Freedom: Liberty for Security?

Freedom is an intangible item, of which most people on earth have not had enough. Freedom is gooey and defined differently by many. One basic definition many may have is,"You're allowed to do anything you want as long as it does not hurt anyone else and their property". This is again, very open to interpretation and idealistic, however, I believe this is actually where we need to be, more-so than where we are now. I know, there's lots of things that can 'hurt' somebody but be totally within the limits of ones freedoms, but I am talking more just in the physical sense. Anyways, where we are now is not desirable by many who are understanding, or know already, what freedom is. We have definitely lost our grasp on how important this unseen force is in our everyday lives. Freedom is like the wind, you can't see it but you can see the effects of it, if you just know what those effects are. Some that I notice in everyday life are things such as recycling, curb appeal (outer house decor) and your right to travel.

Recycling is something that I don't see much use for, unless it's done locally, like at your house. Composte, for example, is a great way to recycle, if you're gonna use it at your own leisure. But when it's trucked off to some plant or whatever, repackaged and shipped out again, or just let to rot at some composte location, that just wastes any good that can come from using composte. It would be just as costly to leave it in a landfill and be done with it. And the argument that recycling plastics is better for our environment. Well there's lots of information out there that states otherwise and it's usually the argument of transportation and processing of these plastics and then the fact that there more expensive in the end than new plastic. Besides all the arguments for and against recycling, the fact is that it should be someones free choice to recycle or not. Freedom to do what you want with your garbage and not being told how to sort it, or get fined, is the key. It's just one more way to make criminals out of hard working, mind-their-own-business type of folks that most of us are.

Aside from recycling, there are all these by-laws to ticket offenders if there grass grows too long or if the weeds are getting too out of control and such. Or overzealous landlords who like to run a townhouse community just so or else you'll be kicked out or whatever. This is a total infringement of ones right or freedoms. I personally don't care how people take care of their lawns or outer decor. Sure it might be an eyesore, but freedom is free to choose that, and not to have the community or bylaw officers tell you how to run your life. This is encroaching the boundaries of ones personal choice. I don't think it should matter what someone elses property looks like. I think the social pressure to keep up with everything in life is enough, nevermind having to get ticketed if you want, or don't care, the lawn to look a certain way or threat of losing your chance to renew a lease if your christmas lights are up all year round. Freedom of choice people, if you, or me, want to be lazy about christmas lights or mowing the yard, then let us/them, it's not hurting anybody and some people really need to worry about themselves more than others.

Now, on to the right to free travel. I don't know the laws much about this except from experience but some things really bug me about the traffic violations one can ensue very easily. These are things like seatbelt tickets, driving without a license or insurance and red light/speeding cameras (film or video). First off, seatbelt tickets, these are a personal choice and not at the power of the province or feds to make me or anyone else comply. This does not affect other people, physically. If someone wants to take a risk with their own life, let them. They should know better. However, it's funny that sometimes seatbelts don't save lives or the absence of a seatbelt put the driver in better circumstances when an incident did occur. I'm not sure how the numbers work out but I would say that it's about 50/50 where seatbelts saved someones life opposed to not wearing a seatbelt saved someones life. I have heard many stories about people who did not wear seatbelts, and if they did, they would have been dead or at least worse off (but who's really to say, it's like predicting the future). Anyways, it still seems to me that I should have to pay the officers wages, by taxes, to give me a ticket, which I then have to pay, for something that should be my freedom of choice. Same with driving without insurance or a license. First of all, I do think licensing is a good idea, however, parents and sane people know when someone should be able to drive or when they themselves are ok to drive, if they use good judement. Now, I know not many have that supposedly, but don't you think if we actually needed to use our own judgement, we would still have it??? Back to my point though, just because I may not have my license on my persons at the time of a ticket or whatever, doesn't mean I can't drive. It just means I forgot it at home or lost it. This should not result in a huge fine and towing fees and all the rest of the hassle that goes along with this. If the cop really is there to serve and protect people, he could escort the person home to find his license and if he/she doesn't have one, then ticket them for not having one (this is assuming we should still require licenses for 'travelling'). Same goes with insurance, health insurance is an option (other than basic coverage), so why can't we have the option to have car insurance. Again, it should be freedom of choice to take that risk of paying the rest of our lives or have insurance to save us from that burden. But the choice should be yours. And if you can't prove you have insurance because you don't remember where the hell you put it last time or it renewed recently, you get an order to appear in court and maybe pay a hefty fine if you don't have insurance, which is usually more than insurance anyways. This is all, I feel, another weight on the working class. Another tool to conform our society, just like the last two paragraphs. Also, I'm sure everyone gets pissed off at traffic cameras or photo radar, mainly because we getting ripped off. They are not making anyone slow down so how is this fulfilling the general mandate of the authorities to 'serve and protect', as it does neither. The other thing about this monitoring of people, in motor vehicles, is the fact that we're being tracked and traced by license plate scanners. Just talk to your local police or RCMP detachment and ask them about license plate scanning technology. I know that they don't have it in the city of Edmonton, but it exists people, and while nobodies watching a bill could pass to do just this. It already has in places like New York and other cities, just a matter of time before it's proposed to be implemented to ours. I thought we were free to travel unrestricted and, well, free. Also, I almost forgot to mention, the drunk driving checkstop is a blatant disreguard for this freedom but as a police officer said, and I quote,"Yeah, but it's for the safety of the community". But I guess for the safety of others, we have to submit to this tyranny.

I hope people can start to change the debate on these topics and others from the 'how to implement' to 'should we even be implenting' and then we might have a more free society.

Edmonton Questions 9/11

Edmonton Questions 9/11
Saturday May 2, 2009 1-5pm
Stanley Milner Library
7 Sir Winston Churchill Square
(100 Street & 102 Avenue)
Main Theatre (downstairs)

Guest Speakers Journalist, Author and Media Critic Barrie Zwicker
Co founder of Pilots for 9/11 Truth Robert Balsamo
Presented by Edmonton 9/11 Civil Information & and the friends and supporters for 9/11 truth.
Sponsors include : Earth General Store, Edmonton Small Press, The Unbought and Unbossed radio show CHLY Nanaimo B.C.

Please plan to attend if you're in the area, if not, check out the vids that I'm sure will be posted and just get active against the NWO, thanks.

Keep our right to bear arms!

FIREARMS LICENSING:
My love-life is no business of the government!
I am Paul Rogan, publisher of Canadian Access to Firearms, and a friend of Pierre Lemieux He exceptionally allowed me to use his mailing list to write to you (without compromising the confidentiality of the mailing list). You will see that this exceptional e-mail is for a good cause.
I am helping raise money for Pierre Lemieux's fund in his challenge to the Canadian gun controls following the revocation of his right to have "armes for his defence" to paraphrase our English forebears. He will be in court in Mont-Laurier on May 26 and 27.
See http://www.pierrelemieux.org/ and especially http://www.libertyincanada.com/.
More details on Pierre's case are available at http://www.pierrelemieux.org/policecanada/cafc-cfc.html.
The gist of the case is that, in renewing "his" firearms licence (as he is forced to do every five years), Pierre refused to answer a question about his love life. Question 6(d) asks, "During the past two (2) years, have you experienced a divorce, a separation, a breakdown of a significant relationship, job loss or bankruptcy?" As an answer, he wrote, "My love affairs are none of your business." This form, like all the documents related to his case, is available on-line at the above address.
In the National Post of June 2, 2007, George Jonas wrote a column about Pierre's refusal to answer one of the intrusive questions. And Pierre himself wrote a column in the Ottawa Citizen of November 8, 2007.On December 1, 2007, Pierre received a registered letter from the Québec provincial police, which administers the federal gun control in cooperation with the RCMP's Miramichi bureaucracy. It was a "Notice of refusal to issue a firearms licence". The reason is clearly stated as his refusal to answer the intrusive question.
As a consequence, he was also notified that the "registration certificates" of his legally registered guns were revoked.
He filed a motion of appeal before the Québec provincial court. While he asks for the licence refusal to be quashed and apologies be issued, he argues that the Firearms Act and related Criminal Code provisions are unconstitutional, and that he does not need any licence to exercise his traditional liberties - his, and our, RIGHT to possess firearms
His pro bono counsel is Richard A. Fritze, the well-known Alberta lawyer and committed defender of firearms owners and their rights. Financial support for travel and accommodation expenses, including for their high-powered expert witnesses, in what promises to be a long, difficult and protracted battle to reclaim our liberties is needed. The experts are all attending for only the cost of their travel and accommodations, a very generous donation in and of itself, but one which shows the level of dedication and commitment to this vital cause.Pierre represents the best chance the gun community in Canada has had since Oscar Lacombe in 2001.
Already help is being pledged to his case (more details will be provided in my newspaper, Canadian Access to Firearms, regarding donors and expert witnesses). Richard Fritze is offering his time - for free at this stage of the proceedings (the Provincial Court) - a contribution worth over $50,000. My newspaper is giving three full pages of advertising, worth $500 each, and I have myself thrown another $500 cash in the pot. Mr. Barry Holland, has already donated $1,000. The Canadian Shooting Sports Associations (CSSA) has pledged $500. Other donations are starting to come in. But we need more.
We should be able to keep the out-of-pocket expenses to reasonable limits - we estimate we need around $10,000 in Provincial Court - again excluding Richard's time, which is provided free.
TAX DEDUCTIBILTY FOR ALL DONATIONS
All it will take is for 100 of us putting up $ 100, or 200 of us putting up $ 50.
Better, I suggest that you give $168, $268 (or $568), in "honour" of the 1995 Bill C-68 which brought us this infamy.
The Canadian Constitution Foundation (www.canadianconstitutionfoundation.ca) has graciously agreed to help us, so that any donor of $68 or more will receive a charitable tax receipt making the full donation deductible from your taxable income.
There are several ways to make your donation:
1) You can send your check directly to CCF:
Canadian Constitution Foundation
235, 3545 - 32 Ave. N.E., Suite 641
Calgary, AB Canada T1Y 6M6
Do not forget to indicate on your cheque that that you wish to donate to the "Pierre Lemieux Legal Fund".
2) Go to www.canadianconstitutionfoundation.ca and make your donation online credit card.
Go to "Donate to CCF"
Go to "Optional: Designation"
Mark the "Property rights research and court cases" tab, the fifth one down on "Optional Designation" .
ALL donations made under this option will be earmarked exclusively for the Pierre Lemieux's Defence fund.
If you want your donation to be reflected immediately in our statistics, feel free to send me an e-mail (firearms@northwestel.net) confirming the amount of your donation
Any money over and above what the April 26-27 court case will cost will be spent on the follow-up court battle - or on similar cases. If we win, it is certain the Crown will appeal. If we lose, we will appeal.I know we can do it!
My warm thanks to all for taking the time to acquaint yourself with this case! Looking forward to your kind and generous response!
Paul Rogan Publisher of Canadian Access
Nota Bene: Please feel free to forward this appeal to anyone you know who is interested in this cause. With our warmest thanks!