• I hope this gets appealled

    In any case, never, never, never give consent to search your vehicle. Think about it, are you 100% certain there isn't stuff in your car that could be used against you? Own a used car? Was it a drug dealer's ride? New car, it's been on test drives and many car lots let their sales agents take cars home with them.

    A lot of the work that a criminal defense attorney has to do involves undoing the legal mess you created for yourself after the fact. You say yes to a search and they find something and now the search is legal. You say no and your attorney is successful, then anything found in that search might be suppressed as evidence.

    Never say anything to a cop that you don't want repeated to 12 jurors. Do every legal thing in your power to prevent them from finding something that they can show those jurors.


  • Here's a thought

    Recognize that a doctor who treats a pregnant woman has two patients. If he kills one of them, charge him with murder. If she has hired him to do it, charge her as an accessory or murder-for-hire.

    Obvious exceptions would be those circumstances where failure to abort would lead to a greater loss of life such as a pregnancy that is expected to kill mother and child if continued.

    Here's a hypothetical:

    If a doctor killed a woman's "wanted" unborn child, he would be charged with a crime, likely murder. An abortion doctor wouldn't be so charged if she didn't want the child. So I guess the difference between murder and justifiable homicide in the case of an unborn is simply the want or lack thereof on the part of the mother.


  • Disgusting

    I don't see anything that would give the police justification to use deadly force. This man was running, not taking a stand against the police.


  • is it possible

    To have some kind of reputation system that will allow new members who get downvoted heavily to go into a restriction that limits their ability to post to only once every five minutes and possibly less if they are even less inclined to straighten out their act. This would give people a time-out and an opportunity to think about their actions. They could get back off restriction if they are inclined to make better quality posts.


  • Even if he intended to buy

    Even if he intended to buy drugs with it, can a true libertarian on here find any problem with that?


  • VOR Navigation


    Believe it or not, planes can get lost and off course if they don't have a firm method of determining where they are at and sticking to a flight path. The sky is managed like a highway with VOR towers that help planes know where they are. So, planes often fly from tower to tower and change course in the vicinity of a tower. That is why you see them in such patterns and why you can see them change directions in roughly the same area of the sky. Also, planes fly at certain altitudes for certain directions of travel so as to avoid collisions mid-air. Planes flying in the same direction along the same VOR radial will be in the same 2000' altitude range because pilots don't tend to rear-end other planes, especially when they have a navigator and air traffic control personnel watching the skies. If no attention was given to altitude in reference to direction of travel, two planes might collide head-on if they chose the same altitude.


  • Repeal all age restrictions

    I'm for the repeal of all age restrictions. We should repeal the age to smoke, drink, own firearms, gamble, etc.

    At age 18, you are an adult in our society and should be able to make those decisions on your own. Some will falter, but that is the danger of freedom.

    As for under 18, parents are the government in most households and should decide for their kids what is appropriate. For example, I don't see any problem with the idea of my 16 year old boy owning a handgun as I've taught him how to use one. My younger ones are not quite ready as they are still childish. The goal of every parent should be to develop their children to a point where they are self-sufficient and capable of personal independence by the time they are 18, if not sooner. To do that, you have to give them the opportunities to explore independence and be there to lend a hand should they fail.

    If local government is the best, mom and dad were the most local for children.


  • Tyranny vs. Slavery.

    “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton,” Bundy said over the weekend, according to the Times. “And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”

    I think he is guilty of not being able to convey his message in a way that is easy to understand by the masses. I wonder if by saying "they never learned how to pick cotton" was another way of saying that they didn't learn any productive work skills under government subsidy. There is some truth to that...our government doesn't really work to get people off welfare by improving their skill sets. You get on welfare, you stay on welfare because government certainly doesn't make you work to keep it so there is no motivation to get off it except one's own personal motivations.

    The phrase "they didn't get no more freedom. They got less freedom" is just pointing out that under our current tyranny, the plight of black people is made worse than it was under slavery. Unborn black babies had a better chance of seeing life outside the womb, incarceration rates for blacks were lower, and most had a skill set, albeit derived from forced labor.

    Back in 2005, I met this old black man while on a work project outside Baton Rouge. He told me he wished that segregation still existed. This floored me as it was the last thing I expected to hear from him. He said black people had their own communities, shopped at black-owned stores, minded each others' children, etc. He told me that now instead of buying at a store that might put food on the black owner's kitchen table, they were all shopping at Wal-Mart, making some suit somewhere even richer.

    Our government likes to spend money subsidizing the murder of black fetuses. It likes to recruit inner-city kids, mainly blacks, to fight in their wars of aggression, killing them before they become men. Look, if you wanted to commit genocide in a politically acceptable fashion, all you have to do is get the target race to enlist its men and scrape the wombs of their women, pass laws that incarcerate those that won't go die in foreign wars and promote promiscuity to destroy the family unit in their culture. Then, if none of the above work, just give them enough free money to try and prevent them from seeking out a better life outside this system.


  • Put me down as interested

    While I'm no educated man, I do believe I grasp the true understanding of freedom to be a helpful contributor. A valid constitution is universally acceptable. However, it must have teeth. Our US Constitution is great, but it has no teeth. Therein lies the problem.

    I do hope your constitution includes a right of secession of the people and counties in its bill of rights. It should also recognize the right of revolt. The way I see it, if you don't like the way things are run, you have the following options: Change it (elections), leave it (secession), shoot it (revolt). Changing it is the best method as it provides the most satisfaction to the individual, whereas secession is next preferable as those who are still satisfied can choose to remain and those that are not satisfied will leave. Revolution occurs when satisfaction is no longer possible amongst the many. The problem with our US Constitution is it doesn't recognize secession or revolution as a direct right of the people. For all the foresight of our founding fathers to include a bill of rights to put down in words the obvious fact that we have inalienable rights, they seem to have forgotten the right to leave and to abolish, both of which were employed at the birth of this nation.


  • I'm not that impressed

    While I'm glad to hear that more people will be able to carry guns in more places, I'm disappointed that this is done with a new law instead of a repeal of an old law. It just goes to show that freedom has been gone for so long that legislators don't know what form it takes. They should have been removing old laws that were barriers to personal freedom.


  • Humidity & Contrails

    Humidity has an effect on how rapidly a contrail can dissipate. So can altitude. For example, in higher humidity, the air is more saturated with water than in lower humidity. This decreases the rate at which water evaporates due to the higher saturation of water molecules already in the air.

    Altitude has an effect as well as lower air pressure is present at higher altitudes, leading to a lower temperature for evaporation and boiling of water.

    So, an airplane flying at a higher altitude such as a cross-country flight on a dry day will have little to no contrail. A lower flying plane such as a local flight on a humid day will have a contrail that lasts longer in the sky. I think this fits in well with the theory of chemtrails seeding the sky to make upcoming storms more fierce. The reason is because when the storms are coming, the humidity is higher and contrails last longer.

    Now, if you are concerned about the sky being poisoned, you don't even need a chemtrail conspiracy to know that such is occurring on a daily basis all over the globe. There are millions of pounds of aviation fuel being burned overhead every day. Not a conspiracy, just a fact as air travel is more commonplace today than it was a half-century ago. The gases given off by burning those fuels are not good and already it is a topic of considerable study and concern.


  • could be a good thing

    If they are doing this with the intent of not paying the government it's fees, then have at it. I'm all for open defiance of the "fees" to use land that belongs to the American people.


  • Daniel Love

    He has worked with the BLM in the past, might be employed by them. He is mentioned as a Special Agent with the BLM in this WSJ article from August 2012 http://www.online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB100008723963904447...

    http://www.nevadajournal.com/2013/10/28/are-blm-police-actin... This article from Oct 2013 has Daniel Love as a BLM Special-Agent-In-Charge for Utah & Nevada

    http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56096171-78/redd-agents-ja... Here he is again, accused of doubling the value of an Indian artifact to move a charge from a misdemeanor to a felony and using excessive force to raid a home in 2009.

    Looks like he may be a government employee for the BLM as opposed to a contractor.


  • Good find

    The story says that the planet receives only about 1/3rd the light that we do. I imagine that any animal life on there would develop larger eyes to allow for more light to enter the eyeball. Which is interesting when you consider that there are a lot of depictions of aliens with large eyes.


  • He doesn't know the meaning of the word.

    A terrorist is someone who basically tries to create sheer amounts of fear in a group of people. They often target the general population. For example, the Beltway Sniper. That is a domestic terrorist. People were in such a state of fear that they would cower behind their cars as they filled up at gas stations.

    A person who would fly a plane full of civilians into a commercial building is a terrorist.

    Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols were domestic terrorists, although they did target a federal building.

    When an idiot like Reid calls a bunch of Americans who demonstrated a willingness to engage armed aggressors to defend a man's private property all domestic terrorists, he cheapens the term "terrorist" and insults the victims of true terrorism.


  • Of course! Its not like I

    Of course! Its not like I work for the government, ya know?

    Have a good day.


  • Gov Shutdown

    Well, I do recall that during the most recent shutdown, protesters gathered up the barricades closing national parks and monuments and stacked them up against the White House fence. While it wasn't really an armed confrontation, I would still call it an act of resistance that may be regarded as one of the first situations that led to the revolution depending on which future history book you read.

    I think we are now entering a period of revolution where we see a mix of acts of defiance, armed confrontations, and massive protests. The next period will start when people are actually killed. This confrontation isn't quite the event that galvanizes an upswell of support from citizens. It would be great if tyranny could end quietly but people need to see the harsh reality that is the federal government killing people to silence dissent.


  • http://www.dailypaul.com/3171



  • I absolutely agree

    Property tax essentially makes one a tenant on his own land. I own 20 acres in Utah but I can lose it if I don't pay them for nothing other than the privilege of possessing dirt within their border.

    However, if a state is going to collect property taxes, no land owner should be exempted, even the federal government. The main concern here is that if Nevada had proper ownership of all that federal land within its borders, it would be better off financially. I've already mentioned property taxes but they could also sell or lease out the land. Furthermore, if so much land were not federally held, more towns might have sprung up from 1864 to present. These towns may have developed into cities, creating jobs and drawing in more people resources that are beneficial to the state.

    I'm going to make another post about Nevada Revised Statute 321, it was passed in 1979, codifying Nevada's position on the federal lands within its borders.


  • laws

    "Do laws no longer apply when the radical right no longer agrees?" said Ryan Lenz, a writer for the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors militia group activity.

    Let me fix that statement...

    "Do British laws no longer apply when the colonists no longer agrees?"