Category Archives: Law

U.S. Seizes Kim Dotcom Assets

Posted on by

Kim DotcomI’ve been following the saga of Kim Dotcom since January of 2012 when New Zealand police raided his home and charged him with copyright piracy. Things took another disturbing (at least for Libertarians) turn this weekend when a U.S. court decided that because he was a “fugitive” that the government was entitled to seize all of his personal assets despite the fact he hasn’t been convicted of a crime.

I’ve written about this entire misguided prosecution several times before and I don’t want to reiterate all my objections and will focus on this latest travesty today.

What happened is that the government of New Zealand, where Kim Dotcom resides, raided his house and took his property but the courts in that country decided that after nearly three years and no trial they needed to give him his stuff back. The United States then invoked a new legal proceeding claiming that Dotcom was a fugitive and as such they could seize his assets.

How Dotcom is a fugitive of the United States when he never lived in this country and never did business in this country boggles the mind. How the United States is entitled to steal … er seize … the assets of a person who was arrested, but untried, in another country is frightening. What can’t the courts decide? Who can’t they bankrupt?

The United States now owns $67 million worth of what used to be Dotcom’s property. His business is destroyed and he has yet to face trial three years after his initial arrest. The United States now owns his bank accounts, none of which resided in the United States! They own them! The accounts legally belong to the United States Government because a U.S. court decided the accounts of a man from another country was a fugitive.

There has been no trial and Dotcom wasn’t even legally allowed to defend himself in this latest phase. He now has no money to pay his lawyers to continue his case.

Who is safe from such rapacity?

Are you?

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Rape, Assault, Murder, Cooperate .. the Rene Enriquez Story

Posted on by

rene enriquezThe War on Drugs makes my stomach turn and I just read another story that brings me close to vomiting. Our police agencies are ferrying around a man convicted of rape, assault, and murder because he is has been cooperating with authorities for the last twelve years.

A fellow by named Rene Enriquez grew up in a middle class neighborhood with a businessman father but, for whatever reason, took up criminal activity. His first crime was raping an intoxicated woman as a juvenile and his list of misdeeds just gets more heinous from there. He helped organize the violent Mexican drug cartels and is clearly responsible for countless murders.

All this violence is fueled by money from the illegal drug trade. I’m not going to pretend there aren’t violent people who would commit crimes even if all drugs were legal but the level of violence and the organization of those who manufacture and distribute drugs is fueled by money.

That being said it’s not point of my blog today. Enriquez was essentially tortured in prison by being sent into isolation for twenty-four hours a day. After about tens years of this he decided he was willing to help police understand how the Mexican gangs operate and began cooperating with the FBI and local California police agencies.

He has acted as a witness in numerous occasions and is essentially on a speaking tour to promote his book. That’s what the original story is about. He was recently released from prison to give yet another speech. This time the paperwork wasn’t filled out properly and all the money spent to protect him from possible vengeful cohorts has come to light. The speech was for business leaders and top level law enforcement officers.

These same business leaders and law enforcement officers are speaking out on his behalf begging for this murdering rapist to be released. Why? Because he is cooperating. If released he will be moved into Witness Protection, given a new identify, and go on about his life.

I’m angry because it was drugs and their attendant money that led him down this vile path. I’m furious that this murdering, rapist is the darling of supposedly “tough on crime” high-ranking police officers and business leaders.

This is the place the War on Drugs has led us. We created Enriquez with our misguided laws and now we want to reward him for his criminal past. How many has he killed? Who knows and apparently who cares? He can help us perpetuate the War on Drugs so we can breed a thousand more just like him so let’s forgive him, let’s grant him parole. Yay!

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Daredevil Motorcycle Rider Arrested

Posted on by

Daredevil Motorcycle Rider ArrestedI just saw an interesting video at Yahoo News about a fellow that was riding a motorcycle while standing on the seat. He was chased down by the police, pulled into a gas station, and was arrested.

My question is what was he doing wrong? From the video he was keeping in his lane properly and wasn’t speeding. Now, that doesn’t mean he wasn’t breaking traffic laws while not on video but, from what I saw, I see no reason to arrest the guy.

I think the initial reaction of most people will be that he was riding recklessly and endangering those around him. That was certainly my first thought. I’ve been on the highway when motorcycle riders were engaging in reckless actions. Speeding, dodging between cars, and other violations that I think warranted a ticket.

After watching the video a few times I don’t see this arrest as warranted. He seemed to be as much in control of his vehicle as anyone else. He didn’t seem to be speeding. He wasn’t wildly changing lanes or doing anything that appeared to endanger those around him. There’s no doubt that what he was doing had a higher potential for causing an accident than driving from the normal seated position but can we start arresting people because it appears they might be doing something that could be dangerous but isn’t?

Can a police officer arrest you for steering with your leg if you are maintaining your lane properly? Can a restaurant be shut down for looking dirty but obeying the various regulations that govern the food service industry?

There are laws in various states about distracted driving but this fellow was clearly pretty focused on what he was doing.

I’m not opposed to traffic laws. I’m certain that the greatest danger I face on a daily basis is people in their cars who are driving poorly. That being said, if this guy was sitting in the seat no one would think that he was driving dangerously. His driving is solid. He obeys the traffic laws.

There is certainly the possibility that he was driving dangerously at some point earlier and if such video comes out I’ll understand the arrest. But, barring that, I think the arrest was an example of the police state in which we live. We live in a nation in which an officer who doesn’t like the way you’re doing something can decide to arrest you even though what it is your doing isn’t against the law.

What do you think?

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Police Contrived Conspiracy against Douglas Dendinger

Posted on by

dendinger-cell-phone-video-summonsI read a lot of stories about abuse of power from law enforcement officials in the news these days but this one ranks near the top. A fellow named Douglas Dendinger served a summons concerning a police brutality case involving his nephew.

The police officer, two prosecutor, the police chief, and three other witnesses described the handing over of the summons as a physical assault. Written testimony from multiple witnesses stated clearly that Dendinger assaulted the officer in the course of serving the summons. Dendinger has a prior drug conviction.

I want you to imagine the comments you might have made with just that information. What you might have thought about the story right at that moment. The police chief and six other witnesses accused a convicted drug user of assaulting an officer. It’s impossible they’re all lying. The guy is a convicted felon. The case involved his nephew.

I wonder how many times this exact same scenario has occurred all across this great nation of ours? There’s something new today. People have phones and can easily take video. I think you know where this is going.

The case finally got tossed out of court when the prosecutor’s office was forced to recuse themselves and the state took over. With the case dismissed Dendinger is now free to discuss the events in public. There is video. The police chief lied. The officer lied. The lawyers from the prosecutor’s office lied. Dendinger handed over the summons and walked away.

I want you to think about this case the next time you blindly support police officers against suspects. I’m not saying all police officers are bad. But when the bad officers are supported by the good officers we are all in trouble. The entire system may not be broken but it’s not working properly anymore. It is my opinion that good police officers are being driven from the force because they won’t go along with this sort of thing.

This antagonistic relationship between law enforcement and citizens is driven by the War on Drugs. The fact that municipalities increasingly rely on Seizure Laws to finance not only the police department but the entire city government. For all those great police officer out there; be aware that I’m not trying to attack you, I’m trying to save you!

This must stop. Police must return to Protecting and Serving, not intimidating, stealing, and using their position of power to attack anyone who dares question their authority.

When the citizens of this nation no longer trust the police force the entire country is in danger. We’re not there yet but it’s not good out there.

End the War on Drugs. Write the seizure laws off the books. City Hall finance your police department with what they need not the other way around. This is serious business.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Dominik Walker Sentenced for Murder because he sold Heroin

Posted on by

Dominik Walker Heroin OverdoseThe War on Drugs continues to threaten all our security and the case of Dominik Walker should send chills down the spine of every United States citizen.

Walker possibly sold heroine to Marlene Rose who then died of an overdose. Many people will say good. He was selling an illegal product and deserves a prison sentence. I couldn’t disagree more. This is such an egregious overreach of law enforcement that it makes my stomach turn. The implications are so far-reaching it’s difficult to fathom the possible repercussions.

Can a firearm dealer be charged with murder for selling a gun to someone who didn’t have a license and then went on to kill someone? Can a bartender be charged for murder for selling to a 20 year old who then got in a car accident in which someone died? Can a grocery store clerk be charged for murder for selling a cigarette to a 17 year old who then accidentally set fire to their house killing their entire family?

I’ll not tread lightly here. I’m a Libertarian who believes that the only drugs that are currently illegal are those the drug industry doesn’t control. Heroin is legal. Cocaine is legal. All types of drugs are legal but just in forms the pharmaceutical industry controls. Should a pharmacist be charged with murder when a patient overdoses on their pills? When the child of a patient overdoses because they took those pills?

The entire War on Drugs has caused nothing but misery and suffering for everyone. Drug users, drug dealers, law enforcement officers, innocents, and everyone else. We are all suffering and this apparently new legal precedent shocks me. Who can’t be charged when it becomes criminal to sell anything to anyone who goes on to commit a crime?

Someone who sells a stolen car should be charged with dealing in stolen property, not murdering the family the driver of the car hit in an accident. It’s madness. If someone dies from an herbal remedy manufacturer who engaged in false advertising should the retailer be held responsible for the death? I could go on forever. There is no end to the possible abuses.

I’m not one to bring race into every argument but the fact that Walker was black and Rose was white makes me question the entire prosecution. Do you think there would have been such a charge and sentence if Walker was a young white man from a good family and Rose a black woman from a poor neighborhood? I don’t.

End the War on Drugs. Manufacture, distribute, and sell. We are adults. If we make poor decisions we suffer the consequences. That’s the true price of freedom.

Tom Liberman

Don’t Jump to Conclusions – Road Rage Tammy Meyers

Posted on by

tammy_meyerThere’s been a pretty big story all over the news the last week and when I first read it the comments pretty much leaned in one direction but the story is quickly changing and comments are now going pretty much in reverse.

I don’t want to talk about the story so much in this blog post as the problems that come with leaping to a conclusion too quickly. That being said I do have to cover the story to explain my premise.

A woman was recently killed at her house. Her family reported to police that Tammy Meyers was involved in a near collision while teaching her daughter to drive and the people in the other vehicle followed her home and began shooting.

The initial reaction was that the people in the other car needed to be found and killed immediately. That there was no need for a trial when such vicious animals are involved.

The new story is that there was an driving incident but that Meyer returned home safely. She rounded up her son and at least one firearm before going back out to search for the offending vehicle. They could not find said car and returned home only to find that they had been followed and then the other group began a gun fight.

I would not be at all surprised to find the story changing even more. I’m going to withhold judgment for the moment although the family has already lied to police about the incident at least once which makes their entire story less plausible. The other party fled from the scene and has not yet turned themselves in which doesn’t put them in a particularly good light either.

At this point I think it’s entirely possible that Meyer caused the road rage incident, escalated it, and her son was the first to fire his weapon. That’s certainly the tone of the comments on the story now.

The reality is that I don’t know. That’s the lesson for everyone who was ready to pass judgment the moment the story broke and those with their opinions now. It’s a lesson we should all acknowledge. It’s easy to pass judgment without knowing all the facts. It’s a good idea to gather up information before making a committed decision one way or the other.

The reason this is such a good idea is that once you’ve committed to a particular opinion it’s not so easy to reverse. There is the natural human tendency to refuse to admit a mistake. And of course you cannot unsay anything you’ve said. If you’ve said something truly awful even an apology cannot always completely fix things.

Something to keep in mind.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Atheist Murderers – Craig Stephen Hicks

Posted on by

craig-stephen-hicksThere’s a pretty big story making the news in that a self-proclaimed atheist murdered three young students in North Carolina who were Muslims. I’ve written a number of times about the nature of fanatics and the underlying cause of violence.

I think I’ve been pretty consistent about my thoughts on this subject but they’ve come in a variety of posts over the last few years and these terrible murders made me suppose I might clarify my thinking on the subject in a single post.

What I see, and have seen in the past, when someone of a particular religious or non-religious persuasion murders people there is pretty much instantly a round of the blame-game.

I’ll state my position clearly. The blame goes to Craig Stephen Hicks. He was clearly suffering from a tremendous case of frustration which lead to rage and then to violence. I wrote about how frustration is often the underlying cause of the expression of rage through violence in another post. The fact that Hicks is an atheist has no bearing on the subject any more than if he was a Christian. I know that people will think I’m just saying this because I’m an Atheist myself but I’d urge you to read through my other posts on this subject. Let me explain my thinking to save you all that reading.

People who commit such murders are generally acting out of either extreme frustration or fanaticism and often both. People who are frustrated in life find something on which to focus their rage, be it religion or the lack of courtesy when others use parking spaces not assigned to them. When we get frustrated with things in life it leads us to anger. When the frustration persists eventually to rage. In those who lack the ability to control themselves, for whatever psychological reason, eventually to violence.

Today I blame the murderer not the religion or lack thereof. Tomorrow I’ll do the same even if the murderer is a Christian or a Muslim. Those who kill like to latch on to something to excuse their behavior. Religion is often a good excuse as is political affiliation. It doesn’t mean that religion has anything to do with it. The blame is clear in these cases and it will always be so.

I don’t blame Atheism. I don’t blame Muslims. I don’t blame the media stoking such rage with nonsensical news stories designed to inflame. I don’t blame the victims taking up parking spaces. I don’t blame the lack of laws restricting access to firearms. I blame the murderer.

We make our choices in this life. As a Libertarian I think people should have great freedom. With that freedom must come responsibility.

We make our choices and we should be rewarded or punished appropriately.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Caddie Bibs and Capitalism Collide

Posted on by

Caddie BibsI just finished reading a story about how the caddies on the Professional Golfer’s Association (PGA) tour are suing the PGA because they are forced to wear sponsor’s logos on their bibs and are not compensated for it.

The idea is that each PGA tour event has a corporate sponsor and that company pays the PGA a fairly hefty sum of money in order to have exclusive naming rights. The PGA collects an estimated $50 million in such funds each year. For this payment the company in question gets to splash their logo and name over everything involved with the event and this includes the bibs that the caddies wear.

Sponsorship on the PGA is big money. A player sponsored by a particular company gets paid for every second they are on television wearing that business’s brand on their apparel. The caddies are essentially walking billboards for whatever company paid exclusive naming rights that week and they think they deserve some of the money. I agree.

If the caddies wear the sponsor’s branding and it is part of what the companies are paying, then the caddies clearly deserve part of the money. It’s a shame that something reasonable couldn’t be worked out by both parties although it’s not too late for such an agreement. Sometimes it takes a lawsuit to get dialog started.

There are a number of ways this could go. The caddies might get some money. The tour might simply tell the caddies not to wear the logo on the bib anymore and the companies might pay less for sponsorship. The caddies might sell bib space to the highest bidder with the caddies for the better golfers earning more money.

I wouldn’t mind seeing it make its way through the courts so we could get a definitive legal decision but I suspect it won’t get that far.

What do you think? Are the caddies right or is the PGA tour?

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Illegal to Shovel Snow?

Posted on by

Boy Shoveling SnowThere’s an interesting little story in the news related to the blizzard that sort of wasn’t on the Eastern Seaboard this week. A couple of young men decided to go door-to-door soliciting their snow shoveling services. The problem is that they were doing it in a community that had passed an ordinance banning door-to-door solicitation.

The comment section of the story and apparently Social Media is filled with diatribes about how awful it was that these young entrepreneurs were defeated by the big and cruel government. I have some sympathy for those who are angry in that the ordinance in question wasn’t really designed to prevent young men selling snow-shoveling services but rather con-artist types from peddling their wares. However, I don’t have a lot.

The city in question, Bound Brook, N.J. has elected representatives who are tasked with passing various rules and regulations to make the city run more smoothly. Frankly, I don’t like it when people come pounding on my door here in U. City, MO and I wouldn’t mind at all if the city passed an ordinance banning the practice. The fact that after I refused snow-shoveling services once and the would-be entrepreneurs went into my garage and stole my snow shovel might make me a little bit of an angry old man on this one.

We live in the information age. If I need snow shoveling service then I can find it quickly and easily on the internet. I don’t want or need anyone at my doorstep. If the boys wanted to provide the service they could have emailed locals easily enough or created a quick website. If they had planned long enough they could have had fliers up before the storm hit. They could have told neighbors and friends of their plans. I’m just saying there were plenty of choices besides going door-to-door which was an illegal activity in their town.

The city council might amend the ordinance to allow for leaf raking and snow shoveling solicitation in the future although I’m certain those businesses have long since been taken over by professional services that hire young men like Matt Molinari and Eric Schnepf to do the work.

The days of lemonade stands and young men shoveling snow are all but gone, that’s reality. And stay away from my door!

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Josh Gordon’s Alcohol Suspension – Big Brother?

Posted on by

Josh GordonThere’s a fairly major sports story being reported all over the internet right now and it raises some interesting Libertarian questions for me. A football player named Josh Gordon is being suspended for one full season because he tested positive for … alcohol.

At first glance it would seem a severe punishment but there are some circumstances that make it more reasonable. The question it brings to my mind is that perhaps we as a society are too interested in the private lives of people and in the long run it does us no good. Let me detail the situation completely.

Gordon went to Baylor to play college football and received his first suspension when police found he and a teammate asleep at a Taco Bell with marijuana in their car. A year later Gordon tested positive for marijuana and was kicked off the team. He then sat out a year and became eligible for the NFL draft where the Cleveland Browns selected him in the second round.

He had an excellent rookie season and a spectacular second season making the NFL all-star game, the Pro Bowl. He was widely considered one of the best young wide receivers in the league. During that off-season he was arrested for driving while impaired and suspended for ten games during the 2014 season. When he returned he played well although had some internal discipline issues with the Browns. Because of the DWI arrest he became subject to an NFL policy where they are allowed to test him for alcohol in his bloodstream. If he is found to have such he then becomes a second time offender by the rules and is suspended for the season. That is what just transpired.

The rules were clear and Gordon apparently drank when he knew doing so would make him subject to severe penalties. That’s his responsibility and his mistake. I don’t exonerate or excuse him. What troubles me as a Libertarian is the policy itself. I can understand an escalation of penalties for criminal activities or methods taken to gain a competitive advantage on the field of play. The entire NFL anti-drug policy started out as a way to test for Performance Enhancing Drugs but it now reeks of Big Brother.

Why would Gordon be banned from ever drinking? How does that serve the NFL? I understand he had a DWI and if he did it again I would absolutely agree with the suspension. But drinking is not drinking while driving.

I find it to be a microcosm of what is going on in the United States. A person’s entire life is somehow open for review. Anyone who tells a joke that doesn’t come across as it was intended is vilified. While our government is busy finding a plethora of things to make illegal it seems we ourselves are finding new ways to judge one another negatively. We rule people out for jobs not based on their talent and ability but simply because they said or did something that some people find offensive.

It’s my opinion that we should be judged on our actual performance. If someone is a racist but makes hiring and firing decisions solely on performance then their racism is not my business. If someone is a drunk but does their work in superior fashion then their drinking choices are their decisions. If someone is gay, an atheist, an evangelical Christian, a Muslim, spends their free time watching porn, eats only fast food, drives a gas guzzler, drives a Prius, plays with dolls, or anything else legal that doesn’t effect their performance then I need to mind my own business.

Do I have to be friends with a racist? No. That’s my decision to make.

I understand the counterpoint. If a person is a racist I don’t want him working for me. If a person drinks I don’t want her working for me because my values are different. It’s my business and my rules.

I certainly think the NFL has the right to make their work policies and enforce them.

I’m just asking if all this judging is making us better or not? Are we eliminating highly qualified people from jobs because of things that are completely irrelevant to their performance? I’m of the opinion that we are and it’s not healthy. I can see how people will disagree.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Je Suis Charlie

Posted on by

charlie-hebdo-magazine-shootingI think almost all of us have read about the despicable attack in Paris against those who work for a French magazine called Charlie Hebdo. A bunch of religious nut-jobs decided they could further their cause by killing some people who posted cartoons of their prophet.

I’m not going to waste time denouncing these murderous scum. There are plenty of people already doing that. What I want to do today is try to explain, rationally and calmly, why such actions harm their cause greatly.

The thinking of the terrorist is that if they frighten people they can get them to do what they want. It’s a behavior that works in certain instances and thus those who promulgate its use are encouraged. The long term reality is far different. The embracing of terror as a weapon to achieve political gain is destroying the entire Muslim religion and laying waste to hundreds of thousands, nay, millions of young lives. While twelve innocent Frenchmen and women were killed, there is no doubt that the actions will result in the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent young Muslims.

Not just from retribution attacks but simply from the setback in relationship between nations. Countless young Muslim boys will look to this as an achievement and spend their own lives in the fruitless and eventually deadly pursuit of similar activity.

Young Arab men are dying everywhere in this world. Killing each other and trying to kill others. It’s a terrible waste of their lives.

This attack also inestimably set back any attempt to get people to respect Muslims, the Islamic world, or Arabic people in general.

If the terrorists hoped to have the cartoons of Charlie Hebdo splattered over every blog, every newspaper, every media outlet, papered onto every mosque in every western country, and generally shoved down the throats of Muslims everywhere, well, their actions were well-thought out.

If the murdering terrorists wanted to make enemies of rational people the world over then they have succeeded.

If they wanted Arabs who are trying to live in peace in Western countries to be beaten, ridiculed, or even killed by those seeking revenge, well, then their actions were certainly well-planned and carried out.

If, on the other hand, they hoped to gain respect from other people then they have failed. If the goal is to have people respect your prophet then the solution isn’t to murder those who don’t. That only generates hate. The result of the actions of these murderous scum will be felt by peace-loving Muslims all over the Western world. And not in a good way. If their goal was to gain respect, admiration, and acceptance of their religion … they have failed and failed tragically with horrific consequences for so many, mostly for those whom they think they represent.

So terribly sad. Twelve people dead and the exact opposite of the goal of the killers achieved. Everything they hoped to gain by their attack is destroyed instead. Stupidity. Useless rage.

The Muslim world better get their act together soon because enough attacks like this are eventually going to result in such terror and horror a million times over and not against cartoonists. Wake up Muslim world. Save yourself before it’s too late.

Je Suis Charlie
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Parental Responsibility in Murderous Children – Thomas Gilbert

Posted on by

tommy gilbertThe last few days have brought us a tragic story in that a man named Tommy Gilbert murdered his father. I’ve been keeping up with the sad story somewhat peripherally but I read a new article on the subject this evening and I was particularly struck by the comments sections.

The story is one we’ve seen before. 30 year old Tommy Gilbert largely seemed to live off of his father. Tommy graduated from Princeton with a degree in economics so the fact that he didn’t have a job and relied on an allowance from his father seems to have been more a matter of choice than lack of ability. Reading the comments it seems many people think that just anyone can get such a degree but that’s just not true. Perhaps he was given favored status because of his father’s wealth and alumni status but he still earned the degree. With his father’s name behind him it seems impossible that he could not have made some sort of reasonable living.

What I find interesting are the assumptions largely being bandied about in the comments section. The main assumption is that because Tommy had a weekly allowance and his apartment paid for by his father he was spoiled and the parents are to blame for such an entitled child. This latest article seems to indicate that Tommy’s relationship with his father was anything but good. He wasn’t spoiled by his father but apparently constantly ridiculed. Nothing he did was good enough according to at least what Tommy thought if not reality.

This would indicate a parent who is doing relatively the opposite of those assumptions. Tommy was getting a small allowance, $400 a week, and his apartment paid. While $1,600 a month and rent seems like a lot to many people it’s frankly almost minuscule to what many super-wealthy parents bestow upon their children. I would not call it an amount that allowed Tommy to live whatever party life he desired. This sounds like parents who were trying to force their son to get to work without completely cutting him off. I think it’s easy to judge but what parent out there doesn’t want to help their child?

I think the problems that Tommy had were of his own making. He had many advantages in life and failed to use them properly. That’s on him, not his father.

No big rant here today. I just think those that want to lay blame on Thomas are misjudging the situation. Even if Thomas was giving hundreds of thousands to his son it is still Tommy’s job to make his own way in the world.

Was Tommy spoiled and entitled? Unloved and never supported? Not easy to say for certain but I’ll tell you one thing. He’s a murderer and the only person he needs to blame for that is looking him in the mirror.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Friday after Holiday Law

Posted on by

Should be lawA friend of mine made the following post, in jest, on her Facebook page this morning and it’s got me thinking.

I think it should be a law that if a holiday falls on a Thursday you just get Friday off too. I’m just saying ….

Not surprisingly the comment has accumulated quite a few Likes although it’s still early in the morning. I’d imagine everyone who sees it will grin and agree. I’m certain that my friend isn’t actually calling for government intervention in the Thursday holiday situation but there is truth in humor. What the comment got me thinking about was the role of government and its legal arm in our lives.

We do have legally assigned holidays. If you work for a government agency there are certain days that you must give workers off. There are certainly optional religious holidays and cultural holidays where most employers give their employees the day off; these being Independence Day, Christmas Day, and the like.

I’m taking today off. I took last Friday off as well. I have accumulated enough vacation hours to manage to do so. I am logged in at work in case there is some sort of emergency but basically I’m going to sit at home and work and laze about the house. That’s certainly my right with my vacation days. I was aware of the Thursday holidays this year and planned accordingly. Could not my friend have done the same? Do we need to rely on government intervention to take a day off?

Again, I realize my friend’s comment was largely a joke but I do think there is some misguided mentality to the thought process of someone who would make such a joke. If you want to take the day off then make plans to do so. Talk to your employer. Make sure you can take the day off. Schedule your vacation days so that it is available to you. If your employer refuses to give you the day off then consider looking for a new job. That’s one of the reasons employers give optional paid holidays like Christmas and New Year’s off. If they forced their employees to work those days they would soon have no employees.

I work in the IT world and our technicians don’t get days like today off because there might be a client with an emergency. Normally it’s pretty slow because so many businesses are closed but it is important to have someone available in case of disaster.

I’m not making any big rant or complaint about some injustice today. I’d just like to say take a moment to think about how you can accomplish what you want without having to ask for government intervention. I think when the government gets involved legally in issues, even for the most well-meaning reasons, things often do not end up the way we originally envisioned.

Have a great day and a good luck with the coming year!

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

North Korea and the Blame Game

Posted on by

North Korea Sony AttackNorth Korea is good for it. Or at least that’s what it appears to be in the Sony Hacking case.

I was watching this case from before it became major news and when word first started to leak about North Korea and the hack being related to the release of The Interview I was extremely skeptical. I thought it sounded like classic misdirection from whatever group actually perpetrated the hack.

Then the U.S. government got involved in the form of the FBI and they seemed pretty clear that North Korea was involved in the case. Oh well, I thought to myself, I was wrong. More good reason not to jump to conclusions and write blogs before all the information is available. I’ve learned that lesson the hard way in the past and I try to be cautious.

This morning a read a news story from one of the worst of the slanted journalism sites indicating that the blaming of the hack on North Korea was premature. Before you go thinking the Daily Beast has got their act together you might read this story from the same publication that demands the U.S. take action against North Korea for the hack. I’m not going to spend time today attacking or praising the Daily Beast for their regularly insane and irregularly sane articles. Today I want to talk about perception.

North Korea was good for it. There are not many people in the world who have a high opinion of North Korea and that is for excellent reasons. It is the worst totalitarian state in the world. Their record on human rights is abysmal. There is every reason to think they would do something terrible like this. They would certainly be on the list of suspects. What’s important is that all this is merely conjecture.

After reading the article in the Daily Beast I went searching for more articles and there seems to be a fairly general consensus that the FBI laid out the blame without the evidence necessary to do so. That there were other potential parties involved and the investigation seems to have stuck upon the few bits of evidence that supported their presupposed notion. I’ve written about this tendency in smaller and more domestic situation as recently as last week.

I find it predictable, but still disheartening, that law enforcement agencies as lofty as the FBI apparently fall prey to the same sort of investigative blindness. I’m not going to say that North Korea is blameless because I haven’t seen all the evidence. I certainly won’t say that North Korea is behind the attack. I think the question still remains up in the air.

I will toot my own horn. I was skeptical of the blame North Korea game the second I heard that the hackers didn’t want The Interview released. I still think so. It appeared obvious to me that this was a case of one group attempting to lead the authorities on a wild-goose chase by putting out misleading statements.

The real take that I get from the story is that you should always be cautious about assigning blame to the person our party that appears to be guilty at first glance. It’s something we have the tendency to do all too frequently.

Don’t play the blame game. Look at the facts with an open mind and particularly examine those that don’t fit in with your preconceived notions. You might find the world a more complex and interesting place than you imagined.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Does Joe Wickline Call the Plays? It shouldn’t Matter!

Posted on by

joe wicklineI just found out about a situation that’s been brewing in NCAA football for a while now. For once it’s not about screwing over the players, everyone’s favorite whipping boys. This time it’s about a coach.

A fellow by the name of Joe Wickline worked for Oklahoma State as an offensive coach. In that capacity he advised the head coach and the offensive coordinator on what plays to run but did not make the final call. The nonsensical question the court faces is whether Wickline is calling plays for his new school, the University of Texas. Why is this such a crucial question? Because of insane employer contracts.

You see, Wickline was only allowed to leave Oklahoma State without paying a $600,000 penalty if he took a promotion at his new school. If the move was lateral, or technically a demotion, then he would be forced to pay the penalty. Insanity. I will never understand how a business can penalize an employee in the United States of America for taking another job. It’s our right to work where want and when we want as long as an employer is willing to pay us. No one should have any say about that except me and the person who wants to hire me. If I steal company ideas or clients that’s another matter but if I simply want to move from one company to another it’s completely and totally my decision.

You might wonder the point of the clause in the contact. I’ll tell you. It’s a nasty, and in my opinion clearly illegal, way to make other schools pay when they hire someone who works for the first school. In the article I’ve linked the lawyers for Oklahoma State lament the fact that Texas is not paying the fee because everyone does it! Madness. It puts a huge chill on the ability of any employee to actively sell their services. If a potential employer has two candidates but one comes with a half a million dollar fee associated with him or her that clearly effects hiring practices. How this is not illegal mystifies me.

Shame on the anyone who writes such a contract. Shame on any judge who upholds it. Capitalism depends on people being able to sell their services to the highest bidder. It’s not just about making an environment where competition thrives and government doesn’t stifle it. It’s not just for the company, it’s all about the employee as well. Contracts like this stifle capitalism and the free market.

In the immortal words of Mr. Mackey, “m’kay?”

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

More Casualties from the War on Drugs – Baby Phonesavanh

Posted on by

phonesavanh_familyLiterally not a week goes by that I don’t spot a disturbing story about over-zealous police and the ridiculous War on Drugs that is nothing more than a giant promotional device to make drug-dealers rich. This one makes my stomach hurt. After reading this story I want to punch someone. I’m not a violent man and being all of 5′ 7 1/2″ tall and weighing 155 pounds I’d probably get beat up in the end anyway. Still. It’s infuriating.

I hate you proponents of the War on Drugs. I despise your shortsighted insanity. Your insane logic. Your willful ignorance of reality. Your war has cost so many people so much. This includes so many good law enforcement officers who died or were destroyed while trying to carry out your stupid laws. So many people hurt and only pain and violence the result. The War on Drugs has brought on so much more violence than the drug use it was purportedly designed to prevent.

Why am I so mad? I’ll sum up the story of the Phonesavanhs. In an unrelated incident their home burned. So they moved in with family. The estranged son of said family was a meth addict and dealer. The boy had stolen from the family and was not welcome home. Had not been seen in the house since the Phonesavanhs moved in. They didn’t know him although knew he was unwelcome. A wonderful DEA agent named Nikki Autry used statements from a drug informant whose name we will never know to gain a no-knock warrant on the house.

By no-knock they mean kick down the door. Judge James Butterworth authorized the warrant. Apparently no one bothered to learn that the house was overflowing with children including 18-month old Bounkham Jr “Bou Bou”. The officers kicked down the door. They hurled flash grenades randomly about. One of them flew into the crib. The crib!! The doctor described the injuries thus: His chest wall had torn down to muscle and it tore his face down to bone, down to his teeth.

The officers snatched up the baby and rushed him to an ambulance. The parents, worried, asked if anything was wrong. He lost a tooth they were told.

Agent Autry retired almost immediately. Judge Butterworth resigned from the bench. No penalties were exacted on either of them.

The investigation leading up to the raid was called hurried and sloppy according to the grand jury convened to see if any officers, or anyone at all, should be held responsible. No charges were filed.

Medical bills, you ask? Over a million dollars. The state’s responsibility you might wonder? Zero. Protected by laws designed to shield them from any damage they do while enforcing the War on the Drugs.

Oh how I hate thee War on Drugs. You make my heart sick. You make my mind burn with rage. What can I do to stop this insanity?

I write my blog. I write my books. I want to do more.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Which Crime to Investigate – Sex Scandal or Burglary?

Posted on by

Amy Bramlett InnocentI just read about an interesting case in which a teacher, Amy Bramlett, from San Bernadino, CA was accused of having sexual relations with a pair of her students. Three months into the investigation all charges have now been dropped. The details of the case bother me greatly. Read on.

All the information isn’t in yet but the it looks to me like a rather typical case of overzealous police officers backed up by a prosecutor who saw a high profile case as a way to gain advancement.

The story is relatively straightforward. Two boys broke into their teacher’s home and were caught. One boy panicked and made up a story about having sex with the teacher as being the reason why they were there. The second boy denied this repeatedly but was held in custody by the police and questioned for many hours until he too eventually admitted to doing something that he did not do. It’s impossible to guess what sort of trickery the police used to convince the boy to lie but it’s extremely informative as to the tactics our officers use to coerce admissions of guilt.

We’ve all seen various police dramas where officers lie to suspects and use other psychological tactics to gain an admission of guilt. What’s rather shocking about this one is that the tactics were used to get the criminal to lie about his own activity, not admit the truth. The boy was caught in the middle of a robbery and convinced by the police to lie and blame someone else. If you think this is an isolated case you should spend some time looking up Innocence Project.

The first boy went home and immediately told his father that he had lied. Authorities were informed that the boys recanted their story very early in the case but the zealous prosecutor pursued matters for three more months even going as far as to bring charges against Bramlett. In the meantime Bramlett was removed from the classroom and stigmatized in her community.

I well-understand it is the job of the police to vigorously investigate crime and of prosecutors to seek convictions for said crimes. It just seems to me that in this case the choice between a mundane burglary and a sensationalist teacher/student sex scandal drove the investigation rather than actual evidence. I wonder how often this happens.

Again, there’s a lot of information still out there but my initial reaction is to lay blame largely on the prosecutor for steering the investigation the wrong way. Certainly the police with their aggressive questioning in the wrong direction bear some responsibility but the actual filing of charges and three months of wasted time and surely considerable money falls squarely on the prosecutor. Not to mention the damage done to Bramlett which, despite all apologies, can never be undone.

Follow the evidence, I say. Even if you don’t like where it’s going. It makes us all safer.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Police and Rams – To Bully and Intimidate

Posted on by

CrybabyThe Ferguson situation here in my hometown of St. Louis has been making headlines for quite a while although I’ve refrained from posting on it largely because I don’t have much to add to the dialog. But things got weird during the St. Louis Rams football game this past weekend against the Oakland Raiders.

I have season tickets to the Rams and was at the game. My seats give me a good view of the player entrances and I saw the Rams receivers gather and raise their arms before they came onto the field. At the time it didn’t occur to me that they were showing support for the protesters in Ferguson and no one around me seemed to note it either. It quickly became a big story.

I don’t want to lure you into my blog today thinking it will draw conclusions from the tragic events in which Officer Wilson shot and killed Michael Brown. Nor will I be talking about the despicable people who burned and looted during the riots. I won’t be talking about the peaceful protesters. What I will be talking about is the St. Louis Police Department’s reaction to the Rams receivers pregame jaunt onto the field.

What the police force did was demand an apology. Really? Your job is to protect and to serve. Not get bent out of shape because someone disagrees with you. Your job it to protect the rights of the people not to whine like a little baby when someone dares take a stance against you. Your job is quite the opposite. It is to protect those who take such unpopular stances. If a man calls you a pig on the street while peacefully protesting something, your job is to protect that man from anyone who tries to assault him. That’s your job. That’s the oath you swore.

Is it fun to protect people who disagree with you? No. It’s your job.

Do you swear to only protect and serve people who like you? No. You swear to protect and serve us all. No matter our opinion of you.

Stop crying for apologies because your panties are in a twist because someone insulted you.

A Rams official tried to reach out and they threw him immediately under the bus claiming he apologized. They sent out memos embarrassing the official. They tweeted the definition of an apology. Essentially they tried to bully both the NFL and the St. Louis Rams into doing what they wanted. So here we have a police agency’s top officials acting to bully and intimidate anyone who dares disagree with them. Sound familiar?

The police are saying, in no uncertain terms, don’t cross us. We’ll hit you, we’ll hit you hard, and make you regret it. Sound familiar? Top-down leadership makes its way directly to the ranks.

Oh, and by the way, Officer Wilson was attacked and had every right to defend himself. Could he have handled the entire situation better, probably, but when you’ve got a giant man beating on you, you have every right to defend yourself.

Demand an apology? Give me a break.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

Still Rolling on – U.S Government v. Kim Dotcom

Posted on by

Kim DotcomI’ve written about the now almost three year saga of Kim Dotcom who was arrested in New Zealand at the behest of the U.S. government who in turn was working for their corporate masters the RIAA. Whew.

I wrote here how the arrest itself was largely illegal, based on illegal surveillance, and he was mistreated while in prison.

I followed up with a misleading headline that called Dotcom a cyber-fugitive. More on this in a moment.

The story continued when a judge ruled that the nation of New Zealand is not allowed to keep his possessions indefinitely.

As part of the deal returning his possessions the United States now argues that Dotcom is a fugitive and not entitled to use his money to defend himself in court. It’s a ridiculous argument because Dotcom is exactly where he was when he was arrested. The United States wants to Extradite him but he is opposing this which is completely legal. Government stooges working for the recording industry are simply throwing every procedural obstacle they can in the way to further bankrupt their enemy. No one really cares about “winning” the case. They are punishing their opponent financially.

I called the government’s argument ridiculous but I want to explain why. Dotcom is trying to sell his car to help pay for his legal defense. The government wants to say because he’s a fugitive he can’t do so. I want you to imagine a world where government forces can arrest you for anything they desire and without a trial seize your money and possessions for years and when forced to release some of it simply claim you are not allowed to use it for legal defense. To sum up. The government can come by your house, take almost everything, and not allow you to use what’s left for legal defense despite the fact that you haven’t been found guilty of anything.

The original raid was madness. The seizures despicable. This application of the Doctrine of Fugitive Disentitlement is frightening. It is an extension of police force that is essentially unlimited dictatorial power. No one can be secure from such power. Even the wealthy can easily be curbed of their rights when the government simply make it illegal for them to use their money without even a trial.

I rightly worry about the extension of police power at a local level and I’ve written about seizures laws on a number of occasions and this is merely an international version of the same thing. At what point does the government and particularly their police arm present more of a threat to the population than criminals? I honestly think we are there.

I’m a 50 year old white man with enough money to not worry about retirement. When someone like me is honestly afraid of the police there is a serious problem. When I see police at every level doing the work of the highest bidder and far more concerned about seizing money and destroying enemies than preventing crime there is a problem.

I worry that someone in power might decide I’m the bad guy. Charge me with a crime and take my things. To all apparent appearances such could easily be done and there is almost nothing I could do about it.

Maybe we all should be worried.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Broken Throne
Next Release: The Black Sphere

Colorado Officials Paint Edible Marijuana as Hazard to Children

Posted on by

edible marijuana productsThe Centennial State of Colorado was the first in the Union to make marijuana legal to all adults and ever since those opposed have been trying to find loopholes in various regulatory laws to peel back the stated will of the people. It’s enough to make this libertarian have a sip of his wine that is sitting in his unlabeled glass looking an awful lot like grape juice.

The latest attempt to override the fair and legal vote of the people comes from the Department of Health and Environment of Colorado. They are of the opinion that marijuana infused chocolate and candy poses a threat to children because they could accidental ingest it. This is true. It’s certainly possible for a child to eat a brownie that has pot in it. It’s also possible for a child to drink any of a number of alcoholic drinks that taste like candy. It’s also possible for a child to eat a slice of rum cake or a bourbon infused chocolate. It’s possible for them to eat a pill that looks like a vitamin. Parents that have such things in the house would be wise to inform the children of their danger and keep them in safe places.

Marijuana chocolate and candy is clearly labeled. It is only when the label is peeled and a person starts to consume the item that it is no longer labeled. A lollipop in its wrapper is marked as having marijuana in it. The forces at work here hope to convince you that they are doing it on behalf of the children just as they were against the legality of marijuana to save the dogs. The reality is they are against the legalization of marijuana for other reasons but they lost fairly in a voter initiative and don’t like it. This is modern government at its worst.

If they really believe that marijuana is such a danger then they need to take their chances with the voters. I’m guessing they know this route is hopeless and therefore have decided on another avenue. I’m certainly not saying they don’t have the right to try and convince legislators to overturn the will of the people. That’s what a Representative Republic is all about. The will of the people is secondary to the legislative power of the people’s representatives. If the representatives pass laws we don’t like then we have the ability to remove them. They have the right to pass any law they want as long as it doesn’t conflict with our rights as laid down in the Constitution.

What I especially despise is the largely Republican led effort that tells us quite clearly the state needs to be in charge of our lives. That we cannot manage to keep our children safe without the government telling us what we can and cannot have in our houses. That because a few people are not careful with their marijuana infused products that the rest of the people of Colorado must give up their freedom so that the government can protect them.

Marijuana products are clearly labeled. That’s enough. The government cannot and should not protect us from every ill that might befall us. I despair for this country.

I always tell my friends that if they truly understood the core philosophy of a Libertarian they would join us. I’ve always believed that most people really want a limited government that helps where required but largely allows people to make their own way in life. I’m beginning to suspect that perhaps I was wrong. Perhaps most people really do want to tell everyone else how to live. That they want to tell me what weapons I can own, what food I can willingly and eagerly put in my body, with whom I can have sex, and what I should believe as far as religion is concerned.

People apparently want a police state that guarantees them safety while looting them of their freedom.

Not me.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Edge
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books