Bear's blog

With various state legislatures tackling the "issue" of guns in the workplace parking lot again, I see the usual Repugnican apologists whining that letting workers store guns in their cars violates the companys' rights.

Let's put that argument in plain corporate English:

From: Management
To: All Peons Employees

The Overseers and Masters

When honest people speak of "rights" we are using a bit of verbal shorthand; the complete term is "human rights." Real people have rights; not artificial legal constructs.

Once upon a time, there was a Free State Project, which planned to convince 20,000 freedom-minded people to move to one state and work to reverse the trend of power-grabbing-government expansion. While I thought this was a nice idea, I did not sign up because the FSP participation guidelines required "porcupines" to vote in the targeted state. I held philosophical objections to voting.

Later, the FSP changed the guidelines from mandatory voting to a more general "political action" requirement. I could do that, so I signed up.

Back then, there was a catch to signing up: Once the FSP gained 20,000 members, everyone had to move to the targeted state within 5 years. But lest the members be kept in relocation-limbo indefinitely -- what if it took 30-40 years to reach 20,000 members? -- a deadline for recruiting was set: September 2006. If 20,000 was not achieved by then, everyone was off the hook, released from their contractual "statement of intent." That seemed fair.

Back then, the FSP was a volunteer operation. That changed too; suddenly, without consulting the membership (not required, but it would have been nice), the board of directors decided to pay a "CEO" about 3 times my own annual salary. It lost a few members then.

And comes another guidelines change: The board and director, now getting money, unilaterally decided the 2006 recruiting deadline was merely "informal;" the deadline would not count if they were "close" to getting 20,000 people. "Close" was not defined. So long as it might look as if the FSP could reach 20,000, the board could continue to draw checks.

I decided that the FSP had begun unstoppable self-destruction, but stuck to my own original statement of intent; a promise is a promise. To me at least.

After the FSP officially chose New Hampshire as the state to be "freed," I packed up and moved there. I was among the first to do so, and there are still only about 384 of us.

And now I learn that the board decided to "...strike the informal 2006 goal for obtaining 20,000 signatures..."" altogether. But they will generously "allow people who thought this goal was a deadline to opt out at the end of 2006." Perpetual money, and they need not even claim to be "close" to achieving any goals.

In fact, that "goal" was most certainly a deadline until they began screwing with it in a quest for perpetual employment. (Why not just run for Congress and pass incumbent protection acts, board members?) That original deadline served multiple purposes: It gave the FSP a measurable benchmark for recruiting. It set a timetable so people could plan their lives. It encouraged compliance by people who might want to weasel out later. And if the FSP failed, it let the organization die quietly, so we could try something else.

This is no longer the FSP I supported and joined. Consider me opted out now.

Police/"civilian" relations have been on my mind for a long time; certainly before the Katrina-sparked events in New Orleans, with law enforcement officers going AWOL, being filmed looting, beating up old ladies, and stealing firearms, and stealing cars.

Let's try a little thought experiment, in two parts.