It has occurred to me, for personal reasons many people have given up on achieving freedom and peace through a political process. Others believe the political process is a necessary evil or a fact of life, albeit a sometimes ugly fact. Rather than debate that issue, I propose finding areas of commonality, if they exist. Hey it's the least a duly elected Ambassador can do. ;D
One of those areas may be the warrant article process. I propose writing and getting it passed, a warrant article for the town of GRAFTON, instructing the government servants that the enforcement of "victimless crimes" in the town of GRAFTON is to be forbidden. Naturally there will be debate of what constitutes victimless crimes and how this would be written and implemented. That's why this thread was started.
It's my understanding that the one area of commonality between the "in the system" and "out of the system" people, many of you whom I count as friends, is the embracement of the non aggression principle. I've given some thought to how this might be accomplished and would appreciate others input.
I like it. Legally, I don't think the town government can directly order the police not to investigate crimes. However, this has been done in some locations for certain crimes by ordering the police not to expend town funds on certain crimes. Since he can't even drive his cruiser around, or make a photocopy, or pick up the phone without using town funds, it ends up being the same thing.
Very rough, but how about:
"The police force of the town of Grafton shall not expend town funds in the investigation or prosecution of any crime for which there is not a victim who can demonstrate real and articulable harm as the result of the act."
I can already see some holes that would need to be fixed, but that could be a rough framework.
Joe
I'm with you --- at least part of the way ... ;D :clap:
It is supposed to be Juries who ultimately enforce or - more properly - not enforce the laws. (Remember the hole presumed Innocent thingy we were lied to about back in the government school day?)
I have been talking about a Fully Informed Jury Article for Grafton for quite some time.
More than a few of my friends have poo hooed the idea of creating a Fully Informed Jury Article for the Grafton Town Meeting.
Does anyone remember that originally FIJA stood for Fully Informed Jury Amendment? And why to use that process?
I'm thinking it is time I get busy writing it and then getting the required number of signatures. I'll also bring the discussion of the FIJA over to the Grafton Forum.
What is the deadline and how many signatures do I need?
How does it need to start?
To see if the town of Grafton shall ... ?
A very rough 1st draft?
To see if the town of Grafton shall stop waisting tax money on hastling, and or jailing people who have harmed no one.
And to see if the town of Grafton shall, with/through any and all of its agents, henceforth stop any and all activity which has the effect (intentionally or otherwise) of directly and or inderectly initiating and or aiding in the investigation, arrest, and or prosecution of any and all victimless activies (sometimes referred to as crimes).
And to see if the town of Grafton shall henceforth request that any and all other government agencies and any and all of their agents refrain from this aggression within the town of Grafton.
Thanks for the feedback guys. John, let's get together and work out the details. I'll be in town later, if we don't connect today we will see each other sometime soon I'm sure.
Others feel free to continue to comment or critique.
Quote
To see if the town of Grafton shall stop wasting tax money on hassling, and/or jailing people who have harmed no one.
And to see if the town of Grafton shall, with/through any and all of its agents, henceforth stop any and all activity which has the effect (intentionally or otherwise) of directly and/or indirectly initiating and or aiding in the investigation, arrest, and/or prosecution of any and all victimless activities (sometimes referred to as "crimes").
And to see if the town of Grafton shall henceforth request that any and all other government agencies and any and all of their agents refrain from this aggression within the town of Grafton.
Can't vouch for the format, but I cleaned up the spelling and punctuation a little. Feel free to contact me if you want the same for further revisions.
Even if it passed in an election, the State will tell them they don't have to honor it. The oath the local cops swear to probably mentions enforcing state laws and maybe something about the state constitution.
I would change "hassling" to "interfering".
I'm not sure why people in such little towns think it is necessry to have police departments anyway. How does one suggest the elimination of such?
I would think that there might be some common ground between polticals and non-politicals in reporting on what the government people are doing. For example, demonstrating to local people all of the ways their "representatives" act against their liberty. Politicals would hope this motivates people to vote for more pro-liberty people, and non-politicals would hope this motivates people to see that government can only act against their liberty and reject it altogether. Some of the NHLA efforts might qualify in this regard.
There are no cops in Westmoreland where Mark lives.
I live right next to a cop and I've had massive bonfires without permits on a regular basis with no problem. I asked him about starting fires and permits when I first moved in and he looked at me and shrugged and said "Just do it. Avoid it on really dry days."
Westmoreland probably pays through the nose to the nearby towns for the "service" and has no say in how that service is provided. Having a local police department means you have much more influence on who gets elected into the position and how it runs. For example, we get to vote on the budget and any warrant articles related to the police department. If we got rid of the police department in grafton we'd probably be forced to pay Canaan to come to Grafton and have no say in how Canaan police department is run (Canaan already comes to Grafton as it is for violent crimes).
This is currently the case with the high school & middle school. I'm sure someone at some point said, "Why does Grafton need a school?" and now we're paying more than half of our property taxes to the school district and have no say in how its run. We could run a school in Grafton for half of what we pay to the school district and have a lot more say in how it functions and where the funding comes from. (Grafton used to have several little schools all over town... 100 years ago.)
See, this is why I hate politics. With all of the myriad dependencies among various levels of governments and various laws and interpretations, how am I supposed to know whether some political proposal increases or decreases freedom? Maybe I can study really hard and figure it out, or I can just leave it to the "adults".
Quote from: Jacobus on November 04, 2010, 01:18 PM NHFT
See, this is why I hate politics. With all of the myriad dependencies among various levels of governments and various laws and interpretations, how am I supposed to know whether some political proposal increases or decreases freedom? Maybe I can study really hard and figure it out, or I can just leave it to the "adults".
That was kind of the point of my post. By doing everything "in-house" we can do things our way and not have any of these dependencies. The moment you introduce dependencies is when things get complicated and other people start to take money from us and tell us how things will be.
No, it's already complicated. In my naive mind, I think "let's remove town government department X" but you reply with "then that department would be out-sourced to some other government at higher local cost and with less local control". That makes sense I guess, but how am I supposed to know when this is the case? Maybe there is some town government department Y (maybe the sidewalk beautification comittee?) that if removed would not be taken over by some other layer of government.
You have some good knowledge it seems about what stuff a local government has to do or else it would be imposed by a more distant government. My comment "this is why I hate poltics" stems from:
* I don't have that knowledge and don't feel inclined to perform the work necessary to gain that knowledge
* Even if I did have that knowledge, it would put me in the uncomfortable position of advocating for things I disagree with (i.e. local police departments and schools) because they are less evil than the alternative
Its not so much a result of any particular state or county law (which there probably is) as just the fact that Grafton has over 1000 people and bad thingsa do happen here... theft is common, assault, other kinds of violence against people and property. A very large majority of people expect to be able to call 911 and have someone come and do something to help them. So, even if there were no law requiring us to have police protection there would still be a large enough percentage of people wanting it to make it happen.
Milan has over 1,300, and no police department. I don't know if they have an arrangement with Berlin, or some other agency.
When there is no local cop the stateys take patrol your town. Sometimes they do anyway.
County Sheriffs Department...
Whether it's the county sheriff or the state, eventually they'll start billing the town.
I checked the Berlin website; they do provide 24/7 police coverage for Milan, and note that they do so "at no cost to Berlin taxpayers" (meaning Milan pays for it.
Milan and Berlin sound funny. ;D
I think that 1 cop is better than 2 cops and no cop is even better than 1 cop.
I really like the idea of this warrant article. I will sign it as soon as it is finished. :)
I like the 1 sentence version a lot..
Sam a Robrin ... thanks for your help.
Quote from: Russell Kanning on November 04, 2010, 08:33 PM NHFTI really like the idea of this warrant article. I will sign it as soon as it is finished. :)
I like the 1 sentence version a lot..
Sam a Robrin ... thanks for your help.
What warrant article?
I though we were debating wether or not to have police departments and schools and, and, ...
By The Way - I think that the trend back to the (pre 9/11) much darker color (heard "Back in Black") cop cars is a very bad trend. Can we talk about that for a while to?
Yes Bob, let's get together.
Quote from: Sam A. Robrin on November 04, 2010, 10:15 AM NHFT
Quote
To see if the town of Grafton shall stop wasting tax money on hassling, and/or jailing people who have harmed no one.
And to see if the town of Grafton shall, with/through any and all of its agents, henceforth stop any and all activity which has the effect (intentionally or otherwise) of directly and/or indirectly initiating and or aiding in the investigation, arrest, and/or prosecution of any and all victimless activities (sometimes referred to as "crimes").
And to see if the town of Grafton shall henceforth request that any and all other government agencies and any and all of their agents refrain from this aggression within the town of Grafton.
Can't vouch for the format, but I cleaned up the spelling and punctuation a little. Feel free to contact me if you want the same for further revisions.
Thanks.
Quote from: AntonLee on November 04, 2010, 08:20 PM NHFT
Milan and Berlin sound funny. ;D
Especially since they're pronounced "MY-lun" and "BUR-lun".
Then again, I heard some folks from California think NH'ites pronounce "Concord" funny. Eh. Sounds just like the grape to me.
Quote from: Russell Kanning on November 04, 2010, 08:33 PM NHFT
I think that 1 cop is better than 2 cops and no cop is even better than 1 cop.
Yes, and I think that one local cop who is limited in his hours and budget and scope is
much better than 24/7 coverage from an adjoining town/city, or the staties, or county, or whoever. It's a matter of minimizing damage.
One local cop can obviously feel pressure from the town that employs him. The contracted cops from the next town over really don't care is Town Y refuses to spend money on prosecuting victimless crimes; he's going to be paid by Town Y via City Z for his time on the job, no matter what he does.
Quote from: John on November 04, 2010, 09:41 PM NHFT
I though we were debating wether or not to have police departments and schools and, and, ...
By The Way - I think that the trend back to the (pre 9/11) much darker color (heard "Back in Black") cop cars is a very bad trend. Can we talk about that for a while to?
Yes Bob, let's get together.
I was debating. Sorry for the hijack.
Quote from: Lex Berezhny on November 04, 2010, 02:12 PM NHFT
That was kind of the point of my post. By doing everything "in-house" we can do things our way and not have any of these dependencies.
in my house there are no cops whatsoever .... and when a cop tries to enter it .... we tell them we don't like or want or need them
that doesn't seem to keep them out all of the time .... but I don't think it helps to set up a cop in my house to try to keep out other cops
Quote from: Lex Berezhny on November 04, 2010, 03:39 PM NHFT
Its not so much a result of any particular state or county law (which there probably is) as just the fact that Grafton has over 1000 people and bad thingsa do happen here... theft is common, assault, other kinds of violence against people and property.
so far I have mostly had problems with government thugs
so i vote for no hired thugs :)
Quote from: John on November 04, 2010, 09:41 PM NHFT
What warrant article?
I though we were debating whether or not to have police departments and schools and, and, ...
:)
well this idea of Bob's can lead to the heart of the matter ..... should one man be paid to use force at the demands of others?
Quote from: KBCraig on November 05, 2010, 03:11 AM NHFT
Yes, and I think that one local cop who is limited in his hours and budget and scope is much better than 24/7 coverage from an adjoining town/city, or the staties, or county, or whoever. It's a matter of minimizing damage.
actually having one cop doesn't seem to minimize the harm from the feds, state, or county
in fact every local cop I have run into works with and prefers the company of he higher up the chain thugs
they are just the local reps from the empire
Quote from: Lex Berezhny on November 04, 2010, 03:39 PM NHFTIts not so much a result of any particular state or county law (which there probably is) as just the fact that Grafton has over 1000 people and bad thingsa do happen here... theft is common, assault, other kinds of violence against people and property.
Yeah. So if there were fewer thugs running around, there would be less of that...
Joe
Quote from: Lloyd Danforth on November 04, 2010, 06:49 PM NHFTWhen there is no local cop the stateys take patrol your town. Sometimes they do anyway.
The Stateys are going to be patrolling through Grafton, regardless, due to Rt 4.
I like the warrant article idea, though. Cut the budget down to just dealing with actual crimes, and cut taxes to match. Plus, fewer folks getting harassed over nonsense. It's a win-win. Ain't going to end thuggery with one vote, but it could be cut substantially.
Joe
Quote from: Jacobus on November 05, 2010, 05:56 AM NHFTSorry for the hijack.
Nothing personal. "Hijacking" may actually be more popular than not hijacking around here.
Or, maybe I'm just tired, achy, and cranky.
plus we are discussing the whole idea of police in the town of unfree grafton
Were not politics eschewed of this forum?
And a discussion of the heinousness of government set forth to disgrace it.
But now a discussion to partake of government procedure, to create more abomination and then to put it to a vote.
And supposedly then excepting the voter out come... and by proxy excepting every other thing voted on as proper, be it theft or murder or enslavement.
I think "The Ambassador" of Free Grafton is trying to bridge the gap so to speak as referenced in his first post http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=21516.msg329105#msg329105 (http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=21516.msg329105#msg329105)
Perhaps there are benefits to even attempting to bring forward such a document...
The political inclined get some of what they want and believe to be effective and the nonpolitical get to add a little "fizz" to things... cause I'm sure there will be "fizz" when this one is started.
As we all know, when a document is brought forth and agreed upon by a majority of the village, an armed gang, sworn upon their honor, takes the document and holds it as the will of the people, abiding by it's written word as if it's words had been spoken by God himself. The armed gang sanctifies the paper with special symbols, recording it's existence and storing it safely.
All is at peace, because a piece paper has been sanctified by a holy process.
We can be reassured that the next time the men with guns "hassle" a villager, we can point towards the place where the hallowed paper is kept and say, "Look there is a piece of paper." To which they may reply, "So?"
But we still have the holy process and more paper.
In this case, though, the "holy paper" would be telling the armed thugs not to do something.
Warrant articles can be many things. When they are strictly a limitation on the government, without imposing any restrictions on the people, I can't see that they are detrimental...
Joe
if you want it to get press and buzz, make the warrant article about forbidding victimless crime enforcement as originally planned.
if you want it to pass, make it about *deprioritizing* the same.
Blessed is he who seeks the way of the state for he is a tax payer.
I recommend the phrases, "shall make no law" and "shall not infringe". They tell the armed thugs not to do something without imposing any restrictions on the people.
In this case, the afore mentioned "shall not interfere" will do nicely. It will give the villagers much comfort.
Quote from: Jim Johnson on November 06, 2010, 11:09 PM NHFTBlessed is he who seeks the way of the state for he is a tax payer.
I know a number of folks who don't pay taxes, and use the State's system to fight itself.
Statists, like any devout adherents to religious dogma, are trapped by their own way of viewing the world. They have blinders on, and you can easily lead them around if you do not, because they just can't grasp what you're up to.
They
do view the process as "holy." So, if a warrant article passed saying that the town cop is not allowed to enforce these types of laws, well, it must be right that he no longer enforces those laws. They will have to accept it, even if it means a complete reversal in what they had just believed, because holy writ trumps all...
Joe
Quote from: Jim Johnson on November 06, 2010, 11:09 PM NHFT
Blessed is he who seeks the way of the state for he is a tax payer.
I recommend the phrases, "shall make no law" and "shall not infringe". They tell the armed thugs not to do something without imposing any restrictions on the people.
In this case, the afore mentioned "shall not interfere" will do nicely. It will give the villagers much comfort.
;D ;D ;D
Extra points for the effective use of sarcasm. 8)
Quote from: MaineShark on November 06, 2010, 11:18 PM NHFT
Quote from: Jim Johnson on November 06, 2010, 11:09 PM NHFTBlessed is he who seeks the way of the state for he is a tax payer.
I know a number of folks who don't pay taxes, and use the State's system to fight itself.
Statists, like any devout adherents to religious dogma, are trapped by their own way of viewing the world. They have blinders on, and you can easily lead them around if you do not, because they just can't grasp what you're up to.
They do view the process as "holy." So, if a warrant article passed saying that the town cop is not allowed to enforce these types of laws, well, it must be right that he no longer enforces those laws. They will have to accept it, even if it means a complete reversal in what they had just believed, because holy writ trumps all...
Joe
Like warring for peace?
Or fucking for the cause of chastity?
LOL :)
it will bring much comfort to the villagers, but will be ignored by the thugs :)
I have liked any action by the unfree grafton townees that makes the system uncomfortable.
We might have to try a warrant article that has grafton secede. I bet they wouldn't even let us talk about it.
Quote from: DadaOrwell on November 06, 2010, 10:47 PM NHFT
if you want it to get press and buzz, make the warrant article about forbidding victimless crime enforcement as originally planned.
if you want it to pass, make it about *deprioritizing* the same.
Good points, Dave. As some have pointed out even if it passes, it's likely to be ignored by the "officials". However if press coverage is all that happens it could be beneficial.
One reason to attempt it is to create a win-win. If it passes and is actually upheld, it's a win.
If it passes and it isn't upheld, the mirror of reality is held up for all to see. More people are exposed to the hypocrisy of "their vote counting". Some will shrug and do nothing, others may begin to see that the things most of us here hold as truth is reality and want to do something.
If it doesn't pass, a bigger mirror is held up. It serves as a barometer of how far the "villagers" have fallen from knowing right from wrong. I believe getting the 25 signatures for it to become a warrant article is very likely. Besides as Ambassador, I'm "just doing my job". :P
Quote from: Lloyd Danforth on November 04, 2010, 06:49 PM NHFT
When there is no local cop the stateys take patrol your town. Sometimes they do anyway.
...Or the Chief of Police of another town. ;)
Quote from: Jim Johnson on November 07, 2010, 01:21 AM NHFTQuote from: MaineShark on November 06, 2010, 11:18 PM NHFTQuote from: Jim Johnson on November 06, 2010, 11:09 PM NHFTBlessed is he who seeks the way of the state for he is a tax payer.
I know a number of folks who don't pay taxes, and use the State's system to fight itself.
Statists, like any devout adherents to religious dogma, are trapped by their own way of viewing the world. They have blinders on, and you can easily lead them around if you do not, because they just can't grasp what you're up to.
They do view the process as "holy." So, if a warrant article passed saying that the town cop is not allowed to enforce these types of laws, well, it must be right that he no longer enforces those laws. They will have to accept it, even if it means a complete reversal in what they had just believed, because holy writ trumps all...
Like warring for peace?
Or fucking for the cause of chastity?
Not really, no.
Who gets hurt if something like that passes? It's not a "lesser of two evils" thing.
It's like not warring, for peace. Seems like not warring, would be a good way head toward peace. Just being peaceful would be better, but if there are a dozen wars going on, and you can convince the soldiers in one to stop fighting, that's still a move towards peace.
Joe
i will sign the warrant article page, but might not bother to show up someday to vote on it :)
Quote from: Jim Johnson on November 06, 2010, 02:21 PM NHFT
As we all know, when a document is brought forth and agreed upon by a majority of the village, an armed gang, sworn upon their honor, takes the document and holds it as the will of the people, abiding by it's written word as if it's words had been spoken by God himself. The armed gang sanctifies the paper with special symbols, recording it's existence and storing it safely.
All is at peace, because a piece paper has been sanctified by a holy process.
We can be reassured that the next time the men with guns "hassle" a villager, we can point towards the place where the hallowed paper is kept and say, "Look there is a piece of paper." To which they may reply, "So?"
But we still have the holy process and more paper.
Your post sounded very reminiscent and I had to think for a moment of what it was reminding me of.
Monty Python-Holy Hand Grenade (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOrgLj9lOwk#)
That's it !!! We need holy grenades!!! ;D
May the war for peace and chastity continue with the Lord's blessing.
A Guy
^^^Genesis 1-29 God says (paraphrasing here) " Dude if it's a plant and it's got seeds in it, smoke it! " Apparently Sensimillia hadn't been invented yet.
Concerning Chastity (Cher's kid) I heard she listened to some Lou Reed records backwards, grew hair on her legs, took a walk on the wild side and now goes by "Chaz".
Two years ago there was a warrant article by the selectmen to change from billing for property taxes anually to semi-annually. The warrant article failed. People voted no. Selectmen changed it to twice a year anyways.
My point is that if voters in grafton let slide something so obvious and that affects everyone. The warrant article discussed in this thread, wether it passes or not would be even more irrelevent.
Every year there is at least one warrant article that passes to then either be ignored by the selectmen or ruled illegal by the state.
A few years ago Grafton voters passed a warrant article that demanded a 10% reduction in the town budget for 3 years in a row. Guess what?
Quote from: Lloyd Danforth on November 07, 2010, 12:53 PM NHFT
A few years ago Grafton voters passed a warrant article that demanded a 10% reduction in the town budget for 3 years in a row. Guess what?
Uh, it all went towards raises for the supervisors of the checklist ? >:D
1/3rd of 10% of the budget would almost make the job bearable.
Quote from: Russell Kanning on November 07, 2010, 07:15 AM NHFT
i will sign the warrant article page, but might not bother to show up someday to vote on it :)
Oh c'mon. We'll make sure there's something in it for everyone. Stimulus check, chicken in every pot, pot in every chicken, whatever you need!! ;D