear Mr. Milam:

Please accept my gratitude and appreciation for your ongoing generosity by sending me this most excellent publication "Frontiersman."

As I'm sure your records may indicate, I was introduced to your writings by [name withheld] quite some time ago, and indirectly, many thanks go to him as well for his having forwarded my name to you for consideration.

Sadly, I'm no longer able to converse (or write) [name withheld], as I have been transferred from [prison name withheld] c/o [prison name withheld].

Would you be so kind as to amend my mailing address as follows? [new address withheld]

Once again sir, thank you for such an excellent paper and please accept all my best wishes to you for the future.

—a prisoner

Occasionally, a letter like this arrives and makes it seem like my efforts might actually be worth the trouble after all.

—editor

Thanks-- I think I recognised myself in that audio cassette article.

—Sir Donald

Dear friend, the winds of hypocrisy fly hard and fast in these turbulent times. I do believe it is time to destroy the IMF & Fed Reserve Banking System. Chaos is so everyday now that the elimination of the world's major FRAUDS and oppression can only begin to produce some semblance of rational life....

Anyway, same old shit & scare tactics on the talk shows. Not only should we DEFAULT, we should go even further & eliminate EVERY non-constitutional — oops, (non-paid for ) program!! & let the chips fall where they may!

—a prisoner

Stray Thoughts
Sam Aurelius Milam III

Overkill — You know that the diet craze is out of control when you see people buying diet water.

Attitude — The word civilization is generally misused and misunderstood. As is normal in the English language, the word has been burdened with a half-dozen or so extraneous and inappropriate meanings. Properly speaking, civilization isn't a synonym for society, even for technologically advanced society. Civilization isn't even an attribute of societies. It's an attribute of individuals. It's a process of enlightenment, a kind of behavior, an attitude. It's learning to be civil in relationships with other people. Of the various definitions provided in the dictionaries, the only idea that comes close to being appropriate is refinement of thought and manners, or good taste.

Big Difference — Insurance doesn't protect you from loss or injury. At best, it might reimburse the expenses of such loss or injury. That isn't the same thing as protection. Insurance only compensates for a loss or injury. Protection prevents it.

Vacufoam³
Sam Aurelius Milam III

Styrofoam is light and strong. The small, spherical cells that make up the material are filled with gas, presumably atmosphere, at or near ambient atmospheric pressure. Suppose that, instead, the cells were evacuated. That is, suppose that they were (if I may make such an outlandish statement) filled with vacuum.⁴ The small size and spherical shape of the cells would provide vacufoam with sufficient structural strength to resist crushing at atmospheric pressure. The best part of the idea is that the stuff would be buoyant in atmosphere.

The number of possible uses for vacufoam are limited only by our imaginations. Airplanes would be lighter if all of the insulation and light duty internal structural things were made of vacufoam. Stadium roofs wouldn't collapse if they were made of vacufoam. Imagine houses made of the stuff, floating in the atmosphere. It would be a wonder for a person's home to drift on the wind, borderless, anywhere around the world. Imagine the freedom. Imagine the headaches for the flight controllers and the customs thugs. I already like the idea.

Vacufoam would probably be easy to make in orbit, on the Moon, or on an asteroid. It would be the beginning of a whole new space industry. Of course, you'd have to ballast the stuff to get it to the surface of the Earth. That could be an new auxiliary industry — using vacufoam to deliver heavy resources gently to the ground, from space.

Personal Website of Sam Aurelius Milam III, Bright Ideas, Vacufoam, Idea posted prior to Monday, October 30, 2006.

When we were children, my sister Betty commented that something, I don't remember what, had stopped working because all of the vacuum had leaked out of it. We all understood what she meant.

Please use the enclosed envelope to send a contribution. I prefer cash. For checks or money orders, please inquire.
For PayPal payments, use Frontiersman@manlymail.net.

August 2011

Frontiersman, ^c/o 4984 Peach Mountain Drive, Gainesville, Georgia 30507

Page 3

Frontiersman
^c/o 4984 Peach Mountain Drive
Gainesville, Georgia 30507

Conspiracy is an exercise of the freedoms of thought, speech, and association. Any attempt by any government to restrict the practice of conspiracy, or to punish its exercise, is in and of itself a sufficient reason to overthrow that government.

Acknowledgments

My thanks to the following: SantaClara Bob; Lady Jan the Voluptuous; my mother; Dewey and Betty; and Eric, of Ione, California.

— editor

Questions
Original Source Unknown. Forwarded by David, of Idaho Falls, Idaho.

•

Why are there five syllables in the word monosyllabic?

•

Since Americans throw rice at weddings, do Orientals throw hamburgers?

•

Why are they called apartments, when they're stuck together?

•

Why does sour cream have an expiration date?

•

Why is it that you have a pair of pants but only one bra?

•

Does the reverse side also have a reverse side?

Strange Laws
Original Source Unknown. Forwarded by Steve, of Mililani, Hawaii.

I didn't try to verify any of these but who knows?

—editor

•

In Lebanon, men are legally allowed to have sex with animals but the animals must be female. Having sexual relations with a male animal is punishable by death.

•

In Hong Kong, a betrayed wife is legally allowed to kill her adulterous husband but only with her bare hands. The husband's lover, on the other hand, may be killed in any manner desired.

•

In Maryland, it is illegal to sell condoms from vending machines with one exception. Prophylactics may be dispensed from a vending machine "in places where alcoholic beverages are sold for consumption on the premises."

Frontiersman

Subscriptions and Past Issues — Printed copies of this newsletter, either subscriptions or past issues, are available by application only.

Cancellations — If you don't want to keep receiving this newsletter, then return it unopened. When I receive it, I'll terminate your subscription.

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. 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.

Payment — This newsletter isn't for sale. If you want to make a voluntary contribution, then I prefer cash or U.S. postage stamps. For checks or money orders, please inquire. For PayPal payments, use Frontiersman@manlymail.net. The continued existence of the newsletter will depend, in part, on such contributions. I don't accept anything that requires me to provide ID to receive it. In case anybody's curious, I also accept gold, silver, platinum, etc.

— Sam Aurelius Milam III, editor

Please use the enclosed envelope to send a contribution. I prefer cash. For checks or money orders, please inquire.
For PayPal payments, use Frontiersman@manlymail.net.

Page 4

Frontiersman, ^c/o 4984 Peach Mountain Drive, Gainesville, Georgia 30507

August 2011

Back to the Frontiersman Directory

Back to the Beginning of This Issue