I was invited on Ernest Hancock’s “Declare Your Independence” yesterday to talk about what’s happening in Keene.

Download the archive.

You can hear Declare Your Independence via free, live streaming audio on LRN.FM every weekday from 5-7pm Eastern. Also, LRN.FM airs in Keene on 107.5 FM.

Heika’s letter to the editor was published in the Union Leader yesterday, but they apparently don’t put those on their website, so Heika kindly sent Free Keene a copy:

First things first: Baring one’s breasts in public is not a crime, nor is it illegal. That said, I also want to make clear that, contrary to what your article of July 19 implied, there were not several of us parading around downtown, taking off our clothes. A very talented local artist and I decided it would be beautiful to have my breasts painted. He was very respectful of not touching my body in any way except on a professional level. We were sitting on a park bench, covering what was not being painted.

I was officially—and wrongfully—arrested for holding an open container of alcohol in a public place. For the record, I was not intoxicated. Part of the reason people gather daily on the common in downtown Keene is to peacefully protest this ludicrous law. Some drink, while others socialize. Many people feel we are not properly going about achieving our goal to see changes in personal freedoms (such as drinking a beer on a property that we are required to pay for), but at least we are trying. Writing the government to ask them to change the law simply doesn’t work.

We are very peaceful in our gatherings. We leave the park cleaner than the way we found it, we don’t scream belligerently at cars or people passing through, and we do not threaten or harm anyone in any way. That sort of behavior is frequently seen on the patios of downtown restaurants and bars, yet the police do nothing about that. Why are we the ones being singled out and crucified?

The answer is simple: People are scared of change. Creatures of habit we may be, but like it or not, there will be change. Eventually we will truly be allowed to “Live Free Or Die,” as New Hampshire’s motto reads. I am proud to be a resident of a state with such a proud slogan. I do not need brutal police officers to tell me when and where I can relax and have a beer. I have a job, I pay taxes, and I am an adult–an adult with a very capable mind, and no intent of harming another being.

If the government can dictate what kind of beverage I can hold while sitting on a bench that I have in part paid for, then where does it end? Will they soon be telling me I can’t walk barefoot in my own back yard? Or will they be telling me what time I must be in bed? I am no longer a helpless child to be subject to such restrictions. As a grown woman, I do not require rules concerning my body and property, which I am capable of maintaining and paying for.

I have heard many people ask us to stop our protest, that we are wasting too much of the taxpayers’ money. My response to that is: Stop making rules that hinder my right to choose and be free. If that would happen, we would have fewer arrests, lower court fees, and less jail time, and more money for worthy causes and concerns.

I was cited yet again this week for holding an open container of alcohol, and I will continue to do so until we see results. Results that allow us to make decisions for ourselves. As time goes on, more and more people join us in our peaceful protest of this law. Many people are not activists, but agree that this law is unjust. We invite anyone that agrees with this to join us at the park! All are welcome.

This past Tuesday, Heika was arrested after using a megaphone to speak in front of the Keene District Court. It’s worth noting again, Heika was not warned that her behavior would lead to arrest or seizure of property; police just walked up and arrested her.

The police took the megaphone, which was no longer in Heika’s hands, as evidence to be held for her court date. Heika’s charges were fully dealt with on Wednesday morning in a plea deal, but she had not been given the megaphone back yet.

Now, Keene Police are asking for the court’s permission to destroy or sell the megaphone! It does not belong to Heika, nor does it belong to the police, of course. But they have filed a motion to “Destroy Contraband and/or Forfeit Property and Destroy or Sell Same”. Essentially attempting to permanently keep this piece of property, which is not illegal to own, out of the hands of it’s owner.

Click to read the KPD’s motion

It is my understanding that a “legal” resistance will be put against this in court. Stay tuned for updates.

A FreeKeene.com reader/commenter has asked me the following question regarding the Shire Society Declaration:

BTW: How is that “Shire Society” document NOT just another Constitution-type, set of simple statutes? In other words, SAME THING, as the current system of (unjust)laws???

I is none constitutional scholar… but I’d say the vast difference is found in the second provision of the document:

“Second, no individual or association of individuals, however constituted, has the right to initiate force against any other individual;”

If all of the sudden a 28th Amendment were to be smacked onto the United States Constitution which mimicked the above, we would have a voluntary society.  A society where wearing a costume and a piece of metal on your chest no longer instills a magical ability to initiate violence against someone.

Imagine that.

This question may be one that other people not directly involved in liberty circles have.  Perhaps you could have a better explanation to this question than I did?

Please, show me up below. 

Pete and Adam from Liberty on Tour cover one of this week’s demonstrations for Rich Paul and other peaceful prisoners:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Thanks to James “Puke” Schmill for donating his time as a photographer to create the high quality Shire Society Declaration documents The document was signed by a number of wonderful activists from Porcfest, with a final few signatures from the Keene area.

Declaration Two:

Here they are as high resolution PDF documents:

Declaration One:
Shire Doc One.pdf

Shire Doc Two.pdf

On the Free Keene forum a discussion/debate has sparked into existence regarding the topic of whether or not the police are blindly robotic in their enforcement of the law.  My position on this important question is that the police have no choice but to be blindly robotic and accordingly will enforce any law that they’re directed to.  If a police officer wants to keep their job, they have no choice.

Let me articulate my argument as to why they are forced to be blindly robotic…  why it is a terrible thing…  and why society would be better of if this was not the case.

In the State of New Hampshire just about all people who have the “authority” to arrest someone (initiate force) answer to an organization called Police Standards and Training.  PSTC (for short) has the authority to determine what the appropriate training of new police officers will be, as well as revoke or suspend a certification of an individual law enforcement officer for a violation of its rules.

In order to be appointed (and remain appointed) as a police officer in New Hampshire one must comply with the rules set forth by PSTC.  This diktat (as it pertains to police officers of towns) can be found in this law.  The law reads:

Any permanent constable or police officer who is either elected under the provisions of RSA 41:47 or appointed for full-time duty under the provisions of RSA 105:1, and who is in compliance with the requirements of RSA 188-F:27, shall continue to hold such office during good behavior, unless sooner removed for cause by the selectmen, after notice and hearing, or unless the town has rescinded its action as provided in RSA 41:47. Any such elected permanent constable or police officer shall be deemed to be a permanent policeman, and entitled to benefits under the provisions of RSA 103 if otherwise qualified.

“(W)ho is in compliance with the requirements of (PSTC).”

So, as a matter of law, in order for one to become or remain a police officer…  they must be in compliance with the rules of PSTC.

One of the rules that PSTC imposes on a governmental unit that wishes to employ a new law enforcement officer is that they conduct a background investigation.  The background investigation requires the following:

Pol 301.05 Background Investigation.  The following shall apply to the background investigation required on the applicant by the agency:

(g)  The hiring authority shall evaluate the results of its background investigation and the agency shall not appoint or invest with authority an applicant who:

(16)  Whose general character and reputation in the community are such that a reasonable person would doubt that the applicant would conduct him/herself with honesty and integrity and uphold the rule of law.

In order to even become a police officer you need to be someone who will “uphold the rule of law.”  Not “uphold moral laws” or “uphold laws that address real crimes.”

Correct me if I’m wrong…  but if this rule were in place during the 1960’s and a person who told everyone they would never enforce Jim Crow laws applied to be a law enforcement officer, they legally could never become one.  Why?  They don’t believe in blindly upholding the “rule of law.”  You know, words on paper that did the following:

- Made slavery possible,
- Implemented the mass murder of Jews in Germany; and
- Presently causes people to be put in cages like animals for possessing plants.

So…  if you want to BECOME a police officer, you must be someone who believes in the “rule of law.”  If you believe in the “rule of law” you support doing precisely what it is that the legislature says you should…  until the courts say otherwise.  This blind belief and support of the “rule of law” could cause you to hurt a great many people…  but that’s okay, right?  It’s the law.

There are very few people who have state “authority” to arrest without answering to these rules.  The two reasons for this exemption are either constitutional or specific statutory exemption.  For the hell of it, I’ll list three examples:

1. The “High Sheriff” elected to one of New Hampshire’s ten counties.

Becoming a sheriff in New Hampshire is a constitutional right (specifically Part I, Article 71)…  which makes it beyond the reach of a legislature-created regulatory body.

2. The Commissioner of Agriculture Markets, and Food.

The Commissioner of Agriculture, Markets, and Food and his “inspectors” have police authority pursuant to this law.  This law requires that the “inspectors” meet the requirements of PSTC…  oddly, it nowhere mentions that the actual Commissioner him/herself must comply.

3. The mayor of a city.

This law from 1855 gives the mayor of a city the power of a sheriff (ie: arrest) without any statutory requirement that the mayor comply with PSTC’s rules.  This law is also the closest law found in the New Hampshire Revised Statues that has to do with “peace officers.”  Note the extent of the mayor’s enforcement authority.  This law is how all “peace officer” laws should read.

-/-

My conclusion:  Unless you are someone who believes in the blind, robotic, unquestioning “rule of law,” you cannot even become a police officer. Your own moral judgment is not allowed.  You must substitute your own judgment for that of the majority.

Blind belief in the “rule of law” is responsible for countless cases of mistreatment of people throughout history.  Blind belief in the “rule of law” is responsible for countless cases of mistreatment of people today.

We who blog here at Free Keene do so not for money…  we do so to offer our ideas and opinions about how a society can exist without the need for initiating violence against the peaceful.  Many of you who read here may vastly disagree with what we advocate, but I don’t think you could claim that we are not advocating what we truly believe is the “right” thing to do.

We believe in helping people…  mostly, by helping people to understand how a society can exist without the initiation of force.   Helping people is not always limited to ideas, writing, activism, and politics though.

A participant in the Free Keene forum has mentioned that the Summer Chill ‘10 Blood Drive will taking place in Keene at the Best Western Hotel on 08/02/10 from 11:00AM to 7:00PM.  I respectfully request that all Free Keene readers (whether advocates of what we advocate or not) join us in going to help people who need help to survive.  Let’s give some blood.

Anyone who is sixteen years old can donate blood with written parental permission here in the beautiful State of New Hampshire.  Seventeen years old and beyond can do so without parental permission.  The law (isn’t there one for everything?) is here.

Perhaps some of you who think we Free Keene writers/activists/supporters are crazy can come meet us and get to know us better.  I wasn’t always a supporter of this particular flavor of movement which advocates freedom…  but I am now for the simple fact that the people behind it are some of the nicest people I’ve met in my life.

Perhaps you too would come to that conclusion…  come meet some of us AND help us help others in need at the same time. 

Liberty-minded people called “Talkback” on WKBK last week to discuss open container, school outreach, a movement without leaders, working in the system, Keene Nightcap, and complaints to the police. A local statist calls Talkback and suggests forming an opposition group. Cynthia and Dale are hilariously clueless about their own ordinances during Sam’s call. Enjoy!

Grab the archive.

Please join us for our weekly chat and calling sessions on Saturday mornings from 9a-12p. If you’re in the Keene area you can tune in to WKBK 1290 AM or 104.1 FM. The Talkback discussion thread is here on the Free Keene Forum.

Ohio city forces people who want to contest red light camera tickets to pay a $95 court fee, which happens to be the same amount as the fine, police accidentally taser a UK man in the groin, a deaf man wrongfully convicted of rape wants to be let out of prison, and the Congressional Christmas tree has been chosen but may require secret service protection so vandals won’t ruin it.

http://www.freemindstv.com

While Cop Block’s Adam Mueller makes a good point in this video, a more important point to make is that NO ONE needs to pay for the parking meters, as has been proven in recent court cases. All you have to do is have the courage to take it to court rather than pay, and odds are good they will drop the charge or find you not guilty. Plus, the more people take them to court, the more likely they will drop them! That said, here’s Adam’s Cop Block of a Marlborough cruiser:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Heroic civil disobedience activist-turned-politician Andrew Carroll has thrown his hat into the ring for the race for “State Representative” and has launched his campaign website at Carroll4NH.com. There you can learn his positions on the issues, help his campaign, and get in touch with him via email.

Here’s his bio from his website:

Andrew Carroll is a dedicated, passionate young man living in Keene, New Hampshire. He was born and raised on the other side of the country in Whittier, California where he quickly discovered the political culture is more rewarding to big pockets than big hearts. It seems natural to him, therefore, that his passion for individual rights, freedom, compassion, and honesty would lead him to the last remaining hope for consensual governance in America: New Hampshire.

More than anything Andrew Carroll wants to spend his time here making this state a better one; which means retaining door-to-door campaigning and local, town-hall-style meetings, retaining as much of a feel of non-partisanship as possible, and retaining the values that brought him here while still making visible progress. Luckily, the balance between morality and practicality is less an issue here than anywhere else; and it is possible to be an honest politician with little-to-no cash, and lots of help from friends, and win an election.

In that regard, New Hampshire has already proven to Andrew that it is the place where the dreams of a young idealist can be achieved; and he hopes, now, to prove to New Hampshire that he is up to the task of achieving those dreams.

Go Andrew!

A new face showed up at tonight’s Nightcap. Dorian told her story of the Keene police, who she previously had been a fan of, harassing her for doing spray painting (artwork on paper, not graffiti on buildings). They threatened her apparently and demanded she beg for permission from the city government people and pay some absurd amount of money for their piece of paper. Instead, she told them she was joining the “free staters” and showed up with a fire breathing performance tonight:

From the Union Leader’s Melanie Plenda:

A woman arrested while topless in downtown Keene last week was arrested again Tuesday, this time clothed, for protesting outside Keene District Court.

Heika Courser, 26, formerly of Richmond and currently listed as residing at 20 Forest St. in Keene, was charged with common law criminal contempt and obstructing government administration.

Courser was one of about 15 people standing on the sidewalk in front of the courthouse about 10:30 a.m. protesting a hearing for fellow Free Keene member Richard Paul.

Police Lt. Darryl Madden said Courser was arrested for “yelling” into a bullhorn, causing ruckus that led Keene District Court Judge Edward Burke to recess court.

Courser and Paul were two of seven people arrested last week in Central Square on charges of drinking in public. Courser was reportedly topless while an artist applied paint to her breasts. Courser was arrested, not for being topless, which is legal in Keene, but on charges of having an open container of alcohol and resisting arrest.

Paul, 41, of Manchester, was also arrested on charges of obstructing government administration and disorderly conduct in blocking a police cruiser from leaving the area.

After Tuesday’s incident, Courser was held overnight in the Cheshire County jail and arraigned at 9 a.m. yesterday, where she accepted a plea agreement. In exchange for pleading guilty to two open-container charges and resisting arrest from last week and the contempt and obstruction charge from Tuesday, she received 180 days of suspended jail time and two years probation.

“I accepted the plea because they would not allow me to communicate with my friends,” she wrote. “(My friends) were about to pay the $500 cash bail, but I had no way of knowing that, and after spending one night in (jail), I was not going back! It’s as bad as they say!”

In another e-mail she also said if she wasn’t free and at work today, she would lose her job.

The judge presiding yesterday was Howard B. Lane and not Burke.

Madden said Courser “can exercise her First Amendment right to free speech until it disrupts the peace of the business going on in the area.”

After Burke recessed court Tuesday, he asked police prosecutor Eliezer Rivera to call police to have the protestors moved.

Protestors at the scene and Courser said she was never asked to stop making noise; she was just arrested as soon as police arrived.

“When I was arrested for protesting outside of the court, the officer simply said I was breaking my bail conditions,” Courser wrote in an e-mail yesterday to the New Hampshire Union Leader.

This was not the only incident involving the Free Keene protestors this week.

On Monday, protesters were ejected from an arraignment hearing for Paul, said Free Keene activist Sam Dodson.

“They wouldn’t stand for the judge when he came in, but they stood up for Rich Paul,” Dodson said. “So they were kicked out of a public hearing.”

That night, Dodson said, the protestors held a candlelight vigil outside Judge Burke’s home. Dodson said it was a peaceful gathering.

Tuesday, the group gathered outside the courthouse.

In a video posted online by the protesters, Keene police, who can barely be heard over a lawn mower, appear to be asking protestors to leave. One officer also attempts to confiscate the bullhorn, which another woman, not Courser, holds.

She refuses to give him the bullhorn until Rivera threatens to charge her with a felony if she doesn’t turn it over. He can be heard telling her it is evidence.

Burke declined comment through a spokesman for New Hampshire Courts, Laura Kiernan, and referred reporters to the Keene Police Department.

John Greabe, a visiting law professor at Franklin Pierce Law School and constitutional law expert, said First Amendment law is a sticky area. In general, government can legally determine the reasonable time, place and manner of speech as long as a reasonable alternative for that speech exists. And police can ask protesters to quiet down if they are being disruptive.

“If she was in fact arrested without being told to stop (being disruptive),” Greabe said, “I’d have to say that’s pretty draconian.”

Recently, a law enforcement officer reader of FreeKeene.com decided to participate in the discussion that ensued in the comment section about my blog detailing my opinion of better ways to engage in open container civil disobedience.  The commentary between this officer (who I am grateful to for deciding to join in our discussion) and I shifted towards my pointing out the immorality of using violence against peaceful people.  The officer’s response I think is something worthy of discussion.

The officer replied to my assertions that initiating violence against the peaceful is immoral by stating:

“I don’t use violence but the neccessary force to obtain my lawful objective.”

“I don’t use violence (…..)”

Yes you do.

“(L)awful objective (…..)”

“Lawfulness” doesn’t matter.  It was at one time lawful to own another human being.

This response indicates a very, very, very important disconnect that many good-hearted police officers have.  I consider myself to be good-hearted…  and I had this same disconnect for about 10.5 years of police service.

The police academy doesn’t teach new recruits that they’re directing violence towards mostly (the vast majority) peaceful people. It teaches them that they’re using “necessary force.”  “Necessary” as in there is absolutely no other alternative.

“The final solution” sounded a lot better than saying “systematically mass-murdering six million Jewish people.”  This is violence…. and sugar-coating it with the term “necessary force” makes it sound like using the force (violence) is both necessary and moral.

Initiating violence is never necessary or moral to solve peaceful problems.  Understanding this basic concept is to understand everything that we who write here at FreeKeene.com represent.

Two days ago I posted a blog which included a letter I sent to the Keene Police Chief regarding a question as to why his agency is not enforcing the state’s prohibition on activities during the Lord’s Day.

I’ve never met the fellow but from what I hear from fellow FreeKeene.com contributors he is indeed a very nice guy.  I personally appreciate his responding to me so quickly regarding my questions.

This is what he had to say:

Mr. Jardis: Thank you for your inquiry. Relative to my comments on WKBK concerning RSA 332-D, I was incorrect.  It was my belief at the time that these laws had been repealed only to later learn they had not. It appears they are on a time line for repeal sometime in 2011. I researched whether the City of Keene utilized the exceptions outlined in RSA 332-D:4.  I learned that in 1971 the City Council voted in favor of permitting the activities that 332-D:1 prohibited.  I am not sure why they no are codified in the City Ordinances. As it stands, the laws are still active. However, as you well know, law enforcement often utilizes discretion in applying any law given the circumstances or events under which the violation may have occurred, or is occurring.  There is activity afoot to repeal these laws and I have heard no argument against doing so.  As such, the Keene Police Department has utilized the appropriate level of discretion in not pursuing violations of RSA 332-D, and will continue in that respect. Best regards, Kenneth J. Meola Police Chief

I have three observations I’d like to make.

1.  The Chief deserves respect for being willing to admit that he was wrong.  There are seemingly an unlimited amount of laws (most ridiculous) on the books that it would be impossible for someone to know them all.  The paradox I believe that the Chief not being up on the law reveals is that it does not matter whether or not YOU know what the law says as you are subjected to every single one of them at all times.

Legally, the Chief can find a law that he himself didn’t know by randomly flipping through the book and then enforce it on you.  You didn’t know what the law was?  Tough cookies:

626:3 Effect of Ignorance or Mistake. –

II. A person is not relieved of criminal liability because he acts under a mistaken belief that his conduct does not, as a matter of law, constitute an offense unless his belief is founded upon a statement of the law contained in a statute or other enactment, or an administrative order or grant of permission, or a judicial decision of a state or federal court, or a written interpretation of the law relating to the offense officially made by a public servant, agency or body legally empowered with authority to administer, enforce or interpret such law. The defendant must prove a defense arising under this subsection by a preponderance of evidence.

Translation:  Ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

You are expected to know and comply with every single law that the police decide to enforce…  an impossible task.  How is this fair?

2. The Chief says regarding my question about the ordinances exempting the community from the silly Lord’s Day restrictions: “I researched whether the City of Keene utilized the exceptions outlined in RSA 332-D:4.  I learned that in 1971 the City Council voted in favor of permitting the activities that 332-D:1 prohibited.  I am not sure why they no are codified in the City Ordinances.”

Unless these exemptions are codified (words written down on paper) in the city ordinances…  they do not exist and the statewide scheme for regulating the Lord’s Day is the law of the land within the City of Keene.  I think that the Chief’s answer was slightly misleading as it seemed to me that he was trying to claim that his agency is not enforcing the law because of a ghost ordinance that would prevent them from doing so.

3. The Chief states regarding his agency not enforcing this law: “As such, the Keene Police Department has utilized the appropriate level of discretion in not pursuing violations of RSA 332-D, and will continue in that respect.”

My response to this is that they are simply ignoring this law.  Discretion does not mean nullify the existence of law.  Discretion does not mean you can use your own opinion regarding the validity, purpose, or practicailty of a law.

This contradicts the Chief’s assertions on the radio that if they have probable cause that a law is violated that they will enforce it.  It also seems to contradict the first assertion in the Keene Police Department mission statement.

The police CAN and ARE ignoring certain laws.

Chief, THANK YOU for ignoring this stupid law about morality and religion that has no victim.  Were your officers out enforcing it they would be using coercion, threats of violence, and possibly real violence to implement it.  This would make your officers the aggressors against peaceful people.  That would be wrong and you are absolutely right by not allowing it.

Please follow your own example and ignore more stupid laws about morality and religion.

Want to easily stay in touch with other individuals who believe in a peaceful evolution into a society where violence isn’t used to solve peaceful problems?

Have a cell phone that is able to send and receive text messages?

Join the Free Keene UPOC group.  It is like an internet chat room…  but one that is connected to your phone through text messaging.  If you don’t have unlimited text messages, or even a cell phone, not to worry: you can read/send messages through the website.

This is sort of like the Keene 411 system…  but easier to use/set-up.  It is also private…  so the general public cannot view the discussion.

(Membership in the group is restricted to verified contributors/participants with the Free Keene blog and forum.  After you click “Ask To Join” please PM me on the forum so I know who I am verifying!)

After hearing the head of the Keene Police Department assert that outlawed activities are not illegal during his interview on WKBK I’ve decided to e-mail the Chief and inquire with him publicly what his positions are on enforcing the law.

Kudos to FreeKeene.com’s Sam Dodson for mentioning the ridiculous law that the Keene Police apparently have decided to ignore.  This ignoring of a law seems to fly in the face of the first provision of the Keene Police mission statement.

My letter to the Chief is below:

Chief Meola,

My name is Bradley Jardis and, as you know, I am a blogger at the FreeKeene.com website.

I recently heard an interview that you took part in on WKBK.  During the call a fellow contributor of mine at FreeKeene.com called to participate in the interview and he made reference to your department not enforcing the provisions of RSA 332-D.  Your responses to him during this interview have left me with questions regarding the consistency of your law enforcement agency enforcing the law.  I have some questions about this and I would be very appreciative for your response.

Although it is safe to say that at the present time the vast majority of people disagree with many positions our blog takes regarding the role of government, one cannot deny that our website is frequently visited by residents of your community.

QUESTION #1

During the interview you claimed that engaging in sports or business on the Lord’s Day is not illegal.  A clear reading of RSA 332-D seems to conflict with your assertion.  Specifically:

332-D:1 Sunday Work. – No person shall do any work, business, or labor of his secular calling, to the disturbance of others, on the first day of the week, commonly called the Lord’s Day, except works of necessity and mercy, and the making of necessary repairs upon mills and factories which could not be made otherwise without loss to operatives; and no person shall engage in any play, game, or sport on that day.

RSA Chapter 332-D allows individual local governing bodies to exempt their communities from the provisions of this state law.  Specifically:

332-D:4 Exceptions. – Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the governing body of any city or town from adopting bylaws and ordinances permitting and regulating retail business, plays, games, sports, and exhibitions on Sundays. Bylaws and ordinances adopted by the governing body in accordance with this section shall continue in force until altered or annulled by vote of the legislative body.

I’ve reviewed all of Keene’s city ordinances and have failed to find an exemption to the prohibition of activities authorized by the Keene city council.  Does such a bylaw or ordinance exist?

QUESTION #2

State law imposes a penalty for violation of chapter 332-D.  Specifically:

332-D:7 Penalty. – A person who violates any provision of this chapter is guilty of a violation.

Does your police department have the authority to enforce this law?

QUESTION #3

Recently the New Hampshire General Court debated legislation intending to change the requirements of the prohibitions imposed on activities during the Lord’s Day authorized by RSA 332-D.  The General Court declined to make any changes to this chapter leading me to believe that it is the remaining intent of the General Court that activities prohibited by RSA 332-D:1, absent a specific bylaw or ordinance exempting a local municipality from it’s requirements, remain prohibited.  I’ve also examined the history of the chapter and have found no case law or Attorney General opinion declaring that the statue is unconstitutional or otherwise unenforceable by the authorities.

I’ve been to Keene many times on Sundays and have seen numerous violations of this law.  Why doesn’t your police department enforce this law which is openly violated by countless individuals in your community on a weekly basis?

-/-

I thank you for your time in reading and responding to my concerns.  I believe all residents of Keene are entitled to know which laws their law enforcement agency intends to enforce.

Respectfully,

Bradley Jardis
FreeKeene.com

I arrived on-scene as Heika was being loaded up into a KPD cruiser. Her crime? “Free” speech over a megaphone. We were kicked out of the court earlier by the robed man because a bunch of activists stood for Rich Paul when he was called. It was because we were kicked out of court that Monica went to get the megaphone – I had run home at this time to make a phone call I was late for, and when I returned, Heika was being arrested for “disorderly conduct”. According to witnesses, Heika was not on the megaphone when police arrived. They didn’t give her a warning that she was being “disorderly” – they just came up and arrested her. They are calling it a bail violation, so she’s in jail at least for the night and the arraignment is expected for tomorrow. Hopefully she won’t lose her job.

Please move to Keene and help us end this madness!

Varrin Swearingen is the president of the Free State Project, and lives in Keene. Here’s his letter to the editor that appeared in the Keene Sentinel about the Central Square controversy. These are his opinions as Varrin the individual, as he is not speaking for the FSP:

Some people feel the topless, smoking and drinking demonstrations in Keene’s Central Square have gotten out of hand. Others feel the government and its police are wrong for making and enforcing unjust behavior codes.

So far, this debate has centered mostly around what behavior is acceptable.

Ironically, what some would call immoral behavior simultaneously illuminates and distracts us from the true moral problem. There are two facets of this previously-hidden moral problem I’ll highlight.

First, it is not just for anyone, including government, to coerce support of property from people who don’t agree with the terms.

Second, the government’s right to enforce behavioral standards is justly limited to protecting people and their property from external harm and trespass.

So-called public property, such as Central Square, fails to be moral on both counts: it’s coercively funded, and “the public” cannot, by definition, be external.

In this case, there is a simple solution to both moral failures: privatize Central Square.

What might such a solution look like? Here’s an idea that would retain most of the popular features we would like to enjoy.

The city could deed Central Square to the “Central Square Trust” subject to conditions. Funding could be removed from the current city budget.

The existing mandatory tax associated with that funding could be replaced by an optional property tax to be forwarded directly to the Central Square Trust for maintenance of the property. The Central Square Trust could then contract some or all of its management, including behavioral policy enforcement, back to the city to make it easy. This would keep things more or less status-quo, with a couple of important exceptions.

First, paying for Central Square would become truly voluntary on the part of both parties. Disenfranchised taxpayers could legally stop paying for Central Square, and the Central Square Trust could refuse revenue from uncooperative residents.

Second, as a result of initiating private property rights, “the management” could morally evict people from Central Square for any reason and legitimately enforce eviction using existing trespassing laws.

It could then choose to evict in cases that would be legally and/or morally controversial on public land.

With this kind of setup, users would simply be guests who use the property, not out of right, but out of invitation. Central Square’s revenue would directly depend on satisfying the taxpayers’ actual desires, lest they stop paying.

It could do that systematically without the same limitations burdening public property. To tidy up the transaction, the Central Square Trust could post signs explaining that Central Square is private property, it’s free for use use by all according to its policies, and violators are trespassing.

Instead of arrests for breasts, violators would simply be trespassing — a concept I believe the current batch of demonstrators actually respects.

I’d be happy to participate in such a plan and I bet most others would, too.

We could voluntarily restore a respectful, family-friendly Central Square and morally ask those who won’t cooperate to leave.

When asked, the current batch of controversial demonstrators would likely leave without a fuss and Central Square would be, for the first time ever, truly and rightly “ours.”

VARRIN SWEARINGEN

2 Starlight Drive

Keene