Nomadic thoughts of dubious importance.

Replies or Rebuttals?

E-mail me

Author photo

Links:
Two Four

Presence of Mind

Claire Wolfe

Karen De Coster

Colby Cosh

No Treason

Catallarchy

Unruled

Nolo Consentire

The Obscure Store

Fred Lapides

Survival Arts

A Small Victory

The Creative Foot Dragger

Belligerent Bunny

Mudita

Wendy McElroy

The Technoptimist

Instapundit

James Lileks

Israpundit

The Corner

Arts & Letters Daily

Andrew Sullivan

Midwest Conservative Journal

Sgt Stryker

Saturn in Retrograde

The Light of Reason

Diana Mertz Hsieh

Tal G. in Jerusalem

Little Green Footballs

VodkaPundit

The Raving Atheist

Best of the Web

Meryl Yourish

Lobowalk

kausfiles

Amish Tech Support

Ken Layne

Samizdata

Virginia Postrel

The Truth About Israel

Natalie Solent

Tim Blair

Trojan Horseshoes

USS Clueless

Blogcritics

Armed and Dangerous

The Volokh Conspiracy

No Watermelons Allowed

One Hand Clapping

Achewood

Jane Galt

Right Wing News

Cut on the Bias

Attack Cartoons




 
Archives
<< current













 
The author is an ex-submariner, questioner of authority, cigar smoking fly-fishing fanatic who wants to live to be 103.



























Improved Clinch
 

Thursday, May 22, 2003

 
More Ringing Bells

Here are some additional thoughts on ringing bells which are causing the masses to salivate by those who hear the bells but remain immune to the conditioning and thus free from the drivel response so hoped for by the conditioners.

Billy Beck
Claire Wolfe

John Venlet - 8:00:00 AM | Permalink

Wednesday, May 21, 2003

 
Little by Little

Conditioning. Most of us recall Pavlov's experiment with dogs. Do you here that bell? What did Pavlov's experiment prove? The piece linked says this,

"Pavlov's experiment proved that all animals could be trained or conditioned to expect a consequence on the results of previous experience."

Pay particular attention to the fact that "all animals could be trained or conditioned to expect a consequence on the results of previous experience."

I've been thinking about the above in relation to wearing seat belts and owning an animal. Here in Michigan, as in other states, the State has been touting their "Click It or Ticket" campaign via publishing in papers, TV ads (those soundbites again), and local newscasts. Karen DeCoster mentioned Michigan's and Massachusetts' seat belt enforcement mobilizations in a recent post titled "Tidbits of Statism" and our local paper, The Grand Rapids Press, just last night ran this story on seat belt enforcement.

Are you with me so far? Good. Now, here's a reading from the Kent County Animal Control Regulations. The regulation is from Article III - Collection of Stray and Unwanted Animals, Section 303, Private Property.

"The Director is authorized to examine, capture, or rescue any animal or to conduct inspections of all properties, public or private, in conjunction with the fulfillment of the duties and responsibilities in the Regulations. No person shall refuse to permit the Director, after proper identification, to inspect any premises in accordance with MCLA 333.2446 nor shall any person molest or resist the Director in the discharge of those duties and the protection of public health."

Still with me? Good. Now, how are these two items related? One deals with cars and one deals with animals. Both require licenses and both require restraints. Seat belts in cars and leashes on animals, but that similarity is not what I have in mind. The similarity I have in mind is enforcement.

Wearing your seatbelt or owning an animal are both rather innocuous affairs. A matter of individual choice, or should be. Unfortunately, the enforcement of these regulations, to most people, also seems rather innocuous. But is it? I don't believe so and the reason I do not is enforcement. Enforcement of these regulations by the State is actually a matter of conditioning. Mobilization of state, local and county police to enforce seat belt laws and regulations such as Section 303 above, which basically gives the Director of the local animal control unit carte blanche to inspect (search) your private property for animal violations are small steps on the road to searches of your private property by the State for any reason. We are being conditioned, through these seemingly courteous, innocuous enforcements, for complete control by the State.

Allowing the State to ticket you for not wearing your seatbelt and regulations which give animal control officers carte blanche to search private property for supposed animal violations are conditioning steps that are leading us to "expect a consequence on the results of previous experience." What will the State's next conditioning step be? What consequence will you be expecting?

Do you hear that bell? Are you salivating?

John Venlet - 8:11:00 AM | Permalink

Tuesday, May 20, 2003

 
It Really Is This Simple

A sincere thank you to the fine folks over at No Treason for linking to Lysander Spooner's treatise on Natural Law. Though they've highlighted a meritable portion which comments on legislation, I found the following, which comments on the simplicity of honesty, justice and natural law, to be truly, the most simple kind of truth.

"Honesty, justice, natural law, is usually a very plain and simple matter, easily understood by common minds. Those who desire to know what it is, in any particular case, seldom have to go far to find it. It is true, it must be learned, like any other science. But it is also true that it is very easily learned. Although as illimitable in its applications as the infinite relations and dealings of men with each other, it is, nevertheless, made up of a few simple elementary principles, of the truth and justice of which every ordinary mind has an almost intuitive perception."

Here is the link to the entire piece written by Spooner. Read the entire thing, or, as I did, read it, print it, read it, highlight it and then read it again. Then share it with your friends. One need not be steeped in the vagaries of learned men to understand it or the precepts it presents.

John Venlet - 4:13:00 PM | Permalink

Monday, May 19, 2003

 
Propaganda Working

Anti-drug, anti-gun, anti-this and anti-that, everyone has an agenda for which they develop an indoctrination line (propaganda), which can easily be absorbed by the sound bite devouring masses. The hope is that the masses will so readily consume the anti whatever indoctrination line (propaganda) it becomes rote, spewed forth at the mere mention of the subject the anti is referring to, and then turned into some sort of restrictive law that eats away at another freedom. Is it any wonder I've always had a penchant for the line that laws are made for stupid people?

Over the past 30 days, among other things, I've been contemplating the effect propaganda has on people. Specifically in regards to owning a gun and moving small amounts of marijuana. A good number of people I know like to occasionally indulge in small amounts, recreational use, of marijuana. By no stretch of the imagination would I consider these people the classic stoners which the propaganda machines of the government depict. They are attorneys, salesmen, teachers, you know, real people with lives who in most instances think independently. Meaning they do not spout the anti whatever message by rote. A percentage of them are also gun owners and a percentage of those hold concealed carries.

Here's what I find interesting. I own a gun, unregistered, and am not afraid to carry. The people referenced above, who have no compunction whatsoever in asking me to facilitate or point them to a source for their recreational needs, have an unnatural fear of owning a gun that is not registered. As to carrying, I think they'd rather be facing the business end of a gun, in unfriendly hands, than consider such an endeavor. What does this tell you? Does it point out the failure of anti-drug propaganda and the success of anti-gun propaganda? Does it exhibit an unatural fear of the power of the State, our supposed friend, when it comes to having to face the guns in their hands against the gun in yours?

When I discuss this with the above mentioned folks, I find that the illegality of the one, and their participation in its use and movement, does not even register on their radar whereas when it comes to a piece of finely machined metal, not registered with the State, their knees almost knock together with fear that the State is going to hang them. Both gun owners and non-gun owners. Isn't there something wrong with people thinking this way?

I think it's just propaganda working.

John Venlet - 7:52:00 PM | Permalink

Monday, May 12, 2003

 
One Day Short of A Month

May 12th and I haven't posted a word since April 13th. I could explain the dearth of posts by referencing deferred maintenance on my almost 80 year old house, or, by the fact that mayflies are hatching and trout are looking up after a winter spent in a state of lethargy. But I won't, though both factors contributed to my limited time in front of this screen, which I've looked at daily, but only to check the inbox.

A short run through of blogs of note, at least notes that I cast a ear towards, remind me that fools and charlatans still assail us. Disconnect from the blather that swirls into our ears has cost me nothing. The tunes blaring from major media are still the same, though the lyrics change to suit the occasion. Clarity of thought and speech remain the realm of free thinkers and individuals who have not succumbed to the chains being built, link by link, to enslave us to the whims of the State. I've missed reading these clear speakers, the sharpness of their points, driven one by one into the beast, though the beast remains standing. Some contributions on my part will be forthcoming.

Back at it.

John Venlet - 3:51:00 PM | Permalink

 
Powered by Blogger Pro™