L. Neil Smith's
Number 72, May 15, 2000
Armed Informed Mothers' Day

Letters To The Editor

by Our Readers
Send Letters to TLE@johntaylor.org


You were dead on about S&W semiauto's versus revolvers. Even when they stole the design from Glock for their Sigma, they still made a piece of crap. Not only do they not work well, they also break very often. And getting parts out of S&W is a pain.

That is one of the major reasons that departments switch to and stay with Glock. They almost never break and replacement parts are readily available and virtually drop-in.

However, you forgot one more Smurf and Weasel stupidity.

On many of their current production guns they are going to plastic internals. Now, I have nothing against plastic guns -- I have three Glocks, one of which I won at a Glock Match.

But, my gunsmith tells me that the parts which are being made in plastic are parts in which plastic wears much more quickly than metal. (As in the metal part lasts forever and the plastic part months or years.)

They've done this with revolvers, semiautos and almost all the Walther stuff they produce.

But that's OK. Dan Wesson is back in business. They make a revolver that'll accept .45 ACP and .45 Winchester Magnum!

Tod Casasent <muhgi@yahoo.com>

From: Carlos A. Alvarez <carlos@THERIVER.COM>
To: AZRKBA@asu.edu <AZRKBA@asu.edu>
Date: Monday, April 03, 2000 10:49 AM
Subject: The strategy of encroachment

Some on this list may remember, or have read about, what happened when the social security ponzi scheme was first suggested. There was a national outcry at the thought of everyone being forced to have a national identity document. There was also the outcry against the obvious pyramid nature of the proposed social security system. To quell this, and pass the scheme, lawmakers assured us that it would be strictly voluntary (except for railroad workers, whom the scheme was originally intended for), and that it would NEVER be used for identification. Where are we today?

A similar pattern emerged when the driver's license was suggested. Of course, then it was proposed as merely a convenience for the traveler, and for his own protection. Slowly it was required for a few more things, and insurance companies popped up to offer to "protect" you from the acts of reckless drivers. Of course, these guys wanted a way to keep track of you, so they required the newfangled license in order to provide you the "benefit" of insurance. Look where we are today.

What has brought about this reminiscing? The current example being set by our friends in green, the Border Patrol division of the INS. Many years ago INS, and its enforcement division, were created to "protect" us from the scourge of those damn foreigners. Americans being xenophobes to some extent, liked the idea. They would only be on our borders keeping out the undesirables, of course.

Here in Arizona, a novel experiment was tried about ten years ago. They moved away from the border, and set up checkpoints in a few places on roads that lead from the border. Just North of Nogales and Douglas are a couple of them. But they were only a couple miles North, just to catch any wetbacks that should jump the fence and then get on the highway. You know how many starving, desperate Mexican border-jumpers have cars, right? Of course, they were also there to "protect" us from the evil Evil EVIL drugs that are brought into the country. I guess someone forgot to add the "D" to "Immigration and Naturalization and Drug Service", INS.

This went on for a few years, and then they tried another experiment. They moved many miles North, to Peck Canyon road. This, purportedly, so they could catch even more of those Mexicans who throw their cars over a fence and then drive across sand, onto the interstate in search of the American Dream.

Sure, there were some complaints about racism and profiling. Well, if you're at a checkpoint looking for Mexicans, how can you claim with a straight face that you're not?! Of course, much like Cheech Marin learned, it doesn't matter if you were born in East LA. If you look the wrong color you are asked for your traveling papers. But the complaints were washed over, the media got bored, and hell, it was just those damn Mexicans complaining anyway.

So this past Saturday, the experiment reached Phase Three. They moved again, this time about 50KM within our borders. This puts them about half way to Tucson. Who wants to bet me against me that one day I'll be driving down Valencia and be forced to stop for an immigration and drug checkpoint? I'll give you odds. Real high ones.

This is all part of getting us accustomed to police presence, checkpoints, showing our papers, and having our property and persons searched. You see, we're a nation of lazy people, and conformists. As long as it doesn't surprise us, we'll go along with anything.

I'm not lazy, and any of you who have met me in 3D would hardly call me a conformist. I'd like to apply a little pain and pressure on the Border Patrol. I need about fifteen people who will join me in writing a few letters to the media, and Border Patrol themselves. Also, someone with experience with FOIA requests is critical. If you will help me, and I promise to make it as easy as possible and not too time-consuming, please e-mail me PRIVATELY, not on the list.

Now for some fun, a transcript of my encounter with the checkpoint guys on Sunday is below. They were waving everyone through when I came back from Patagonia on Saturday, but stopping everyone and looking in/under cars on Sunday. Warning, strong language ensues, which I used for effect, to express emotion, and to put them on the defensive.

BP: Hi.

ME: (With arm outstretched) SIG HEIL!

BP: What??

ME: Just saluting Der Fuhrer's good soldier, out here looking for the Unclean and their contraband.

BP: Sir, I don't think that's necessa...

ME: I'll tell you what's fucking unnecessary, is a dozen of you assholes sitting around on your asses here leaching your living off the sweat of honest Americans, now THAT'S fucking unnecessary!

BP: Sir, I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't use such lang...

ME: Yeah, and I'd fucking appreciate it if you wouldn't harass citizens who are traveling peacefully.

BP: Sir, we're just trying to do a job out here.

ME: BULLSHIT! For one thing, your job is to patrol the borders, see how that's right on your badge there? Not to sit up here and harass traveling citizens. And two, when the Nazis went on trial in Nuremburg the "we're just following orders" defense didn't work, did it? (The officer's name was Helman...I love irony.)

BP: Sir, can I ask you to pull up over there and speak to my supervisor?

ME: Ask all you want, won't mean I'll do it.

BP: Sir, I have to insist that you...

ME: And I have to say, "Fuck off." Look, what are you going to do if I refuse to cooperate, if I just leave?

BP: You really need to just pull over and talk to him.

ME: No, what I really need is to get home and... (Supervisor walks up, and is now speaking to the officers standing by my car. I get a map out from the door pocket and unfold it. He comes to talk to me.)

BP: What seems to be the problem here?

ME: You guys are fucking lost!!

BP: Excuse me?

ME: (Holding map of AZ) See this? This is Mexico, and this, this is the border. Up here is the land we USED TO CALL AMERICA, until you worthless assholes turned it into Germany.

BP: Look sir, never mind, why don't you just move along now.

ME: (Deflated, I rolled up the window and dropped the accelerator.)

Carlos Alvarez, Tucson, AZ, USA, Earth, Sol System, Milky Way Galaxy

Carlos A. Alvarez [carlos@theriver.com]

Dear John:

I was reading your TLE#71 and was appalled and sickened to see the article entitled "Libbits, WE OUGHT TO LICENSE THEM THE WAY WE DO CARS". [in "LibBits" - ed.]

What were you thinking John? Is this a joke, or some kind of sarcastic hoax? I certainly hope so.

As an avid reader of TLE, I find it important, scary (the more I learn about our corrupt "repugnicrat" government and the utter stupity of the American "sheeple", the more afraid for the future of our nation, myself, and my family, I become), and have found it to be absolutely required reading for all libertarian freedom lovers and free thinkers.

(As an aside, I would prefer to see more balanced coverage of the evils of victimless crime laws, such as the drug war, police checkpoints, the runaway growth of government spending and power at all levels, and the many other fundamental libertarian ideas which are important to freedom lovers and free thinkers. As important and indispensable to our freedom as the 2nd Amendment is, sometimes the TLE seems to be an endless tirade on the right to bear arms, ignoring all other issues. There are 9 other Amendments in the Bill Of Rights of our precious Constitution after all!)

I must say though, that after reading the above mentioned article, I have scarcely seen such a sickening piece of socialistic, totalitarian, nonsensical crap in all my life.

PLEASE tell me this is a joke.

If it is not a joke, please cancel my subscription to TLE immediately. Any organization/publication/individual who would even consider supporting such an insane notion, is no friend of freedom, no friend of liberty, no friend of mine, and no one with which I wish to be associated.


I eagerly await your response.

Vince Schulte <vschulte@home.com>

[It ain't so, Vince. - ed.]

For Publication

On Sun, May 07, 2000 at 11:09:02PM -0400, John Taylor wrote:
>THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE ...................... ISSUE 71
>May 08, 2000 .............................. Nasty, Brutish, and Short

Ah, John, you had me looking forward to a contribution from Harlan Ellison.

>To the editor and publisher,
>Congratulations on your obvious originality as shown by the
>introduction of "Crass Commercial Messages" to The Libertarian
>Enterprise Web site.
>G. Gordon Liddy has been calling advertisements "crass commercial
>messages" on his syndicated radio program for more than 6 years now.
>Having copied G. Gordon Liddy on this, I wonder when you folks will
>copy some of Rush Limbaugh's schtick next. Or perhaps, in your
>efforts to attract readers, you'll be copying Howard Stern as well.
>Dean Chambers

Alfred Hitchcock was referring to his advertisements as "crass commercial messages" on the Alfred Hitchcock Show more than 35 years ago. The phrase has entered the language. Indeed Hitchcock was able to convey considerable disdain for his advertisements in his language and facial expressions, which was quite a feat given the standards of television of the day.
( http://nextdch.mty.itesm.mx/~plopezg/Kaplan/HFAQ/FAQ.html)

As Tom Lehrer said, if you are going to plagiarize, plagiarize from the best.

-- C^2 (Charles Curley) <ccurley@trib.com>
Looking for fine software and/or web pages?

Dear John, (I just had to do that...)

I'm presently in Japan, on a contract for an American high-tech company. Often I hear the "pro-gun" side, the one that gets air-time at all, talk about how "you can't have police on every street corner."

Well, folks, that's what they do here. They also torture confessions out of suspects, do random searches of peoples houses (at least once a year), have no first, 4th, 5th, 6th, or for that matter ANY of the protections "americans" have come to take for granted.

I don't know of Blint Vazsonyi's book, "America's Thirty Years War, Who Is Winning?" has been mentioned in TLE, but I don't remember reading any reviews. I can say now that I've finally visitted a country where the "commisar" rules, that Balint is spot on. It would seem that his experience with socialism of different brand names really does give him insight into the mind of those who wish to control others lives.

At dinner, me and 6 other Americans from the project were discussing drugs. Not bad evil awful child-murdering-drugs of-mass-destruction, things like banana peel, nutmeg, silly bored college student things. I realized after a few minutes that we were talking about this in PUBLIC, and said, "Hey, enough of this, remember where you are." Everyone shut up very quickly.

Freedom is a very thin skin, easily broken in the name of "safety". People here truely have given up essential freedom for "safety", the safety of a bus-load of people cowering in fear for 10 hours, held hostage by an angry teen with a kitchen knife. Oh, a totally illegal kitchen knife, as if the thing were somehow evil... where have I heard that before?

I recomend buying and reading Balint's book, available at online bookstores everywhere. Oh, and pick up a copy of The Probability Broach at the same time. Interesting contrasts...

Curt Howland [howland@Priss.com]


TLE #70 was a most powerful issue, and I have taken the liberty of forwarding it to several D.C. area news reporters I correspond with. I feel, regrettably that any possible story on this will end up on the spike.

A survey was recently taken concerning news reporters' bias in story content. The results were interesting, in that no political bias or motivation was found to be a factor. Some would cynically suggest this was not unexpected. However, what was surprising is that reporters polled (including 3 major networks, Reuters and AP) stated that they avoided any story that was complicated or boring. This seems to point out an elitist mentality toward the viewing and reading public.

That a story may actually require a person to think or reason presupposes that they are INTELLIGENT. Since reporters avoid such stories indicates their basic contempt for Americans' reasoning capabilities. This poll shows that editors and reporters freely admit this contempt.

Editorial comment in the delivery of news has long been complained about in this magazine and countless others, but never before admitted to by the organizations guilty of it. I feel the true scope of literary bigotry has at last been revealed. That's right, bigotry, in the grossest sense of the word. The third estate has made it plain that it is their ball, and they play by their own rules. They will print all the news that will fit.

News organizations have stereotyped gun owners and victim armers as white, male, and quite irrational. That is most assuredly not the case. Editors and talking heads find it laughable that an armed citizenry is a deterrent to crime. Statistics show that they are wrong about that, too. Newsies also wag their heads and tougues about the absurdity of owning guns as a safety valve to liberties taken by a despotic government. Regrettably, and finally, they may be wrong about that too.

Jack Resch <paratime98@yahoo.com>

Oh, this is greatly entertaining. I'm watching a show in the US Marshals (the wonderful people who murdered Sammy Weaver) on Discovery channel. The "reality TV" bit isn't just a fake, it's a bad fake: the MP5Ks (!) don't a one of them have a magazine in.

More than that, the goons don't keep the butts of the folding stocks anywhere near snugged into their shoulders - which proves the Elian shots were no flukes - and despite the fact that the 5Ks have pistol-style foregrips, a lot of the shooters hold onto the front of the mag well - a near guarantee of pulling out the magazine, or bending it all to crap, in the stress of combat. Well, if they remember to put mags in.

Finally, my memory of watching TV shows on SWAT teams (which I can stand to do about twice a year) is confirmed: these yoohoos cover each other with their muzzles all the time.

Just thought it might interest and amuse.

Victor Milan <vicmilan@ix.netcom.com>

I think I have figured it out. I think the logic of Conservative supporting the Repugnantcins has finally come to me. It does get old, arguing with Conservatives on the subject of their bad voting habits, they scream about how bad the Liberals are, and how the tyranny of those Democrats must be stopped. They ignore the Republicans bad record on liberty.

They just don't see the tyranny of Republicans. Nixon's paranoid assaults on the war protesters by going after the marijuana they smoked brought us the current madness of Drug Prohibition. The jack booted thugs in the streets, the fear of the government informant, and the worship of government are all the legacy of that Republican tyrant. After all, most Republican voters don't do illegal drugs, so what do they care about the rights of some stinky hippies being violated.

That tyranny was continued through the Democrats, and then picked up by the Great Obfuscateor and his wife. Just Say No to Drugs, and Yes to Government tyranny. No Knock warrants, like the one used in the case of Elian Gonzalez, along with military joining law enforcement for assorted jack booted thug raids, are all the legacy of the Great Reagan. But again, those were just stinky hippies, and a few accidental innocent civilians being harmed. Again, not a big Republican voter block.

Then George Senior came along, and in the footsteps of Reagan continued the tyranny against the hippy, and expanded it to cover all sorts of people he found to be icky in his sight. Laws were enforced without regard for the Constitution like no other time in history. The measures used against our own people would be banned by the Geneva Convention, not like he or any other tyrant in history cared. But still, the Republicans didn't care, it wasn't their hobby that was being persecuted.

After 12 years of unparalleled tyranny, the scale tipped. The stinky hippies elected one of their own. Expecting relief from the oppression of the Republicans, they instead got revenge of a different sort. Instead of drug prohibition being eliminated, it was expanded. Along with a new war, a war on guns. With the same reasons, for the children, being used to justify this new war.

So with this new tyrant joining such exalted persons such as Hitler, Nixon, Reagan and Bush we saw this War on Liberty expanded to Conservatives. Now they cry and scream about how the Democrats must be stopped. They holler loudly about No Knock Warrants, Jack Booted Thugs, and Government Oppression. Now that the boot is on their neck, they notice it.

Well, in the words of Bruce Willis, Welcome to the Party, pal. After all these years of restrictions on liberty, you open your eyes and notice it. You speak the words of the Founding Fathers "When the liberties of one are threatened, all are threatened.". You mouth platitudes about the importance of supporting others in their desire of freedom. Unless of course, they are stinky hippies.

Well, today the stinky hippies, tomorrow the cigar smoking conservatives. Your Republicans started this war on liberty, and now the laws are being used against you. I hope you are happy with what you have wrought. Now it's up to the Libertarians to straiten out the mess you have made. You can admit your mistake and join us, or stand in the way of liberty. Your choice.

Scott Graves <lockman2@uswest.net>

Well, you wouldn't think that after watching the Clintonistas at work over the past seven years that I would have been surprised by the Saturday morning raid to "recover" Elian, but I was. Not that they would do such a thing, that is, nor even how they would basically do it. What surprised me is:

1. They didn't kill anyone.

2. They didn't wait until Easter Sunday and stage the raid while Elian was attending mass and then burn the church to maximize the terror produced in the community.

3. No tanks were involved.

4. Lon Horiuchi wasn't called in.

At any rate, here are some suitable captions for the Elian at gunpoint photo:

- "Hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to help!"
- Your Tax Dollars At Work
- The Clinton Administration: Bringing You A Kinder, Gentler Krystalnacht
- "Negotiate THIS!"
- "They would have sent Lon Horiuchi instead of me, but your mom's already dead."
[OK, that one's really bad -- I like it! -- ed.]
- Uncle Sam Wants You... In Cuba!
- Zero Tolerance For Freedom
- Castro's Repo Man
- "...And round up any Jews, too!"
- "Put your hands up, I have a penis! Er, I mean, a gun!"
- "Come along peacefully, kid, or I'll shoot your dog! Oh, wait, I already did that!"
- The U.S. Government: Making Anarchy Look Better Every Day
- Family Values Uber Alles!
- "Boy, these census takers are sure getting pushy!"
- "Suffer the little children to come unto me ... or I'll blow your head off!"

Keep up the good work, guys.

Rick Trentham <ricktrentham@hotmail.com>

A copy of a letter I sent to High Times, a magazine dedicated, allegedly, to marijuana legalization. In the past they have been very left leaning liberal, but after the Klinton administration they may be ready for a change in politics. I recomend sending them some letters. They have a good sized readership, most of who don't know about the LP.

To: hteditor@hightimes.com

This years election gives the freedom activist two basic choices. You can vote for the status quo, or for someone who will end Drug Prohibition. You can vote for a candidate who has done all he can in his political career to ratchet up pressure on innocent people who self-medicate, or someone who will on their first day in office surrender this war with honor and pardon all who have been convicted of drug crimes.

Your vote can change the country this year. Your vote can set this country back on the path the Founding Fathers intended. Your vote can end the slow crawl to tyranny 30 plus years of drug prohibition has moved us toward. Or you can give into the fear being spread by the media, the fear of liberty and responsibility. You can give up, accept the tyranny of those who would enslave you.

Your choices this year are for the Repugnantcin/Demagouge Party, with their interchangeable candidates of Algore and Dubbya Bush, or you can vote Libertarian. This year the Libertarian Party will run not only Harry Brown for President, but we will have candidates for Representatives and Senators in almost every State. We will have local, county and state candidates as well, we are a full fledged party that is dedicated to freedom.

When a Libertarian is elected, you can be assured they will do all they can to end Drug Prohibition. They will do all that can be done to free the prisoners of this war, to return this country to freedom, on city, one county, one state at a time if that's what it takes.

Of course, you might not like the other planks of the platform, you will hear about eliminating gun control, taxes, the alphabet soup of Federal agencies, and everything else the Constitution of the United States does not authorize. Well, that's the deal. If you want to get rid of the tyranny that oppresses you, you have to accept freeing others from the tyranny that oppresses them.

So that's the deal people. If you can accept your neighbor owning a gun, he will have to accept your cannabis plants and trash cans full of empty corn chip bags. That's the Libertarian principle, when the rights of one are trampled, the rights of all are trampled. Will you accept the risks of liberty or the safety of tyranny?

Scott Graves <lockman2@uswest.net>

Next to advance to the next article, or
Table of Contents to return to The Libertarian Enterprise, Number 72, May 15, 2000.