Most Laws Are Illegitimate and Should Be Ignored

I believe that the vast majority of the laws in this country are illegitimate and should be disregarded with the utmost contempt. So many of the laws are designed to protect us from ourselves or to protect us from nature itself. These laws are actually harmful because they take more and more of our autonomy and self-determining ability away from us and thus render us susceptible to the imposition of more laws as we are less able to determine right from wrong. The only laws that should be recognized as legitimate and obeyed are what many would call natural laws. These are laws that ensure the peaceful coexistence among fellow human beings. The laws against murder, rape and theft for example. Laws prohibiting one from committing bodily harm or destruction to property are legitimate and should be obeyed. These "higher" laws are imprinted into the consciousness of humanity and with rare exceptions and obeyed by all. Think about it, if the above laws were the only ones we had, how many criminals would we have?
Let me give you a few examples of illegitimate laws. The law requiring seat belts must be worn is a perfect example of a law designed to protect us from nature or physics to be more specific. Seatbelt usage should be completely voluntary and the decision of the individual if they are adults or the driver/owner for minors in the vehicle. I’m not here to argue whether seatbelts save lives or not. The fact is, I believe seat belts should be worn and do save lives most of the time. My issue is, of what concern is it of the government (New Hampshire excluded) to require people to wear seatbelts and to punish them with fines if they do not? I am approaching this subject completely from an individual human rights standpoint. Here is an illustration that might make my point clearer: We have been told by the medical community for years that we would be healthier and live longer by cutting back on red meat and eating more fresh fruits and vegetables. So following the above dietary suggestions is as somewhat like wearing seatbelts. But, we have no laws requiring us to eat a healthy well-balanced diet (not yet, anyway). If we claim to believe in human rights in this nation, then we must allow people to be truly free to discover their own potentialities. When we allow an entity, such as the government to make our decisions for us through laws and regulations, we no longer need to exercise our own judgment and tend to lose the ability to determine right from wrong. It’s similar to exercise. If we don’t use our muscles on a regular basis, they will begin to atrophy and become useless. The same applies to our minds and consciences. If we don’t exercise our decision making and self-determining ability, we will begin to lose it. The loss of "common sense" that seems so prevalent today is a perfect example of what happens when the government steps in and makes decisions for people through laws.
Other examples of illegitimate laws are those against "victimless crimes" such as prostitution
and the like. I believe the main reason prostitution is illegal is because of the exchange of untaxed money, not the sexual act itself. Let me explain: There are no laws enforced against adultery. Everyday adults have consensual sex with other adults that they are not married to and no vice squad comes breaking in to arrest them. However, prostitutes and their clients are constantly at risk of arrest and prosecution. What’s the difference between the adulterous affair and the visit with the prostitute? It’s not the sex my friends. It’s the money. Prostitution is technically just tax evasion. And in this nation, tax evasion is very serious indeed because our money is more important and what makes us of value to the government. We are valued for what can be taken from us, not for whom we are as persons. The seatbelt law for example was passed not so much from an altruistic motivation, but a financial one. The old adage, "follow the money trail" applies here. Who benefits financially from a seatbelt mandate? The automotive insurance industry. Auto insurance companies sent lobbyists to the Capitol to make large monetary contributions to the political machine and so the seat belt law became a reality and individual choice be damned when there is big money involved.
Another issue that goes hand in hand with this is the penchant the government has for punishing its citizens. Here is an example: When a driver is involved in a traffic accident, it is not enough that the person experiences the shock and possible injury to both body and vehicle caused by the accident, or the fact that a very unforgiving, opportunistic auto insurance company will likely increase their annual premiums. In addition, the government needs to make sure that a punishment is administered in the form of a fine and possible points against the driver. Indeed a traffic accident is a perfect excuse for the government to engage in additional victimization and theft against its citizens. The reason they are called traffic accidents is because that is exactly what they are....accidents. Sure, there may have been some bad judgment involved, but traffic accidents are rarely intentional. So why does there need to be fines and punishments, especially if the driver has an otherwise good driving record? The reason is simple: as I stated above, it is another opportunity to rob the citizen to enrich the government. It’s not to repair the vehicle or to pay the medical costs because the insurance takes care of that. No, my friends, it is a money making scheme and I say lets treat it with the contempt it deserves.
Next time you are involved in a traffic accident and the friendly police officer comes by with dollar signs in his or her eyes and a citation pad in hand, thank the officer for his or her concern and inform him or her that you have exchanged insurance information with the other party.
When the officer starts talking about fault and violations and begins to write on the citation pad, inform the officer that the damages will be paid by the insurance company and to punish someone for an accident is quite inhumane and mean spirited. Let the officer know also that you are a little short on cash anyway because you have been systematically robbed and maybe he or she should go and arrest the thieves. After all, theft is a real crime and laws against it are legitimate. Take out your paycheck stub with the federal, state and local tax withholdings as proof of the theft. Tell the officer also that you would be glad to submit your property tax bill, your annual car registration bill and the receipt for your annual car inspection and emissions test. Also, don’t forget your per capita and occupational privilege tax receipt and the fee to renew your drivers license every four years. Perhaps you have made improvements to your property and had to apply for and pay a fee for a permit. Maybe you also had to pay transfer fees and even inheritance tax as well. Offer to provide the officer of with all these other tax or fee receipts as evidence of the theft, not to mention the 6 percent on most of your purchases. If the officer has any sense of justice or compassion, he or she will certainly agree that you have been victimized enough and to fine you for an accident is just downright cruel.
So many people give way too much honor and respect to laws. With the exceptions of the obvious natural laws mentioned above, laws are really just suggestions or advice. Most have been decided without our knowledge or approval by men and women who are actually employed by us and are our servants. These legislators are not demigods (although some may think they are) but are human beings just like you and me. If the laws they pass infringe upon our ability to be self determining, free moral agents, or were passed as a result of lobbyist influence, we should simply disregard them. The phrase "It is against the law" does not impress me and should not impress you if you want to be free. If slavery appeals to you, then go ahead and obey the hollow laws. I prefer to be free and determine my own destiny.
Many who read my essays may bemoan the common theme that runs through most of what I write: the government is to blame for most of our problems. Many may say that I’m just ranting and my accusations toward the government are exaggerated and thus should be disregarded. Let me respond with this example: During the formative years when a child is growing up, the biggest influence on the life of that child is the parents. Why? Because the parents are the ones who are the most involved in every aspect of their child’s life. They love, provide for and teach the child and for better or worse, it could be said that as the child matures and becomes an adult, the child, even though an individual, still in many ways mirrors his or her parent’s ideology religious and political philosophy, and general world view. The reason is the ubiquitousness of the parents in the child’s life. Unless the parents are completely derelict of their duty to their children, they cannot help but be the biggest influence on their lives.
The same principle applies to the government, however in a negative way. While the government is ubiquitous in the lives of its citizens, it is so basically in parasitic way. With few exceptions, most transactions between the government and the citizen work out with the government at the receiving end. Unlike the parent/child relationship which generally is based on love and nurturing, the government/citizen relationship is based on coercion and oppression. The government’s negative ubiquity in the lives of its citizens is why I feel justified and correct in my assessment that it is in fact to blame for mostly all of our problems. If the government doesn’t want to be blamed for so many things, it should back off and leave us alone!
Contrary to what many might think based on my writings, I am not an anarchist. I believe that government is necessary and I also realize that some form of taxation is necessary as well. It is just that the level of taxation and government intrusion has long passed acceptable levels. We have reached an extreme of government oppression and taxation and the only way to get back to the middle ground is to push to the other extreme and hope that it lands us closer to center.
"A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate." --Thomas Jefferson:

Possible Repeal Is Just A Red Herring

Okay, now the state legislators are going to consider repealing the "unvouchered expense" provision which allowed them to immediately receive the 16 to 54% pay increase they had
clandestinely voted for in the wee hours of that July 7 morning. But folks, all that does is delay, not undo what they so obscenely did on that fateful morning. If this is an attempt to persuade the voters of Pennsylvania that these folks aren’t so bad and should be reelected, we cannot allow it to work. The fact is, they still get the grotesque pay increase even if the provision is repealed, it will just be later. As usual, the taxpayers lose no matter what happens, but I guess we should all be pretty used to that by now!
The pay increase itself is what should be repealed and we as taxpayers and voters should demand nothing less. Remember that the money was stolen from us to begin with. Do you know that even the legislators who didn’t vote for or take the pay increase, such as Representative Mauree Gingrich from the 101st district, did not get to give the money they would have gotten back to the people of their districts? No way folks, the money was just put into the state treasury. Interesting how quickly we are all forgotten when there is money left over as it were. Half the state senators and a little less than half of the House members did not take the raise which was allotted to them. Friends, that is not chump change. Since the money was already set aside for the pay increase, why couldn’t that money go back to the respective districts of the legislators who refused the raise? It could have been divided amongst the residents of the districts or used for improvements to public properties within those districts. No, we the people are nothing but cash cows for the elite politicians.
Now we learn about the significant tax breaks that state lawmakers enjoy. The $141.00 tax deduction for when they are in session or attending committee meetings. What about the so called "four day rule" which allows the same tax deduction for legislators when they are at home for a period of four days or less between legislative sessions. Then there is the lodging per diem for legislators living more than 50 miles from the Capitol and car payment and mileage reimbursements. Oh, I’m not done yet, the legislators receive fully paid health benefits for their family and themselves and fully paid life and disability insurance as well. And don’t forget their excellent pension plan.
Let me ask the reader, how many of you even have fully paid health benefits where you work? Most of us have to contribute to our health plan premiums through payroll deductions. Yet with all these benefits and allowances, our legislators have the unmitigated gall to demand a pay increase. If I had those kinds of benefits, I’d be willing to become a state legislator for a salary of $25.000. That’s right folks, I’d do the job for $25.000 per year with all the benefits and then I would work to have the entire tax system restructured.
Remember on election day that we cannot reelect any legislator that voted for the pay increase regardless of whether they repeal the "unvouchered expense" provision. Why, because these people have so little respect for us the taxpayers. The fact that they are so arrogant to believe that they deserve such royal treatment when they were elected to be public servants is repugnant and anathema to taxpayers. And the possible repealing of the provision is just an attempt to redeem them before the election.
Folks, don’t vote for any incumbent who said yes to the pay raise. When you go to the polls to vote on Tuesday, take some time to remind those going in to vote that they should "remember the pay raise"