Article Image

When the Law is the Problem

Written by Tisha Casida Subject: Congress-Congressmen

It would be an optimistic assumption that most of us, want to make an honest attempt to follow “the law”.  But, what is the law?  And are all of the laws on the books – whether at a federal, State, or local level – actually beneficial to the community and/or the individual rights of the citizens of their respective States?  There is an argument to be made that sometimes “law” is plunder.  Because:  whoever so makes the laws, is who will benefit from those laws.

Congress – people who go to Washington, D.C. to be legislators and write laws (much different from being a ‘representative’, of whom there are only a few) – who are these legislators beholden to once they are in office?  Well, they are beholden to the money that got them there, which oftentimes comes from special interest groups that want them to make laws to either benefit or protect their companies and industry.

Why do people in Congress spend millions of dollars to get in office and make a salary that is a fraction of that if they are elected?  Good will?  I think not.  It is simple math and logic – they go to exercise their power, to bring your taxpayer dollars back to those who got them elected.  It is a simple strategy – and they use “the law” to do this.  This is law as plunder – this is taking legislation and creating rules and regulations that in effect protect or promote certain companies, certain industries, all while lining the pocketbooks of corrupt individuals who are using “the law” to take from one group and give to another.  What is fair about that?

Members of Congress swear an oath upon the Constitution of the united States of America, but unfortunately for most of them, their words mean nothing.  It is their actions that we should watch.  Most members of Congress actively participate in writing laws – the problem is that now those laws have piled on top of each other and have made almost every action we take “illegal” – we must ask permission (fees, licenses, taxes) for almost any activity that we engage in: working/labor (income tax), property (building licenses, property tax, among others), driving (driver’s license), lemonade stands and other means of selling food (retail food licenses), farmers’ markets (event licenses), etc.

What is the law?  At one point in time, the Constitution of the united States of America was developed to restrain the federal government to its enumerated ‘powers’ – one of those being to protect the individual rights of the citizens of their respective States (e.g. the Bill of Rights).  States could create their own constitution and  “laws” for the ‘benefit’ of their own citizens as long as they did not violate an individual’s natural liberties.  States have an obligation to protect their citizens from the heavy hand of force (government).  A constitutional republic, affords for a mix and match of social, philosophical, and political discourse – so long as individuals’ lives, liberties, and properties are protected – each State can have more discretion as to what is right for them.

In 1850, The Law was first published by Frédéric Bastiat – and engagingly illustrates some of these points.  If you don’t have time to read this, look around you – and think about everything you have to ask permission for in order to survive.  Whomever makes “the laws” – will benefit from those laws.  And legislation coming out of Washington, D.C. is not the law of the Universe, which wants you to be free, be prosperous, and own your property.  What is law?  I can tell you what it is not.  Law is not anything that takes away your life, your liberties, and your property.


10 Comments in Response to

Comment by Joseph Vanderville
Entered on:

Here comes anothther Loco that just flew out of the cuckoo's nest who is telling us that we should live life without any law. Is there anymore evidence necessary to prove this case of lunacy? I rest my case ...

Comment by Michael Ellis
Entered on:

The Law. The idea of law goes back to the Code of Hammurabi. The law is anything that those who have the power of violence says it is. Its as simple as that. We dress it up with lots of rituals like majority rule and democratic process but in fact the hundreds of thousands of laws that are currently on the books are only designed for one thing....control. The laws does not protect, it doesn't prevent, it only serves to punish. It is a way to legitimize violence and intimidation against the population at large. For those that are unaware of our situation, let me put it like this. Those who write the laws and enforce the laws, don't actually have to follow the laws. There is not one single law that has been written that has ever served to protect a single person, nor have any laws prevented a single 'crime'. Laws are punitive and that is all. There is not one single person reading this who has not broken at least some laws. This is by design. If we are all violators of one law or another, that makes us all potential criminals. If we are all potentially criminals then that gives those in control the ability to threaten just about anyone with incarceration. This creates a state in which everyone adopts a slave mentality. We are all slaves of the state.  

Comment by Ana Panot
Entered on:

Anno75, you again hit the nail on the head -- a nice educational lesson to those who think law is the problem. But again notice how it triggers somebody's neurosis, babling in his long, long comment below that's coming from nowhere, to nowhere! The wasted space should have been given to those who want to post comments useful to the discussion of this important issue.

Comment by Steve Duncan
Entered on:

 A close friend narrated to me that his cousin was born with an "X" mark on his forehead.  It was believed to be that of Satan.  That cousin of his was a "civil disobedient activists".  He hated traffic laws and traffic cops who always issued a traffic violation ticket everytime he violates traffic laws, rules and regulations instead of forgiving him as a ricidivist.  His last traffic violation was running the red light at more than 60 mph. He now resides six feet below the ground, with a young married couple and their six-year old child he brought along with him to his grave.

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Seems to me that "law" simply means "cause and effect" or "action and reaction" behind that which happens.

I don't have any tendencies towards, or beliefs in, Evolution, but an evolutionist might say that man-made law is natural law, because man came from nature, and so his law has to be from nature as well.

All this kind of thinking takes us back to the idea of "random." Is there any pure random anywhere? Or is everything "set in stone" so to speak, acting according to the pressures that act upon it, which, in turn, act according to the pressures that act on them, all the way back to the beginning.

Now, be patient with me here, and think about what I am saying. I am using "random" to explain "law." It is difficult to state it correctly in such a brief writing as this.

When you search throughout science on ideas and explanations of "random," you will find two basic points.

1. The random that is spoken of in science is really pseudo random - not really random at all. It has to do with our ignorance of the operation of things. We use ideas like "random" and "probability" to form an educated guess about something we don't really know much about... when the details are so complicated and numerous that we can't know them. This explanation fills far more volumes on "random" than #2.

2. There is no pure random that science has been able to discover. Everything in the universe acts according to "cause and effect, action and reaction." All the theories that attempt to explain how and where random might exist, do so by expressing tons of deep, non-random "LAWS." So, the deeper one gets into science and the explanation of things, the deeper he gets into natural law, and the further he gets away from what pure random effect must be like. (Nobody really knows what random is, because we all live by all the laws of nature all the time. Nobody has ever had a real random experience.)

The point is, all of man's homemade laws, are part of natural law, because they are part of man, who can live no other way than by natural law. The reason why man's laws fail to accomplish the things he wants out of them, is because man never places enough natural law into his laws, or into the usage of his laws, for his laws to follow through with natural law, which is over everything. So, it is not really that man's laws fail. It is that they fail to accomplish the things that man set out to accomplish with them. Instead, they accomplish the things of nature, in the way they affect nature.

Consider this from Deuteronomy 4 (NIV):

1 Now, Israel, hear the decrees and laws I am about to teach you. Follow them so that you may live and may go in and take possession of the land the Lord, the God of your ancestors, is giving you. 2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord your God that I give you.


7 What other nation is so great as to have their gods near them the way the Lord our God is near us whenever we pray to him? 8 And what other nation is so great as to have such righteous decrees and laws as this body of laws I am setting before you today?

9 Only be careful, and watch yourselves closely so that you do not forget the things your eyes have seen or let them fade from your heart as long as you live. Teach them to your children and to their children after them.

What this means is that the 10 Commandments and other laws that Moses recorded in the Pentateuch in the Bible, while Israel was wandering in the wildernesses of Arabia, are some of the best laws to follow if you want to live according to the laws of nature. But they have to be followed from the heart. They have to be followed with wisdom. The more they are broken, the more life will fail. Why? Because they are the laws that were set in place by God, Himself, through Moses. And God is the One who set up the laws of the universe and nature in the first place.

Comment by Boston Releigh
Entered on:

I think these guys want to start an experiment to show what happens if they disobey the law. As a military man, I know what happens to deserters who disobey the military law. I wish they start their experiment by disobeying the traffic law, like running through the red light. The result is a profound way of learning the outcome of such experiment. No need for argument.

Comment by Bertha Anonimo
Entered on:

This article is a terrible mess up in an attempt to radically interpret what "law" means.

The author rides on his donkey of errors – galloping on an erroneous premise that law "takes away your life, your liberties, and your property." It is a stupendous contradiction, to say the least! Without law and order, you have no life, liberty and property. The law orders it for you.

The law is NOT passed by CONGRESS against the PEOPLE. The People and Congress are but one entity. We learn this truth in the kindergarten of politics – in the polity of our Democracy. Hillbillies have yet to learn this in school, not from spitting tobacco out of their mouth like an ignorant smart ass.

The People themselves are the law. It does not benefit anyone except themselves. Those who benefit more than the rest, is an "imperfection" of the law that the people themselves had created through Congress or the Legislature. That’s because "the people" themselves are not a "perfect", faultless creation of God. But to say that a group of people schemed to pass a law to benefit themselves to the exclusion of others, only comes from the hallucinating mind of a moron. Even negative influence peddlers in Congress like Ron Paul who want to pass a law to abolish the Federal Reserves and the Income Tax could hardly pass the two chambers of Congress. He has been doing it for the last 20 years and still no success. That's because that moronic thinking of a useless politician in Congress may be supported by a handful of scalawags but it is NOT the thinking of Congress, it is not the thinking of the American people.

In other words, to write down this stupid claim that the law is created by those who only want to benefit themselves is a criminal lie. Only criminals fault the law, to cover up a rogue mind.

The law is NOT the problem [only felons want you to think that it is] – the law was created to solve problems. Those who disobey the law IS the problem. The number one enemy of criminals is the law.

Just a few corrections out of this outrageously contradictory article written by a confused mind that failed to understand what "law" means. Interpreting the law in a clandestine way to jibe with one’s hatred of Congress and the Government identifies a dangerous lunatic character in the FBI’s Watch List.

Comment by Bob Podolsky
Entered on:

Well said, Tisha! For a still deeper discussion on the nature of Law, here's another article you might enjoy.

Comment by Dennis Treybil
Entered on:

You made a nice distinction between natural law and formal (artificial) law.

If formal (artificial) law is the foundation of guvamint power and legitimate government derives its power from consent of the governed, then law must at least have begrudging consent of the governed, We the People.

The Lousiana State Constitution asserts that law is not merely consent of the governed, it is more than that, it is the will of the people.

Whose will is it to put unearned property in their own pockets?  The pocketeers' will.  That's whose!

Who was it that observed the constiution contained within itself the seeds of its own destruction?  No matter.  The constitution charted a republic.  A republic is a state in which supreme power is held by all the people.

Well, a monarchy had just failed when the constitution was framed.

So if a monarchy failed and a republic was doomed to failure, what's the problem?  What do these two forms of rule have in common?  The rulers and the ruled!

The human factor is the source of the conundrum. 

There's the rub!

DC Treybil

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

The law? The law is what the strongest kid on the block says is the law. And a lot of the time, the strength is in shrewdness rather than muscle.

But, the strong kid better have (and use) this shrewdness to keep himself at least somewhat honest and humble... if he wants to remain the strongest kid on the block, that is. Why? Because, even the strongest kid can be taken down by a bunch of weaker kids joining together.

What the Ron Paul campaign is about is, keeping the Government in a more or less humble and honest position. Sure, the reason that he wants to do this is because he truly wants to see peace, tranquility and happiness among the people. But there is a greater reason.

Ron Paul's biggest reason for running a campaign designed to bring honesty and humility back to Government is, the kids on the block have taken just about all they are going to take. If Mitt gets in, he will move Government further in the direction it has been going, stretching the peoples' patience all out of proportion, and the big kid on the block will be taken down by the people.

It won't be easy. It will be messy, and it will be bloody. But the Occupy movements show us that the people simply won't stand for much more.

RP doesn't want this to happen. He would rather that the Government use wisdom and self-restraint. And if it can't be wise, then at least it should be shrewd enough to recognize that its impending downfall is of its own making.

If the powers that be are smart, they will cause Ron Paul to become President. Then they will sit back for awhile, and let him do his job. If they don't, it'll take them a century to rebuild what they will lose when the weaker kids take the big kid down.

Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network: