On Monday, May 21, 2001, at 10:53 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --
> On 20 May 2001, at 16:49, John Young wrote:
>> And that's why Tim will get a subpoena to a Grand Jury to explain
>> why he did this.
>
> Usually the authorities are reluctant to repress articulate people who
> can afford good lawyers. Their usual tactic is to kill a few rednecks
> in order to send a message to the guys that they really wish to
> suppress.
>
I know someone whose view is that to spend good money on shysters to
defend the obvious is foolish. His view is that spending $300 an hour
for at least a dozen hours overall so that a "Speaker-to-Burrowcrats"
can draft response letters in the proper lingo is a waste of his money.
Some of his friends think he is foolish for thinking he can avoid hiring
shysters.
His view is that he is under no obligation to explain his First
Amendment exercise, nor his he obligated to spend his time and money
travelling from his isolated home to a regional airport, getting on a
plane with his own money, checking into some court-approved fleabag
motel, not being able to have his guns with him during this travel
process (if he flies), and then (maybe) being reimbursed some fraction
of his expenses. HIs view, so I understand, is that if they want his
views on his First Amendment exercise they can come and pick him up at
his house and handle _all_ travel issues, in a manner to which he is
accustomed, and of course reimburse him for his lost time at his usual
rates, plus a bonus for the hassles of dealing with burrowcrats.
My friend says that he is not the government's bank, and that he does
not advance them money to cover incurred expenses. He also points out
that the justice system was not until recently used to have casual
witnesses to minor things travel 3000 miles or more to answer a few
questions.
But I don't always agree with him on all points.
And so far he has only been "served with papers" once in his lifetime.
He told the process server to get the fuck off his property, that he was
tresspassing. This trespasser declared angrily that he some "right" to
be the on my friend's property. My friend disagreed and shouted louder.
The process server declared that he "felt threatened" and would be
contacting the local cops. My friend slammed the door and made sure his
usual precautions were ready, but the Gestapo did not arrive.
Alas, this person tell me, the process server had already handed him the
papers. My friend complied with the served process in the most minimal
and useless fashion he could imagine. So he told me.
My friend now knows to look through the peephole before ever opening the
door. (My friend has also twice--that he knows of-- received "mail
subpoenas," which he did not think were possible. After all, he knows
the State-Monopoly Postal Scam is not reliable, and he often doesn't
even look through all of his mail for days or weeks, sometimes
misplacing letters and spam and advertising completely. So he knows that
such "mail subpoenas" clearly are not legally enforceable, so he ignores
them. Those he finds in his flood of incoming mail, that is. He expects
these mail subpoenas to be replaced with FedEx or Certified Mail
subpoenas; if this happens he expects he'll have to be "not home" when
suspiciously-small packages for things he did not order are delivered.)
My friend believes the signs are abundant that state fascism is out of
control. I agree with him, of course.
--Tim May
