...With NO Warrant!

http://independentprinciplesapplied.blogspot.com to watch the video.




This thing pivots on the warrant. 

If this happened to me, and the police show up to my house with a warrant....I stand down peacefully and let the legal system run its course. But if they show up to my house the way they did in this case, without a warrant.....I safeguard my child in a hard room and refuse them entry into my home.

Honestly, at what point should resistance to the State involve total non-compliance? What is actually so sacred that you would defend it with your life? If not this, then what?

The Age of Sustainability?

"Our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change."

~ New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, April 22, 2013

THIS......IS NOT......A GOOD DEFENSE. It is not sustainable if we desire to maintain the liberal freedoms we cherish.

I wonder if New York and the elite writ large will set future trends for interpreting Constitutional Law for the rest of the country? You know, the same way they set fashion trends? I wonder if the definition of freedom will be reduced to fashion choices, menu selection and music preferences? My guess is that in time, the media will shun people as extremists who do not subscribe to our liberties being violated on a regular basis.

I believe the dial will only turn increasingly higher with time....to add pressure that forces these people (libertarians) to be isolated from the mainstream. And for the record, Lindsey Graham and John McCain are not libertarians. They are about 180 degrees off (or so) in their approach, but who's counting ticks on the compass, right?

The video above is a prime example of why the best defense is not letting terms be dictated to you. People suffer as a result. The best defense is a good offense. The video shows what our society will be continually subjected to so long as we remain in our current mode of dealing with threats using a reactionary approach. This cannot go unchecked indefinitely.

We need to be on offense. This offense need not include military occupation, counterinsurgency, or nation building. Let humanitarian organizations do nation building. An offensive strategy does not need to be verbose in its objectives or come flailing with unclear mission statements. It just needs to define the enemy, locate him, and take him out. No bullshit. Just go to MEMRI TV to see an example of target selection out in the open around the world (MEMRI does an amazing service to the world with the translations they provide).

If these enemies happen to be a naturalized American citizens, well, then we have to treat them with the protections afforded to citizens under the Constitution. Not doing so essentially negates liberty for the rest of us. But dammit if we might review our naturalization protocols to deny our enemy from using our liberal society as protection! If we fail to take these steps, you can expect to see empty metro streets on non-holiday workdays, curfews, and even the elderly escorted from their homes for cordon and search operations coming to city near you.

And should you live in a metro area, it is likely that renegade terrorists fleeing from the law and looking for a hideout will find it wherever there is a home not defended by a gun. So instead of the police being alerted to their presence by your shots fired in defense your family, they will be alerted (likely once the terrorists are long gone) when your neighbor screams bloody murder after finding the bodies of your family shot execution-style. Again, this is another example of why offense is better than reacting; reacting only serves to clean up mess after mess. It also is an example of why individual liberty saves the day against the bad guys.

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, shall have neither liberty nor safety."

~ Benjamin Franklin

Local vs National Control: let's do some critical thinking, people

If you're viewing this post via email notification, you may have to go to http://independentprinciplesapplied.blogspot.com/ to view the photo.

Above is exhibit A. I see this sort of thing all over the People's Republic of Madison, Wisconsin.

This begs the question, would you rather donate to a local charity or the United Way? Why? If you would rather donate to a local charity than a national one, let's apply the same principle to the overall rate of taxation in America.

I am such a nice guy. Really, I am. I believe the world is a harsh place, therefore I believe overall taxation rates need to be kept at current levels in order to help the "little" man in his battle for social justice. Therefore, let's give local government 30% of our income. After all, they know how best to help the diverse types of underprivileged people living in their unique community. Let's keep the state taxation rate at its current level. And lets give the federal government a flat-rate amount roughly equal to what municipalities receive from local property taxes.

Local is better, right? Come on buddy, be honest! Yeah! Slap hands! If you won't slap my hand, this means you are a big government hypocrite! You are voting to defeat the expertise that local community organizations can give to local people with local problems! It means that all the propaganda has fooled you into believing that ONLY national government can solve our problems!

With warm weather around the corner, I'll soon be greeting everyone I meet at the local farmer's market with a big grin on my face. My philosophy means that I am consistent in my approach in wanting to help local people directly rather than allowing elites to skim money off the top.

Deny my logic, and you deny truth. Power to the People. No, really. Very truly yours,

A. Critical Thinker

P.S. I offer free training if you are interested. I also believe in free education.

Dr. Maya Angelou, Freewoman

I encourage you to watch the entire interview. At about the 3:20 mark she discusses her views on firearms. This is the mark of a Freewoman.

All her comments considered, it hit me how sad it is that we must waste time discussing the firearms issue. She has so much more to offer; a grace and presence that is becoming increasingly rare in this world. While it is valuable know Dr. Angelou's opinion on the matter of guns, this is only so because our Rights have recently come under attack.

Her comments remind me how much the firearms rights issue should be an open and shut case. It is the mark of the free-thinking individual to be able to exercise the freedom to defend their life whenever it is threatened. Of course they should not need the permission of government in order to do so. It is so unnatural to consider any alternative that isn't consistent with a living being's natural instinct of self-preservation. And of course we should practice with the gun we carry regularly. It is common sense.

Dr. Angelou is proof that a citizen who wishes to exercise this right is not a killer, but rather a protector of life. Never allow yourself to be painted as the former; take pride in standing up for yourself as the latter!