Brian Travis invaded by bureaucrats

[xyz]

Misty, Have you ever felt like you were just going around and around in circles?   

[MaineShark]

Maineshark...nope, I don't do drama. Maybe we have different definitions of it. I've said things that obviously many on here do not agree with. My opinions, my information and my posts aren't popular...I'm guessing so because I've just figured out what the karma thingy is beneath the screen names.   I personally consider it dramatic to say murder and horse seizures go hand in hand. Sarcastic I will admit to, dramatic...nope.

You're posting somewhere that you are obviously disliked, where you clearly are not going to change anyone's mind (since the information you claim to be generously providing relates to animal welfare, whereas we are discussing armed robbery, so your information is meaningless to our discussion), and you are then going to claim that you "don't do drama," and with a straight face?

Sorry, but that would be a textbook definition of drama...

But wait...I'm the dramatic one?

Trying to use that side issue to cloud the situation is roughly on the same moral level as a lawyer trying to slander a rape victim by calling her a slut in order to defend a rapist.  Whether or not that description of her is accurate, it doesn't justify the fact that she was attacked.  And nothing that Brian or Heidi or anyone else does to a horse will ever justify violently attacking them.

Yes, you're the dramatic one.  See, what I posted is called an "analogy."  You may want to look up the term.

Please explain that *fact* to all of those posting on this forum who've had some sort of civil disobedience they've related online. I don;t think they know they're dead yet. Now I may be a HUGE fan of Monty Python...so maybe as they're being carried off the dead heap they're saying, "But Oim not dead yet!" Someone needs to tell the poor souls.   And forgive my craptastic memory...but the only one I can think of off the top of my head is Mr Barsky, so Mr Barsky et all...my deepest condolences on your recent demises.  

No, they're not.  Because they have taken the "high road" and refrained from exercising their human right to self defense.  They have given your thugs a pass, whether because they were outnumbered and chose to stand down, or because they happen to be pacifists, or for some other reason.  They actively had to refrain from exercising their human rights, in order to survive the encounter.

Just like giving a mugger your wallet instead of shooting him dead on the spot.  Choosing to hand him your wallet does not mean that he did not use the threat of deadly force to coerce your actions.

For someone who doesn't "do drama," you sure exaggerate a lot.  Thirty degrees below zero?  In Candia?

Apologies then...I had spoken to someone not too long ago from that general area who stated that they had windchills at that temp over the winter there during some storms. If they related incorrect information from me, I apologize for passing that on.

You seem to be getting a lot of your information from unreliable sources, for someone who wants to claim to have "the facts."  You're certain that none of the other "facts" you've related were from the same unreliable source, or others who might not be giving you honest information?

The folks who made drive by complaints happen to believe in the laws and followed them correctly. Just because they don't share the same anti-government sentiment you do does not make them wrong. It makes them different from you. You aren't by chance going for some sort of master race where everyone thinks and looks alike, are you?      

No one has to think like me, because I don't enforce my opinions at gunpoint.

You and your ilk, on the other hand, do demand conformity with your views, or else the guns come out.

I have had cause to draw my sidearm on several occasions.  I have chosen to act on that cause in only one of those occasions, where it was clear that I had no other choice in order to save my own life.  In all of those cases, I was being directly attacked by an armed individual intent on harming/killing me.

You, on the other hand, will pay some thug to attack someone who has harmed no person.

That's why I'm right and you're wrong.  Because you can believe anything you like, and even do anything you like (short of violating someone's rights) and I won't interfere with your life.  You, on the other hand, won't allow that same freedom of action to others.  You demand that others conform to your personal opinions of right and wrong.

As for not having the guts...been there, done that and have 11 t-shirts to prove it in the last 5 years or so in this location. More if you count previous locations. Got punched once too.   Sucker punched...but what can one expect from a someone who thinks it's manly to abuse animals and then hit a female about 1/2 his size? I'm one of the people also called in to deal with this type of stuff...and not be government. By my neighbors.

T-shirts prove something?  I have more than 11 t-shirts.  Does that mean I have more guts than you?

I am the one responsible for making them free thinkers and to question anything and everything.

Except for questioning whether violence is an appropriate way to settle inter-personal disputes, eh?  Wouldn't want to question that...

Anton...hello again. The government needed veterinary proof to seize the horses...so proof was proven at that time by professionals. The law states that the first seizure is temporary only. So they *have* to return the horses. Believe me...they're probably not thrilled about having to return them. That's one of the hardest things working in animal rescue...when the law forces you to return animals to situations where you're almost positive they'll not be treated humanely. But they follow the law. So nope, not a vendetta. The SPCA has to follow the laws as well as the horse owners are supposed to be doing. Independent vets determined at risk animals...law requires they be returned due to it being a first seizure. Plain and simple.  

"Independent vets" who have government licenses, which will be revoked if they refuse to cooperate with the government.

Speaking as someone who was a "licensed professional" in the past, I can state for the record that I have been present when another tradesman was ordered to make a false report of a code violation that did not actually exist, or the agent of the State making the demand would have his license revoked, thereby costing him his livelihood.  Was his professional opinion on that code matter "independent," Misty?

Joe

[MistyBlue]

Misty, Have you ever felt like you were just going around and around in circles? 

Kinda yeah. But there are differences of opinions and that I can understand. The world would be a boring place indeed if we all thought alike.
I'll probably never understand the "well let them suffer and then die, as property it doesn't matter if they're alive." To me that's a sign of a crap society.
Few people like the truth when it doesn't agree with their dogma.  
So Deb's shown up...how long until you think Gerry will? She had 78 horses taken...9 dead I think. I'm hoping this place doesn't get inundated with animal killers looking for support just because it was the SPCA who stole/saved the survivors under their care. Because these folks just lurk the google and try to find sympathetic ears for their sob stories. The wording in many of these posts will be attractive to them.

You're posting somewhere that you are obviously disliked, where you clearly are not going to change anyone's mind (since the information you claim to be generously providing relates to animal welfare, whereas we are discussing armed robbery, so your information is meaningless to our discussion), and you are then going to claim that you "don't do drama," and with a straight face?

Sorry, but that would be a textbook definition of drama...

According to you I'm unliked. I won't lose sleep over that. And boy howdy do you get defensive when called dramatic. I have received a few e-mails and a few contacts on another BB I frequent from people who googled me from here and contacted me there. So I don't think I'm disliked by everyone. And there have been some nice replies on this thread too. I did not realize you spoke for the masses.

Yes, you're the dramatic one.  See, what I posted is called an "analogy."  You may want to look up the term.

A dramatic analogy. Didn't have to look it up. And since the textbook definition of drama you posted above wasn't correct, you're welcome for the clarification. 
And good Lord...I toss up my hands and heartily apologize for calling your replies dramatic! I didn't think it would elicit such vehemently...ermm....vivid? emotional?...replies. 

No, they're not.  Because they have taken the "high road" and refrained from exercising their human right to self defense.  They have given your thugs a pass, whether because they were outnumbered and chose to stand down, or because they happen to be pacifists, or for some other reason.  They actively had to refrain from exercising their human rights, in order to survive the encounter.

Oh I'm sorry. I had thought when you stated so UNdramatically that if anyone doesn't do what the law tells you that they KILL you and that was a FACT that you actually meant that. Not that the statement had caveats and addendums to it and only applied to nonFSP folks.

You seem to be getting a lot of your information from unreliable sources, for someone who wants to claim to have "the facts."  You're certain that none of the other "facts" you've related were from the same unreliable source, or others who might not be giving you honest information?

One comment...not "a lot of my information." Stating that a LOT of info.. could be considered...exaggerating? I was chatting with a cousin of mine in Manchester. I thought that was somewhere near Candia, I could be wrong. She has a temp gauge on her back deck and we were comparing wind chill temps. So either she lied to me, her temp gauge that measures windchills was incorrect or...I dunno. Many of my facts weren't mine so much as me pointing out how the exact words of the folks involved didn't match up at all and were direct contradictions of what they said elsewhere or previously. I guess you'd consider them unreliable sources?

That's why I'm right and you're wrong.  Because you can believe anything you like, and even do anything you like (short of violating someone's rights) and I won't interfere with your life.  You, on the other hand, won't allow that same freedom of action to others.  You demand that others conform to your personal opinions of right and wrong.

Your opinion. Not fact. I don't demand that others conform, the law does. But I'm impressed that you think I have the power to influence the law. Thanks. 

T-shirts prove something?  I have more than 11 t-shirts.  Does that mean I have more guts than you?

"Been there, done that and got the t-shirt" is an expression. And can also be considered an analogy. And yes, you probably do have more guts than I do. Unless you're a much smaller than average adult male then you most likely have a higher weight of organs and innards than I do. *You* were the one bringing up the highschool saying of "or don't you have the guts?" challenge. I replied. Was I not supposed to? Did it piss you off that I have indeed approached people about animal welfare? Did that screw up your argument? If so, my apologies. But please refrain from asking challenging questions withough knowing the actual person if you're going to be pissed off about the answer you get.

"Independent vets" who have government licenses, which will be revoked if they refuse to cooperate with the government.

Speaking as someone who was a "licensed professional" in the past, I can state for the record that I have been present when another tradesman was ordered to make a false report of a code violation that did not actually exist, or the agent of the State making the demand would have his license revoked, thereby costing him his livelihood.  Was his professional opinion on that code matter "independent," Misty?

Had you kept up on reading current (and not so current) laws pertaining to medical and veterinary licenses you would know that only the medical association that awarded that license can revoke it. If in fact the SPCA or even the PD tried to coerce agreement...they'd be in a shiteload more trouble than the one carrying the vet license. It's not a conspiracy theory going on there...no matter how much you want it to be. So it's a big ol' NOPE on them being coerced by the SPCA or PD. Neither of those have any control over their licenses.

[J’raxis 270145]

Probably the last post I'll make in this thread unless someone replies to me directly.

This whole situation reminds me why I'm building my home in Grafton—underground, with hundreds of yards between me and any other human development.

I for one will be willing to help Brian build whatever he needs around the property for the horses. I'd suggest, first, an 8'-high wall around his entire 40+ acres, replete with razor wire and signs like this one posted every fifty feet.

A moat wouldn't hurt either.

With alligators or sharks with lasers or something.

The most disturbing thing about this situation isn't that some horses may have been abused. The most disturbing thing about this situation isn't that a freestater may have turned the State against another person. The most disturbing thing about this situation is how little control people have over their own property, on their own land, and how many people apparently either approve of, or themselves engage in (if the allegations of numerous anonymous complaints from neighbors are to be believed), nosing about other people's property and reporting things they disapprove of to the police. And not just this situation. That "couch enforcement" farce out in Keene. That restaurant that was painted the wrong color. That fire- and health-code harassment at another restaurant. That woman with the "illegal" sink in her house a few years back. Every single time you hear about the SPCA, DCYF, DSS, DHHS, OSHA, EPA, ABC, DEFG, LMNOP, or some other government alphabet soup swooping down on some private citizen's private use of their private property, putting it under a god-damned microscope, and then telling them what to do with it, or taking it away, "for its own safety," or even more galling, "for your own safety," all because some officious twit or twits got their panties in a bunch over someone else's problem, and made an anonymous report to mommy fucking government. And then people applaud what was done.

It's not about animals. It's not about backstabbing. It's not about philosophical masturdebating over property rights. It's about mind your own damned business.

Crap like this is why groups not in agreement with the "values" (hah) of the society around them eventually become insular, paranoid, and cultish. (Think FLDS, Branch Davidians, and the Montana Freemen here.) I swear, the only way we're ever going to achieve peace and security against these prying busybodies is to do the same.

Sorry if this post isn't helpful to our "image," Kevin.

I am seriously starting to grok NHArticleTen's whole "Repel and destroy" and "Everyone leave everyone else alone!" attitude.



Enjoy!

[AntonLee]

ah I see that you disagree me being allowed to make the rules. . . seeing as I don't have any horse experience.  I know a lot of people that make rules about horses that don't really know anything about them.  They're called your local politicians.  Frankly, vets are not in the business to help and save horses, they're in business to make money.

Let's not joke around about that last point.  Unless of course you'd like to show me some examples of vets that do not have a practice except for volunteering their time and knowledge to only save and help horses.  I don't know of any vets that work for free.  If it's all about the welfare of the animal, why is it that I don't see this?  I figure dinners with politicians cost a lot of money.  Since they're going to do your bidding, might as well try to give them some of the hard earned money.

If you feel like you're going around in circles, maybe it's time to stop and think outside of your circle for a few minutes!  I'm not trying to be your enemy.  As a matter of fact I don't remember ever going to a horse owner bulletin board to tell you how to live your lives.  I don't really remember hearing anything about Brian or his family entering your property to steal your horses.  Seems to me that half the people here have left others alone, and the other half seem determined to change our minds about allowing others to do as they please with your property.

So, lets organize a viewing.  I'd love to see how *you say* horses are *supposed* to be kept.  Honestly.  I'll go in with an open mind and be quite polite about it.  I will videotape some things and post them so that the people who you wish to educate on the proper care of horses can see them.  I'll even let you view it before I post it.

It'll be a good step in helping others who might be abusing their animals to see how you say it should be done.   It won't involve hurting people nor stealing their property.  It might just SAVE A FEW HORSES FROM BEING TORTURED.

so seriously, lets set it up.

[MaineShark]

The other thing that I don't get is that you talk about thugs with guns, but you all seem to have one or ten.  You love your guns - open carry, right?  Does that not make you a thug with a gun?  I'm really confused by that.   

I'm a civilized person, who believes in self-defense, hence I carry a gun.  That gun is a statement that I believe all people should be equally-able to defend themselves, regardless of their physical size or whether they are a lone individual with an unpopular opinion, or someone with dozens of friends to back them up at all times.  I believe that violence should be limited in scope to only self-defense, but available to all.  Firearms are the best that human ingenuity has come up with in that regard, and well over 99% of the population can effectively wield them if they choose to do so.  Eventually, some bright mind will come up with a solution for the few remaining individuals who can't operate one.

A gun on a cop's belt is a different symbol, entirely.  That gun is an implicit threat of attack.  If you don't do what he says, that gun will come out.

What I do know is that, late night,  on a dark NH highway, I'd rather run into a LEO packin' than one of you guys...  Even if I was so tanked I didn't know my name and I was bouncing off the guardrails.   DUI any day...     No offense.

Which just proves that you are ignorant, since the statistics are clear on the matter, and you are far more likely to be shot by a cop than me or anyone other than violent criminals.

The horses weren't stolen; they were taken into protective custody.  You can't seem to get that straight.  The difference is that stolen property, at least in my world, doesn't get returned.

If you deprive someone of the use of their property without their permission, then you are a thief.  No ifs, ands, or buts.  Whether you return that property at some later time is not relevant.  The condition of that property when it is returned is not relevant.  The deprivation of the owners' use of their property is, by definition, theft.

You guys aren't above the law, at least at this point, to the best of my knowledge.

I'm not anywhere with relation to your laws.  Those are your rules, which I didn't sign up for.  If you attempt to force me to obey them, you're just a kid on a playground trying to tell everyone that they have to play the game that you want them to play, and throwing rocks at them when they don't do what you say.

I was actually hoping that you guys would help her.

If you're so concerned, why don't you "pony up" some cash?  You're concerned about the condition of the horses, and you want us to assuage your concern with our time and money?  Why don't you put your time and money where your mouth is?

Joe

[MaineShark]

Kinda yeah. But there are differences of opinions and that I can understand. The world would be a boring place indeed if we all thought alike.
I'll probably never understand the "well let them suffer and then die, as property it doesn't matter if they're alive." To me that's a sign of a crap society.

Do you understand the concept of "cognitive dissonance?"  Experiencing any?

You can understand that differences of opinions are good, but then when a different opinion comes along on some topic, your response is that, because you can't understand that particular opinion, those who hold it need to conform or die?

I don't understand how someone can abuse an animal (except in terms of clinical psychology - I can describe the mechanisms, but I can't empathize with an abuser).  I don't understand how someone can be a racist or a homophobe, either (again, except in psychological terms).  However, when I come across a divergent opinion, my response isn't to violently attack the individual holding that opinion, no matter how despicable that opinion is, by my standards.

Attacking others who have not harmed any person is the sign of a "crap society."

Few people like the truth when it doesn't agree with their dogma.  

Yes.  You're living proof of that.

So Deb's shown up...how long until you think Gerry will? She had 78 horses taken...9 dead I think. I'm hoping this place doesn't get inundated with animal killers looking for support just because it was the SPCA who stole/saved the survivors under their care. Because these folks just lurk the google and try to find sympathetic ears for their sob stories. The wording in many of these posts will be attractive to them.

I doubt they will find anyone sympathetic to their stories of abuse, but I will always be sympathetic to victims of armed robbery, regardless of what else I may think of them.  Just like I can call for boycotting a business that discriminates based upon race, while simultaneously opposing the use of force to make them end their discrimination.  It's called having principles higher than "whatever happens to please me is good, and whatever happens to offend me is evil"...

And boy howdy do you get defensive when called dramatic.

Um, no.  I just dislike hypocrites.  However, I don't demand that you give up your hypocrisy or die.  I just ridicule you.

No, they're not.  Because they have taken the "high road" and refrained from exercising their human right to self defense.  They have given your thugs a pass, whether because they were outnumbered and chose to stand down, or because they happen to be pacifists, or for some other reason.  They actively had to refrain from exercising their human rights, in order to survive the encounter.

Oh I'm sorry. I had thought when you stated so UNdramatically that if anyone doesn't do what the law tells you that they KILL you and that was a FACT that you actually meant that. Not that the statement had caveats and addendums to it and only applied to nonFSP folks.

There's no caveat.  If you don't go along, they will kill you.  They went along, so they didn't get killed.

One comment...not "a lot of my information." Stating that a LOT of info.. could be considered...exaggerating?

I seem to recall that other claims were refuted, earlier in the thread...

I was chatting with a cousin of mine in Manchester. I thought that was somewhere near Candia, I could be wrong. She has a temp gauge on her back deck and we were comparing wind chill temps. So either she lied to me, her temp gauge that measures windchills was incorrect or...I dunno.

Manchester is likely similar to or warmer than Candia.  Of course, a back deck in a city likely gets exposed to much higher wind velocity than a a wooded farm (I haven't seen the property in question since before the horses arrived, but it was heavily wooded at the time, and I doubt they've done a massive lumbering operation since then).  Still, other than an individual gust, windchills are not going to reach -30 in Manchester.  And an individual gust isn't going to hurt horses.

That's why I'm right and you're wrong.  Because you can believe anything you like, and even do anything you like (short of violating someone's rights) and I won't interfere with your life.  You, on the other hand, won't allow that same freedom of action to others.  You demand that others conform to your personal opinions of right and wrong.

Your opinion. Not fact. I don't demand that others conform, the law does. But I'm impressed that you think I have the power to influence the law. Thanks. 

You support it, hence you are responsible for it.  You sound like someone claiming that a butcher is evil, while munching on a hamburger.

*You* were the one bringing up the highschool saying of "or don't you have the guts?" challenge. I replied. Was I not supposed to?

Nope...I'm "old school" I guess. Cowboy or cowgirl up, put on your big boy/girl pants and act like a grown up. If you take it in and it's alive, treat it somewhat decent. if you don't like the laws, work on changing them. Arguing endlessly on a BB about how tough everyone would be if it ever happened to them and how unfair everything is is whining...kids do that. Fix it, change it, work on it. Do it in ways that actually get results. JMHO.

Did it piss you off that I have indeed approached people about animal welfare? Did that screw up your argument? If so, my apologies. But please refrain from asking challenging questions withough knowing the actual person if you're going to be pissed off about the answer you get.

No, I don't get pissed off by unsupported claims from folks who have already proven themselves to provide false information in the past.  I just assume that unsupported claims by such folks are false until proven otherwise.

Had you kept up on reading current (and not so current) laws pertaining to medical and veterinary licenses you would know that only the medical association that awarded that license can revoke it. If in fact the SPCA or even the PD tried to coerce agreement...they'd be in a shiteload more trouble than the one carrying the vet license. It's not a conspiracy theory going on there...no matter how much you want it to be. So it's a big ol' NOPE on them being coerced by the SPCA or PD. Neither of those have any control over their licenses.

I can see you know nothing about this subject, or are willfully providing false information.  Aside from the fact that government agencies can certainly pressure such revocations, such licensure includes a "good moral character" clause, which allows revocation if the licensee refuses to cooperate with law enforcement, among other things.

Joe

[MistyBlue]

Anton...large animal vets are drastically underpaid. Small animal vets make a ton more money than horse and cow vets do. As a matter of fact this country is in crisis right now due to so few large animal vets staying in business because they can't afford to and extremely few future vets now in school for that are majoring in large animals due to the brutal hours, no office, brutal work conditions and lack of income. A large animal vet does not make anywhere near what other doctors make. They work 24/7 too BTW. They're on call all the time. Many of their appointments come at 3 am on blow freezing nights to work in an unheated barn or outside on a sick/injured terrified animal weighing in excess of 1000 lbs that has a fight or flight reaction ingrained in it's DNA. The graduate with a butt load of debt, they usually go through new trucks every 18-24 months due to wear and tear and mileage. They have many various injuries from their jobs and their patients. I wouldn't take that job for a 6 figure income. And yet they take it for less than half of that in many parts of this country unless they're part of a surgical hospital for equines. These aren't plastic surgeon salaries.  So nope, I have never met a single one in it for the money. Considering they do the same procedures on horses that small animal vets do on dogs (in heated buildings) for about 1/3 the cost...they're not making crap.

If I knew you personally, I'd have no problem having you to my house here in CT. With video camera. My animals are well taken care of, my property is clean. I'm pretty camera shy though.

Maineshark...just reply "Neener neener, you're a big doodyhead" to me and get it out of your system. 

And since I do care for my horses enough to keep them healthy...I'm off to bed. 5:30 am comes around pretty early every day of the year. Can't sleep in. Take care.

[xyz]

Anton, maybe in another life that will be possible.  I do know where we could go to show how not to do it....

Maineshark, thanks for the definition on the thugs with guns. I can wrap my brain around that.  I still don't see any difference, threat of attack is threat of attack, but I see how you possibly could.  So good, you've enlightened me on one point.

Anyway, I was reaching out to you guys because you all seem really wacked out by this whole thing and I just thought I could give you some insight of what could really be done constructively to help Heidi and Brian out.  That's all, you guys, frankly have attacked me.  I didn't come on here with guns ablazin'.  Not even a little bit.  Not mad or bitter or hateful, don't care how you live your lives (as long as you're not trying to starve, etc. animals), none of it.  I also have absolutely no desire to get involved in your hashing and rehashing.   

I'm not going to be assisting them because they're not in my circle of friends not to mention that they probably wouldn't be so excited to see me pull up on their property.  But, if they were my friends, I would try, I would have been trying all along, to help them out. 

If Heidi called back in Nov. and said she needed help ~ would have helped.  If she called in Dec. and asked, would have discouraged her from buying another horse, and would have helped.  Jan. - you got it, would have helped.  Feb. - would have helped.  March - DID HELP, she didn't even have to call.  You just don't like the level of help that she received.  Such a pity.

None of any of this will change anything.  The system is what it is and the wheels will continue to slowly turn, as they do.  So, carry on.  I shall bid you adieu.  Happy Trails!

[MaineShark]

Maineshark, thanks for the definition on the thugs with guns. I can wrap my brain around that.  I still don't see any difference, threat of attack is threat of attack, but I see how you possibly could.  So good, you've enlightened me on one point.

The difference is that they will threaten to attack you if you don't do what they say.  I will only attack you if you attack me, first.  I will respond to force (sometimes), but I will never initiate it.

None of any of this will change anything.  The system is what it is and the wheels will continue to slowly turn, as they do.

A lot of folks were saying that in the latter half of the 18th century...

Joe

[Friday]

You're posting somewhere that you are obviously disliked, where you clearly are not going to change anyone's mind (since the information you claim to be generously providing relates to animal welfare, whereas we are discussing armed robbery, so your information is meaningless to our discussion), and you are then going to claim that you "don't do drama," and with a straight face?

Sorry, but that would be a textbook definition of drama...

According to you I'm unliked.

I like you, MistyBlue. 

[AntonLee]

I'm not looking for a video on how NOT to take care of animals. . . I'm looking for you to step up and show us how it's done right, at least in your opinion.  I mean, everyone most likely has some sort of skeleton in the closet.  You leave a rake out and a horse steps on it and whacks itself in the face. . . just like a three stooges thing.

But, you very well could be following all the rules.  Every rule, to the letter.  It's very well possible.  From what you say, especially Misty, it seems you have a lot of information to share.  I'm sorry you and XYZ have felt attacked from the minute you entered here.  I don't really understand what it was you expected from some of us, after all, you've come here to defend people who took someone else's property.  You say that it was justified, and some of us don't believe that taking someone else's property is ever justified.  A difference in principle, yet the gun in the room is clearly not on the liberty side of the table.

Misty, if you decide to change your mind at some point, please PM me.  In all honesty, I'm not trying to set you up, or put you into a trap.  I am quite fair and very transparent.  People know my position because they know my principles.  I understand how hard it must be to take care of horses.  Actually, I probably have no possible idea how much work must be put into it.  I wouldn't attempt to even look at the amount of laws that a piece of paper says you must abide by.  I question the validity of those laws, and question to what end is all of it necessary.

a lot of us have to get up early as well.  I've been later to my job than I would like because of this forum.  Trying to keep a healthy discussion is very difficult when people are very happy to point out their 'caring' ways which usually entail jackboots swarming someone's property in order to steal that person's property.

If you decide to change your mind, you know how to reach me.  I'm sorry that XYZ is hoping for this to happen in another life, because I'm still working on the one I've got.  This is one of those times when one of the persons involved is being fair and most likely is somewhat principled on 'live and let live' philosophy.  Misty has already stated that in some instances that she would not want to aggress against their neighbor.  Her break in this philosophy comes down to when she feels that an animal is being abused. 

I don't agree, but I can let live with the amount of slack she's given to us.  It took me a very very very long time to see how easy it can be to get what you want without hurting other people.  Maybe you'll see that in some time, that you could talk someone into not abusing their animals.  Until then, I'd be glad to have you stand beside me on other issues that you and I can both agree are clearly violations of a person's right to life, liberty, and property. 

I like Misty as well, because I do feel she has taught me things.  I hope you don't feel that all dislike you.

[Peacemaker]

This isn't just for you Misty, but for anyone else reading that is still tangled in the myth of society and the state.

The unfortunate truth is that the threat of violence is perpetually there. If a cop shows up, he is a weapon of the state and will murder you if you try to defend yourself or your property against that that weapon. There is no argument there.

Don't like it? Change it? What happens when the system for affecting change is corrupt and protected by the weapons of the state? What happens when the state has effectively shut down all but "feel good" measures to appease the general public? What happens when the majority think all of this is status quo and perfectly normal? What will happen when that apparatus decides to take away ANY effective way of defending yourself against it? So many questions...am I off topic yet? 

I know. Just cowboy up and pull on my shit-kickers and labor like there's nothing wrong. Someone else will take care of it because they know what's better for the whole of the community. Volunteer for one of those feel-good, community-building events that gets posted in the local paper and makes everyone go "awww...how nice". Everything else is just fine. Ignore the gun in the room. Smile. Wave at your neighbors, unless they're doing something with their property you don't like. If that is the case, frown and disapprove, and then call Zoning or one of the other countless departments available on them. It's a free country Damn I'm proud to be an American. Ahhh...freedom. Makes me want to spread it to other countries (by force if necessary). I don't think I can be more sarcastic...

Honestly, the LEAST of your worries in this day and age is horse abuse.

Home school your kids. The public school system is a complete and utter disaster and not worth saving. Turn off your TV. American Idol (or Lost or any other tripe) doesn't matter. At all. Tell your "representatives" they don't represent you. Because they really don't. Stop empowering them. Power corrupts.

I will admit. We've got it really good here in NH compared to other states. Gee... how long till we're like the other states? Not long if we ignore the real issues.

Loved your Post Lou!  Way to bring it home!!! 

[Peacemaker]

XYZ wrote:

The other thing that I don't get is that you talk about thugs with guns, but you all seem to have one or ten.  You love your guns - open carry, right?  Does that not make you a thug with a gun?  I'm really confused by that.      What I do know is that, late night,  on a dark NH highway, I'd rather run into a LEO packin' than one of you guys...
_____________________________________________________________


I'll be happy to help you.  Being a Thug with a Gun, means you INITIATE Physical Force, Violence, against others, in order to take whatever (property or worse), whenever, for whatever reason you come up and decide to Print on your best Stationary.

And on the other hand, Being a responsible Gun Owner means you would only use your Firearm in Self Defense to protect yourself from Threat, Harm, versus using it to Rob your Neighbors, for example.  And you would use it for Target Practice and maybe Hunting too.

And on your comment that You'd "rather run into a LEO packin than one of you guys." I find unbeleiveable.  Are you serious?  If you truly believe this, then you don't have a CLUE who the Liberty Activists associated with the Free State Project are.

I'm suddenly reminded of the Movie Stripes with Bill Murry..."And that's a fact, Jack!"


 

[Russell Kanning]

I have followed this thread with interest. I do not know who to believe. I would like to believe the freestaters (Travis etc) but that would make me biased, as I am staying open to the comments from both parties.

there are way more than 2 parties in this thread.

btw Shyfrog ... your posts are very welcome and make me laugh