Menard posted a huge rambling on Facebook yesterday. I am not quite sure if he wrote it all himself, or lifted parts from elsewhere.
The Law and Its Perversion.
This communique is not written by a lawyer. The author has no formal training at law. You are perfectly free to reject completely for that reason alone. It is not meant to be legal advice, and is the author’s opinion only.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse, is a well known truism, and can be used to actually identify what the law is and what it is not.
Statists would have you believe “The Law is whatever the judges says it is” but if that is true, how are we supposed to know what the judge is liable to say? Are we expected to read minds, or look into the future? Because if not, then ‘The Law’ is not what the judge says it is, merely because a judge said it.
If ignorance of the law is no excuse is a true statement, then the term ‘the law is whatever a judge says it is’ must be false. The law is written in our hearts, and it identifies a specific purpose and intent. That is the only reason which supports the claim that ignorance of it is no excuse. And even though there are statistically a few sociopaths out there, who will not have it properly written on their own hearts, that does to mean it is not what is written on most people hearts.
Simply put, and from a philosophical standpoint, the Law is that which is written in the hearts of men. It has been expressed innumerable times by many teachers. “Do Unto Others as you would do unto them.” “Do not do unto others as you would not want them to do unto you.” “Live and Let Live.” “What comes around goes around.” “You reap what you sow.” Expressed through out history it varies very little from a core concept, which at its heart is all about reason. The law, if boiled down, is about reason.
If one wanted to express what the prime purpose of law is, one would likely arrive after very little effort, at this: allow as many people as possible to live happy peaceful lives. That is the only lawful and reasonable purpose of law. It is not to allow one subset to lord over the rest, nor to extract wealth, nor concentrate power. If it is to be reasonable, public peace and individual happiness must be the ultimate goal.
Supporting Statutes are supposed to support and work towards this primary goal. Statutes against public intoxication, were instituted to help keep the public peace, because some idiots could not enjoy a beer in the park without breaching the public peace. That is, the action itself might not be a breach of the public peace, but has previously lead to it, so the action itself is then banned, regulated, prohibited. The problem comes when enforcement of these supporting statutes takes the form of actual breaches of the public peace. We employ people whose primary goal is to preserve and maintain the public peace, and yet these same people feel free to initiate violence, and breach the public peace, in order to enforce statutes ostensibly created to preserve and maintain it.
Since the public peace relies on an absence of conflict, and conflict is a result of one party feeling they were denied dignity which was due, actions which deny dignity are the greatest causes of breaches of the public peace. And the greatest way to deny dignity to any human being is to deny equality. And the best way to deny equality and thus dignity, is to claim the right to restrict actions by way of actually breaching the public peace, in order to stop activities that may possibly lead to a breach of the public peace. These enforcers soon learn they are above the law, and may breach the public peace and initiate violence, not due to a breach of the peace, but do to a contravention of an imposed rule, whose existence is meant to protect the public peace.
You will find this contest is all about words on paper versus what is in your heart. Those who make their living putting words on paper, interpreting those words, enforcing those words do not want you looking into your own heart for the law. They need you to ignore your heart, and accept their words without weighing them against what you find in your own heart. Admittedly it is a very dangerous path, standing against the fear mongers and word peddlers. But it is one which is far less dangerous in the long run, then choosing to not look into your heart, and refusing to stand for what you find there. In the end it is your choice. You can allow fear to guide you, and ignore you heart for what others tell you is right and wrong, or stand your ground and follow your own moral compass.
There are people will hinder discussion and a sharing of ideas through derision, mockery, demands of proof, redirecting focus, and personal attacks. They will employ every tool in the book to hinder discussion. They ask questions not for clarity, but to dispute and find fault. They seek to argue about trivialities, drawing the focus away from the larger issues. These people are generally known as trolls, and in this case they focus on forums discussing certain specific freedom and law focussed forums. Here is what some have to say about these personality types.
Two studies published in 2013 and 2014 have found that people who are identified as trolls tend to have dark personality traits and show signs of sadism, antisocial behavior, psychopathy, and machiavellianism.[1]The 2013 study suggested that there are a number of similarities between anti-social and flame trolling activities and the 2014 study suggested that the noxious personality characteristics known as the "dark triad of personality" should be investigated in the analysis of trolling, and concluded that trolling appears "to be an Internet manifestation of everyday sadism.” Their relevance is suggested by research linking these traits to bullying in both adolescents and adults. The 2014 study found that trolls operate as agents of chaos on the Internet, exploiting hot-button issues to make users appear overly emotional or foolish in some manner. If an unfortunate person falls into their trap, trolling intensifies for further, merciless amusement. This is why novice Internet users are routinely admonished, "Do not feed the trolls!" The 2013 study found that trolls often have a high expectation of what it means to be successful, which is higher than they are able to attain, and this results in them resenting others who think they are successful but who fall below their standards.
[1] Buckels, Erin E.; Trapnell, Paul D.; Paulhus, Delroy L. (2014). "Trolls Just Want to Have Fun". Personality and Individual Differences 67: 97–102. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.016. Retrieved 2014-02-20.
If you decide to follow this path, you will alienate many who are comfortable with their packaged foods, opiate sports, and comfortable lifestyle. Many will think you insane or that you are a threat to their happiness. If you decide to become a vocal activist, you will draw the attention of the nitwits who will take it upon themselves to ‘debunk’ you. What they call debunking, others would know as harassment, defamation, mockery and derision. But the funny thing is, the more they do that, the more you realize the law is what is in your heart, and for those with enough internal fortitude, it will merely strengthen their resolve. You will see their actions are unloving, unkind, and designed to deny dignity. Thinking that law is about obeying superiors, they will claim that since you no longer accept as superior to you these words smiths, or obey and pay anymore, that you no longer deserve the protection of the law, and will attack you. You will notice they will however insist upon hiding their own identity, because in their hearts they too know what they do is contrary to the law. It is a denial of equality and dignity. It is unloving and unkind.
The Freemen are a threat to the establishment, because we have learned what the law actually is. Those who act for power, control, or wealth, without love and reason, are not keeping the law, regardless of their word smithing abilities and power over the ignorant and lazy.
The law is actually really simple, children know it, but lawyers and politicians need it complicated to extract wealth and power. The violent need it convoluted to justify their violence. But neither wealth, nor violence, nor power supersede actual law. These people pervert the law.
Simply put, law is 'loving reason'.
Happy New Year everyone!
