The Manchester Free Press

Thursday • March 21 • 2019

Vol.XI • No.XII

Manchester, N.H.

Alabama court upholds first amendment rights for registered sexual offenders

By Anna Beahm . . . A federal district judge has ruled parts of Alabama’s sex offender registration and notification laws are unconstitutional under the First Amendment, court records show.

read more

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

Vin Armani’s Epic 15+ Hour Broadcast from Liberty Forum 2019

Free Keene - Sun, 2019-02-10 07:43 +0000

Vin in his Nevada days.

The Free State Project‘s wintertime convention, Liberty Forum, happened this weekend and they had the good fortune of having the talented Vin Armani perform a broadcast throughout the event.

Vin is the host of “Destination Unknown” a weekly podcast with co-host and FSP early mover Dave Butler. Both Vin and Dave headed up the epic live video feed that aired for over fifteen hours spread across the three day event in Manchester, New Hampshire.

The broadcast featured various interviews of speakers at Liberty Forum including Lyn Ulbricht, Stephan Kinsella, two-time Liberty Legislator of the Year winner Mark Warden, Derrick J Freeman, and Free State Project founder Jason Sorens. They also interviewed movers to NH both new and old. It’s a lot of content.

The live video streams, archived on the FSP’s YouTube channel, also featured the excellent documentaries, “101 Reasons Liberty Lives in New Hampshire” and “Derrick J’s Victimless Crime Spree“.

Here are the streams. The first video is under two hours, as it was just for the evening of Thursday, February 9th:

Day number two, Friday, featured two streams, one over seven hours long:

The other stream from day two, was just under an hour:

Finally, on day three, Saturday, over seven more hours of streaming with multiple interviews:

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

NH Supreme Court rules with registered sexual offender who employed teen

By Holly Ramer, Associated Press . . . A registered sex offender did not break the law by hiring a 16-year-old boy to work for his landscaping business, the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled Friday.

read more

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

Why Can't We Just End NEVER-AUTHORIZED Prohibition, Already?

Adventures in the Free State - Fri, 2019-02-08 04:07 +0000
Holy gorram hell, I'm so tired of fighting these fractious, presumptuous, obstinate, insubordinate, rule-of-law-resistive assholes. This was the opposition to (effectively "merely", given the regulatory state to remain) dialing back neo-prohibition: recalcitrant "servant" (yet entirely self-serving, and on the clock, thankyouverymuch) enforcers -- who should have no official positions other than those given to them by their employers (that's you, madam taxpayer) -- and nanny-state prohibitionists -- about whose opinions regarding my rights over my own body I could not possibly care less, even were I paid handsomely to do so (but if and when I do care what they think, I will pay them for their advice) -- and children whose perverse and troubling-to-a-free-society understanding of Constitutionally protected inalienable rights and the intended purpose of this limited servant government can only be explained, it seems, by the interest-conflicted indoctrination inflicted by government schools (get them out...!!!). So in other words, pretty much business as usual.

Don't accept the bullshit. The bill doesn't legalize "under-age use" (but the kids can still go die in the regime's undeclared elective wars of empire, and everybody's in agreement they can easily get it now, so...) nor "DUI" by anybody, nor does it somehow empower black markets (which are caused by fiat prohibitions of market-demanded goods and services, y'see -- and the passage of the 21st Amendment, repealing the delegated authority for the only nominally lawful, if nevertheless also foolish, substance prohibition in this country, is proof that we'd actually learned that painful lesson once upon a time). The "gateway effect" is but a gateway to that thus-enabled black market, and thereby prohibition, if we're being, y'know, honest, undermines itself. Indeed, the "forbidden fruit effect" is suggesting that youth use goes down when adults manage to regain their rights from servant governments operating entirely above their delegated pay grade. Despite so much prohibition surrounding their production for so long, too, the growing statistics simply don't support the hysterically prophesied increases in all manner of terrible things (like, say, overdose deaths). But even if they did, liberty, however, does support -- does demand -- respect for self-ownership. And ostensibly, this society was founded on respecting and protecting such individual liberty.

And contrary to the up-ended, progress-oppositional "conservatism" message of the defiantly entrenched self-ownership-averse prohibitionists, "Live free or die" NH's recalcitrant "servant" government has had many opportunities to "lead" on this issue in an actually productive and liberty-friendly manner, to simply accept the demonstrated will of their employers, the people, now approaching three-quarters of whom want an end to this madness (but whom do they think they are, right?). Starting just in the last decade, we've seen 2008's HB1567, or 2010's HB1652 (video here and here), or 2012's HB1705 (video here and here), or 2013's HB337 (video here and here), or 2014's HB492 (video here and here and here and here and here), or 2016's HB1610, HB1694 or HB1675, or 2018's HB656 (video here and here and here) or SB233 (video here), or 2019's still-to-come companion HB722.

The People -- the boss in this here shop, and overwhelmingly in favor of ending this unauthorized and horrifically expensive (in blood, treasure and liberty) social-engineering experiment -- have been trying to lead their government, their servants, but have ultimately met defiant resistance at every turn.

While with the aforementioned HB492, the NH House became, in point of fact, the first legislative body in the country to approve the end of cannabis prohibition, sadly our "Democratic" governor at the time preferred conservative reactionism and the status quo to "leading". And the oligarchs in the NH Senate were more than happy to have her back in the unauthorized-to-them-to-begin-with "War on People Who Use (Some) Drugs"™. And so today NH is an island of prohibition in the northeast, entirely surrounded by the more enlightened, more liberty-friendly, more responsive, more obedient jurisdictions of Maine, Massachusetts, Vermont and Canada. Yep. Mighty proud...

So. This day, 2/5/2019, the NH House Criminal Justice Committee gets its latest shot at restoring some semblance of limited government (it's bad enough that we're looking at yet another over-regulated government monopoly rather than true free-market competition, the unique driving metric of which is satisfying customers, rather than cronies), with HB481, "relative to the legalization and regulation of cannabis and making appropriations therefor" (which nonsense title is the type that prompted the absurdist question posed in a previous post, "how much will ending prohibition cost?" -- 'cuz simply stopping what you're not allowed to do in the first place shouldn't cost anything!).

The legislative-majority Democrats now actually have "legalization" in their platform -- what took so long, "liberals"? -- but now we have a GOP governor obsessed with placating the (also servant, if we really need the reminder) police state and "Incarceration Nation". So keep your cards and letters and phone calls coming, free people -- both to your "representatives", such as they are, and to the corner office...

Press
  • Governor’s commission on alcohol and drugs against N.H. pot legalization - 1/25/2019
  • Will NH legalize recreational marijuana use? - 2/3/2019
  • Marijuana legalization showdown in N.H. State House Tuesday - 2/5/2019
  • Big Turnout For Bill To Legalize Marijuana in New Hampshire - InDepthNH.org - 2/5/2019
  • Hearing on latest bill to legalize pot marked by passionate debate | Crime | unionleader.com - 2/5/2019
  • NH lawmakers hear arguments for, against legalizing recreational marijuana - 2/5/2019
  • New Hampshire’s opioid crisis looms over marijuana legalization debate - The Boston Globe - 2/5/2019
  • CCC chair "comfortable" with [MA] banking, retail progress - News - MetroWest Daily News, Framingham, MA - 2/7/2019
  • Dave Solomon's State House Dome: A decade of efforts to legalize pot | Statehouse Dome | unionleader.com - 2/9/2019
  • CloseUp: The debate over legalizing marijuana in NH - 2/10/2019
  • With Marijuana Legalization Across All Borders, What Does It Mean For N.H.? | New Hampshire Public Radio - 2/12/2019
  • Legalize Pot? Amid Opioid Crisis, Some New Hampshire Leaders Say No Way - The New York Times - 2/20/2019
  • House Panel Recommends Passing Bill To Legalize Marijuana Use - InDepthNH.org - 2/21/2019
  • House committee endorses bill to legalize recreational cannabis | Crime | unionleader.com - 2/21/2019
  • My Turn: No proof of causation in anti-pot column - 2/25/2019



Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Michigan’s SORA is punishment, says MI Attorney General in amicus briefs

February 8, 2019

LANSING, MI – Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel filed amicus briefs in the Michigan Supreme Court today in Michigan v Snyder (Case number 153696) and People v Betts (Case number 148981), arguing that Michigan’s sex offender registration and notification requirements are punishment because they are so burdensome and fail to distinguish between dangerous offenders and those who are not a threat to the community.

read more

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

NH State House Examines New Voting System Proposals

Free Keene - Mon, 2019-02-04 22:15 +0000

Are New Hampshire’s representatives finally taking a closer look at alternative voting systems? For years, the state elections committee in the state house has rejected any proposed changes to NH’s voting system, regardless of how much sense they have made. However, now that Maine has adopted “ranked choice” voting, perhaps NH’s reps are taking the issue more seriously.

I was surprised recently to receive a call from Keene Sentinel reporter Jake Lahut asking me for my opinion on ranked choice voting for an article that appeared last week. As someone who has been a longtime libertarian, I’ve seen how the “vote for one” system we have in place hurts third parties, so I definitely support ranked choice and its competitor, the easier “approval voting”.

Both systems solve the “wasted vote syndrome” where voters, afraid of the worst of the two evils winning, will vote for the “lesser evil” of the two major party candidates. They will do this even though they may better agree with a third party candidate, like a Green or Libertarian, simply out of fear of their least favorite major party candidate winning.

Ranked choice allows the voter to rank their favorites on the ballot while approval voting allows the voter to simply vote for all those candidates they’d be alright with winning the election.

Last week in the state house, HB 505 was heard that would allow for approval voting to take hold in New Hampshire’s elections. Here’s the bill’s full hearing in front of the house elections committee:

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

State House crime policy hearings week of Feb. 4, 2019

Sate House Crime Policy Hearings Week of February 4, 2019 Monday February 4,  Legislative Ethics Committee 104 LOB.

read more

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

Bitcoin-for-Taxes Bill in NH Unanimously Approved by House Subcommittee

Free Keene - Sun, 2019-02-03 06:35 +0000

Here’s full video of the subcommittee that was assigned to look at HB 470, the bill that would authorize the “State of New Hampshire” to accept bitcoin for tax payments. The subcommittee voted unanimously to approve the bill with amendments. It now goes back to the full Executive Departments and Administration committee for another vote. Stay tuned here to Free Keene for the latest on this legislation.

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

Bill to ban sex offenders from some Halloween activities dealt setback in committee vote

A bill that would prohibit sex offenders from participating in certain Halloween-related activities had a setback Thursday in the House Judiciary Committee.

read more

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

"It is an income tax ... right there in black and white"

Adventures in the Free State - Fri, 2019-02-01 17:14 +0000
"... plain and simple. Page two, line 35 ...  Why must the government tell workers: 'this is the benefit you must pay for'? That is not a choice." They've "fixed" the "problem" in last year's bill: no more "opt-out". Simple coercion. Brilliant...!

All your contract are belong to us, youbetcha.

The quotes above are NH Senate Minority Leader Chuck Morse, from his testimony on SB1, "relative to family and medical leave", before the NH Senate Finance Committee, 1/29/2019. The video below leads off with a snippet from the very end, because I suspect it won't find its way into the official recordings (in addition to the now-standard (but still hit-or-miss) Senate committee audio recording, they live-streamed this hearing to Facebook for the first time), and I found it surprisingly rude. Uncollegial, even. The "space cadet" Chair Lou D’Allesandro disrespectfully references is Richard Lavers, Deputy Commissioner of the NH Dept of Employment Security, the state bureaucracy that would be tasked with administering this new government "beneficence" (with other people's money and contracts, naturally).

At about the 3:14:00 mark, Lavers presents the committee -- in response to committee questions, even -- with inconvenient facts and figures, the nuts and bolts and processes of implementation (repeating his similar duty at last year's hearing). In other words, he spoke to the content of the bill, as D'Allesandro claims to want at the end. But don't bother Chairman Lou with facts and figures when he's on a crusade. Damn eggheads, trying to confuse his subjects, spoil all his fun. Pay no attention to those mean old numbers and processes, children. Go back to sleep...

Testimony this year is happily willing to concede that this is, in fact, a subsidy -- although they get testy when it's directly put to them as such. An insurance attorney -- whose firm supplies this coverage right now, but would, believe it or not, just love a larger captive market, thankyouverymuch -- is downright giddy that "participation" would be coerced. A representative from a small business that proudly acknowledges -- leads with it, in fact -- the competitive advantage that offering such coverage affords them in the competitive market for labor -- it's good for their business -- yet nevertheless demands that government kill their profitable advantage in attracting and keeping the best employees. Relentless tales of people who experienced financial calamities because they'd chosen to not purchase insurance, now asking government to protect others from themselves by forcing them to buy insurance. We are told that, literally, "the future of our world" now rests on coerced paid family leave. I kid you not. But the construction unions are opposed. How 'bout that...

Otherwise, I say about everything else I want to say -- and here's a shock: it's all still relevant -- in the extended post on last year's first-crack ("government-solutions addiction", get it?) HB628, reposted below the video.

Press
  • New Hampshire, Vermont Governors Pitch Two-State, Voluntary Paid Family-Leave Plan - WSJ - 1/16/2019
  • Sununu Joins Vermont Governor to Pitch Plan for Voluntary Paid Family and Medical Leave | New Hampshire Public Radio - 1/16/2019
  • Sununu Unveils Paid Family Leave Plan; Democrats Balk | Concord, NH Patch - 1/16/2019
  • NH And Vermont Governors Propose Two-State Family Medical Leave Plan | NH1.com - 1/18/2019
  • Democrats unveil paid family, medical leave plan - 1/28/2019
  • Debate begins on paid family leave plan for NH workers | Politics | unionleader.com - 1/28/2019
  • N.H. Senate Democrats Begin Push For Paid Family Leave Plan | New Hampshire Public Radio - 1/29/2019
  • Paid family leave proposal makes its NH Senate debut - New Hampshire Business Review - 1/30/2019
  • A costly and unnecessary paid leave plan - THE JOSIAH BARTLETT CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY - 2/1/2019
  • SB 1, Paid Family and Medical Leave, Passes Senate Finance Committee - InDepthNH.org - 2/5/2019
  • Partisan Divide on Family and Medical Leave in Concord - InDepthNH.org - 2/14/2019



Here's most of the text from last year's post (go here for the video, if you dare):
"Family Leave Bill is Tax on Income" 
That's the assessment of the Coalition of NH Taxpayers. But let's start here, though, 'cuz since financials bore me to tears, I rarely have a natural opportunity to focus on this shit.

Theft (noun): taking without the owner's consent.

Is that, by itself, a fair, unbiased, unprovocative, nonpartisan definition? I believe it is. It doesn't matter a lick what the thief intends to do with his newly acquired property. If the owner didn't consent, then it's theft. And in my definition of a free society, theft is unlawful. Rude. Frowned upon, even. Property rights are respected and upheld, regardless of the identity of the thief. Yes, even regardless of whether or not the thief has been "democratically elected." That is, in fact, what we believe is, self-evidently, the purpose for instituting a government.

Taxation is theft perpetrated by government, as your representative, in your name. And just as capos worked for, and were accountable to, Al Capone, your respective government representatives work for you. You are the "top capo" in this legal mafia. And thus you are responsible for the crime -- like theft -- that they commit which you condone (if, of course, you do so) simply because you happen to like what they propose to do with the stolen property -- your neighbors' property, that they quite possibly don't consent to surrender (which is why the IRS has so many guns). Either you (perhaps grudgingly) recognize this basic truism, or cognitive dissonance is about to make your head explode.

HB628, heard here before the NH House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee, 1/16/2018, would set up yet another force-funded government entitlement that's nevertheless already available in the competitive (to the extent government "allows" it to be, of course) private sector.

For the moment, at least, a convoluted so-called "opt-out" provision is beneficently included, but privacy professional Rep Jess Edwards, starting at about 1:14:00, asserts that the Federal Trade Commission would characterize it as "unethical" and "an unfair and deceptive trade practice" -- were government to be actually held accountable to the rules it imperiously imposes on its employers, of course (hey, how terribly convenient that government doesn't hold itself to, well, even the standard standards, eh...?).

Except, even with the uniquely arduous, and shady (and precariously tenuous, to be sure) opt-out provision, the scheme won't generate enough theft to cover this bill's centrally-planned "utopia" -- per government's own testimony. Here's the "money shot," immediately following Rep Edwards, from Richard Lavers, Deputy Commissioner of the NH Department of Employment Security, responding to a question near the end of his testimony, at about 1:30:00.
"The work that Employment Security has done, in a mathematical analysis of various levels of participation, is that at an 8-week average duration, at a half-percent premium contribution, the only way this program is solvent is at 100% participation. At 90% participation, it's no longer solvent."
Dire words, indeed, from someone who does dearly love a good wealth-transferring government entitlement -- at least when the coerced books balance, anyway, so at least there's that...  He does figure that if the premium contribution were increased by fiat to .67%, and the duration decreased to just 6 weeks, it just might fly.

So. Oopsie-you-weren't-supposed-to-notice, but a proposed government program that's written to be insolvent, to fail ('course, we all know that won't happen: as Reagan said, "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!"). And even the skeptical DC Lavel, as we later hear, wants it to be "successful", "to be around for a long time". But it won't be with voluntary contributions. Whatever shall we do...?

Where, then, will the money come from to make it solvent? Charging ridiculous sums -- sums necessary to sustain inevitably inefficient non-competitive government bureaucracies, sums that the innovative competitive private sector seems able to avoid without (ok, much, comparatively) subsidies -- surely won't fly with government's happily captured market -- the market that's been testifying all day that they'd like more free and subsidized stuff. Because they'd neglected to buy insurance for themselves (well, government takes care of those things, doesn't it...?).

That leaves, seems to me, 1) removing the (already intentionally onerous) "opt-out" provision altogether to ensure the elusive-yet-necessary 100% mandatory market "satisfaction", or 2) implementing a broad-based income tax to shore the whole collectivist mess up (and gosh, then what other new programs could we fund by raising the rate just a little bit more...?). Aw hell. Why not both...?!

As always, however, as Meldrim Thompson explained, "Low taxes are the result of low spending," not t'other way 'round. Especially as government crowds the private sector out of the market even further, costs will go up. Because there's simply no (market) pressure not to. And seriously, when was the last time a politician lost his job for spending too much of other people's money?

But more fundamentally, if this scheme -- even as presumably eventually modified -- is self-sustaining, if this is a profitable model, why does government need to be involved at all? If you want FMLI, go voluntarily contract directly with a competitive private-sector provider. It's available now. One doctor testifying in great support of this bill curiously told the committee how he's set up a private-sector foundation to voluntarily help people get this insurance! Problem solved.

So why don't all these people who've suffered such hardships because they didn't have insurance, instead of trecking to the legislature to beg for contract intervention, just go get insurance? What's the advantage of injecting unnecessary and expensive government / employer middlemen if the customer will be paying for it either way (right?), other than being able to legally steal subsidies from their neighbors' dinner tables?

And here's a shocker: businesses love to get their operating costs subsidized by taxpayers, too. Corporate welfare. Just ask the private-sector airline industry, with their public-sector "security" costs -- subsidized by you, whether you choose to fly, whether you choose to suffer their "security theater" at all, or not. Your protestations are irrelevant. As Al Haig put it, "Let them march all they want, as long as they continue to pay their taxes." It applies to the Warfare State, too, in case you haven't noticed. Does that seem right to you...?

Further, if offering such insurance as an employment benefit is, in fact, a competitive advantage for the business (as also noted by supporters, curiously), they will happily offer it sans government coercion, because it's in their economic self-interest. Because it attracts the best employees, thus increasing the business' productivity. Because it's profitable. Again, problem solved.

So why are they lobbying government to provide -- hell, to mandate -- their competitors with equivalent bennies? Why are they advocating to undermine their own perceived competitive advantage in a cutthroat market for labor? Seems counterintuitive -- even foolish -- doesn't it? Could it be that they just want a subsidy? And the public perception of being charitable with other people's money, of course -- but ya simply don't get moral credit for that.

But if they nevertheless don't believe it makes economic sense, what can we surmise about no-skin-in-the-game ('cuz it's not its money, it's yoursgovernment's rosy "utopian" economic predictions?

Indeed, if it's inherently not profitable, what can we anticipate regarding where the funds will eventually have to come from for this force-based government entitlement that, once implemented, will... never... go... away?

If you're "allowed" (nevermind an actual competitive free market) even just a nominal "choice" -- that the FTC, according to someone who should know, would likely call "an unfair and deceptive trade practice," remember -- this bill as written will not work. According to a state economist. Even if you simply don't like competitive free markets and voluntary contracts. Won't work.

You can do better on your own. Right now. And you can control it. You should do that.

But then, in a free society, one that respects the rule of law -- hell, even in this one -- insurance contracts aren't supposed to be a government function in the first place. You have an unalienable right -- and a concomitant responsibility, notably -- to control your own contracts (including, potentially, a voluntary contract -- get this -- to manage your contracts). And to control your own property. Even if your addle-pated neighbor "neglected" to anticipate certain contingencies, you are under no lawful obligation whatsoever to bail them out. 'Course, you can always still choose to help them voluntarily. Used to be that way back in the day, in point of fact...

What if servant government simply gave up the repeatedly empirically failed notion that it perfectly and uniquely groks economics, the incomprehensible economy -- for everyone -- and knows better than you how to run your life -- at your neighbors' expense?

What if servant government was compelled to simply acknowledge and humbly accepted that it was never expressly delegated the lawful authority in the first place...?

Press
  • Stop the secret income tax | New Hampshire
  • NH HB 628: One Step Closer to the Perpetual Drain of an Income Tax - GraniteGrok — GraniteGrok
  • Letters: Income tax bill disguised as insurance bill is bad for NH | Manchester Ink Link
  • Reminder: These New Hampshire House Republicans Voted for An Income Tax - GraniteGrok — GraniteGrok
  • Is New Hampshire Ready For Another Unsustainable Social Experiment? - GraniteGrok — GraniteGrok
  • House committee votes against New Hampshire family leave bill
  • Family leave bill set back by committee vote | New Hampshire
  • Is Gov. Sununu Going To Break His No Tax Pledge and Destroy the New Hampshire Advantage? - GraniteGrok — GraniteGrok
  • HB628: What We Learned From The House Finance Committee Work Session | The Liberty Block - Always principled, always libertarian
  • Dave Solomon's State House Dome: Family-leave bill faces veto | New Hampshire (4/15/2018)
And here's the key line: "HB 628 would effectively create an income tax, which I obviously can't support."
The governor cited the inability of the departments of Employment Security and Insurance to certify that the program as proposed will be solvent, and called for independent research to determine the number of employees who would voluntary choose coverage, and the frequency with which they would make claims.
"Only then would we have any ability to determine the true cost of such a program," he wrote. "To advance the cause of an optional paid family- and medical-leave program, the state must independently hire outside experts to design and develop a program that is guaranteed to be solvent."
But ya know what? They already exist. They're called "insurance companies". And they're already hired by individuals (or even businesses) who voluntarily choose (to offer the employee benefit of) coverage. "Problem" solved, no government involvement necessary. Nor advisable. Nor prudent...
  • Family leave: Numbers still don't add up | New Hampshire (4/16/2018)
  • Sununu says paid family leave bill runs afoul of N.H.’s ‘Live Free or Die’ nature (4/17/2018)
  • Capital Beat: Myths, realities in the paid family leave debate (4/21/2018)
  • Leave policies: Senate Finance makes sense | New Hampshire (4/22/2018)
  • Paid family and medical leave bill appears poised for defeat (4/23/2018)
I have to ask, "Regan Burke, of Salem," if you're begging the Senate to make you buy insurance, why don't you just go buy insurance...?
  • Family-leave supporters feel betrayed by Sununu | New Hampshire (4/24/2018)
  • Senate, as expected, kills family leave bill | New Hampshire (4/26/2018)

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

News on crime bills for the week of Jan. 28

News on crime bills for the week of Jan. 28
By Chris Dornin

There was a tense subcommittee meeting last week on our HB--229 to make Corrections run its draft policies before lawmakers and get them approved as administrative rules. We need a show of support for the bill at its next subcommittee meeting on Mar. 5. I've been sitting down with the six sponsors of the bill, and two of them plan to speak at that critical workshop. We need members of CCJR to speak too.

read more

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

HB 567 Would Move New Hampshire into Atlantic Standard Time, Year-Round

Free Keene - Sun, 2019-01-27 18:43 +0000

Last week, liberty activists testified in Concord in favor of HB 567 which would move us to Atlantic Standard Time year-round, so long as MA and ME also do. This would end the stupid, dangerous, and annoying clock shifting we currently have to do twice a year. I’m happy to announce that all signatures on the blue sheet in the committee room were in favor of this bill!

Here’s full video of all the house testimony on the bill:

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

Full Video of Committee Hearing on HB 470 to Legalize Bitcoin for Paying Taxes in New Hampshire

Free Keene - Fri, 2019-01-25 05:28 +0000

The bitcoin & cryptocurrency news sites are ablaze with the headlines that New Hampshire’s state representatives are again considering legislation to authorize state agencies to accept bitcoin for fees and taxes, HB 470. Here’s what you won’t find anywhere else – full video of Wednesday’s hearing at the state house, where everyone spoke in favor of the bill:

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

Why Don't We Finally Just END Prohibition, Already?

Adventures in the Free State - Fri, 2019-01-25 01:04 +0000
We've reclaimed the right to produce beer at home -- much as the Founders did. We've reclaimed the right to produce wine at home -- much as the Founders did. Why not liquor -- much as the Founders did? A craft hobbyist's goal, after all, is not to reproduce Budweiser, let alone a toxic product in addition to an insipid one. This is a labor of love and pride.

Indisputable: NH is already similarly defying the (entirely unauthorized) feds on medical cannabis. And equally defiant full "legalization" in the "Live Free or Die" state (thus removing our embarrassing current "island of prohibition" status) is within reach despite yet another recalcitrant governor defying the will of the people.

Further, while the 21st Amendment leaves to the states the regulation of alcohol, it does not -- it cannot -- authorize those states to ignore the rest of the Constitution as long as their regulation simply mentions alcohol. The First, the Fourth, the Fifth, etc. remain fully in effect. We need not trade one unalienable right in order to secure government's permission (does that seem right to you?) to exercise another.

Herewith, HB473, "allowing hobby distillation of liquors," before the NH House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee, 1/24/2019. The protectionist NH Wine and Spirits Brokers Association opposes it, big surprise. The prohibitionist New Futures opposes it, big surprise. Neither bothered to testify. The public hearing for 2017's similar HB427 came and went before your humble chronicler was even aware of its existence, and went down in flames. Let's get it right this time...
  • Home Brewing Is Legal, And Home Distilling Should Be Too
  • The Whiskey Making Was Hard, But the Government Was Easy - Reason.com



Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

NH Lawmakers Study our Bill to make the Department of Corrections Adopt Formal Administrative Rules

READ OUR LASTEST LEGILSLATIVE ALERT

https://us15.campaign-archive.com/?u=b1017c87e9bafb3ef49d18057&id=ec512b...

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

BREAKING: City Approves Pho Keene Great Sign!

Free Keene - Fri, 2019-01-18 19:18 +0000

City Approves Pho Keene Great Sign!

After the story Free Keene helped break about soon-to-open Vietnamese restaurant “Pho Keene Great” went viral, there’s a surprising development now three weeks later: Pho Keene Great’s sign has been approved – with the logo and name unaltered!

According to Isabelle Rose, Pho Keene Great’s part-owner, not only has the sign been approved, but it happened without them having the meeting that was scheduled with the city manager to discuss the manager’s concerns over the supposedly “offensive and not appropriate” name of the business.

It’s unfortunate that the new city manager, Elizabeth A. Dragon created the ridiculous situation in the first place, but apparently cooler heads at the city gang prevailed and Dragon has backed down. Good choice, considering the “City of Keene” would only continue to be ridiculed by people and headlines around the world if they continued to push all the way to court, where they would likely lose, just like they did when they tried to crush Robin Hood of Keene’s free speech.

The City of Keene happens to own the building in which Pho Keene Great will be opening, but that shouldn’t give them any further rights to control the name of a business. Especially after that same city manager had signed a lease agreement back in April of 2018 knowing full well what its name would be. They then collected rent from Pho Keene Great for the rest of the year before Dragon called Rose on Christmas Eve to object to the name and demand her temporary sign be taken down.

Pho Keene Great – T-Shirts Available at Rt 101 Local Goods!

I spoke with Rose today about the good news and she confirmed the sign will look as it does in the mock-up photo posted to Pho Keene Great’s facebook page, minus the street address. What a win! Further, Rose told me in an email:

“We stood our ground regarding our business name. And, on the basis of the First Amendment, we defended it. The City cannot regulate content. Further, no where in the contract did it stipulate we could not use that business name. The government cannot demand or require us to do anything that supersedes our baseline rights. We are deeply grateful to everyone that offered and gave their support and appreciate all opinions and input, even with those that were offended by our business name. Thank you.”

That’s not the only win for Pho Keene Great, however. The city’s predictable stupidity led to a media explosion with coverage coming from countless major media from all over. You can’t buy advertising that good and as a result of the publicity, the Pho Keene Great official t-shirts have been flying off the shelves at Route 101 Local Goods.

The little local shop was slammed with orders both in real life and on the internet from as far away as Australia and Afghanistan. Route 101’s owner Chris Rietmann says his shop has never been so busy and he’s shipped out well over 1,000 shirts so far. The story went so big, there were even people trying to sell knock-off shirts on other websites. However, only the official shirt sold at Route 101 Local Goods is the one where profits benefit Pho Keene Great, so get yours here online or stop in at 661 Marlboro St. in Keene!

Isabelle Rose, at her food truck in 2016.

Route 101 Local Goods was the location of Rose’s original bitcoin-accepting Vietnamese food truck, which is where she got her start serving delicious Pho noodle soup to people in the area and led to her teaming up with another local business owner to upgrade to a full sit-down restaurant – Pho Keene Great. Though NHPR ran a story this week suggesting some kind of conspiracy between me and Rose, the fact is that I’m merely the property manager for Route 101 Local Goods and I had nothing to do with the naming of her new restaurant. Though, I do love the name and when I heard about it last year, I predicted the city might step into the trap. And they did.

Now rather than gearing up for a protracted legal fight that would only hurt the taxpayers of Keene, Pho Keene Great’s owners can focus on opening their doors in the heart of downtown Keene’s Central Square, next to the City offices this March as planned, with an awesome logo and name intact. Hooray!

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

Chris Cantwell has become what he once hated – a total statist.

Free Keene - Thu, 2019-01-17 18:15 +0000

Chris in Simpler Times, Acting as Security for the Hallowkeene Dance Party in 2014.

While Christopher Cantwell still looks like himself on the outside, his beliefs have completely changed in the last few years and become even worse than they previously were. Tuesday night, Johnson Rice, Aria DiMezzo and I had Chris in the LRN.FM studio for a special internet-only, in-depth conversation that exclusively aired on the LRN.FM Twitch channel. If you can stomach the watch, it’s fascinating in a train-wreck sort of way.

In my last article about him, written shortly after his arrest in Charlottesville at a white nationalist hate rally, I explained that despite Chris’ libertarian activism being covered by this blog in the past, he had never been a blogger at Free Keene, nor was he ever invited to be. When he came to Keene in the early part of this decade, he was just crass libertarian comedian Chris Cantwell from Long Island. He wasn’t a racist, but still caused much controversy for his hatred for the police.

Today, Chris has embraced the police as his potential tool of oppression, even though they recently threw him into a jail cell for months in Virginia. As he revealed in our conversation Tuesday night, he literally wants to become the state. Shortly after 2 hours, 22 minutes in he actually says he wants to force his beliefs on others, and then moments later says, “I want to be the government, yeah.”

His dramatic shift to statism isn’t a first for the Free State Project libertarian migration, which was the original reason Chris chose to move to New Hampshire. Early mover to Manchester Amanda Bouldin went from being an anarchist to a hostile-to-libertarians leftist. Conversely, Chris has gone from being an anarchist to a actual NAZI. There’s not a shred of a libertarian left in him. Libertarians, voluntarists, and liberty-loving anarchists believe people should be judged as individuals, by their words and actions. Chris is obsessed with race and admits in the conversation that it’s lazy to judge people based on the group into which they are born, but nonetheless runs with the idea anyway, as he considers the laziness of racism to be an efficient filter for his ideal society.

Previously a libertarian against the war on drugs, he’s now for prohibition.

Further, Chris actually seems to believe he has some chance of becoming the state, by leading some kind of white nationalist takeover of the government. About the only thing we agree on is his support of secession. Politics does indeed make for strange bedfellows. Of course if NH were ever to secede, we’d be at odds again as I support open borders and he supports a closed-border police state.

The conversation we had on the Twitch-only show (though I’ve since exported it to Youtube here) had some particularly bizarre moments including Chris holding the confusing position of having used cannabis while supporting continuing prohibition against it. He speaks out of both sides of his mouth by acknowledging the benefits of harm reduction and decriminalization but refusing to advocate for policy changes in that direction. It’s a perplexing perspective. Despite his own personal knowledge of the ineffectiveness of prohibition and the various studies proving it is an abject failure that creates the opposite of its intended results, he rejects all that on the near-religious belief that outlawing something reduces its use. It’s a belief wholly at odds with how he used to think on the issue.

At one point in the conversation he actually refers to himself as a caricature. What does he really believe? Outside of another total personality shift to a communist, that which he currently hates, or perhaps maybe going transgender, it’s hard to imagine where Chris will go from here.

Speaking of transgender, Chris also had a segment with the Anarchist Shemale, Aria DiMezzo. Aria wrote about it on her blog, and was disappointed she didn’t get more time on-air to fight with Chris. I’d invited her there with the expectation that Johnson wasn’t going to stay through the whole show and that Aria could take his chair later. Turns out, Johnson stayed the whole time. She was also upset that we didn’t go toe-to-toe with Chris on trans issues, which I honestly know next-to-nothing about.

Only advocates of peace are allowed to blog at FreeKeene.com

Others, Aria included, wanted to see more challenges from Johnson and I, and were upset that I laughed at Chris’ sick jokes. I’m the first to admit, I laugh at inappropriate things and I’ve always enjoyed Chris’ sense of humor. But Johnson and I definitely challenged his racist and insane statist beliefs. People will hear what they want to hear, of course, and people are highly emotional when it comes to Chris. They give him way more power and weight than he actually has. Some say we shouldn’t give him a platform, but then widely share the very video they say we shouldn’t have made.

Others, like me, can see the value in giving enough rope to Chris to verbally hang himself. We don’t think that bad ideas should be shut down, but instead they ought to be countered publicly. The answer to ugly speech is more speech, not de-platforming or censorship. If you don’t think I was the best person to counter Chris’ ideas, that’s fine. If you hate me because I’m kind to Chris, that’s fine too. Hate only hurts the hater. That’s ultimately the true irony here, that hating Chris only makes you more like him.

Chris has become what he once hated – an arch statist. He has rejected the libertarian principle of non-aggression and instead embraced coercive, institutionalized violence as his tool. Of course, violence begets violence and he will reap as he sows.

Though Chris is certainly responsible for his horrible beliefs, he’s ultimately a creation of a society that has long embraced the aggression of government as a tool to control their neighbor. If you hate Chris but you support the coercive state, you ought to look in the mirror. People cover their support for state violence by believing in nonsense like the “social contract” and refusing to see the threats of violence that back all government programs. They hold conflicting positions, like supporting the state while believing they themselves support peace. To his credit, at least Chris is honest about his reasons for supporting the state. He knows it’s a tool for the violent to control others and is eager to use it for his purposes. If you support the state, you helped make Chris into a monster.

Here’s the full, unedited, over three-hour show:

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

Relief for Some Persons on the New Hampshire Sex Offender Registry

Relief for Sex Offenders Retroactively on the New Hampshire Sex Offender Registry   Effective June 6, 2016, in New Hampshire, Tier 2 and Tier 3 sex offenders who were convicted before 1992 have a clear process by which they can seek to be relieved of sex offender registration requirements.     

read more

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

Free Talk Live Host Gets Hair Dyed for Charity!

Free Keene - Sat, 2019-01-12 04:38 +0000

With the help of Free Talk Live‘s generous listeners and the Shire Free Church, we successfully raising over $30,000 to buy some land to be used by a Ugandan orphanage! As an incentive, FTL host Mark Edge had promised he’d get his hair dyed. Here’s a time-lapse video of the active parts of the 2.5 hour salon visit (I cut out a lot of the waiting around). You can learn more about the fundraiser and orphanage at http://hope.freetalklive.com

Special thanks to the cryptocurrency-accepting Moda Suo Studio Hair Salon in Keene, NH!

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

Full Video of “Science on Tap” Cryptocurrency Panel in Manchester, ft. Vin Armani & Chris Rietmann

Free Keene - Thu, 2019-01-10 22:26 +0000

Vin Armani of Cointext.io and Chris Rietmann of Bitcoin Embassy New Hampshire were the special panelists at the recent “Science on Tap” put on by the See Science Center in Manchester, NH.

The audience had great questions and Vin and Chris provided excellent answers. The over-an-hour-long video is an excellent introduction to some very important concepts with cryptocurrencies. Highly recommended!

Categories: Articles, New Hampshire

The Manchester Free Press aims to bring together in one place everything that you need to know about what’s happening in the Free State of New Hampshire.

Media

Articles

Bloggers

Our friends & allies

New Hampshire

United States

We publish links to the sites listed above in the hopes that they will be useful. The appearance of any particular site in this list does not imply that we endorse everything that the particular site advocates.