Keeping the Balance - Railroads and the Public Good

This article, entitled "Strict enforcement of trespass law by BNSF could put Wisconsin shoreline off limits",is from 2015, but it points out some current problems with lawmakers who do things quietly. Like those in WI who quietly removed an exemption, from the law regarding trespassing on train tracks, for pedestrians who were walking straight across them for a purpose at places other than legal crossings. (I mistakenly thought this was the work of Governor Scott Walker​, but this article says that happened in 2006, well before he was elected in 2010. My apologies to Mr. Walker on that front.) 
I also bring this up now, because there is a growing level of enforcement of the no trespassing on railroad tracks law that demonstrates the incremental way in which tyranny occurs. 

I get it that railroad employees don't want to have to deal with the tragedy and aftermath of stupidity, drunkenness or suicide by train. Nobody would. Cops don't like dealing with stupid, drunken or high people or those who wish to commit suicide by cop either. Automobile drivers don't like dealing with such things. Nobody does, but they happen. You could build the tracks high enough in the air to avoid people and vehicles or underground and those people would still find their way to the tracks. Because that is human nature and one of the unavoidable risks of having a railroad system. 

There is also the private property argument - that this is the private property of the railroad. The thing is, railroads are seen as a necessity for the public good. Something that enables the ruthless use of eminent domain.  
From https://www.nap.edu/read/22093/chapter/22
Eminent Domain and Railroads
"Many states have extended the right to take private lands for public use to certain companies, including railroads, because the states consider the use of such property to be fundamentally public."

Then the argument becomes why can't the public walk across the tracks or even on the tracks when they are not in use? The public has, in a way, purchased that land for the railroad companies by the use of eminent domain, giving the railroad companies a bargain. The railroad companies probably got a bargain from the government in the purchase of land that was not acquired by the use of eminent domain too. 

By walking across the tracks for a purpose, when there is no train in the vicinity, the public is not damaging the tracks nor impeding the progress of the trains. That seems a fair exchange for the really enormous amount of power granted to the railroads because they are providing what the government regards as a public good. It is also prevents the reasonable objections the people would otherwise have made to giving up easy access to things across the tracks in places that are not near legal crossings.

So no,we do not own the railroads, but they are not as much private property, philosophically, as they would be were the land all purchased without the use of eminent domain. The fact is that if we did not recognize the railroads as a public good, they probably would not own that land either. It would have been far too expensive to purchase without the use of eminent domain and government cooperation. They were formed and continue to operate because of the good will of the people. 

While there will always be grumblings from those who live near train tracks about the noise and inconvenience, we tolerate that because of the perceived good they do. How fast will that goodwill evaporate as more and more people are hunted down by the railroads to be ticketed for trespassing? Probably not fast enough in our current, corrupted, pseudo republic to do what should be done - restoring the exemption.

(Yes, that's 10 years between quietly dropping the exemption and enforcement, That way, when questioned about it law enforcement can say "but it's been the law for ten years, you should have objected back then if you had a problem with it." Also, it will slowly seep into the public consciousness in a way that will have our children accepting that it has always been this way. Given the rather poor education they have been/are being given regarding the founding philosophy of this nation and the exercise of rights, how would they even know to object? NOAA would be proud.)

(I was going to post a photo taken between the tracks here. The caption would have read:

"This is a photo that was taken from a public sidewalk at a marked crossing of a newly laid track which is being straightened by the slow moving piece of machinery you can see at the end of the visible track.  Is it unsafe? It's a public sidewalk. Is it illegal? As a photo taken from a public sidewalk in a marked crossing, it shouldn't be." 

But I am finding that the stress incurred by the thought that the ever so powerful and rich railroads might choose to sue me into financial ruin just to make an example of how easy it is for speech to be chilled through lawfare and the imposition of unreasonable fines has worked. And I despise myself for the cowardice of that choice.)  

Railroads work when there is cooperation. Blocking people's access to the other side of the tracks when there is no train is not cooperation. Asking for train schedules and permission if you are a professional photographer who wants to do a shoot, paying attention whenever you are around railroad tracks, checking for trains and crossing quickly and safely as a responsible person would - these are cooperation on the part of the public and just common sense too. Removing the exemption is not cooperation and is a poor exchange for the power to exercise eminent domain. 

We cannot legislate away stupidity or depression. They are part of human nature. Punishing the rest of us for what those who do not have the common sense God gave a chicken do is pointless and will not stop those people from getting killed and traumatizing the railroad workers who had to watch it. As for depressed people using trains to commit suicide - suicide is already against the law.

The railroads are certainly making an effort to educate people about the fines for, and now criminality of, trespassing on the tracks. I suspect they could do the same for just plain educating people about the dangers of being on the tracks - aside from the obvious one. Things like uneven footing, the 3 feet a train extends from either side of the track, optical and auditory illusions created by hills, curves and valleys. 

But quietly doing away with reasonable accommodations between the public good (railroads) and the normal and reasonable pursuits of everyday life (crossing a track to get to the other side - you know, like you do with roads) is how laws become tyrannical. The exemption needs to be put back. 

"For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:" ~ Romans 13:3

R.I.P. LaVoy Finicum

This blog offers condolences to the family and friends of Mr.LaVoy Finicum. 

It has been the policy of this blogger to refrain from offering political opinions or other analysis while offering condolences. But the death of Mr. Finicum is different. It is different because this is not just the death of a rancher, but an unmistakable symptom of the decay of the character of the citizens of America,

While there will be many deconstructing the events around his death, the truth is that he was killed because we have allowed our government to become tyrannical. 

 Were it not so, peaceful protesters would have been allowed to be occupying  this property for as long as it took to resolve the constitutional issues at hand. They were not threatening the lives of anyone. They were not damaging the property. Their stated reason for seizing that property was Constitutionally valid. While I may not have agreed with their choice of actions, I respected their wish to support and maintain the US Constitution, because that protects my liberty as well as their own.

Having watched Pete Santilli's live feed for a while, it is clear that many of the people of this nation are no longer in possession of the necessary character needed to maintain the form of government set up by our founders. The sheer juvenile nature of some of the comments regarding the death of an intrinsically valuable and unique human being, one who was willing to give his life in support of their own liberty - liberty, not license - was appalling. Their ignorance of the constitution is appalling. Their lack of respect for life is appalling.

Their lack of ability to look at the situation and disagree respectfully out of some sense of decorum and respect for the dead is unacceptable.

 My apologies to the family and friends of Mr. Finicum for offering this opinion where it does not belong. Again, you have my condolences. May the Lord guide us because we are lost.

"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand." ~ Ephesians 6:12-13

‘Complete anarchy’ as Obama invades girls’ showers

"The Department of Education is demanding that an Illinois school district allow a boy who identifies as a girl and plays sports on a girls team to have full access to the locker room and showers with the girls on the team.

Read more here:Complete anarchy’ as Obama invades girls’ showers
The reason this is so wrong is because it violates the most fundamental implied contract between the government and parents with regard to the public school system. That contract is one that says, you(parents) give me(government) access to your children to educate them and I am worthy to be trusted with that most valuable part of your family - your child(ren).

That implied declaration of trustworthiness means that the government does not get to traumatize your child, nor encourage them in harmful behaviors, nor to use them for social experiments.

Telling girls that they must allow males to use ladies bathrooms is bad enough, but to say that males must be allowed to be naked in proximity to themselves while they are also naked or in various stages of undress is harmful. 

It tells girls that they should disregard the feelings of discomfort that occur when another person is behaving in a way that is outside of the norms of that society. There is a good reason for those feelings of discomfort. It is to keep you safe.

When someone is behaving oddly, it is a signal that they may be mentally unstable or ill or about to engage in bad behavior. The natural impulse is to keep your distance from such people. And that's a good thing. Sure, artists play on such discomfort all the time, but schools are not meant to be social or artistic experiments. Because if they were, no one, except those who don't care about the mental health and well-being of their children would send their children there. 

And that is the proper response for the parents of this school and all schools across the nation - keep your children home. Homeschool them, get them a tutor, send them to a private school that is segregated by sex, but do NOT allow the government to engage in social experimentation with your children.

And don't just vote with your feet on this one, because that will leave other children subject to being the victims of this egregious abuse of the population. Go to your local school board meetings, call your state and federal legislators and your mayor and your governor and demand that the government cease using children for their social experiments. It is unethical and abusive of children. 

In fact, tell them the social experimentation is not the province of government at all, because it is not. 


Call. Because if there are no consequences for bad behavior, the behavior will not change. But, before you call, call your school and let them know that your child will not be in attendance until you can be assured that they will be safe from being forced to participate in such madness. You are the first line of defense for your children. Failure to protect them from this is failure as a parent.

"23 Then said the king, The one saith, This is my son that liveth, and thy son is the dead: and the other saith, Nay; but thy son is the dead, and my son is the living.

24 And the king said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a sword before the king.
25 And the king said, Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other.
26 Then spake the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her bowels yearned upon her son, and she said, O my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it. But the other said, Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it.
27 Then the king answered and said, Give her the living child, and in no wise slay it: she is the mother thereof." ~1st Kings 3:23-27

Political Pistachio: A Coddled Tyrant

This post by a friend of mine, Douglas V. Gibbs, said what I have been thinking for some time. As I could not have said it better myself, it seemed like a good idea to share his post:

"One more parallel exists.  As with the British, the attempt by the federal government is to influence public opinion through misinformation.  The press has always been a valuable weapon for tyranny, serving as an important tool in any propaganda campaign.  To properly carry out such insidious public opinion engineering, however, the tyrant needs more than just a compliant and complicit media, but one that is fully aware of what the flow of information is supposed to be.  Theirs is not about what is best for the country, but what is best for their agenda.  It is not enough to lead the Americans to socialism.  These tyrants wish for the American people to raise the red flag of socialism themselves, willingly, and enthusiastically.

The leftists in control of the federal government are not interested in being reasoned with, because their agenda for socialism trumps the welfare of the United States, or the welfare of its citizens.  No other choice exists, but to stand up against the federal government, and restore our Constitutional Republic."

See more of this excellent post at: Political Pistachio: A Coddled Tyrant

Wisconsin Guns Across America event

Today I dragged myself out of bed to drive down to Madison for the Guns Across America event being held at the capital. I took some photos and some video. The video will have to wait for tomorrow as I need to change the format in order to get it uploaded in a reasonable amount of time, but the photos I can share now.

Her sign reads, and correctly so might I add:"Rights are not gifts from the government"

Senator Glenn Grothman

 Peacefully leaving after the rally

The ambiance, while friendly and polite, was not the same as the cheerful boisterous gatherings put on by the TEA party, no. These were the people who have the vision to see what's coming if we do not preserve the 2nd amendment. they were grim and steadfast.

Don Pridemore - running for State DPI superintendent

There was a bit of remorse over what we have allowed the enemies of this nation to do to our children because we have allowed them to infiltrate our schools and capture the minds and hearts of our children nearly without opposition. But that can be remedied.

This is not a conservative, liberal, GOP or democrat issue. This is a Rule of Law issue and every American citizen needs to understand that if the 2nd amendment can be usurped by the oathbreakers in DC, then we are living under nothing more than a soft tyranny, soon to be replaced with a hard tyranny. (Don't believe me? For those who were foolish enough to trust Ms. pelosi - wait until you see what's in obamacare. You won't be waiting long. Think you're safe because you can afford a "Cadillac plan"? I hope you can afford the 40% penalty on it too. But that's going to be the least of your worries.)

If we do not remove these oathbreakers, then we and our children and our grandchildren along with the rest of the world will revile us, and rightly so, as the generation that failed to preserve the last best hope of freedom in the world. I hope, that with God's will - and I hope that we, as a nation can regain God's good will towards us - we can avert the looming destruction of this nation.

As I approached, I couldn't help but notice that the great majority of the people were avoiding the lawn. (Good thing too because it was unseasonably warm-a blessing perhaps on the event. ) Once again, responsible people act responsibly.

I have no idea what this guy's sign said, he was moving too fast for me, but thought the Guy Fawkes mask was worth showing.

In the end, it's not about party or philosophy. It's about Liberty.

"He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty; and he that ruleth his spirit than he that taketh a city." ~ Proverbs 16:32

Winds of Secession?

Update 11/13/12: Here is a list with total signatures of the states that currently have petitions to secede at whitehouse.gov. As you can see, there are a few states that have more than one petition. Interesting.

1. Alabama - 16,255
2. Alaska - 601
3. Arizona - 9,281
4. Arkansas - 12,186
5. California - #1- 12; #2- 3,561
6. Colorado - 12,395
7. Delaware - 3,393
8. Florida - 17,368
9. Georgia - #1-16,201; #2-8,555
10. Indiana - 10,969
11. Kansas - 736
12. Kentucky - 10,710
13. Louisiana - 25,465
14. Michigan - 11,168
15. Mississippi - 10,884
16. Missouri - #1-10,417; #2-9,077 #3-10,336
17. Montana - 8,744
18. Nevada - 4,617
19. New Jersey - 8,520
20. New York - #1-10,129; #2-2,691
21. North Carolina - 15,195
22. North Dakota - 7,837
23. Ohio - 3,352
24. Oklahoma - #1-1,643;#2-9,273
25. Oregon - 9,101
26. Pennsylvania - 5,986
27. South Carolina - #1-9,761; #2-12,758
28. Tennessee - 15,927
29. Texas - 57,276
30. Utah - 2,305
31. Wyoming - 2,375

And of course this list would be unfair if I didn't include a link to this petition: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/strip-citizenship-everyone-who-signed-petition-secede-and-exile-them/ZbMjcwPf
. Please note that the numbers had changed by the time I went back to double check them-usually by about 200+ signatures and Kansas appeared while I was making this list at 1:00am. I think anyone may sign any petition so I assume that there are some folks who are signing them all. Makes this a right mess to figure out. Still interesting. As with any document, be sure you read it before you sign it.

In the aftermath of the "election", some are choosing to play by the rules, in apparent denial of the fact that those whom they are opposing have thrown out the rule-book altogether, by demanding recounts and etc. It didn't work for those who opposed Saddam Hussein and I suspect it won't work in America either. It is the state of denial that insists that if we play nice, so will they. Reality is about to bite hard, but I wish them luck ...and a swift awakening to reality that isn't too painful.

Some folks are doing something a bit different. As of this writing, Louisiana, Texas, Alabama, New York, Colorado,and North Carolina all have petitions at whitehouse.gov peacefully requesting secession. Now, this is not as official as it sounds, since anyone may start their own petition at the site and when it reaches 30,000 signatures, then the petition is bumped up to the next level bureaucrat who decides whether or not it will be ignored. I would guess that no matter how many signatures are gathered, these will be ignored unless this administration decides they can be used against us in some way. 

In point of fact the fellow who started the North Carolina petition, has people commenting on his blog that they would sign in a heartbeat, but for the fact that they don't want to put their name to anything that might drawn the negative attention of this administration. And that's the problem right there, isn't it? If they felt free enough to sign those petitions, there would be no need for them. That they feel too threatened by this administration to even sign such a thing is indicative of the tyranny with which this administration has been credited. I suspect it will get much worse before it gets better.    

 The entire premise of this nation, up to the Civil War was that the United States were united by their agreement to be so. The U. S. Constitution is the contract by which the states agreed to be united, which is why it is a list of restrictions on what the federal level of the government may do rather than a grant of authority to do whatever it thinks necessary. The states didn't want a high handed federal government telling them what they could and could not do - that was the bailiwick of the citizens of those states.

Many (mostly those who favor the out of control, micromanaging, spendthrift nanny state we currently suffer) will argue that the civil war ended state sovereignty. Others will argue that state sovereignty is no more negotiable that one's right to control what one eats or drinks, it is self evident and therefore unalienable.(Mrs. obama may have tried to force those kids to eat healthy, but they refused to eat her choices for them and went hungry instead - see the parallel to freedom there?) 

They have 30 days from their posting to get those signatures. What will be done if they get them? Hard to tell. I suspect this administration will, as they have done in so many other areas, simply ignore them. That's not the question. The question is what will the people do?

Update 11/11/12: As of this writing, 14 more states have added their petitions to the milieu. California, Missouri (Actually there are two petitions from Missouri), Tennessee, Michigan, South Carolina, Oregon, New Jersey, Indiana, Florida, Kentucky, Georgia, Mississippi , Montana, North Dakota, Apparently the petition for the secession of New York was filed by someone in North Dakota. Why? Who knows, but any number of reasons spring to mind from humor to cutting out the UN heart of this tyrannical administration. Keep up on new petitions here. Be aware that in order to sign the petitions there, one must have a whitehouse.gov account

"The fining pot is for silver, and the furnace for gold: but the Lord trieth the hearts.
 A wicked doer giveth heed to false lips; and a liar giveth ear to a naughty tongue."~ Proverbs 17:3-4

If You Don't Get Caught

"There is NO reason for a student to have a knife on campus"
said the head of campus security in response to my question about their policy on pocket knives.

Yes, I was in attendance at a parent orientation event for my son's college. "I beg to differ" was my reply. "Well, why do you think anyone should be able to carry a knife?" she asked as though I were the slow student in a class. In addition to what should have been obvious, that I am a responsible adult who hadn't attacked anyone with my knife at breakfast or even at dinner the previous evening simply because it was handy,( as is almost always the implication when discussing these types of policies) I said that I had been in the habit, when I was younger, of carrying a pocket knife everywhere I went and it had been extremely useful in a number of situations. That, in addition to the blade, my pocketknife had had a variety of screwdriver tips and other useful tools.

Her response was not to acknowledge that a pocketknife was actually a very useful tool, (since scissors are generally awkward to carry) but rather to tell the rest of the parents to send a set of screwdrivers with their child, almost jokingly forcing the assumption that only the other tools I had referenced on my pocketknife had been useful, rather than asserting that the blade itself was a useful tool.

Then she shook her head dolefully while loudly repeating "THERE IS NO REASON FOR A STUDENT TO HAVE A KNIFE ON CAMPUS" as though by saying it slowly, it would become a less ridiculous thing to say. The other parents looked at me in some revulsion, as though I had grown a second head, or maybe that's just my perception since I was so obviously being scolded by the wise head of campus security whose job it is to keep our precious children safe.(From pocketknife wielding maniacs such as myself no doubt.)

While I was being assured that the bread knives they could use for dining purposes were the only knives allowed on campus, (A pointless gesture since sharp edges are available almost anywhere if someone is so motivated.)my son was being assured by the older students who were administering his orientation that "pretty much anything is okay as long as you don't get caught."

My point here is not that the students are bad people, or that the policies are excessively nannyish(or at least not my whole point), but rather that when regulations get to a certain point of intrusiveness, people ignore them and do what they like. There is a balance that must be maintained between personal responsibility and safety. Just as the excessive protectiveness at this institution of higher learning(and nearly all others of which I am aware) has generated an attitude of "just be careful not to get caught while you are breaking the rules" in the students, so does it occur in the general population. The problem is that when a people are forced to abandon the study of and adherence to our laws because they have become overly intrusive or protective and multiplied beyond comprehension, then we are likely to gradually come to a point where we disregard all laws.

If we are not a nation of laws, then we cannot have the highest level of individual freedom that is possible in a stable society. We must either restrain the government from becoming so intrusive, through laws, regulations and ordinances, that common sense will no longer serve to keep an individual safe from the breaking of those laws or prepare for a society where the law is regarded as a tyrant from whom we must hide our activities if we wish to live a reasonably normal life.

Laws serve a purpose. What we need to decide in November, is whether the purpose of laws is to assure a stable society with the greatest amount of individual liberty possible in such a society or to subjugate the people to a tyrannical government that can enforce archaic or little known laws at any time to enforce their will on the people as a whole.

The IRS has become the master tool of behavioral modification for the nation already. Now they will be in charge of regulating our access to health care as well as our ability to keep our money and our property.

Vote on character, not party in November. It may be the last chance we have at freedom. If we are willing to claim it, it will only be the beginning of the struggle to restore our freedom.


" But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. " ~ Gal 3:23-24