Archive for February, 2018

Iowa’s First Test Of ‘Stand Your Ground’ Law Enters Realm …

The state of Iowa is fairly new to the Stand Your Ground game. It only recently passed the law, which simply states that there is no duty to retreat from an attacker prior to using lethal force.

Now, it seems the law will get its first test. Unfortunately for one man, it has entered the realm of the bizarre in how its being applied(emphasis mine).

Prior to Gov. Terry Branstad signing the SYG bill passed inApril 2017by the legislature into law, Iowans needed to make a reasonable effortto retreatfrom a perceived danger before using deadly force, unless they were in their homes or reasonably believed themselves to be in immediate danger of death or severe injury.

The facts in the Ped Mall shooting case werent in dispute. Wilson admitted shooting the three men who confronted him on the Ped Mall in the earlier hours of Aug. 27. The prosecution did not dispute that those three men were armed. But in a pre-trial hearing, Judge Paul Miller ruled that whether the SYG law applied in Wilsons case would only be considered in a post-conviction hearing, if he was convicted.

Since the legislature did not specify at what stage in a criminal proceeding a SYG defense should apply, Miller relied on the 1989Iowa Supreme Court rulinginState v. Kingto make his decision. In that case, the defendant claimed a state law providing immunity to anyone reporting a case of child abuse should apply to her, because even though she was the person who injured the child, she was also the person who brought the child to the doctor for treatment. The trial court judge in that case ruled that the immunity claim would not be considered until after the jurys verdict. The state Supreme Court upheld that decision.

Im sorry, but thats just weird.

If the facts are as presented here, it sounds like a slam-dunk case of self-defense. After all, if three armed men confront me, Im not likely to assume theyre merely there because they want to invite me to afternoon tea.

As the original source linked above noted, there is a profound inconsistency in how Stand Your Ground laws are applied. Sometimes law enforcement uses the law to not forward the case to a prosecutor, other times prosecutors use it to justify not prosecuting, and so on. Theres no real rhyme or reason.

Of course, theres a reason for that profound inconsistency.

When an investigator looks at the facts, he may easily be able to tell that its an instance of Stand Your Ground and that theres no reason to forward the case. In others, the investigator may not be so sure and will send it on so an actual attorney can take a look. Still, other times, judges see where a case should never have come to trial, so they dismiss it.

Even non-Stand Your Ground related self-defense cases go through similar inconsistencies.

That said, having a trial first andthen a hearing to determine if a Stand Your Ground law applies goes beyond the ridiculous. Why waste taxpayer money on a trial when a hearing may invalidate it in the first place? Why not have the hearing first so as to avoid the hassle of a trial if its determined to apply to the defendant?

Honestly, this makes no sense at all. Absolutely none.

See more here:
Iowa's First Test Of 'Stand Your Ground' Law Enters Realm ...

Australian Libertarian Society

//

The Australian Libertarian Society (ALS) is the central portal for information about the libertarian movement in Australia.

Active since 2000, the ALS supports free-markets, individual liberty and the promotion of peaceful, voluntary interaction between people. The aim of the ALS is to bring together the many different strands of libertarian thought spread through Australia, including objectivisists, Rothbardians, classical liberals, anarcho-capitalists, moderates, pragmatic libertarians, Austrian economists, free-marketeers, and anybody else who believes in freedom.

The main activities of the ALS is to arrange occasional events, maintain the ALS blog thoughts on freedom, to provide commentary and analysis from a libertarian perspective, and to support other organisations and projects which share a libertarian agenda. If you would like to be involved, the easiest way is to become an active contributor at the ALS blog. The most recent articles are shown on the right column >

The ALS was a co-sponsor of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC), hosted by the Heartland Institute. ALS representatives have spoken at the ICCC and also at the Festival of Dangerous Ideas (Sydney). The ALS also hosts the original australian political quiz. Some articles from the ALS blog are also published at the online mens magazine get frank. If you want to re-print ALS material, have a libertarian project in Australia, or need a libertarian perspective on any issue, please get in touch.

*******************************************************

Young Australian libertarians may be interested in the liberty and society sessions, hosted by the Centre for Independent Studies, and the Kennard Freedom prize run by the Institute for Public Affairs.

*******************************************************

The ALS is an Associate Supporter of The International Coalition Against Prohibition (TICAP), which fights for individual self-ownership and believes that the State has no duty to forbid or mandate what substance goes into the body of a person by his own will, regardless of consequences for the user.

Read more here:
Australian Libertarian Society

Anti-Libertarian Criticism | Keeping libertarians in check …

While I think it would be cool to produce an actual map image, heres a general breakdown of my understanding of the various sectors of the American libertarian movement. It is by no means completely comprehensive, but touches on some of the main groups. Sometimes these groups overlap and an individual can be seen as having multiple tendencies, and at other times theyve also been known to have fights betweeneach other.

Paleo-Libertarians This is the socially conservative wing of the libertarian movement. Theirbig distinctive issues are immigration control, racial politics, opposing the U.N., fundamentalist Christian-western identity, and opposing democracy. This group also has some overlap with the anarcho-capitalists associated with Lew Rockwell and Hans Hoppe. This is where the white nationalists and assorted conservative cranks can safely overlap with libertarianism, as a political ideology designed in such a way as to potentially enable their causes.

To a certain extent, this is what the left-libertarians are fighting against within libertarianism and where I think their best and most effective internal criticism is focused. I know that when I was a left-lib, these people were my most common target of criticism. I was greatly dissapointed to find that most libertarians are sideline sitters and denialists on this controversy, and that for the most part only some left-libs were the ones willing to speak up about it.

Bleeding Heart Libertarians While this is in reference to a particular blog, many of the most visible authors of that blog seem to represent a certain kind of libertarian thats broader than the blog. The defining feature of these libertarians is that they are academic elitists, often with a moderate liberal bent and usually minarchist in orientation. Some try to square libertarianism with Rawls and other aspects of modern liberal political philosophy. Compared to the left-libertarians, they tend to be fairly vanilla. But they also can be found weaving nuanced philosophical tales over the top of obvious moral conundrums bleeding heart fascists.

In a way theyrepresent the closest you can get to mainstream libertarianism within the university. IMO, most of their work comes off as technical philosophic hair-splitting that amounts to nothing of import, and overall the premise of the site comes off as a weak PR campaign with a leftward veering eye. They will never be the kind of libertarians that can particularly appeal to people outside academia. The most radical voices are the handful of left-libertarians who are occasionally featured as writers.

Molyneuvians These are those libertarians who are followers of Stefan Molyneux. Consider it a new spin on Randian cultism. This is about hanging ones hat on the words of Molyneux and goes much further than standard libertarian philosophy, in that it binds one to particular ideas about psychology, metaphysics, morality, religion, and human relationships. To be a true follower of Molyneux is to accept a very rigid, all-encompassingphilosophy of everything. The libertarianism of Molyneux naturally appeals most to people with childhood issues, and it overlaps with the ideas of anti-schooling and criticism of traditional parenting.

Those who are truly dedicated to Molyneux are essentially online cult members who have substituted Molyneux for their parents. While Molyneux has gotten into controversy and has former cult members who are detractors, he has remained a staple in the libertarian movement and is perhaps the prime example of a libertarian individual achieving a high amount of media traffic and status through the internet.

Neo-Objectivists You cant talk about the Molyneuvians without talking about the Neo-Objectivists. This is a group of libertarians and ancaps who either are former Objectivists (followers of Ayn Rand) or otherwise people who integrate Objectivism into their libertarianism. Since theres a lot thats wrong with Objectivism, this introduces its own interesting problems. In some cases, it leads some libertarians to take stances very much like thatof neo-conservatives when it comes to foreign policy and domestic police power.

For others, its more about the philosophic grounding of libertarianism in certain ethical and cultural terms its centered around supporting property rights and markets in Aristotilean terms of flourishing and a culture of enlightened self-interested individualism, leading us into a special twist on bizarro-land. Rands philosophy has been prodded mercilessly and found wanting by a lot of people for good reason.

Left-Libertarians The left libertarians are an odd bunch. The left libertarians are somewhat multi-tendency, but I think it would be accurate to say that the general two tendencies are (1) the fusing of libertarianism with the cultural left and (2) the attempt to either reclaim or reformulate libertarianism as to be anti-capitalist or non-capitalist. In my opinion, as has been spread about through various posts on this blog, the left-libertarians have mainly succeeded at the former (while also bringing along some of the negative baggage of the existing cultural left) but failed at the latter.Its also true that the majority define themselves as anarchists and dominantly use individualist anarchism as their linchpin (which, while perhaps useful, is a limited cut-off point).

The problem is that contemporary American libertarian ideology *is* capitalistic, the bulk of the anarchist movement in the world is anarchist-but-not-libertarian (an important distinction), and that to really start to belong to the economic left the left-libertarians would have to basically cease to be libertarians in their viewson markets.

Beltway Libertarians These are those libertarians who are heavily involved in conventional politics or represent the official Libertarian Party themselves (as a side note: there are times I wonder ifBHL should really stand for Beltway Heart Libertarians). The layperson of this group is the person who wants an alternative to the two parties so they vote libertarian and get involved in it at the level of conventional politics, and most likely they are light on the philosophy side of it, or at least stick to a pretty vanilla minarchism.

The big players of this group are the libertarian politicians, lawyers, lobbyists, journalists, and vanilla libertarian organizations that basically amount to Republican light. This is also where the most money is for libertarian youth outreach (read: grooming people ideologically as the next generation of libertarian talking heads and academics). Think of it as the libertarian attempt to take on the lambasted role of the Marxists in the university.

Tin Foil Hat Libertarians This is the libertarian whose main draw is through conspiracy theory and sensationalism. They freely mix their libertarianism with conspiracies and tabloid style journalism. The reptilian Illuminati Jewish Rothschild bankers from outer space are coming! Think of it as the paleo-libertarian view on a large dose of acid, and after perhaps taking a Robert Anton Wilson book a little too seriously. It has never ceased to amaze me how many people like this actually exist out there. They always visibly existed mixed in as mutual friends of libertarians on social networking, in my experience. I didnt realize how many nutters I had non-thinkingly accepted friend requests from until I decided to clean house.

Geolibertarians These libertarians typically take after Henry George and their pet peeve issue is land. They are libertarians who rightly perceive that there is a distinct issue about land property, though theyre also ideologically tied to a particular solution. Aside from this one issue of land, it says very little about the given libertarian. I also always found interaction with geolibertarians to often feel odd in that they struck me as obsessed with this one issue, seemingly bringing it into discussion of everything as the one solution to politics. There are a number of geolibertarians Ive interacted with who seemed like fairly vanilla libertarians otherwise, and sometimes even surprisingly on the more conservative side of things overall. Its a single-issue position.

Read the original post:
Anti-Libertarian Criticism | Keeping libertarians in check ...

Poll: Americans ‘Overwhelmingly’ Believe Obama ‘Improperly …

AFP Photo/Brendan Smialowski

by John Nolte10 Feb 20180

Despite the disgraced American medias best and most cynical efforts to bury the truth, and to even stop the truth from ever seeing the light of day, this poll (and another addressed below) demonstrate that the American people are almost entirely tuning the partisan, mostly-hysterical news media out and looking to alternative media for the truth.

There is simply no other way to explain these poll results, which unambiguously prove that a majority of the public believe the exact opposite of what an unceasing, coordinated media campaign wants them to believe which is that President Trump colluded with the Russians to win the 2016 campaign and that the heroic FBI is being unfairly smeared by Trumps eeeevil defenders.

Well, despite more than a year of this relentless propaganda coming from all four corners of the mainstream medias fabricated reality, here are the results from all four corners of actual reality

A clear majority of 55 percent believe it is likely that the Obama administration improperly surveilled the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.That includes 31 percent of Democrats, 87 percent of Republicans, and 55 percent of Independents.

A clear majority of 54 percent want a special counsel to investigate whether the FBI and the Department of Justice improperly surveilled the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election. Only 44 percent said no. The partisan breakdown shows that 74 percent of Republicans and 50 percent of Independents want a special counsel as do a full 44 percent of Democrats.

In this particular poll, one fairly positive result for the FBI and Justice Department is that only 35 percent believe these institutions attempted to outright frame President Trump for colluding with the Russians.

A just-released Rasmussen poll, however, shows that a full 50 percent of Americans believe its at least somewhat likely senior federal law enforcement officials broke the law in an effort to prevent Donald Trump from winning the presidency. Only 40 percent disagree.

Another Rasmussen poll from this week shows that only 42 percent of Americans believe Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election more than the FBI. Moreover, a full 34 percent believe the FBI meddled more than the Russians, while 24 percent are unsure.

In other words, we now live in a country where 58 percent of Americans either believe our own FBI meddled in a presidential election more than a hostile foreign government, or are not sure the FBI did not.

Meanwhile, Trumps approval rating is running ahead of former-President Obamas at this point in his failed presidency.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

Continued here:
Poll: Americans 'Overwhelmingly' Believe Obama 'Improperly ...

Fox News Convinces Trump That He Is A Victim Of An Obama …

On Saturday, Trump expressed support for the belief that he saw on Fox News, that the Russia investigation is an Obama conspiracy to get him.

Trump tweeted:

What is an avid Fox News viewer like Trump to do when the Special Counsel is closing in on him, and the Russia scandal is about to hit the fan? He pulls a page out of the Fox News playbook and blames Obama. The belief that the Russia scandal is a conspiracy against him follows along with Trumps belief that Obama wiretapped him in Trump Tower.

Trump has mentally walled himself off from his own Russia crimes and has convinced himself of his own innocence, even though his refusal to release his tax returns and information about his business dealings.

The Russia investigation is the byproduct of Trumps own actions and efforts to obstruct justice. Congress must act to protect Robert Mueller, and it is time for serious Americans to demand Trumps removal from office.

Original post:
Fox News Convinces Trump That He Is A Victim Of An Obama ...