Feds Raid Home of Heroic Free Stater

Kanning ArrestLast week Russell Kanning was arrested by federal DHS/ICE agents for trying to hand a flyer to an IRS agent in Keene, NH. Russell refused to show up for court the next day. This morning, federal thugs raided the Kanning household, threw him to the floor, and arrested him. He is to appear in federal court in Concord today.

The latest is here on the NHFree.com forum.

Digg this story!

posted by ianbernard
  • http://steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    A couple of days ago the headline hailed “Heroic Free Stater”. I guess no-showing a court date is less heroic.

  • http://www.libertyforsale.com Timothy West

    Steve,

    you dont get it. It ***WAY MORE*** heroic, dude!!11

  • ianbernard

    Changed it just for you, Steve.

  • http://www.freetalklive.com Slim

    I would say that not bowing down to the state is heroic. Nice to know our money is being spent on breaking in peoples doors that did not commit a crime against another person. Go feds arrest a person that was trying to exercise the freedom of speech.

  • IanC

    You know, there is a difference between exercising free speech and trespassing.

    This is of course going far overboard with reactions on the part of the Feds; but given this guy’s behavior is anyone *surprised*? (I’m not justifying the behavior. Just commenting on its result)

    Of course… quite frankly… As a skipper, he’s lucky that’s all he got; if it were bail bounty-hunters, he’d be treated far worse most likely (they don’t even *HAVE* the laws against physical abuse the police & feds do…)

    All in all, while I understand the thinking and the sentiment, I must say; expect to hear a number of people saying that he’s getting what he deserves.

  • http://www.lanuf.org/ Neal Conner

    “… that was trying to exercise the freedom of speech.”

    Not just the freedom of speech, but the right of the people to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

  • ianbernard

    I expect that, IanC, as a number of people are ignorant. No one deserves this treatment for trying to hand out a flyer on “public property”.

  • IanC

    Ian B — you’re absolutely right.

    Just one problem: The IRS is a privately incorporated institution. That makes any IRS building private property.

    As I see it, our ‘hero’ is guilty of tresspassing (the stairs count as part of the property), attempted vandalization, attempted destruction of property, and *possibly* attempted incitation to commit all three of the above. One could also see incitation to commit violence as well, but that isn’t a charge *I* would lay at his feet. Feds might, though.

    Being as nothing was done to him until he was in the process of executing these crimes, from a legalistic standpoint there’s nothing wrong with what the Feds have done, right up until the point where they decided to lay the beat-down on him.

    Quite frankly, while the cause is just, I would be able to take all this far more seriously if he were willing to recognize the “victimed” crimes that a property-rights recognizing libertarian society does, that he is/was committing.

  • IanC

    (Follow-up)

    A good way of showing such self-responsibility and self-ownership as is advocated in libertarian circles generally would have been not skipping his court date.

    Then again, I guess property-rights violations & attempts to commit violence don’t count as crimes if the victim is the state, either. Because they’re the bad-guys, and the bad-guys don’t get rights.

    Yeah, that sounds *just* about right.

  • ianbernard

    The state doesn’t have property rights. Only individuals can have rights.

  • IanC

    Ian B — that sounds just about like what I’d expect. I’ll leave you to your thread now.

  • Oje

    If he was so right in what he was doing then why didnt he show up to court? Does he not also have the right to a fair trial? People are charged with things they didnt do every single day in this country. He was charged with something, no matter how wrong you all think it is that doesnt give him the right to skip his court hearing. However if you dont show for a court hearing that does give them the right to issue a warrant and go looking for you. I dont agree with the initial arrest but i dont think they did anything wrong here. If he really felt innocent he should have shown up to court and proved it, simple as that.

  • ianbernard

    The state is nothing more than a group of strangers imposing their way on others with force. Russell’s actions have made this clear, as they continue to get more thuggish and violent with a man that has harmed no one.

    That you can come on here and defend these violent men, is really sad. Libertarians should know better.

  • JodyW

    I wonder what would have happened if Russell had been doing an open carry the first time he went in to the building? How would the filth react if Russell and Kat had been doing open carry in their house? What if I answer my door with my M4 rife? Not pointing it anywhere just carrying via my harness. I don’t think the filth would be as thuggish as they are if everyone open carried. What a bunch of fucking scum bags.

  • ianbernard

    Oje, the courts are nothing more than a public relations front. They exist so that people will believe government is “legitimate”, like you do.

    How can anyone get a fair trial where the judge is paid by the people prosecuting?

    Try this on for size: http://adventuresinlegalland.com
    That should shatter your government court fantasies.

  • Pingback: theRabidQuill » Blog Archive » Free Stater Kidnapped!

  • Oje

    I hardly believe government is legitimate, thanks for the laugh. But if you get yourself a good lawyer and you really did nothing wrong then you will get off. I have been charged for things i didnt do in the past. I got myself a lawyer, went to court and we fought the charges and i got off. Whether my lawyer paid him behind the scenes or not i dont know, all i know is i got off because i went to court and fought it. I didnt stay at home and not show up then wonder why a warrant was issued and then wonder why they came looking for me. I guess you feel if the person doesnt feel the charge is right against them they dont have to show up for court? Thats a good theory, im sure we would have murderers and child molestors walking around everywhere because im sure they didnt do anything wrong either.

  • http://www.coolparty.us Jon

    Lest we forget, here’s how non-violent civil disobedience was strategically planned, effectively organized and successfully carried out by heroes in the past.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nashville_sit-ins

    Although Russell’s cause (except the part about tipping over the IRS table, if Seth’s accurate about that) is a good one, and he’s very courageous to take on the feds, he seems to be completely lacking an effective plan. An effective plan involving more than one guy is needed for CD to work. Why engage in one-man CD if there’s no effective plan for success?

    The CD heroes in Nashville and elsewhere didn’t carry pitchforks on their way and didn’t announce in advance that they might tip over the lunch counters. They did organize, plan, strategize effectively in advance, show up for their court dates with a legal strategy, and ultimitely were successful.

    Although his courage may be heroic, without an effective plan, Russell’s attempts at CD may appear more insane than heroic.

  • ianbernard

    I think Russell would prefer to have more people involved, but he doesn’t want to wait for them.

  • http://www.coolparty.us Jon

    It’s not a matter of preference to have more people organized in advance, it’s a matter of need that will determine success or failure. If he doesn’t have the patience or skills to organize and strategize properly in advance, why should he be prematurely deemed a hero and encouraged to proceed foolishly?

  • Devious David

    “But if you get yourself a good lawyer and you really did nothing wrong then you will get off.”

    Surely, you are kidding right? Or smoking crack. That vast majority of Federal defendants plead out, whether they are guilty or not. Why? Because the deck is stacked heavily against them and the penalties more severe. You are truly gullible if you beleive that the criminal justice system, especially at the federal level, is predisposed to find in your best interest. A fair trial is the exception rather than the rule. You have no concept of the realities whatever.

    As for the IRS being a private institution, I doubt that. It’s not a generally accepted or even ADMITTED to idea by either the government or the IRS. They can’t/won’t even point to the law that requires us to pay income tax or make a clear statement to the effect when cornered! For these reasons, the IRS is to be considered a government agency whether it is or not. And it is.

  • ianbernard

    Jon, depends on your perspective. You consider it foolish, Russell likely feels differently.

    He’s made his point, much like Gandhi. He’s forcing the government to show how violent and thuggish it is, and as a result of this publicity, we’ll likely have more refuseniks moving to Keene.

    Eventually, because of Russell’s actions, the Liberty movement in Keene and NH will be stronger.

  • Devious David

    I also have trouble understanding how any trespassing took place. If those IRS offices are anything like the one here, then there is a lobby and a locked door. Walking into that publicly accessible and paid for lobby and talking to someone behind that glass, trying to get them to take a flyer or buy girl scout cookies is hardly trespassing and if by some tenuous logic it is, we all know that initiating force upon someone for such a thing is represhensible and unneccessary.

    Even if you beleive for some reason it is trespassing, they could have at least waited for him to enter the property. They were there is force and could have easily neutralized and threat he offered instantly on the spot, had he done so. Indisputably, no matter how statist some of you are, the force applied was far out of the range of acceptable or necessarily applicable to the situation.

  • ianbernard

    DD, they were waiting for him when he got there last week. He never made it to the IRS office. See: http://hammeroftruth.com/2006/07/27/feds-arrest-heroic-free-stater/

  • Devious David

    Exactly Ian, they didn’t even wait for an offense to be committed. They could have easily escorted him into the office and waited for him to push the leaflet through the glass window and then beat his brains out of his head. This is total nonsense. Did they even look at the leaflet? What if he was going to file his taxes or something? Obviously, his stated intent was different, but it seems he was stopped before any perceived offense took place.

    I guess next we’ll have to go and arrest Jehovah’s Witnesses for knocking on people’s doors because they might proselytise. Or more appropriately, arrest them as they approach the front door before they get a chance to knock.

  • http://steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    I wonder what would have happened if Russell had been doing an open carry the first time he went in to the building? How would the filth react if Russell and Kat had been doing open carry in their house? What if I answer my door with my M4 rife? Not pointing it anywhere just carrying via my harness. I don’t think the filth would be as thuggish as they are if everyone open carried.

    Actually, in that scenario law enforcment officers would likely give you a double-tap to center mass, have it ruled a clean shooting, and be back out on duty within 24 hours. However, based on the over-the-top seething bile you’ve spewed in this thread and the previous one, JodyW, I somehow doubt you would back up your rhetoric in real life and find yourself in that situation to begin with.

  • IanC

    The IRS is indeed a corporation unto itself (Part of the reorganization act of 1988/1998 — can’t remember which). Anyone remember Mussellini’s definition of Fascism? Anyone who enters the offices for a purpose other than ‘legitimate business’ as determined by the owner of the property can be tried for trespassing. Russell’s stated purpose was not legitimate business.

    The trespassing charge is, indeed, legitimate even in a libertarian sense. And, as he was only detained once in the process of executing the crimes he had declared the intent for, he should face up to them.

    But again, this is a point of self-responsibility I doubt the ‘zero-government’ crowd here will appreciate.

    DD — Would you, having known what the plane hijackers of 9/11 were going to do, wait until the crashed the planes into the building to consider them as having committed the offences of *trying* to do so?

    … why am I bothering? Have fun, y’all.

  • http://steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    But again, this is a point of self-responsibility I doubt the ”˜zero-government’ crowd here will appreciate.

    You nailed it, IanC. Some people confuse the concept of “liberty” with that of “license”. “Liberty” implies an undercurrent of self-responsibility, which makes it unattractive to both statists and many zero-goverment’ers alike.

  • R. E. Lee

    The vast majority of citizens wouldn’t know that the IRS building is private property. So, at the very least, the
    private owner needs to put up a prominent sign describing the property status and the kinds of activities that one entering is permitted to do. And just because something is public property, doesn’t mean the feds won’t limit your 1st amendment activities. I once got stopped at the Liberty Bell building (outside) and told I’d be arrested if I continued to hand out political literature.

  • ianbernard

    Hardly Steve and IanC. Just because we don’t want a coercive group of strangers telling us what to do doesn’t make us irresponsible. Actually, that would make us more responsible.

  • JodyW

    “Actually, in that scenario law enforcment officers would likely give you a double-tap to center mass, have it ruled a clean shooting, and be back out on duty within 24 hours. However, based on the over-the-top seething bile you’ve spewed in this thread and the previous one, JodyW, I somehow doubt you would back up your rhetoric in real life and find yourself in that situation to begin with.”

    I am an FSP member and have signed the first 1000 pledge, how about you?

  • Wes P

    If the IRS is a private corporation, what right do they have to tax us, even if you’re a statist?

    This self-serving doublethink needs to be exposed and ridiculed, until the emperor really has no clothes.

  • Devious David

    Yeah, if the IRS is a private corporation, then how could we be under legal obligation to send them money? And how could they criminally prosecute us?

    Oh and JodyW, awesome comeback!

  • IanC

    Wes P — *THAT* is a good point.

    The supposed authority is that they are granted the capacity to do so by government regulation. This is part and parcel of why I believe the United States of America as it stands today is 100% a fascist nation.

    We have a racial, secretive enemy.
    We have corporations that exist solely to enforce government regulations.
    We have government regulations that exist to arbitrarily endorse specific corporations.
    We have a political system that suppresses dissident opinion.
    We have a domestic spying agency that requires no legislation or approval to target specific individuals.

    Each of these are hallmarks of fascism in action.

    None of this means that there should be an anarchy. Just that today’s state needs to go.

  • IanC

    IanB — your argument about responsibility will hold weight when and if you recognize that while certain criminal acts are in fact necessary, that you must also face the respective punishments for said necessary acts.

    As it stands, you want your cake and to eat it too.

    You can’t have both.

  • http://steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    I could care less about your FSP activities, JodyW… I’m referring to your rhetoric regarding firearms. I’m a serious 2nd Amendment proponent who has put forth the effort to educate myself and get private training, both in marksmanship and home defense. I’m active at my local gun range, attend gun shows statewide, am a longtime NRA member, and engage in political activism on the issues when necessary.

    Having laid out that context… I DESPISE people who talk fancifully about firearms, flash them around, or otherwise doesn’t regard them responsibly. No serious firearms owner talks the way you just were about going into a government building with an open carry, or walking around one’s living room with an M4 rifle harness. You are either a phony rube, running his mouth to sound tough, or else a complete f*cking moron. People like you infuriate gun owners.

  • dann

    congress created the ‘office of the commissioner of internal revenue’ on 1 jul 1862 on the recommendation of then president a.lincoln [to help pay for his unjust war.]
    it was created to prosecute the manufacturers of alcohol, tobacco and firearm products who had not purchased the tax stamps for paying the excise tax [per art.1, sec.8, cl.1] on the privilege of manufacturing, producing a/o the distilling of those products
    john baptist kotmair, jr., ["do courts have law making powers?"] says that this was the 2nd criminal law enforcement agency created by congress. [does this make it a private corporation..? i vote that it doesn't.]

  • JodyW

    ” I DESPISE people who talk fancifully about firearms”

    I have the right to open carry, open carry is not a “fanciful,” or “flashing,” opportunity. If you continue to cower in fear of what might happen to you least you exercise your FULL 2nd Amendment rights then please, stay out of the FSP. I must open carry and people must see me do it, the government must see me do it. I guess you think going to a gun show, joining the NRA and doing an occasional action will actually secure your freedom. Sorry, but you are the f*cking moron.

  • http://steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    please, stay out of the FSP

    Oh, have no fear there… I would join the Church of Scientology before I would the Free State Project. How batshit-crazy do you have to be for large numbers of libertarian blog commenters to turn on you and think of you as a loony cult?

    I must open carry and people must see me do it, the government must see me do it.

    This goes back to my early remark about your rhetoric vs. your actions. If you really feel this way, then I’ll be looking forward to Ian Bernard any day now posting a video clip of you proudly walking around the DMV or Post Office with your M4 Carbine harnessed to your shoulder. THAT would make for a much more interesting post than Farmer Bob with his pitchfork and flyers!

  • ianbernard

    Loony cult? It’s clear you don’t know very many FSPers.

  • http://steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    It’s clear that JodyW is not an effective ambassador for your cause, Ian. I’ve even seen you have to bring her back in check a time or two here. Right or wrong, our name is usually only as good as our associations.

  • ianbernard

    There are plenty of lousy Libertarian ambassadors. I’m not losing sleep over it. I just focus on my message.

  • JodyW

    I only become forceful if force is initiated upon my person but I do have the right to open carry. Why are you so against open carry? Why do you get all worked up when I simply say that I would open carry? Do you assume that because someone is carrying a gun that they are violent and will use it? I love Russells non-confrontational attitude. Millions put Gahndi down but by sitting on his ass in protest he changed an entire country. I have the right to carry whatever the fuck I want to on my person, I don’t have the right to use whatever I carry to harm others unless they have harmed me first, at which point I will most likely be dead. Why do you hate me wanting to open carry? What are you afraid of? Again, why does talking about open carry upset you so much? I did not say to walk into the post office and start killing people. I said walk into a post office open carrying a firearm, so, so what, what is the big deal? Are you some kind of federal agent?

  • ianbernard

    So you know, Steve, open carry is legal in NH.

  • JodyW

    In addition to your earlier comment Steve about cops shooting someone who legally open carries, it is at that point when you say something like that which proves beyond a doubt that police need to lose their jobs and our freedoms have been flushed. I don’t want to own guns, I think they are a waste of money, but if I do not own guns then eventually the only people with them will be the government. Freedom is scary but the responsibility of maintaining that freedom is even scarier.

  • http://steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    Open carry is legal here in Georgia, and getting my concealed carry license was only slightly more trouble than my driver’s license. I’m support carry rights, and don’t know what in the world you’re talking about. Anybody who says anything to you gets the FSP thrown in in their face (yeah we GET it, you clicked a button on a web page form)… along with a bunch of incoherent hate ranting.

    The only thing I’ve “opposed” here is a bunch of ridiculous rhetoric about carrying an M4 Carbine through your local IRS office, or while sitting around your living room in case the cops burst through the door. For the record, I also oppose the multiple calls you have made over the past couple weeks for police officers to be murdered in cold blood. As a FSP’er, Ian may not worry about your impact on their image. As a gun owner, however, I definately feel led to distance you and make clear that your attitude does NOT speak for serious 2nd Amendment activists.

    (cont.)

  • http://steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    (…cont)

    Still waiting on that committment from you to film a video or still photos of you wondering around your Post Office with an M4 Carbine. Since it’s what you do rountinely as a matter of principle and all…

  • http://UnCivilDefence.blogspot.com MRJarrell

    Well, now. As A gunowner, a CCW holder and someone who carries whenever they leave the house I don’t find Jody’s comments a bad reflection on gunowners. She may be passionate about her cause but certain gunowners are more than willing to sell out their rights for a single issue. I see it all the time and, it looks like I’m seeing it again. The only reason I have a CCW is so the cops don’t have a reason to murder to me for excercising my right to self defence. How many people are “responsible” gunowners going to sell out in order to be allowed a modicum of freedom where their firearms are concerned? Apparently a lot, judging from some folks.

  • http://neworder.box.sk programmer

    This is why we ‘need’ law enforcement, etc..
    Us humans can’t talk with each other without fighting and holding pissing contests…
    self-government requires restraint and um.. empathy? a willingness to admit that someone else may be right, or may have larger genitals…

    I’m not pointing @ anyone in paticular.. but i mean, .. read down and see how the conversation sort of twirled on down the gutter, about 1/2 way thru..

    get a grip man!

    this is bat country!

  • Wes P

    Digg it at http://digg.com/view/all

    Join up and push Russell up the front page!

  • http://www.republicofnh.org Caleb

    –I’m a serious 2nd Amendment proponent who has put forth the effort to educate myself and get private training, both in marksmanship and home defense. I’m active at my local gun range, attend gun shows statewide, am a longtime NRA member, and engage in political activism on the issues when necessary.– Quote from Steve Perkins

    You’ve repeatedly bashed my friend, Russell Kanning, who has the courage to go up against armed thugs with nothing but flyers. Gun-cleaners like you will only have courage in a “fair fight”. For all your talk of “guns”, I don’t see you starting any sort of revolution. You’ll clean your guns until they come to take them away, at which point you’ll just hand them over. Thank a man like Russell Kanning for having the courage to stand up for your freedom. God knows you don’t.

  • http://www.steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    For all your talk of “guns”, I don’t see you starting any sort of revolution.

    Well Caleb, let me simply say:

    I certify that I do not believe in or advocate the initiation of force as a means of achieving political or social goals.

    I know that HoT is not necessarily a wing of the Libertarian Party, or some sort of LP mouthpiece. However, I hope that it does come closer to this description than to being a mouthpiece for milita nuts who openly advocate armed revolution and murder of law enforcement officers. No matter how hard you guys try to “shame” rank-and-file Libertarians, the only shame I feel is that some might associate me with you.

  • http://www.republicofnh.org Caleb

    I agree Steve, I hope that no one thinks we are together too.

  • Patriot

    Second Ammendment. What?

  • http://www.republicofnh.org Caleb

    You’re a Quaker, Steve? What sort of piss poor Quaker are you? I thought Quakers were pacifists?

  • Wes P

    Russell Kanning is armed with only his conscience and all the publicity we can give him.

  • http://www.steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    Yes, Quakers historically oppose all forms of violence. There are strong parallels between the Quaker Peace Testimony and the Libertarian Party’s membership pledge. Ayn Rand’s essay “The Roots of War” (from “Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal”) is one of the most succinct statements tying libertarian philosophy to Quaker morality (well you know, apart from Rand’s militant atheism and all!).

    What part of this makes me a “poor Quaker”? A moment ago you were calling me a hypocrite because I SHOULD support the rhetoric of violent revolution. Now I’m a hypocrite because I SHOULDN’T. Are you reading my comments, or attacking a strawman of your own creation?

  • http://www.pnar.org Tom Blanton

    The court (and presumably the IRS) disputes the notion that
    it is a private corporation, so it would be hard for them
    to make a case for trespassing on private property.

    See Snyder vs IRS:

    http://www.quatloos.com/taxscams/protcase/snyder.htm

    Most federal buildings are open to the general public. Ican’t find in articles at Keene Free Press what Kanning has actually been charged with. “Being somewhere when you don’t have business” is not a charge. Handing out flyers (soliciting) on federal property is.

    For example, it is against the law to hand out flyers inside
    the Post Office – but it is ok to do it outside. We found this out doing tax day protests on April 15th at Post Offices. I am assuming that soliciting is what Kanning is charged with.

    If you don’t go to court, they will issue a capias – and this is probably more serious than the original charge.

    I hope Mr. Kanning can avoid jail and get tons of publicity
    in doing so.

  • http://www.republicofnh.org Caleb

    Well, Steve, let me state first off that, in the interests of full disclosure, though I’m not a Quaker, I am a conservative Christian pacifist. That is to say I oppose ALL force EVEN IN SELF-DEFENSE.

    You are advocating, (at least, it seems to me) a more Libertarian “non-aggression” principle.

    That may make you a fine Libertarian. But it makes you a piss poor pacifist.

    –I know that HoT is not necessarily a wing of the Libertarian Party, or some sort of LP mouthpiece. However, I hope that it does come closer to this description than to being a mouthpiece for milita nuts who openly advocate armed revolution and murder of law enforcement officers. No matter how hard you guys try to “shame” rank-and-file Libertarians, the only shame I feel is that some might associate me with you.–

    I am not now, and never have been, a Libertarian. I have affiliated myself with the Democrat Party, and have recently left the Democrat Party to form the NH Independence Party.

  • http://www.steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    You are advocating, (at least, it seems to me) a more Libertarian “non-aggression” principle.

    That’s a pretty fair assessment, Caleb. You are correct in that the Quaker Peace Testimony is “pure” pacifism, and I don’t live up to that. It’s something I struggle with personally, and has led to many interesting discussions with others at my meeting (ie. church).

    My deal is this: if someone were to come through my door or window at 2:00 in the morning, and were a threat to my wife or family, I simply don’t want to be dishonest and lie about what I would do. I have to believe that many people who would describe a purely pacifist reaction in that kind of situation are either lying, or at least kidding themselves that they can say with 100% certainty either way what they would do.

    I don’t support war, and I don’t support talk of armed revolution. I don’t support the initiation of force in any circumstance. But I don’t boast about my pacifist “credentials”.

  • ianbernard

    For the record, none of the NH civil disobedience activists are armed insurrectionists. We make it clear we are a non-violent revolution.

  • http://www.bradspangler.com/blog/ Brad Spangler

    There seems to be some confusion here. Defensive violence against the state is never an initiation of force. The state itself is systematic and ongoing initiatory force. There may be plenty of practical reasons not to go out in a Rambo-esque blaze of glory, but there aren’t any in terms of libertarian principle. They started it.

    As it happens, though, I believe non-violent or at least minimally violent revolution is possible.

    http://agorism.info/

  • http://www.steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    There seems to be some confusion here. Defensive violence against the state is never an initiation of force.

    Yes, there does seem to be some confusion here. Defensive force against the state may be called for when you or your family is coming under mortal danger. However, since most zero-government types tend to define the existence of government in the first place as an initiation of force, this creates an unacceptable “carte blanc” loophole. I acknowledge no principle by which you could “go out in a Rambo-esque blaze of glory”, or even start a “minimally violent revolution”, on account of a tax bill you got in the mail. Not even in theory.

  • http://www.bradspangler.com/blog/ Brad Spangler

    Your acknowledgement matters about as much to me as a fart in a hurricane. I was clarifying the issue for other readers because I oppose the attempts of people like yourself to obfuscate the Non-Aggression Principle.

  • http://www.steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    Heh, that’s some pretty interesting verbal gymnastics. A pretty clear example of “obfuscation” would be taking a pledge to oppose the initation of force, and twisting it to proclaim the exact opposite of its text. If government, by definition, is an initiation of force… then obviously violent action is advocated for political goals.

    This is hardly what David Nolan put to paper in the early 70’s, and would no doubt be taken as a bait-and-switch by the hundreds of thousands of Libertarians who signed that pledge under a more conventional interpretation.

    Of course, I can’t track which of you loonies are or are not associated with the LP. If your “Non-Aggression Principle” is some FSP or militant anarchist thing, then viva la revolución, Che. If you’re talking about the LP membership pledge, however, then you’re just dead wrong (or else I need to send a donation check the size of three house payments to the LRC!).

  • IanC

    Steve — let’s not even begin with getting into the idiologies of people like myself whom do not define government as ‘the initiation of force’ intrinsically.

    The longer I’m exposed to libertarian ideologies the more and more I become convinced the reason why we’re so ineffectual as a society is that too many people of sound reason got shoo’ed out of the game before they got started by the emphatic nature of the zero-staters. I won’t call them ‘purists’ … because they are anything but pure.

    That’s enough muck-raking however. Mr. Kanning; if you are reading this; I want to make one tiny suggestion:

    Your enthusiasm is appreciated. Your impatience is appreciated. However, there is a certain… nobility, that I see somewhat lacking. An example; facing the court date without need to be dragged present. This would have presented a possibility to address the press from a position of righteousness. As it stands; to the common eye you’re just another “nut.”

  • ianbernard

    There’s nothing “nutty” about refusing to participate with violent thugs.

    We are showing the world how violent and clueless these government people are. Think whatever you want, all that matters is that we’re finding more and more people who are seeing the light about the state.

    Enjoy your shackles!

  • http://www.steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    Exactly, IanC. The issue with loosey-goosey interpretations of the non-aggression principle is that since each of us learned how to talk, one of our first sentences was “He started it!”… with a finger pointed toward a sibling. It’s a deeply ingrained part of human nature that we can ALWAYS pin the initiation of force on some aggressor party other than ourselves.

    Applying the non-agression principle without honestly owning up to this and factoring it into consideration is tandamount to declaring that you advocate the use of force whenever you damn well please, and upon whomever you damn well please. It’s tandamount to have no principles at all.

  • http://www.steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    There’s nothing “nutty” about refusing to participate with violent thugs.

    Common ground at last.

  • http://www.libertyforsale.com Timothy West

    durn, I thought you rubes were never gonna run out of steam. :)

  • http://www.freestateproject.org Steve

    Why would anyone think that the IRS is a corporation, when their site (in the .gov domain) plainly states that they are a bureau of the Department of the Treasury?
    http://www.ustreas.gov/bureaus/

  • http://www.freestateproject.org Steve

    It is ironic that Steve Perkins complains of straw-man attacks while using similar tactics himself. Steve, as a libertarian who, I trust, values the individual, you will appreciate how problematic, even fallacious, it is to generalize about a group based on the behavior of a few indivdiuals. Anyone with an a-priori desire to dislike the FSP can find some dislikeable particpants to wave as examples. However, the FSP mirrors the wider libertarian community, with the same share of LP/RLC members, Cato sponsors, and Reason readers. According to a recent survey, FSPers’ top 3 pro-freedom subscriptions are
    26% LP News
    25% Reason magazine
    15% NRA’s America’s First Freedom

    If anything, the community leans right, and matches you more than it does me (a Reason-reader and lifetime LP member). Check out the Christians sub-group:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fsp-christians
    where you will find the FSP president.

    And I won’t condemn all gun nuts for the hostile, ill-informed words of one.

  • http://www.steveperkins.net Steve Perkins

    I have no quarrel with the FSP community as a whole, or even with most of its supporters participating in this thread.

    However, if the group “leans right”, it does NOT match me (fellow Reason subscriber and LP member in good standing). In reference to “strawmen”… self-identifying as Christian does not automatically make someone “right-wing”.

  • http://www.freestateproject.org Steve

    >if the group “leans right”, it does NOT match me

    Could be my biased perception. Excessive attention to our gulcher customers has led the FSP to eschew demographic info. But we will soon allow people to opt in and share more info, like what the anonymous survey collected.

    >self-identifying as Christian does not automatically make someone “right-wing”.

    Definitely bias on my part. ;)

    I have not read the above thread in great detail, but I suspect that my opinion differs from those of the FSPers posting here. When your rights are being violated, the question is not *whether* you may use force, but *how much*, and how much effort you can be expected to invest in finding a minimum-force solution. What statists call “market failure” I call “imagination failure”, and I would apply that term also to those unable to find less harmful ways of defending their rights. I would even apply it to those who rush into confrontration. Gandhi collected salt; did he also enter gov’t offices?

  • IanC

    Steve — it’s one of those tiny tricks like the Fed being a private institution as well…

    The IRS was ‘reorganized’ as a corporation. So while its function and purpose is entirely public… draw the lines between the dots. A private corporation, commissioned to carry out a public function, can be a government bureau and a private company all at once.

    Not going to go much further on that one.

  • LeoTolstoy

    people don’t understand the difference between common property and rights and collective property and rights…

    the point at which Russell was arrested was where the authorities determined is the demarcation line between collective property with a general purpose (lobbies, hallways, auditorium) and a specific purpose (transact official IRS business).

    when they asked him what his purpose was to entering the specific purpose area he told them and they said you can’t and if he did he would be arrested.

    he then preceded and thus initiated the force that lead to his arrest…

  • Wes P

    Leo Tolstoy aka Frank Chodorov aka Mao Tse Tung,

    How dare you use ivory-tower political philosophy to justify the power that flows from the barrel of a gun?

  • Wes P

    As if we all got together, sang Kumbaya, and organized the IRS and DHS with all their current powers.

  • LeoTolstoy

    so the debate then is not about whether Bush is a fascist, or has committed war crimes among various other heinious charges but whether or not collective property is legitimate and whether or not common property rights are individual or not.

    freedom of speech, assembly, thought and right of ways are individual equal rights held in common.

    collective property is a group right delegated to an authority (state) who can dictate terms of use prior to use.

    the sidewalk is collective property with the common individual right of way that supercedes it’s use…

    you a free to use without permission as long as you do not infringe on the equal rights of any other individual.

    you are even free to use the general purpose areas (lobbies, auditorium, etc) to get to the specific area

    the same can’t be said for the collective property for a specific purpose of the IRS offices

  • LeoTolstoy

    WesP wrote:

    “As if we all got together, sang Kumbaya, and organized the IRS and DHS with all their current powers.”

    no but our delegated authority did…

  • Wes P

    I didn’t delegate it. Neither did Russell.

  • http://www.lightofalexandria.com James Maynard

    Of course, this is going to be a BOON for us here in the Free State, especially Keene.

    Think about it….. There are poitical types here and CD types. Most of us (at least in person, lol) are pretty friendly with each other.

    That means that the friends of the people who they (KPD especially) arrest today will be determing their budgets in a few years….

    Ahem….

    JM

  • Pingback: Heathbar’s Crunch » Feds Raid Home of Heroic Free Stater

  • http://www.RichDPhoto.com RichD

    The IRS is owned, operated and paid for by the federal government. That in and of itself makes it subject to the restrictions placed on all government entities by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The IRS and it’s agents regularly and summarily disregard the existence of those documents.

    Russel’s arrest for the attempted distribution of this flyer violates the First Ammendment in at least two ways — freedom of speech and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.

  • http://www.RichDPhoto.com RichD

    [i]An example; facing the court date without need to be dragged present. This would have presented a possibility to address the press from a position of righteousness. As it stands; to the common eye you’re just another “nut.”[/i]

    It is not “nutty” to assert that the court has no right to try him for doing something that’s not really a crime to begin with.

    Position of Righteousness? Who’s righteousness? From who’s perspective? How is it righteous to “play by the rules” of an entity that changes it’s rules at will and “enforces” them arbitrarily and selectively on a whim?

    As Wes P pointed out, that court does not represent *me*, nor does “the press”. Their tactic is to make so many things “illegal” that people can’t help but violate the law. That’s how they cash in on making people *feel* guilty, whether they’ve actually done anything wrong or not.

    Thoreau and Rand got it right: Bad laws *should* be disobeyed.

  • http://www.RichDPhoto.com RichD

    [i]An example; facing the court date without need to be dragged present. This would have presented a possibility to address the press from a position of righteousness. As it stands; to the common eye you\u2019re just another \u201cnut.\u201d[/i]

    It is not “nutty” to assert that the court has no right to try him for doing something that’s not really a crime to begin with.

    Position of Righteousness? Who’s righteousness? From who’s perspective? How is it righteous to “play by the rules” of an entity that changes it’s rules at will and “enforces” them arbitrarily and selectively on a whim?

    As Wes P pointed out, that court does not represent *me*, nor does “the press”. Their tactic is to make so many things “illegal” that people can’t help but violate the law. That’s how they cash in on making people *feel* guilty, whether they’ve actually done anything wrong or not.

    Thoreau and Rand got it right: Bad laws *should* be disobeyed.

  • Money Dollars

    “No serious firearms owner talks the way you just were about… walking around one’s living room with an M4 rifle harness. You are … a complete f*cking moron. People like you infuriate gun owners.”-Steve Perkins

    I guess I am a complete f*cking moron. When my phone line went out a few weeks ago, I decided to “clip up”. Loaded about 180 rounds into 30rd mags and took the m-4gery out of the safe. I also don’t like ranges, and do ballistic testing in my back yard, or in the woods. It is possible to roll up on while I’ve got a rifle on in my house, or outside of it.

    Here is me on the roof of my house:
    http://timcondon.info/roof3.jpg

    “Still waiting on that committment from you to film a video or still photos of you wondering around your Post Office with an M4 Carbine.”-Steve Perkins

    Not the post office or IRS, but here is me doing some ballistic testing with an m-4gery in my back yard in NH.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HN1U7mLuv7s

    And I don’t have guns for hunting, cus I’m vegan.

  • Money Dollars

    “Loony cult? It’s clear you don’t know very many FSPers.”-Ian Bernard

    That is what most people in NH think of the FSP.
    Well, those not in the cult ;)

  • LeoTolstoy

    Rich D wrote:

    “Russel’s arrest for the attempted distribution of this flyer violates the First Ammendment in at least two ways ”” freedom of speech and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.”

    you only have those individual common rights on right of ways like the sidewalk out in front or in collectively owned property for the explicit purpose designated for that (public forum).

    you have no freedom of speech right that will disrupt the business transactions in collectively owned property (IRS/postal service buildings) whose use is dictated by our delegated authority.

    when asked, Russell told the officers exactly what he was going to do (tell the employees to quit) the officers determined that this would disrupt normal business once Russell transgressed from common purpose areas of the collective property (lobbies, hallways, stairs) into the specific purpose areas (offices, etc) and told him to not go further than where they stood.

    he did and they arrested him

  • IanC

    RichD; maybe, just maybe, you might want to go back and re-read what I posted a priori.

    If we are to be heard by the public, our message must be clear: libertarianism means being free to do what you want — and paying the consequenses for said actions.

    By attempting to evade the court-date, he tacitly and explicitly acknowledged the wrongful nature of what he did.

    If he had shown to court, and simply stated, “I did what had to be done” then it would have worked *FAR* better on that plateau.

    And honestly, defending his public perception as ‘just another “nut” ‘ to me… is just plain silly.

    I didn’t say *I* saw him as one. I said his actions make him appear one to the common eye.

    And if a publicity stunt like this is to be effective (which in the end is what civil disobedience amounts to) THEN IT MUST REACH THE COMMON PERSON.

    This isn’t.

  • Mike R

    A point I have not heard yet.

    Governments seek legitimacy. All governments. As long as the people respect that they are legitimate, they need not exercise the power of their guns. To me, it seems like Russell may not have recognized that the government laws or court system are legitimate.

    Mere existence does not make it legitimate – in the same way that not all laws are legitimate. Are the presidential signing orders legitimate? Similar arguments are being made about why military tribunals for “enemy combatants” may not be legitimate, although the word legitimate is seldom used.

    Think about that word. What makes our system of government legitimate?

    http://www.buildfreedom.com/strategy/legitimacy.htm

    Were the laws regarding blacks in the south legitimate? Should Rosa Parks have given up her seat?

    Do you support the authority of the UN court system? Would you yield to a request to show up for a bogus trial for breaking bogus laws, illegitimately passed?

  • IanC

    From Mike R’s link to Ernest Hancock’s article: “This [social contract] is a contract I never signed, that I’ve never seen, that has no terms, that is binding upon me but not upon the other party [...]”

    And there — way in the beginning of his argument — the whole thing falls apart.

    I’ll wax John Lock-ish here. (Not that I agree with everything he wrote: I don’t.)

    The ‘social contract’ is no more an actual contract than I am the Intergalactic Lord Xenu. *EVERYONE* who ever refutes it — in libertarian circles — always makes the same complaint: “I never signed it, so why does it bind me?”

    The answer is simple; because ‘it’ doesn’t *exist* in the way you are refuting it. It is a model for society; that attempts to describe and provide a rationale for limiting the authority structures that develop *WITH* society.

    Mr. Hancock’s thinking only works in non-societies. He freely admits this (paraphrasing): “It is no surprise that the streets of all ‘civilizations’ run red.”

  • IanC

    The answer to wether or not government is legitimate — and when and where it is not — is when/if it protects the individual from illegitimate behaviors. In the face of illegitimacy, force is *required.* Hence government can be said to be the practice of exerting required force to protect individuals. Anything beyond this measure is in fact illegitimate.

    What does this entail? If someone attempts to force you to do something you don’t wish done, then government should prevent it. (Think; stopping rape, punishing murder, et al.)

    If two people *CANNOT* agree, and their disagreement *CANNOT* be absolved by their moving in two separate directions (think; who really owns 1212 Mockingbird Lane? Herman or Eddie?) then government should arbitrate.

    Arbitration and protection of individual liberties against the whim of the majority. Those are the sole legitimate functions of government; they are things that only government can feasibly, reliably, accomplish.

    (ended next post)

  • IanC

    Ernest makes the argument that a social contract is only one way. That is his first, greatest error. By definition it goes both.

    But, this being said; to all who think anarchy is the state of greatest freedom…

    I ask you; what would these people say about that statement, given how ‘traditionally moral’ Arizona in particular is? (Note: I AM NOT A MEMBER OF THIS GROUP)

    http://www.arizonapowerexchange.org

    I use this example because it all boils down to this; in a “NIFP” anarchy, these people would be lynched by any mainstream culture.

  • Bill Walker

    “you only have those individual common rights on right of ways like the sidewalk out in front or in collectively owned property for the explicit purpose designated for that (public forum).”

    Statist fantasy. The founders envisioned Free Speech, Freedom of Assembly, and Petition for Redress of Greivances as peacable means to harass recalcitrant would-be petty tyrants into compliance with the Constitution andWill of The People.

    “you have no freedom of speech right that will disrupt the business transactions in collectively owned property (IRS/postal service buildings) whose use is dictated by our delegated authority.”

    Use of a building that I was forced without consent to pay for is not “dictated” to me by anyone – except a dictator. The government disrupts our lives and worse at its whim – disrupting agencies of tyranny here and there is a fundamental Right, one heartily encouraged by several of the Founders.

    Slink back to your masters and whimper your worship of them.

  • Seth

    Rebuttal to Ian’s spin making Russell into a hero….

    http://www.conmon.com/drupal/blog_entry/seth_cohn/perhaps_it_is_a_vice

  • Pingback: Hammer of Truth » Another Take On The Russell Kanning Situation

  • LeoTolstoy

    BillW wrote:

    “The founders envisioned Free Speech, Freedom of Assembly, and Petition for Redress of Greivances as peacable means to harass recalcitrant would-be petty tyrants into compliance with the Constitution andWill of The People.”

    these are all individual rights held in common….you only have common rights in common areas.

    it doesn’t help one bit that most libertarians confuse common property with collective property – they are not the same!

    BillW wrote:

    “Use of a building that I was forced without consent to pay for is not “dictated” to me by anyone – except a dictator. The government disrupts our lives and worse at its whim – disrupting agencies of tyranny here and there is a fundamental Right, one heartily encouraged by several of the Founders.”

    and that fundamental right is an individual right held in common which the founders most certainly DID understand.

    blur the definitions at your own and the equal freedom movement’s peril.

  • http://intlib.blogspot.com Mike Lorrey

    IanC, how is it possible for a citizen to trespass on public property?

  • Pingback: mediapolemic.com » Blog Archive » Feds Raid Home of Heroic Free Stater

  • http://keenefreepress.com Russell Kanning

    An organized crime organization (the feds) told me to travel an hour to visit their court. I decided not to go. So they drug me there by force. 2 weeks later they let me go. We live in a police state, but we are working on that problem. We will win. :)

  • Pingback: Hammer of Truth » Feds Release the Outlaw Flier Distributor!

  • http://bullseyepoker.com Ralishaz

    I think the action having the greatest impact on the statists (and therefore the most effective for the cause)isn’t the distribution of flyers but in fact the failure to appear. Follow this. Time is the basis of everything. Without time nothing exists and when your time is up your life is over. A person is defined by their actions (or inaction) i.e. how did they spend the time alloted to them. If imprisoned or enslaved, someone else is mandating how you spend your time. Property represents the amount of your time you spent to aquire it or to aquire the money to purchase it. So life, liberty and property = time. If I show up in court then I agree that, against my will, the state has the right to take the following portions of my life: hrs round trip 2 court, hrs to pay 4 fuel to get there, hours for the hearing/trial, hrs of community service, hrs 2 pay the fines, many hrs 2 pay 4 my attorney etc. If true, then I am already a slave so why not just pay the IRS their blood $$ up front?

  • Pingback: Political News » Feds Raid Home of Heroic Free Stater