Monday, June 23, 2014

"Freedom? Here, let me take that for you."

There are psychological defects that go along with becoming a politician. First of all they think everything is theirs to control and use. And they also think every human activity needs to be regulated.

Just look at this article for example: Commissioner considering land use policy

"Lack of zoning and other regulations have meant that Curry County has little control over what is imposed within its limits."
Yeah, heaven forbid there's a little bit of freedom you perverts haven't yet outlawed.

And, what was that back up there in the first two paragraphs?

"Curry County has little control over what is imposed within its limits."  " the county achieve more jurisdiction over its land."
Oh no, the land isn't "its (Curry County's) land" that you seek to violate through control- it belongs to the individual owners, ONLY. Hands (and "laws") off!

But, it's about "protecting" you- or at least the local power-grabbers:
"A land use policy, Bostwick said, can help give an area some protection from federal regulations — of particular concern are those regulations that pertain to the Endangered Species Act or the Environmental Protection Agency."
So, in the name of protecting residents from the feds, you steal more false "authority" for yourselves.

What's worse: the tyrant thousands of miles away whom you can ignore without him even noticing (unless some slimy local statist wants to report you for a chance at a pat on the head), or the tyrant next door who can drive past your property every day?

"A land use policy would also allow the county control over businesses, though Bostwick insists the renewed interest has nothing to do with a recently proposed strip club."

"A land use policy allows officials to designate an area’s best use."
"Best use"? Determined by who? Not the property's owners, I am certain. What if your idea of "best use" is wrong, and yet you impose your will on me anyway, when my idea would be better? Or just as good. What if the reality is that there are many different equally good possible uses for a piece of land? Or what if I, as the owner, want to use it in a way you don't consider "best"? Well, in that case you should jump off a bridge into molten lava instead of imposing your will on the property owner.

"There are zoning opportunities in the land use policy,"

"Opportunities"? Does that mean he sees every woman as a "raping opportunity" or every car as a "theft opportunity"? That is only exciting to a control freak.

"Bostwick and Pyle said it will be the residents of Curry County who would have to help determine what the county’s best use actually is under a land use policy."

That's still socialism. Crowdsourcing evil is still evil. I have no more "right" to say what my neighbor does on his own property than does a dictator.

"We’re going to engage the public."

Is that like asking your victim if she'd prefer to be beheaded or drawn and quartered? What if "the public" just says "No!"? 

Interesting word, "engage". In war, the soldiers often say they are going to "engage the enemy"- so I guess "the public" should understand how they are viewed by these control freaks.

So, yeah, just look at how these people think. They are entitled to your property- Oh, they'll still let you "own" it so they can keep collecting the ransom ("property tax"), but the ultimate control, they believe, is theirs.

I think a wake up call for all molesters of this sort is long overdue.



  1. Polititians are like a bad case of the piles (hemorrhoids that become inflamed) - a real pain in the . . .

  2. Back in the very early 90s, I was working in an "estates department", in the middle part of England. The biggest part of our collective job description was preparing "planning applications" with all of the ecological, hydrogeological, traffic, archaeological etc studies to accompany them, in the hope of getting "planning permissions" for our employer to actually be able to use his land.

    One afternoon when bringing the boss man's car back from getting serviced, the radio news mentioned a Council planning officer being shot dead infront of the BBC's TV cameras. (the BBC news reader in the youtube is claimed by some to have been one of the inspirations for the foul mouthed, sleezy, Viz comic character "Roger (michael neville) Mellie - the man on your telly").

    Although I didn't directly know the people involved, I knew plenty of people who did.

    According to friends who live in that area, it was the culmination of a long process of bullying and harrassment, so much so that there were protests in the local town in support of Dryden.

    According to those friends, Alby Dryden was eccentric, very intelligent (he used to make and launch rockets which travelled for several miles) but harmless, so much so that one of the neighbouring farmers, had no hesitation in driving his little tractor up to pull the police minibus out of the ditch which the panicking cops had driven it into.

    Dryden is still in prison, and after firing at a a cop (and getting him up his arse) the vested interests of the cop union will likely ensure that he stays there until he dies. It's a shame, those who know the guy say that he only got violent when his tormentor showed up with diggers cops and tv cameras to destroy the house he'd built and very publicly rub his nose in it.

    The "planning officer" came from a family originating from a coal mining village known to the locals as "little Moscow".

    After that event, my colleagues suddenly found that "planners" else where in Britain, suddenly developed manners, and became almost, but not quite, helpful.

    Strange coincidence, that.

    1. Sorry, I've missed out a key detail.

      After pursuing cops, digger driver and tv crew, until they left his property, Dryden had supposedly returned and administered a coup de gras shot to the "planner", going beyond any claim of defending his property.

    2. Being prevented from using your property as you wish is equal to being stolen from. You have been robbed just as surely as if someone had taken that property from you physically. And that means you have a right to defend that property with deadly force.

      Yes, it was a bad idea to finish off the thief in this case, and Dryden had no right to do so. But it doesn't lessen the offenses of the guy he killed in any way. The dead guy is still the one who started it- there would have been no incident at all if the "planner" hadn't made a career out of going around taking people's property (the useful value of it) away from them.

      Had I been asked to arbitrate this case, I would probably have ruled that Dryden was guilty of going beyond what he had a right to do, and would have said he owed the dead "planner's" family restitution, minus the restitution the dead planner owed Dryden for his violations- how about half an ounce of silver? Or if "replacement value" is the goal, maybe he owes them a pet rat, since he killed a human rat. Maybe I'd be really generous and rule he owes them both, and I'd even subtract the silver (and the cost of the rat) from my arbitration fees.

    3. I understand that for some psychology experiments, planners are used in the place of rats:

      There are some things you just can't get a rat to do


  3. Sorry Kent, I'm clogging up your comments here with stuff from Britain - I 'd better use the excuse that the mal-incentives for central planners are the same regardless of the place.

    One recent scam that I've seen from planners is to claim that they like the application, but it just needs a little change - the fee for changes after submission here is £1k.

    A couple of years back, a council planning department screwed £10k (about $15k) out of my brother, before they finally fessed up and said that they were going to recommend refusal.

    done by anyone else that would be obtaining money on false pretences.

    No doubt the planning department could claim that they were earning money for the council.

    Experience over the years suggests that once you offend a planner, then you will never get a planning permission again as long as you live. I've had several clients in that situation.

    1. It's fine. Britain is part of the world and people live there. I care about people having their lives violated wherever it occurs. I find this very interesting and infuriating.

  4. One of the continuing questions which interests me about Harry Collinson's campaign of officious agression against Alby Dryden and its subsequent outcome...

    Is how did Collinson get to know about Dryden's little house in the first place?

    The plot is beside a minor public road, and a large brick arch gateway and high earth bund around the little plot do serve to prompt the question "what's behind that?"

    That said, there is the information problem - bureaucrats are not omnipresent, omniscient beings. It is quite possible that no one from the council planning department had been down that road in ten years, and even if they had, there's no reason to believe they'd have their eyes open.

    What do appear to be omnipresent, are jealous little busybodies, all too keen to snitch.

    There's a farmer in that neighbourhood (I'm deliberately being vague), who has variously spent his time snitching on his farming neighbours to assorted bureaucrats for having things like thistles and nettles in their fields.

    There are of course plenty more like him, and there is little need for an award of "Order of Quisling" (second class, of course - they're mere plebs, not esteemed taxfeeders) to reward them, they'll happily do the dirty work for free.

    If it was a snitch, I wonder whether he's happy that a man was bullied for several years, is still in prison, and will likely die there, or consoles himself that he brought a dangerous pre-crime to the attention of the authorities?

    1. I really despise those who report people to the authroiturds for a pat on the head. I'm sure the one who reported Dryden believes himself to be a hero of sorts.