Something is going on at Error's apartment!

[dan_sayers]

Let's be specific. Many people here still believe that the Brown's would be justified in using force in self-defense because they believe the income tax is theft.

This was not my understanding at all. My understanding was that he was vehement about trespassers. Anybody coming to arrest him would have to first trespass. He did not observe any arrest warrant because he was not afforded due process. That was my understanding.

[David]

I'm NOT impressed with the way the group seems to exclude members that don't feel exactly as they do.

I'm fairly confident that most of the posters here disagree with just about everything I post, and yet here I am.

They simply draw a very clear line at violence which I applaud.

Agreed.  Remain respectful, don't set up the forum to be accused of violence, then life online is good.

Violence against the gov't only makes it stronger for the same reason that war is the health of the state. 

[mvpel]

+1

[grasshopper]

    Well, I finally got to murphys yeaterday.  I met the bar tender and 2 other patrons, nice people.  I had this English beer 5.2 % that knocked my dick in the dirt and a Bud and sat for an hour or so and shot the shit.  I took off around 4 ish.
  I asked if there were porqs there or if there were any free staters presant and got funny looks.  I left, i didn't want to get people nervous, I'm a new face so I didn't want to push it.
   About the Fed picking up your child.  Press charges!  Period.  Next time any of those assclowns touch anything or anyone, scream bloody murder,  If they bump you ask them if that was an assault and inform them the next time it happens you'll call the police, call the police and press charges.  You don't know if that fed is a pervert.  You do not know if the feds have warrents,  if they touch anything, call the cops, press charges.  If they hasstle the patrons of Murphys, call the cops and complain, have them thrown out for anti social behavior.  If they get in your face, sit down and call the cops.  Do not be assaulted in any way shape or form.  If they want to play nice offer them a drink but do not put up with any bullshit.  A crime is a crime.  If you'd be thrown in a cell for doing something agressive, the fed can be thrown in jail for the same actions.
   "Please, help, I gotta calm down"     This is why I pray to god.  God can protect me from this stuff.

[Raineyrocks]

Perhaps I'm preaching to the choir...

I am one of the few at the very heart of this controversy and am feeling intense amount of stress because if it, yet I am even more concerned with what is occurring right here on this board. 

I feel like there is a lot of fighting occurring right now.  I feel this is EXACTLY what the Feds are looking for.  I feel most of the events since the Brown arrest have not necessarily been because some of us supported them and they are searching for potentially violent Brown supporters.  On the contrary I feel our current harassment is because they know only some of us supported the Browns in their entire stance, they know as a group we do not advocate violence, they know the entire issue is a sensitive one, and they know we have been divided in the past on the same issue (i.e. they know of Rob and others being 'kicked off' this forum for speaking of or advocating for violence). 

I feel they specifically targeted us in order to stir up the hornets nest and divide us now because we are becoming more and more united in this fight towards realizing liberty in our lifetime!  We are gaining a momentum and it is scaring them.  God forbid if Ron Paul get elected - they will be out of jobs.  God forbid we do away with this large federal government - they will be out of jobs!  Hell, I'd imagine if enough information about the work of some of these agencies were made public enough and the tide in this country changed enough, many of these Marshals and other government workers could be tried for treason!!!  Of course they are terrified!

I ask you all... no, I beg of you.  Please stop any fighting or bickering.  I don't think it is necessary to "clarify" on issues such as whether or not the Browns were or were not FSPers at the cost of unity of the group.  I don't think it necessary to 'clarify' on any view at the cost of unity of the group - if people need to know what we stand for it is right there, easily found on the FSP site.

[Raineyrocks]

The job of these feds is not to protect us, it's to protect the government.

[srqrebel]

Whoa... Kat's karma just now was 1040 and Russell's was 666 

Fixed both 

[EJinCT]

I carry a gun and am ready to use it...but I will NOT be the first person to threaten violence in any situation...I will only use it to protect myself.

Perhaps I'm preaching to the choir...

I am one of the few at the very heart of this controversy and am feeling intense amount of stress because if it, yet I am even more concerned with what is occurring right here on this board. 

I feel like there is a lot of fighting occurring right now.  I feel this is EXACTLY what the Feds are looking for.  I feel our current harassment is because they know only some of us supported the Browns in their entire stance, they know as a group we do not advocate violence, they know the entire issue is a sensitive one, and they know we have been divided in the past on the same issue.

I feel they specifically targeted us in order to stir up the hornets nest and divide us now because we are becoming more and more united in this fight towards realizing liberty in our lifetime!  We are gaining a momentum and it is scaring them.

Ancient battle tactics, divide and conquer.

That is one of the main reason I do not engage in debate with posters who advocate/initiate, violence/aggression. It serves no purpose but to divide my attention; and even should one present a sound rebuttal to these antagonistic views it is likely to serve no purpose; for many that take such an outlook are fearful and narrow minded to begin with and will only believe that which they want to.

Ignore button works much better to silence agitators anyway. 

IMO, the majority of contributing members on this board share a similar view about appropriate responses; it's just a few griefers and troublemakers that make it seem much worse than it is.

[Raineyrocks]

I carry a gun and am ready to use it...but I will NOT be the first person to threaten violence in any situation...I will only use it to protect myself.

Perhaps I'm preaching to the choir...

I am one of the few at the very heart of this controversy and am feeling intense amount of stress because if it, yet I am even more concerned with what is occurring right here on this board. 

I feel like there is a lot of fighting occurring right now.  I feel this is EXACTLY what the Feds are looking for.  I feel our current harassment is because they know only some of us supported the Browns in their entire stance, they know as a group we do not advocate violence, they know the entire issue is a sensitive one, and they know we have been divided in the past on the same issue.

I feel they specifically targeted us in order to stir up the hornets nest and divide us now because we are becoming more and more united in this fight towards realizing liberty in our lifetime!  We are gaining a momentum and it is scaring them.

Ancient battle tactics, divide and conquer.

That is one of the main reason I do not engage in debate with posters who advocate/initiate, violence/aggression. It serves no purpose but to divide my attention; and even should one present a sound rebuttal to these antagonistic views it is likely to serve no purpose; for many that take such an outlook are fearful and narrow minded to begin with and will only believe that which they want to.

Ignore button works much better to silence agitators anyway. 

IMO, the majority of contributing members on this board share a similar view about appropriate responses; it's just a few griefers and troublemakers that make it seem much worse than it is.

Oh yeah EJ, well I totally disagree with everything you've said!  Just kidding!

[EJinCT]

Oh yeah EJ, well I totally disagree with everything you've said!  Just kidding!

Even if you had disagreed, it's ok, I don't feel threatened by someone that has a different perspective than I do. 

[David]

Ivy, I know it is disturbing to watch the constant debate, but overall, it is reasonably civilized, and respectful.  After a while, it usually works itself out.  It is distressing to watch, I know, but it will work itself out.  It always has every other time.   
I'm surprised no one else mentioned this.  In ohio it is legally (I think) kidnapping to take someones child from where they are supposed to be, to somewhere else.  That gov't person did.  I assume someone was watching him, and the fed lady just picked him up and took him inside.  The standard may be malicious intent, which other than to identify you, it doesn't appear malicious.  Btw, did she even bother to ask who was watching him before she picked up your son? 

[EthanAllen]

Let's be specific. Many people here still believe that the Brown's would be justified in using force in self-defense because they believe the income tax is theft.

This was not my understanding at all. My understanding was that he was vehement about trespassers. Anybody coming to arrest him would have to first trespass. He did not observe any arrest warrant because he was not afforded due process. That was my understanding.

We are either a system of laws based on equality in the eyes of the law or we are a system of men with guns making up our own rules (law of the jungle).

The only moral position to an immoral act from the state is non-violent, civil disobedience. Too many people here do not understand this position. Those that do became pawns/shields in the Brown case for those that don't. If the Browns had used violent self-defense claiming they were protecting against trespassers against agents lawfully trying to apprehend them, then they would be acting immorally.

[David]

I'd say we have a system of men with guns very selectively choosing which laws to enforce and on who they want to enforce them on.  This has the same impact as men making up the law as it suits them. 

[EthanAllen]

I'd say we have a system of men with guns very selectively choosing which laws to enforce and on who they want to enforce them on.  This has the same impact as men making up the law as it suits them. 

The salient question though is how to respond.

The two options are:

1. work within the political/legal system (ex. NHLA).
2. non-violent, civil disobedience (ex. Lauren & Russell).

There is no option for men with guns making up their own rules outside of the state.

[kola]

The 3rd option is to evaporate from the system.

Kola