Is it true that I need an NH Driver's license in order to register?
What are the steps necessary for me to register?
Thanks in advance.
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=7661.0
http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=5985.0
THanks for the links. One of my (many) roommates said they all but demand an NH DL. If I show up with my MO license and something with my new address, will this suffice?
Quote from: Quantrill on March 30, 2007, 07:41 PM NHFT
THanks for the links. One of my (many) roommates said they all but demand an NH DL. If I show up with my MO license and something with my new address, will this suffice?
I never showed ID when I registered.
I think something with the new address is fine... of course you live in 'the big city' ;) so the rules might be different there.
I wouldn't recommend joining the matrix.
Yeah, but I didn't move 1400+ miles just so I could opt-out of the system. I could have done that at home. If we're going to effect real change we must do it (at least partly) at the voting booth. I'm assuming they have more than just candidates on the ballots here. Every single time I voted in MO there was at least 1 tax increase on the ballot and many times there were multiple tax increases. We have a say in how much we are taxed and what is done with that money. That is why I am here. All the Alderman/board of whoever/school board/ ad infinitum sessions are or should be open to the public and getting these people out of our lives as much as possible is the goal. At least it's my goal...
NOTE: I hope my father was wrong. He said "I was young and idealistic once. Now I'm cynical and apathetic. You'll be there too."
Quote from: Quantrill on March 31, 2007, 11:16 AM NHFT
NOTE: I hope my father was wrong. He said "I was young and idealistic once. Now I'm cynical and apathetic. You'll be there too."
I used to be super cynical... now I am hopeful. (because of members of the FSP)
Quote from: Quantrill on March 31, 2007, 11:16 AM NHFT
Yeah, but I didn't move 1400+ miles just so I could opt-out of the system. I could have done that at home. If we're going to effect real change we must do it (at least partly) at the voting booth.
I am sorry to hear that.
So .... should I have to obey what the "majority" votes for?
Do what you feel is right. Hopefully you'll be aware of the consequences of your actions when doing so. I break laws all the time, knowing what could happen. I yearn for a time when I won't need permission to do things. It's the government who will need permission to do things. Ignoring them won't make them go away. Reducing the amount of money at their disposal and ridding them of Socialists is a pretty damn good start if you ask me...
Registering to vote in Manchester is easy. Just bring something that was mailed to you to your new address, like the postal change of address form, a letter, anything. I brought an envelope that my family had mailed stuff to me in and it worked. The people up there are pretty nice and all that, so they shouldn't give you much trouble. You'll want to go to the Town Hall on Elm Street to register.
QuoteI hope my father was wrong. He said "I was young and idealistic once. Now I'm cynical and apathetic. You'll be there too
My dad is like that too...only I'm pretty sure he skipped the idealistic stage and has just gotten more cynical.
Quote from: Quantrill on March 31, 2007, 07:19 PM NHFTReducing the amount of money at their disposal and ridding them of Socialists is a pretty damn good start if you ask me...
You do that by voting?
I just don't pay them the money they want.
Quote from: Quantrill on March 31, 2007, 07:19 PM NHFT
Do what you feel is right. Hopefully you'll be aware of the consequences of your actions when doing so. I break laws all the time, knowing what could happen. I yearn for a time when I won't need permission to do things. It's the government who will need permission to do things. Ignoring them won't make them go away. Reducing the amount of money at their disposal and ridding them of Socialists is a pretty damn good start if you ask me...
Dude,
In the immortal words of someone,
"Don't vote. It only encourages them."
QuoteYou do that by voting?
I just don't pay them the money they want.
I wish I could do that. I actually 'forgot' to pay my state income tax this last time around (baby steps). I suppose if NH passes the income tax I'd forget to file that as well. But we're still being hit at the gas pump, meal tax, property tax, liquor owned by the state, not allowed to carry switchblades, .08 BAC limit, etc... Until getting completely out of the system is feasible for my situation, I feel I can best effect change through the system our forefathers intended us to use.
Maybe this is a dead issue. I understand some people refuse to vote/pay taxes on principle and all I can say is I'm not there
yet. Perhaps someday I will be...
Quote from: maineiac on April 01, 2007, 07:38 AM NHFT
In the immortal words of someone, "Don't vote. It only encourages them."
It may be clich?, but it's true. A politician will win something by a razor-thin margin and then claim that he has a "mandate from the people" to do whatever raping and pillaging he has in mind, when almost none of the people actually want any such thing from him.
And so what if the other politician had won by a razor-thin margin? It's likely he would have done the same thing.
Voting may be useful when neither of those is the case, but this is something you'll have to let your conscience bother you about.
You can still show up at the polls, vote NO on the ever-present tax increase and write your own name in for every office if you feel there is no worthy candidate!
The government wants you to register to vote .... and doesn't ever want to take your name off the list.
Does that tell you anything?
Quote from: Quantrill on April 01, 2007, 06:42 PM NHFT
You can still show up at the polls, vote NO on the ever-present tax increase and write your own name in for every office if you feel there is no worthy candidate!
People who believe in small government MUST vote in each and every election to help turn back the tide of socialism. If only the liberals showed up to vote, imagine how terrible and invasive the laws would be!!
Definitely agree that writing in worthy candidates is the way to go in voting. You are not stuck with bad candidate A and bad candidate B - write-in someone who will make a positive difference and vote the way you would want them to vote.
It does not matter if the winner with 51% of the votes cast claims that they have a mandate of the people. Point out how false that is. The # of registered voters is grossly inflated as well - look through the list sometime and see how many people are registered to vote at your address or at your neighbors house. They only have to clean them up every 10 years so there are tons of old registrations on the checklists.
Quote from: dawn on April 02, 2007, 10:11 AM NHFTIf only the liberals showed up to vote, imagine how terrible and invasive the laws would be!!
That is a very interesting idea. How bad would the laws .... and overall government be ... if no decent people voted at all?
Most people already try to not be part of that process .... in small elections hardly anyone shows up ... and those that do are mostly government employees.
What if none of us showed up on their election days?
Things would get a lot worse before they got better, because most everyone would assume (with or without reason) that the election was legitimate.
They make lots of laws that we don't vote on already .... they make decisions without our input. I don't know if it would get any worse at the start.
Since we have been trying it the other way (having some people vote ... sometimes having a lot of people voting), how about we try it the other way once and see how it turns out short term? :)
Okay, I won't vote tomorrow.
Me either.
Why would anyone be voting tomorrow?
The problem is 30% voter turnout is considered good. Even if it was 5%, hell even if it was 2% these people still get to say "we have a mandate from the voters". And they'll be right because anyone who refuses to vote is saying they're ok with whatever happens.
Of course many non-voters don't look at it that way. 'If there's no one to vote for then I just won't vote' only makes it EASIER for these people to get away with stuff.
Imagine - 20,000 liberty-loving people showing up at the polls on election day. Wait, that's been thought of before...
:(
I have seen votes with lots of turnout and basically none ....... the government seems to go about its business no matter what.
Quote from: Quantrill on April 02, 2007, 07:23 PM NHFT
The problem is 30% voter turnout is considered good. Even if it was 5%, hell even if it was 2% these people still get to say "we have a mandate from the voters". And they'll be right because anyone who refuses to vote is saying they're ok with whatever happens.
Of course many non-voters don't look at it that way. 'If there's no one to vote for then I just won't vote' only makes it EASIER for these people to get away with stuff.
Imagine - 20,000 liberty-loving people showing up at the polls on election day. Wait, that's been thought of before...
:(
I choose not to vote...
Voting is part of the illusion of those around us who desire to impose their ideas, values, and morals upon others using aggression, mob-rule(democracy), and threat of bodily harm, imprisonment, and death.
I own myself...completely...and no other person has any supposed "jurisdiction" over me...
Live Free or Die!
Isn't it telling that so many people have a double standard for "taking at gunpoint"?
When it's done by person(s) without the community blessing they're called thieves...
But...
When it's done by person(s) with the community blessing they're called law enforcement officers...
You know...jack-booted thugs, storm troopers, Nazi SS, Waco Killers, FBI, CIA, BATFE, etc.
How many different flavors of aggression do we need?
I say "none of the above"...
Unintended Consequences by my friend John Ross
Henry Bowman and "V" would make a kick-ass team!
Hey Claire, It's way past time!
So no vote for Ron Paul?
Quote from: lastlady on April 02, 2007, 10:26 PM NHFT
So no vote for Ron Paul?
I support Ron Paul 200 percent!
I will be promoting Ron as much as I can!
I think what he has chosen to do is very admirable.
He will lead new people to the liberty and freedom movement.
It would be great if he became President except that the criminal elite have proven repeatedly that they will assassinate any president that doesn't "behave".
But...
No...
I will not be personally "registering"(asking permission) to vote...
bummer.
We sure could use your vote.
Quote from: powerchuter on April 02, 2007, 10:44 PM NHFT
Quote from: lastlady on April 02, 2007, 10:26 PM NHFT
So no vote for Ron Paul?
I support Ron Paul 200 percent!
I will be promoting Ron as much as I can!
I think what he has chosen to do is very admirable.
He will lead new people to the liberty and freedom movement.
It would be great if he became President except that the criminal elite have proven repeatedly that they will assassinate any president that doesn't "behave".
But...
No...
I will not be personally "registering"(asking permission) to vote...
I can understand and respect not wishing to ask permission by registering to vote. I feel that change does not happen in the voting booth but in the hearts of women and men and through direct action and a consciousness shift.
I go back and forth on the desire to step in a voting booth, my heart in the end feels it is futile and part of the matrix that keeps us in the illusion.
But... I really wanna see Ron Paul win the primaries and I believe it IS possible. :D
Quote from: powerchuter on April 02, 2007, 10:17 PM NHFT
I choose not to vote...
Voting is part of the illusion of those around us who desire to impose their ideas, values, and morals upon others using aggression, mob-rule(democracy), and threat of bodily harm, imprisonment, and death.
I assume you've heard the phrase, "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight"?
Well when votes are the weapon of choice, your best chance for surviving the fight is to arm yourself with a vote, and encourage others do do likewise.
Voting does
not have to mean participating in mob-ocracy. Voting against every spending proposal, voting against every big spender, voting for privatization and repeal of laws, etc., all serve to
dis-empower the mob. That's not ruling by mob, that's self-defense!
Which is more effective: to yell and moan and wave protest signs about the latest imposition of the Mob? Or to cast a vote that stops the Mob?
You can say that your vote makes no difference at the federal level, and you might be right. You can say that your vote makes no difference at the state level, and there's room for disagreement. But you can't say in NH that your local vote makes no difference, because the local level is where spending and taxing are completely intertwined.
If CACR-18 (the "educational adequacy" amendment to the NH Constitution) manages to pass, then local votes will indeed become meaningless. NH will become like every other state, where people scream and yell and protest at local meetings, but the local officials shrug and point their fingers at the state. "We can't help it," they say, "because the state says we have to spend this money."
Do
not give up local control. If you refuse to vote, you agree to be ruled by those who do.
Kevin
see .... the guys who work for the government want you to vote.
I'm guessing that the average bureaucrat is ambivalent about voting, generally ignorant about politics, and, only pays attention when their union or superiors warn them about something effecting their jobs or budgets.
Quote from: Lloyd Danforth on April 03, 2007, 06:49 AM NHFT
I'm guessing that the average bureaucrat is ambivalent about voting, generally ignorant about politics, and, only pays attention when their union or superiors warn them about something effecting their jobs or budgets.
except at the town level.
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 03, 2007, 05:48 AM NHFT
see .... the guys who work for the government want you to vote.
For those of you who missed it,
this guy who works for the government wants you to vote to reduce and eliminate as much government as possible.
Russell's "confirmation" is disingenuous at best.
insulting and accusatory at least...
verifiable and undeniable at most...
unbelievable and unimaginable at worst...
disreputable and disputive and disruptive and dis......
Voting could be useful in some circumstances to slow the bastards down.
Consider crossing this paragraph out on your registration form (I did!):
QuoteIn declaring New Hampshire as my domicile, I am subject to the laws of the State of New Hampshire which
apply to all residents, including laws requiring me to register my motor vehicles and apply for a New
Hampshire?s driver?s license within 60 days of becoming a resident.
Quote from: KBCraig on April 03, 2007, 02:17 AM NHFT
Well when votes are the weapon of choice, your best chance for surviving the fight is to arm yourself with a vote, and encourage others do do likewise.
Voting against every spending proposal, voting against every big spender, voting for privatization and repeal of laws, etc., all serve to dis-empower the mob. That's not ruling by mob, that's self-defense!
Which is more effective: to yell and moan and wave protest signs about the latest imposition of the Mob? Or to cast a vote that stops the Mob?
You can say that your vote makes no difference at the federal level, and you might be right. You can say that your vote makes no difference at the state level, and there's room for disagreement. But you can't say in NH that your local vote makes no difference, because the local level is where spending and taxing are completely intertwined.
Do not give up local control. If you refuse to vote, you agree to be ruled by those who do.
Here, here! This is the way things are done at this point - not voting is exactly what "they" want.
Start sarcasm:
Hey, wouldn't it be great if all the freedom lovers believed that their vote didn't count or that it was force or (insert some negative idea here) and they decided to stay home and NOT VOTE???!!!! Wouldn't it be great it we got them to waste their time putting forth arguments for why voting is good, why voting is bad, etc. Distract them from the real issues, you know?? Oh, who am I kidding, those freedom lovers would never fall for that, would they????
End sarcasm
Important votes can be won or lost by ONE VOTE! I don't see how someone who loves freedom can sit back and let an candidate who will protect your rights be beat by a candidate who will gleefully take your rights away. Or how a person who loves low taxes can sit back and let another huge spending increase pass without saying NO.
We don't live in a perfect world - we must play the game by the rules (more or less) and work to change the rules.
Quote from: KBCraig on April 03, 2007, 10:03 AM NHFT
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 03, 2007, 05:48 AM NHFT
see .... the guys who work for the government want you to vote.
For those of you who missed it, this guy who works for the government wants you to vote to reduce and eliminate as much government as possible.
Russell's "confirmation" is disingenuous at best.
Kevin....we all know how Russell looks up to you. You might have hurt his feelings with that comment.
Quote from: KBCraig on April 03, 2007, 02:17 AM NHFT
If you refuse to vote, you agree to be ruled by those who do.
That's a false dichotomy. I think that is a large part of what "beyond ballots or bullets" is all about.
Quote from: dawn on April 04, 2007, 02:02 PM NHFT
Here, here! This is the way things are done at this point - not voting is exactly what "they" want.
In some ways you seem right. Government folks don't want their enemies to show up to vote. But when it really comes down to it ... the whole government promotes voting ... tells you it is your duty .... tries to make it easy for you to sign up. In fact .... I still have not been able to get my name off of the list.
This thread has inspired me to keep going back to get of the voter rolls and chronicle the saga in the paper. :)
Quote
We don't live in a perfect world - we must play the game by the rules (more or less) and work to change the rules.
I agree we live in an imperfect world, which is the reason I shouldn't play by its rules.
From Jesus:
"Do not be surprised, brethren, if the world hates you."
"If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you.
Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm."
from Paul:
"Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind."
As I've said before, it might be tactically useful to vote in some limited circumstances, but as an overall strategy, we aren't going to vote ourselves free.
Personally, I have never voted. The simple fact is that I have yet to see a candidate worthy of voting for.
The way I see it, with the political sytem at present, it really matters little in the end if one votes or doesn't vote, as it come down to the lesser of two evils. Dem vs. Rep. I dont' feel either party truely has the welfare of it's constituents in mind.
Regardless of the candidates, why aren't some of you voting to strike down the ever-present tax increases? That is one area where you do have a say in how tight your chains are. Ignoring these ballots doesn't diminish the "prepared-food tax" or whatever else is taxed in NH...
Quote from: EJinCT on April 04, 2007, 05:47 PM NHFT
The simple fact is that I have yet to see a candidate worthy of voting for.
That's what the NHLA is for... finding which are good, and which are "least-bad", and which are just bad, bad, bad.
I dare you to tell me a guy like Dick Marple isn't worth voting for, after you've chatted with him for a few minutes.
And of course there's Rep. Joel Winters... who moved all the way from California to New Hampshire so he could work to reduce the size and scope of government.
Quote from: KBCraig on April 03, 2007, 02:17 AM NHFT
Quote from: powerchuter on April 02, 2007, 10:17 PM NHFT
I choose not to vote...
Voting is part of the illusion of those around us who desire to impose their ideas, values, and morals upon others using aggression, mob-rule(democracy), and threat of bodily harm, imprisonment, and death.
I assume you've heard the phrase, "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight"?
Well when votes are the weapon of choice, your best chance for surviving the fight is to arm yourself with a vote, and encourage others do do likewise.
Voting does not have to mean participating in mob-ocracy. Voting against every spending proposal, voting against every big spender, voting for privatization and repeal of laws, etc., all serve to dis-empower the mob. That's not ruling by mob, that's self-defense!
Which is more effective: to yell and moan and wave protest signs about the latest imposition of the Mob? Or to cast a vote that stops the Mob?
You can say that your vote makes no difference at the federal level, and you might be right. You can say that your vote makes no difference at the state level, and there's room for disagreement. But you can't say in NH that your local vote makes no difference, because the local level is where spending and taxing are completely intertwined.
If CACR-18 (the "educational adequacy" amendment to the NH Constitution) manages to pass, then local votes will indeed become meaningless. NH will become like every other state, where people scream and yell and protest at local meetings, but the local officials shrug and point their fingers at the state. "We can't help it," they say, "because the state says we have to spend this money."
Do not give up local control. If you refuse to vote, you agree to be ruled by those who do.
Kevin
I carry guns...and have never brought a pointless blade(pun intended) to a heavy metal exchange...
AND, I CAN ASSURE YOU, I HAVE NOT AGREED IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM TO BE RULED BY ANYONE ELSE!
By voting you continue the myth that the "winning" voters have jurisdiction over the "losing" voters and all those who voluntarily and involuntarily do not vote...
YOU DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION OVER ME, OR ANYONE ELSE..."VOTE" OR NO "VOTE"
Live Free or Die(and take as many with you as you can!)...
Unintended Consequences by John Ross(a must read)
Henry Bowman and "V" would make a great team!
Hey Claire, It's way past time...
Quote from: Quantrill on April 04, 2007, 08:04 PM NHFT
Regardless of the candidates, why aren't some of you voting to strike down the ever-present tax increases?
I am not part of their system. It would be wrong for me to vote how much money should be stolen from people.
Quote from: powerchuter on April 04, 2007, 08:46 PM NHFT
By voting you continue the myth that the "winning" voters have jurisdiction over the "losing" voters and all those who voluntarily and involuntarily do not vote...
By not voting, you turn the myth into reality.
Again: you don't have to vote for power, nor for politicians, nor taxes, nor to tell others how to run their lives. There are many things to vote
against, and when you don't participate, you are left at the hands of those who
do want to vote for power and politicians and taxes and telling others (you!) how to run their lives.
You believe in self-defense, so
defend yourself by voting against spending initiatives, taxes, and bad laws.
Quote from: error on April 04, 2007, 04:50 PM NHFTAs I've said before, it might be tactically useful to vote in some limited circumstances, but as an overall strategy, we aren't going to vote ourselves free.
Exactly.
I'll use their system against them, any time I see fit. It's simple self-defense. Or, at very least, damage-mitigation.
I am not a part of their system, so I am not partaking of the myth that voting legitimizes them. That's something that happens
within their system, not in the real world.
Here's the blunt fact of it: the government is going to bend you over a chair and rape you on a regular basis. The question is: if there's a bottle of Astroglide sitting on the shelf, are you going to hand it to them to reduce the damage you suffer?
Joe
what a pleasant image :(
how's it workin for you?
I decided to stop paying for my own abuse ... it seems to help make it stop.
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 05, 2007, 09:52 AM NHFTwhat a pleasant image :(
Is anything involving the government ever a pleasant image?
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 05, 2007, 09:52 AM NHFThow's it workin for you?
I'll let you know in 20 years or so. No matter what course of action we choose, they aren't going to go away overnight...
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 05, 2007, 09:52 AM NHFTI decided to stop paying for my own abuse ... it seems to help make it stop.
I'm on that path. When my business gets big enough to need extra help, I'm not going to
hire anyone. I will contract with private individuals, and let them run their own lives. If they were my "employees," I would have to withold taxes from their paychecks, and it will be a cold day in hell before I become a tax-collector...
I'll use their system against them, but I sure won't work for them...
Joe
Government is a gang of thugs operating under a cloak of legitimacy. Until we can successfully remove government's cloak of legitimacy, we can use the process and all of the attention paid to it to spread our message and maybe even elect a few candidates as well.
Quote from: MaineShark on April 05, 2007, 09:58 AM NHFT
I'm on that path. When my business gets big enough to need extra help, I'm not going to hire anyone. I will contract with private individuals, and let them run their own lives. If they were my "employees," I would have to withold taxes from their paychecks, and it will be a cold day in hell before I become a tax-collector...
Sometimes the government doesn't care about your contracts .... they think you should give them taxes ..... maybe you will have to magically build stuff with no apparent help. :)
Quote from: FTL_Ian on April 05, 2007, 11:38 AM NHFTUntil we can successfully remove government's cloak of legitimacy, we can use the process and all of the attention paid to it to spread our message and maybe even elect a few candidates as well.
How do you get rid of the cloak ... if you keep attending the fashion show (election) and cheering?
If you keep giving attention to the emporer and his cloak so you can hang out with the crowds .... how do you point out to people that he has no clothes on?
It is unsightly .... time to turn away from the naked king.
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 05, 2007, 01:56 PM NHFT
the naked king.
As an amateur nudist, my vote goes to anyone who has the decency and integrity to be naked while they campaign.
In the last election I voted by absentee ballot. I thought I might be out of town on election day, but I wasn't, so I went down to campaign for my favorite selectman. When the election officials saw me out in the parking lot they called me aside.
"You submitted an absentee ballot?"
"Yep."
"You are here, you have to vote in person."
"I already voted."
"You'll vote now or we'll challenge your absentee ballot."
"I'm not going to vote twice."
So I don't think my vote counted.
I wonder why they wanted you to vote then. Would they have known to shred it after you voted?
Quote from: TackleTheWorld on April 05, 2007, 06:33 PM NHFT
When the election officials saw me out in the parking lot they called me aside.
"You'll vote now or we'll challenge your absentee ballot."
So I don't think my vote counted.
What town & ward was this in?
Russell, don't you have family in Kansas? It sounds like Missouri City (http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/news/11534571/detail.html) might be your kinda town, even if it is across the river.
sounds like a good pattern for any city to follow
so .... if no one in your town voted
would that be a good or bad thing?
Would you get excited that you could take over the town by running and voting for yourself next time?
If you live entirely outside the system and not voting is your thing, then that's your thing. But if you look to anything that was brought about by a vote, say, The U.S. or N.H. constitution for support, does denying the effectiveness of voting make you a hypocrite?
quite possibly
If you don't think voting is a good idea ... then I guess you don't want to be a part of any government.
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 05, 2007, 01:52 PM NHFTQuote from: MaineShark on April 05, 2007, 09:58 AM NHFTI'm on that path. When my business gets big enough to need extra help, I'm not going to hire anyone. I will contract with private individuals, and let them run their own lives. If they were my "employees," I would have to withold taxes from their paychecks, and it will be a cold day in hell before I become a tax-collector...
Sometimes the government doesn't care about your contracts .... they think you should give them taxes ..... maybe you will have to magically build stuff with no apparent help. :)
"Hey, I'm a one-man dynamo. I don't normally drink coffee, so when I did drink some, I just got so high on the caffeine that I installed that 2300-lb boiler all by myself, in one day. Of course, I was working so fast that I accidentally destroyed some of the money that I was paid to do the job, so that's why I only have this much here on me, now." :o
Joe
8)
Quote from: d_goddard on April 05, 2007, 11:12 PM NHFT
Quote from: TackleTheWorld on April 05, 2007, 06:33 PM NHFT
When the election officials saw me out in the parking lot they called me aside.
"You'll vote now or we'll challenge your absentee ballot."
So I don't think my vote counted.
What town & ward was this in?
I don't think there are wards here in Winchester.
Quote from: TackleTheWorld on April 06, 2007, 10:02 AM NHFT
Quote from: d_goddard on April 05, 2007, 11:12 PM NHFT
Quote from: TackleTheWorld on April 05, 2007, 06:33 PM NHFT
When the election officials saw me out in the parking lot they called me aside.
"You'll vote now or we'll challenge your absentee ballot."
So I don't think my vote counted.
What town & ward was this in?
I don't think there are wards here in Winchester.
It seems to me this was malfeasance on the part of the officials.
The Secretary of State's office is the place to report any such problems:
Phone: 603-271-3242 Fax: 603-271-6316
Email: Elections@sos.state.nh.us
If "officials" are not called to task, they will not change their behavior.
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 05, 2007, 09:07 PM NHFT
I wonder why they wanted you to vote then. Would they have known to shred it after you voted?
Maybe they were trying to get me for voting twice.
Quote from: TackleTheWorld on April 06, 2007, 10:39 AM NHFT
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 05, 2007, 09:07 PM NHFT
I wonder why they wanted you to vote then. Would they have known to shred it after you voted?
Maybe they were trying to get me for voting twice.
That was my first thought.
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 06, 2007, 07:32 AM NHFT
so .... if no one in your town voted
would that be a good or bad thing?
Would you get excited that you could take over the town by running and voting for yourself next time?
If someone abandons a trash heap and I go in and clean up, is that "taking over"
Cathleen
I wouldn't call it abandoning .... more changed purpose. :)
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 06, 2007, 01:06 PM NHFT
I wouldn't call it abandoning .... more changed purpose. :)
Bingo!
What's a trash heap when all the trash is gone?
Maybe.... a nice park?
maybe I also have a different goal than some of you....
I look forward to a time with no government .... so not voting now and in the future makes sense.
If you want some sort of government .... I guess you will be voting now and in the future.
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 06, 2007, 03:20 PM NHFT
I look forward to a time with no government .... so not voting now and in the future makes sense.
I look forward to a time when people peacefully, willingly divest themselves of government, one bit at a time, until everybody realizes it wasn't needed after all.... so voting now and for the forseeable future makes sense.
Or maybe me & Russ should just handle this like men and arm wrestle at the MVP meeting.
Naked.
Quote from: d_goddard on April 06, 2007, 04:00 PM NHFT
Or maybe me & Russ should just handle this like men and arm wrestle at the MVP meeting.
Naked.
gay
QuoteIf you want some sort of government .... I guess you will be voting now and in the future.
This is why I have respect for Russell. He has his principles and sticks to them. I
do believe in having a government (albeit a small one) so I do now and will in the future be voting every possible chance I get.
I can understand the Anarchy argument. The thought that basically goes: "I'm my own person, nobody owns me." But even if the entire U.S. government and all state and local government were disbanded tomorrow. We would not have "freedom in our lifetime." Well, maybe for about 2 weeks or so. Just long enough for China, Russia or a handful of Middle Eastern countries to make sure we really were without government. Then we would no longer be quasi-free, we would be even worse off... :(
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 06, 2007, 07:32 AM NHFT
so .... if no one in your town voted
would that be a good or bad thing?
This happens: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070405/D8OAGEOG0.html
Quote from: money dollars on April 06, 2007, 04:07 PM NHFT
Quote from: d_goddard on April 06, 2007, 04:00 PM NHFT
Or maybe me & Russ should just handle this like men and arm wrestle at the MVP meeting.
Naked.
gay
So... if we video tape it, will you buy a copy?
Quote from: d_goddard on April 06, 2007, 04:00 PM NHFT
Or maybe me & Russ should just handle this like men and arm wrestle at the MVP meeting.
If I win .... I let you do whatever you want.
If you win .... ?
Quote from: Quantrill on April 06, 2007, 04:09 PM NHFT
This is why I have respect for Russell. He has his principles and sticks to them.
haha .... the last few times I voted .... it didn't work. So I was forced to look at reality and change my mind about how to go about things.
Then as I dug deeper it got simpler and made more and more sense. :)
Quote from: d_goddard on April 06, 2007, 04:46 PM NHFT
Quote from: money dollars on April 06, 2007, 04:07 PM NHFT
Quote from: d_goddard on April 06, 2007, 04:00 PM NHFT
Or maybe me & Russ should just handle this like men and arm wrestle at the MVP meeting.
Naked.
gay
So... if we video tape it, will you buy a copy?
So could I do the reverse of the "Emporers New Clothes" and say that I am naked when I am fully clothed?
What does an arm wrestling match look like with 2 guys that don't want to use force?
I don't want to initiate or return force and Denis probably would only use force defensively.
look .... all this voting talk has me getting hillary and bill bradley ads. It is like a mirror that shows me my faults. :)
Quote from: TackleTheWorld on April 06, 2007, 10:39 AM NHFT
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 05, 2007, 09:07 PM NHFT
I wonder why they wanted you to vote then. Would they have known to shred it after you voted?
Maybe they were trying to get me for voting twice.
That was my first thought.. and then get you busted for voting 2x.
Quote from: Quantrill on April 06, 2007, 04:09 PM NHFT
I can understand the Anarchy argument. The thought that basically goes: "I'm my own person, nobody owns me." But even if the entire U.S. government and all state and local government were disbanded tomorrow. We would not have "freedom in our lifetime." Well, maybe for about 2 weeks or so. Just long enough for China, Russia or a handful of Middle Eastern countries to make sure we really were without government. Then we would no longer be quasi-free, we would be even worse off... :(
How would we be worse off? While any of those could conceivably conquer the U.S. military under the right circumstances, none could conquer a free people. They'd be insane to even try it.
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 06, 2007, 03:20 PM NHFT
maybe I also have a different goal than some of you....
I look forward to a time with no government .... so not voting now and in the future makes sense.
If you want some sort of government .... I guess you will be voting now and in the future.
Alan Weiss, who is an FSP member, won election to a rather pointless local office in Texas, eliminated its functions, and resigned after effectively abolishing it. He partook in the voting process and stopped the government from taking people's money for that particular purpose.
Sounds like a good use of "voting" to me.
well he should run for president then
I'd vote for anyone who, upon taking office, abolished the office entirely, never to return.
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 07, 2007, 12:58 AM NHFT
well he should run for president then
Would he have your vote?
Quote from: Russell Kanning on April 07, 2007, 12:58 AM NHFTwell he should run for president then
Why don't we elect someone who isn't yet 35? That would give us a few years without a President. And if he had a VP who was even younger, all he has to do is resign as soon as he is about to turn 35, and the VP steps in and does nothing, because
he isn't 35! :o
Joe
You can vote for me. I'll go down there and veto everything that doesn't repeal something. And I'll refuse the salary.
QuoteHow would we be worse off? While any of those could conceivably conquer the U.S. military under the right circumstances, none could conquer a free people. They'd be insane to even try it.
How would we be worse off? Does anyone really doubt the fact that there are countries who would invade us without a second thought? Even if we pulled all of our troops out of every country and issued a formal apology, we've already pissed off enough people that we'd be sitting ducks over here.
I can't be the only person to see that. I hope not...
Quote from: Quantrill on April 07, 2007, 07:55 AM NHFT
QuoteHow would we be worse off? While any of those could conceivably conquer the U.S. military under the right circumstances, none could conquer a free people. They'd be insane to even try it.
How would we be worse off? Does anyone really doubt the fact that there are countries who would invade us without a second thought? Even if we pulled all of our troops out of every country and issued a formal apology, we've already pissed off enough people that we'd be sitting ducks over here.
I can't be the only person to see that. I hope not...
You are making the classic American mistake of conflating the government with the people.
Billions of people are pissed off at the U.S. government and would like nothing more than to see it fall. Most of these people have the wrong reasons in mind, though, for instance increasing their own power.
You're also confusing the U.S. government run by a certain type of weak-willed person, with a free society run by no one. Lots of other places would attempt to invade the former. But no one would invade the latter; it would be suicide. Their troops wouldn't manage to establish a beachhead. The free PEOPLE would not permit it.
If you honestly think every other country would just leave us alone, then I sincerely hope you're right. Unfortunately I'm too pessimistic to think that...
:(
the same methods we use to reject this government .... can be used on the next one that tries to enslave us. It is really simple. :)
Quote from: Quantrill on April 07, 2007, 08:16 AM NHFT
If you honestly think every other country would just leave us alone, then I sincerely hope you're right. Unfortunately I'm too pessimistic to think that...
:(
Oh, I don't think ALL of them will. There's probably one stupid enough to try something. They just aren't likely to get across the Rio Grande alive if they're invading for the purpose of conquest. Too many people would just shoot them dead with whatever was at hand.
You can't fight a land war in America, either.
Quote from: KBCraig on April 04, 2007, 10:09 PM NHFT
Quote from: powerchuter on April 04, 2007, 08:46 PM NHFT
By voting you continue the myth that the "winning" voters have jurisdiction over the "losing" voters and all those who voluntarily and involuntarily do not vote...
By not voting, you turn the myth into reality.
Again: you don't have to vote for power, nor for politicians, nor taxes, nor to tell others how to run their lives. There are many things to vote against, and when you don't participate, you are left at the hands of those who do want to vote for power and politicians and taxes and telling others (you!) how to run their lives.
You believe in self-defense, so defend yourself by voting against spending initiatives, taxes, and bad laws.
Ridiculous!
Obviously you are not mature enough in your thinking to understand the concepts you are trying to discuss.
Quote from: error on April 07, 2007, 08:10 AM NHFT
You're also confusing the U.S. government run by a certain type of weak-willed person, with a free society run by no one. Lots of other places would attempt to invade the former. But no one would invade the latter; it would be suicide. Their troops wouldn't manage to establish a beachhead. The free PEOPLE would not permit it.
We don't have a society of Free People. Some would stand and fight and go down in glory. Many would cower and submit thinking, "I will survive and maybe my children will have a chance to someday be free."
A quick abolition of government here would be disastrous. The People are not ready.
Cathleen
Quote from: cathleeninnh on April 07, 2007, 08:44 AM NHFT
A quick abolition of government here would be disastrous. The People are not ready.
Yep.
We need
at least a full generation of people who are taught in places other than government-run schools, by teachers who are not themselves government-educated.
Quote from: cathleeninnh on April 07, 2007, 08:44 AM NHFT
We don't have a society of Free People. Some would stand and fight and go down in glory. Many would cower and submit thinking, "I will survive and maybe my children will have a chance to someday be free."
A quick abolition of government here would be disastrous. The People are not ready.
Of course the people aren't ready. One of the things some of us have to do is to get them ready. Preferably before this government collapses and they replace it with another one.
During WWII, Japan considered invading the West Coast. And promptly dropped the notion, on the grounds that American civilians would defeat their troops.
American civilians hold more small arms than all the armies of every country on the planet, combined. If only a fraction chose to fight, any enemy force would be defeated.
Could China (for example) overwhelm us with numbers? Theoretically, yes. But how would they get here? Any invasion requires moving troops. That can only be done so quickly. The carefully-planned landing on D-Day barely won out, and only did so because the German military commanders didn't send troops that were needed. Imagine that, without the bureaucrats interfering. Imagine a few thousand conscript troops trying to invade, against massive resistance from the populace...
They wouldn't have time to establish themselves and create a puppet government for people to bow down to. Even if people were inclined to do so (and I agree that the majority are), they wouldn't have the opportunity.
Now, a quick replacement/removal of the current government would be messy, and I think a slower transition is more likely to work well, but the slow transition is not necessary. Of course, it's immaterial, since the Feds aren't going to wander off during the night tonight and forget the way back. Aside from the possibility of bloody revolution, a slow transition is what we'll get.
Joe
A calamity is faster and entirely possible. Natural or economic.
I'm with Denis. We have to save the children. I would like to think we are making progress there. Otherwise, the future looks dim.
Cathleen
Quote from: cathleeninnh on April 07, 2007, 09:44 AM NHFT
A calamity is faster and entirely possible. Natural or economic.
I'm with Denis. We have to save the children. I would like to think we are making progress there. Otherwise, the future looks dim.
There were a lot of them at the MVP meeting.
Yup! we'll need a daycare at the meetings before long
Quote from: Lloyd Danforth on April 07, 2007, 07:01 PM NHFT
Yup! we'll need a daycare at the meetings before long
We already need a nursery room...
But a megaphone will suffice...
For now...
I'm not sure where you could verify this, but I've read that 1 out of 3 Americans owns guns and each gun owner on average has 3 or 4 guns. So that would basically mean a little more than 1 gun for every American so roughly 300-400 million guns.
Again I have no idea how credible this is, but it seems to be a commonly-used talking point...
Quote from: GraniteForge on April 07, 2007, 11:56 PM NHFTQuote from: MaineShark on April 07, 2007, 09:29 AM NHFTAmerican civilians hold more small arms than all the armies of every country on the planet, combined.
I would love to hear where you get this math. I have never seen a reasonable estimate that there are more than 300-400 million guns in civilian hands in the US, and my own extensive experience with guns tells me that a large percentage (perhaps 25%) are unusable, due to poor maintenance or unavailability of proper ammo. Russia and China together certainly have more than that, India and Vietnam have huge stocks. There's Israel and England, South Korea, Japan, the list of countries with large stockpiles of guns goes on, and most of those are in easily provided calibers, unlike that heirloom .32 Colt or .44 Auto Mag.
It's based on the number manufactured, less the number exported or known destroyed, and eliminates any firearm over 25 years of age, on the theory that most are not particularly useful, or may be inactive.
Certainly more accurate than the notion that Federal commerce laws make it illegal to own switchblades in NH, eh?
Joe
Quote from: MaineShark on April 08, 2007, 01:49 PM NHFT
It's based on the number manufactured, less the number exported or known destroyed, and eliminates any firearm over 25 years of age, on the theory that most are not particularly useful, or may be inactive.
My most useful firearms are all over 25 years old. We only have four that are newer than that: Winchester 1300, Ruger P97, Taurus M85UL (Mary's), and a Crickett .22 rifle (John David's).
If I had need to reach out and touch something, the rifle chosen would probably be over 60 years old.
Quote from: MaineShark on April 08, 2007, 01:49 PM NHFT
Certainly more accurate than the notion that Federal commerce laws make it illegal to own switchblades in NH, eh?
Joe
There is no federal law that makes owning a switchblade illegal in NH. the only federal law that makes hard for you to own a switchblade is that it illegal for anyone to sell you one from out of state or for anyone to manufacture a switchblade for sell from out of state. Unless you are in the military, police officer or government employee.
Quote from: KBCraig on April 08, 2007, 02:08 PM NHFT
Quote from: MaineShark on April 08, 2007, 01:49 PM NHFT
It's based on the number manufactured, less the number exported or known destroyed, and eliminates any firearm over 25 years of age, on the theory that most are not particularly useful, or may be inactive.
My most useful firearms are all over 25 years old. We only have four that are newer than that: Winchester 1300, Ruger P97, Taurus M85UL (Mary's), and a Crickett .22 rifle (John David's).
If I had need to reach out and touch something, the rifle chosen would probably be over 60 years old.
Would that be one you bought new in the store?
Quote from: KBCraig on April 08, 2007, 02:08 PM NHFT
Quote from: MaineShark on April 08, 2007, 01:49 PM NHFT
It's based on the number manufactured, less the number exported or known destroyed, and eliminates any firearm over 25 years of age, on the theory that most are not particularly useful, or may be inactive.
My most useful firearms are all over 25 years old. We only have four that are newer than that: Winchester 1300, Ruger P97, Taurus M85UL (Mary's), and a Crickett .22 rifle (John David's).
If I had need to reach out and touch something, the rifle chosen would probably be over 60 years old.
Come to think of it, i don't have a gun that isn't more than 60 years old
Quote from: KBCraig on April 08, 2007, 02:08 PM NHFTMy most useful firearms are all over 25 years old. We only have four that are newer than that: Winchester 1300, Ruger P97, Taurus M85UL (Mary's), and a Crickett .22 rifle (John David's).
If I had need to reach out and touch something, the rifle chosen would probably be over 60 years old.
Indeed. I didn't make the choices. However, eliminating those over 25 years has the added benefit of helping to account for unreportedly destroyed firearms of newer vintage.
Quote from: thinkliberty on April 08, 2007, 03:43 PM NHFTThere is no federal law that makes owning a switchblade illegal in NH. the only federal law that makes hard for you to own a switchblade is that it illegal for anyone to sell you one from out of state or for anyone to manufacture a switchblade for sell from out of state. Unless you are in the military, police officer or government employee.
Indeed. That's why I used it as an example of an absurdity.
Quote from: GraniteForge on April 08, 2007, 04:45 PM NHFTNot at all. You have to understand that no one really knows how many guns have been manufactured or destroyed in recent years, much less before serial numbers were mandatory.
Oddly enough, serial numbers have been required for quite a while...
And wouldn't unrecorded manufatures actually
help my case?
Quote from: GraniteForge on April 08, 2007, 04:45 PM NHFTI have never heard the 25-year age limit, but it doesn't seem valid. My neighbor regularly shoots a 45-70 that he has owned for 30 years and was built in the late 1800s. My carry 1911 was built in the early 1940s.
See my reply to Kevin...
Quote from: GraniteForge on April 08, 2007, 04:45 PM NHFTAs to the comment about the knife law, I wasn't guessing on that. That is the answer I got after pretty extensive research among the people who would be doing the arresting, prosecuting, and defending. No one could find such a case in NH, so the chance of an arrest seems remote, but this definition of gravity knife has been used as a basis for arrest in other states, and in the absence of an appropriate definition in state law, the federal statute may be referenced.
Oh? Who were they, precisely...?
Joe