Concealed carry protects man and property

KANSAS CITY, Mo. – Police say the man who was killed by a clerk at a 7-Eleven has been identified as 18-year old Vincent Williams.It happened about 10:30 p.m. at 2635 Van Brunt Boulevard.Two clerks were in the store; one was in uniform and the other was not. The plainclothes clerk had a gun and a concealed carry permit. According to authorities the teen walked into the 7-Eleven and attempted to rob the store. He was then shot in the neck by the clerk. He was pronounced dead at the scene.
Share Your Thoughts on the Recent Cases of Vigilante Justice -- Post a Video or Text Comment Below Police say they have viewed surveillance video and the shooting appears to be self defense. Officers did not believe there were any customers inside the store at the time of the shooting.Also Tuesday, a possibly-armed man was shot by a security guard at a Kansas City liquor store. The security guard told police the man had been in the store earlier and waved a gun at customers. Then early Wednesday morning, a homeowner shot three alleged burglars, one fatally, when they tried to break into his Kansas City home.Initial investigations into both of these incidents also indicate the shootings happened in self defense.

http://www.nbcactionnews.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=fdb6ab76-c0a0-43a2-a39f-9b8e002d9890

Out of control... check out this story

http://www.naturalnews.com/024304.html


Raw Foodists Arrested for Trafficking Chocolate; Interrogated for "Cacao Crimes"

Ron Paul calls it as it is... CRIMINAL!

Dear Friends,
Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster is about to strike.
The events of the past week are no exception.
The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress' throat is not just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China! "This is welfare for the rich," he said. "This is socialism for the rich. It's bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters."
That describes the current bailout package to a T. And we're being told it's unavoidable.
The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it. But that has become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences - predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics - are being let off the hook. The Federal Reserve System is actually positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess!
• The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets at any one time. That means $700 billion is only the very beginning of what will hit us.
• Financial institutions are "designated as financial agents of the Government." This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.
• Then there's this: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Translation: the Secretary can buy up whatever junk debt he wants to, burden the American people with it, and be subject to no one in the process.
There goes your country.
Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this "sadly necessary." Sad, yes. Necessary? Don't make me laugh.
Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind - another example of the big choice we're supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes. Now, with a backlash brewing, they're not quite sure what their views are. A sad display, really.
Although the present bailout package is almost certainly not the end of the political atrocities we'll witness in connection with the crisis, time is short. Congress may vote as soon as tomorrow. With a Rasmussen poll finding support for the bailout at an anemic seven percent, some members of Congress are afraid to vote for it. Call them! Let them hear from you! Tell them you will never vote for anyone who supports this atrocity.
The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are about to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? Do we care?
When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the media?
Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and what kind of country we shall be.
In liberty,
Ron Paul

Well said. Stop these criminal actions!

There is no authority in the constitution – the document upon which the U.S. government's legitimacy supposedly rests – for a central bank; a global empire; presidential warmongering; warrantless surveillance of citizens; standing armies; the so-called "War on Drugs"; a national police force; gun control; or the mind-boggling array of existing departments, agencies, and bureaucracies with which Americans are afflicted.

by David Bardallis
http://www.lewrockwell.com/bardallis/bardallis11.html

Wow... Debt!

"A multi-millionaire former investment banker, former professor of economics, and our 1st Harvard MBA President have committed at least ONE TRILLION of our future tax dollars to bailing out greedy incompetent criminal millionaire investment bankers."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/quinn8.html

Militarized Police

Great interview regarding Militarized Cops... (occupation forces)... What happended to the community cop???

http://www.lewrockwell.com/podcast/?p=episode&name=2008-09-21_030_militarized_cops.mp3

So, the drug war will be over when the dollar finally crashes?...

The European cocaine market is even more attractive than the American one
because of robust demand and a strong euro, said Russell Benson, the regional
director of the DEA in Europe and Africa. The euro has gained 16 percent against
the dollar in the past three years and one euro today buys more than $1.40.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=ac4NccJve9NQ&refer=latin_america

Drug War's Latest Tally

Of those arrested in 2007, 89 percent – some 775,000 Americans – were charged with simple pot possession, not trafficking, cultivation, or sale. (By comparison, 27 percent of those arrested for heroin and cocaine offenses were charged with sales.) Three out of four were under age 30; one in four were 18-years-old or younger.

The FBI's tally is the highest marijuana arrest total ever-reported in law enforcement history. If this pace continues, annual arrests for pot will surpass one million per year by 2010.

Read here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/armentano-p/armentano-p38.html

Only some have to follow the law...

Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party's nominee for president, has filed a lawsuit in Texas demanding Senators John McCain and Barack Obama be removed from the ballot after they missed the official filing deadline. "The seriousness of this issue is self-evident," the lawsuit states. "The hubris of the major parties has risen to such a level that they do not believe that the election laws of the State of Texas apply to them." Texas election code §192.031 requires that the “written certification” of the “party’s nominees” be delivered “before 5 p.m. of the 70th day before election day.” Because neither candidate had been nominated by the official filing deadline, the Barr campaign argues it was impossible for the candidates to file under state law.
"Supreme Court justices should recognize that their responsibility is to apply the law as passed by the Legislature, and the law is clear that the candidates cannot be certified on the ballot if their filings are late," says Drew Shirley, a local attorney for the Barr campaign, who is also a Libertarian candidate for the Texas Supreme Court. A 2006 Texas Supreme Court decision ruled that state laws "does not allow political parties or candidates to ignore statutory deadlines."
Orrin Grover, attorney for Bob Barr and Wayne Root, said that he believes that the Texas Secretary of State is bound by Texas law to remove the Republican and Democratic nominees from the November ballot. "Either we have rules and deadlines, or we do not," Grover said.
The Chairman of the Texas Libertarian Party, Pat Dixon stated, "Libertarian principles require personal responsibility for your acts and failures. Obama and McCain failed to meet the deadlines. They must follow the law like everyone else." The petition also alleges that the Democratic Party's late presidential filing falsely claimed under oath that Senator Obama had been nominated hours before the nomination actually occurred. "The facts of the case are not in dispute," says Russell Verney, manager of the Barr campaign. "Republicans and Democrats missed the deadline, but were still allowed on the ballot. Third parties are not allowed on the ballot for missing deadlines, as was the case for our campaign in West Virginia, yet the Texas secretary of state's office believes Republicans and Democrats to be above the law."
Barr will be holding a press conference this Thursday at the Texas Supreme Court at 11:00 a.m.

http://www.bobbarr2008.com/press/press-releases/133/bob-barr-files-suit-in-texas-to-remove-mccain-obama-from-ballot/

Positive Twist...

Putting a positive spin on violent crime: when comparing the number of violent crimes, lets assume that each violent crime was committed by a different person and divide the total number of violent crimes by the population of the United States. It would show that .4% of the population committed a violent crime!

That was of those reported in the UCR.

According to the NCVRS: 2% of the population committed a violent crime. And... nearly 8% of the population committed a crime.

FBI Report

Violent crime down .7 % from 2006-2007.

Read here: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/offenses/violent_crime/index.html

Which should we be more concerned about?

Came across this article today: http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/10/iraq_billions200710?printable=true&currentPage=all

How can billions of dollars simply vanish?


But instead of receiving this news and getting upset over it we target this:

http://www.kcra.com/cnn-news/17486187/detail.html


Now what's going on here?

Morality... who's in control?

My thoughts:
Attempting to control the moral behaviors of others has caused society to suffer grave consequences. For many years laws have been enacted that allow for individual privacy to be infringed upon and for aggression to be utilized as a method of controlling the non-violent behaviors of others. Governments have assumed the role of a moral authority and pass moral laws. Force is used to seek compliance of moral laws. This is evidenced by governments passing and aggressively enforcing laws against such activities as drug use, prostitution, and gambling. The passing and aggressive enforcement of such laws essentially dictate to citizens that they have no right to their own life. If an individual has no reason to hold a value other than because it is mandated by law, then he will also have little or no knowledge of how to pursue and maintain that value nor any incentive to discover the reasons. He will seek further mandated guidance because he does not know or even care to learn how to lead a virtuous life.
Some human acts that have no victims become criminalized because they are morally repugnant to the rest of society. As a result, society chooses to restrain individuals from partaking in the acts. The criminal justice system becomes an enforcer of moral standards. The cost of the legal control of non-violent, victimless crime tends to be expensive and ineffective. The waging of war against non-violent, victimless crime has demonstrated the impossibility of creating a system of law grounded in morals, rather than in principle.
Until society fully acknowledges that individuals are free to arbitrarily choose what they want as a value and do so at their own peril, the consequences will not only continue, but increase drastically.

The "high crimes" that the media will not talk about

On September 10, 2008, representative Dennis Kucinich submitted 50,000 more names to the clerk of the House demanding impeachment. On Tuesday, Rep. Jim McDermott (D.-WA) spoke on the House floor in favor of impeachment. As Rep. Kucinich said yesterday, more than 2 million Americans have signed petitions demanding impeachment, making it one of the greatest exercises in grassroots democracy in recent times.
Impeachment has become an unavoidable issue on the floor of the House of Representatives, despite the efforts to take impeachment “off the table.” This amazing development is the result of the work of ImpeachBush.org and others who are petitioning, and joining rallies in cities and towns across the country to demand impeachment. Please make a donation right now to keep up this momentum.

Excerpts from Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s remarks from yesterday’s press conference:

“Standing with me here today are representatives of organizations who have been part of a national grassroots impeachment movement which has collected over a million signatures. Nationally over two million people have signed impeachment petitions. I want to thank the leaders for their efforts and work with them to continue to build a movement for truth.
“9/11 is the day the world changed. We want today, September 10, 2008 to be a new beginning in our efforts to change the world. For my part, I am going to ask those grassroots leaders who have channeled their energies into defending the Constitution and the rule of law to join me in this new endeavor.”

Radhika Miller of ImpeachBush:

Good afternoon, my name is Radhika Miller. I am here representing ImpeachBush.org that was formed by former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark on January 18, 2003 from the stage of a rally of 500,000 people who were demonstrating on the National Mall just across the street to demand no war of aggression against Iraq. Today, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi have died and tens of thousands of US service members have been killed or badly wounded. These horrific casualties took place because George W. Bush was allowed and not punished for initiating a war of unprovoked aggression.
Since that time, more than one million people have voted at ImpeachBush.org in favor of impeachment. Volunteers from around the country collect these ImpeachBush petitions.
We want to thank Dennis Kucinich for having the courage and honesty to introduce 35 articles of impeachment in June of this year. Representative Kuncinch speaks for tens of millions of people who insist that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and all officials be held accountable for criminal misconduct, breaking the peace in an unprovoked war of aggression and for shredding the Constitution.
The fact that Bush has four months left in office does not matter one bit when it comes to violating the Constitution. As one speaker after another made clear in the July 25 hearing of the House Judiciary Committee hearing: impeachment is a constitutionally mandated duty and not a matter of partisan politics.
If Congress refuses to carry out its obligations it sends a message to all future presidents, from either Party, that the Constitution has been stripped of all meaning. We have a duty to act and we will.

Who's polluting? A must read!

The Pollution Solution: Stopping the environment's worst enemy
BY DR. MARY RUWART

Who's the greatest polluter of all? The oil companies? The chemical companies? The nuclear power plants? If you guessed "none of the above," you'd be correct. Our government, at the federal, state, and local levels, is the single greatest polluter in the land. In addition, our government doesn't even clean up its own garbage! In 1988, for example, the EPA demanded that the Departments of Energy and Defense clean up 17 of their weapons plants which were leaking radioactive and toxic chemicals -- enough contamination to cost $100 billion in clean-up costs over 50 years! The EPA was simply ignored. No bureaucrats went to jail or were sued for damages. Government departments have sovereign immunity.
In 1984, a Utah court ruled that the U.S. military was negligent in its nuclear testing, causing serious health problems (e.g. death) for the people exposed to radioactive fallout. The Court of Appeals dismissed the claims of the victims, because government employees have sovereign immunity.
Hooker Chemical begged the Niagara Falls School Board not to excavate the land where Hooker had safely stored toxic chemical waste. The school board ignored these warnings and taxpayers had to foot a $30 million relocation bill when health problems arose. The EPA filed suit, not against the reckless school board, but against Hooker Chemical! Government officials have sovereign immunity.
Government, both federal and local, is the greatest single polluter in the U.S. This polluter literally gets away with murder because of sovereign immunity. Libertarians would make government as responsible for its actions as everyone else is expected to be. Libertarians would protect the environment by first abolishing sovereign immunity.
By turning to government for environmental protection, we've placed the fox in charge of the hen house -- and a very large hen house it is! Governments, both federal and local, control over 40% of our country's land mass. Unfortunately, government's stewardship over our land is gradually destroying it.
For example, the Bureau of Land Management controls an area almost twice the size of Texas, including nearly all of Alaska and Nevada. Much of this land is rented to ranchers for grazing cattle. Because ranchers are only renting the land, they have no incentive to take care of it. Not surprisingly, studies as early as 1925 indicated that cattle were twice as likely to die on public ranges and had half as many calves as animals grazing on private lands.
Obviously, owners make better environmental guardians than renters. If the government sold its acreage to private ranchers, the new owners would make sure that they grazed the land sustainably to maximize profit and yield.
Indeed, ownership of wildlife can literally save endangered species from extinction. Between 1979 and 1989, Kenya banned elephant hunting, yet the number of these noble beasts dropped from 65,000 to 19,000. In Zimbabwe during the same time period, however, elephants could be legally owned and sold. The number of elephants increased from 30,000 to 43,000 as their owners became fiercely protective of their "property." Poachers didn't have a chance!
Similarly, commercialization of the buffalo saved it from extinction. We never worry about cattle becoming extinct, because their status as valuable "property" encourages their propagation. The second step libertarians would take to protect the environment and save endangered species would be to encourage private ownership of both land and animals.
Environmentalists were once wary of private ownership, but now recognize that establishing the property rights of native people, for example, has become an effective strategy to save the rain forests. Do you remember the movie, Medicine Man, where scientist Sean Connery discovers a miracle drug in the rain forest ecology? Unfortunately, the life-saving compound is literally bulldozed under when the government turns the rain forest over to corporate interests. The natives that scientist Connery lives with are driven from their forest home. Their homesteading rights are simply ignored by their own government!
Our own Native Americans were driven from their rightful lands as well. Similarly, our national forests are turned over to logging companies, just as the rain forests are. By 1985, the U.S. Forest Service had built 350,000 miles of logging roads with our tax dollars -- outstripping our interstate highway system by a factor of eight! In the meantime, hiking trails declined by 30%. Clearly, our government serves special interest groups instead of protecting our environmental heritage.
Even our national parks are not immune from abuse. Yellowstone's Park Service once encouraged employees to trap predators (e.g., wolves, fox, etc.) so that the hoofed mammals favored by visitors would flourish. Not surprisingly, the ecological balance was upset. The larger elk drove out the deer and sheep, trampled the riverbanks, and destroyed beaver habitat. Without the beavers, the water fowl, mink, otter, and trout were threatened. Without the trout or the shrubs and berries that once lined the riverbanks, grizzlies began to endanger park visitors in their search for food. As a result, park officials had to remove the bears and have started bringing back the wolves.
Wouldn't we be better served if naturalist organizations, such as the Audubon Society or Nature Conservancy, took over the management of our precious parks? The Audubon Society's Rainey Wildlife Sanctuary partially supports itself with natural gas wells operated in an ecologically sound manner. In addition to preserving the sensitive habitat, the Society shows how technology and ecology can co-exist peacefully and profitably.
The environment would benefit immensely from the elimination of sovereign immunity coupled with the privatization of "land and beast." The third and final step in the libertarian program to save the environment is the use of restitution both as a deterrent and a restorative.


Also Read...

by: Hon Paul Ryan of Wisconsin in the House of Representatives - Saturday, October 28, 2000:

Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit for the Record an article written by former Senator Robert W. Kasten, Jr. The Honorable Bob Kasten served in both the House of Representatives (1975-81) and the Senate (1981-93).
Mr. Kasten writes to remind us of the fact that the Federal Government is the largest polluter in the United States. He brings to our attention anecdotes from the states, which illustrate the states' difficulties enforcing local environmental laws on the federal government. He writes about the federal government's lack of accountability in cleaning up its own toxic waste sites and its attempts to push cleanup responsibility and costs to local levels of government and to private landowners.
According to a Boston Globe article last year, ''federal agencies have contaminated more than 60,000 sites across the country and the cost of cleaning up the worst sites is officially expected to approach $300 billion, nearly five times the price of similar destruction caused by private companies.'' In contrast, private Superfund site clean up is estimated at a fraction of the federal government at $57 billion. The article goes on to say that the EPA Inspector General has found that, federal agencies are increasingly violating the law, with 27 percent of all government facilities out of compliance in 1996, the latest year figures available, compared to 10 percent in 1992.
Department of Energy and Department of Defense environmental clean up budgets are routinely last priorities in the appropriations processes. For example, this year I worked to cut construction funding in the Energy and Water Appropriations bill for the doe's National Ignition Facility (NIF)--a bottomless money pit that the GAO has determined to be mired in waste and technological difficulties—and suggested that this funding be transferred to the doe's waste management account, where I believe the money could be put to better use.
The final appropriations bill increased the Defense Environmental Restoration and Waste Management fund by $490 million dollars. In comparison, the NIF project, which is 100 percent over budget and 6 years behind schedule, was appropriated $130 million for FY 2001. The NIF boondoggle was granted nearly one-third of the total increase of the environmental clean up budget. Clearly the federal government has other agendas than the environment.
We need to look more closely at Federal Government's own environmental problems. The State and Federal Government can work together to modernize environmental laws, streamline the bureaucratic process, and focus less on punishment and more on figuring out the best way to reach high environmental standards and compliance.

Odd Story for the week...

Four UC Tree-Sitters Charged With Lodging Illegally:

http://www.ktvu.com/news/17450600/detail.html

Oh, that printing press. A crime all of its own.

Corruption continues to grow worse over time. We are now in the thirty-seventh year of fully fiat money with central banking. In cases such as Freddie and Fannie, the market must handle the entire process. The government should remove itself totally from participation in the free market. We have been living in an illusion thinking that the government can bail out these private failures and criminal adventures. Some day very soon, the bills will all come due. A government can only create paper money with no backing for so long. This sort of printing press should be viewed as criminal as it once was... Thomas Jefferson wrote:

"The [privately-owned] Central Bank is an institution of the most
deadly hostility existing against the principles and form of our
Constitution... if the American people allow private banks to control the
issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks
and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all
their propertyuntil their children will wake up homeless on the continent their
fathers conquered."

Another cost of the drug war?

This past week there have been numerous news sources reporting on test results of prescription drugs found in drinking water across the United States. Read here... http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/03/10/pharma.water1/index.html

It appears that the drug war may be playing a key role in contamination of drinking water. Read here... http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j2bfGftd2umyPAilXRjxPMvAnY0AD936JSV03

Drug War Crimes: The Consequences of Prohibition

article by Ralph Reiland (Capitalism Magazine)

Arguing that the war on drugs is a poor method of reducing drug use, Miron pulls together the evidence to show how prohibition has increased the level of street violence, expanded health risks for drug users, drained criminal justice resources away from more serious crimes, diminished civil liberties, restricted the medicinal uses of drugs, generated insurrection in drug-producing countries, and speeded the transfer of massive amounts of wealth to criminals.

The costs, in short, have exceeded the benefits. Miron's answer: "Liberty and utility both recommend that prohibition end."

Read more ... http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3838


Well stated:

"The war on drugs has been a total failure and has wasted hundreds of billions of dollars. It has been used as an excuse to undermine our liberties while wasting time and money arresting and incarcerating tens of thousands of individuals who have never committed a violent crime. It has motivated Congress to pass laws forcing mandatory minimum sentences, cluttering our courts and prisons with non-violent individuals while violent criminals get off on technicalities. We live in a country where the federal government can’t even resist regulating the consumption of raw milk." - Dr. Ron Paul

Well Said! Take notes...

Recent Events: Another Failure

Examination of white-collar crime brings attention to what occurred this past week in the United States. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taken over by the federal government. Fannie Mae CEO, Daniel Mudd, and Freddi Mac CEO, Richard Syron, participated in fraudulent bookkeeping by overstating their capital holdings and financial health. Despite this, they are not facing criminal or civil prosecution. They created billions of dollars in mortgage loans when the money did not even exist. Taxpayers must now assume this cost. So what is learned in this case: if you perpetrate fraud your crimes will be forgiven at the cost of taxpayers. (Sad, but true - and all the politicians are okay with this)!

Purpose...

The ideas put forth here are to strengthen and
dramatically improve the criminal justice approach in the United States.
For many years citizens have become vicitms of the criminal justice system and
its failures. It is time to understand ways to best approach the area of
crime through the perspectives of safety, peace, common sense, and
liberty.

Platform

The Libertarian anti-crime plan:

* Respect the victim's rights and make criminals pay full restitution.
* Hold all criminals responsible for their actions.
* Double the police resources available for crime prevention without any additional government spending.
* Reduce the number of criminals at large on our streets.
* Defend the most effective crime deterrent available, the private ownership of guns.
* Create jobs, end welfare dependence, and improve education.

(http://www.lp.org/issues/crime-and-violence)