[00:00.000 --> 00:05.760]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[00:05.760 --> 00:12.320]  In a rare bipartisan defeat for Barack Obama, the Senate voted overwhelmingly Wednesday
[00:12.320 --> 00:18.720]  to keep Guantanamo open for the foreseeable future and forbid the transfer of any detainees
[00:18.720 --> 00:25.080]  to facilities in the U.S. U.S. District Judge John Bates says the U.S. can continue to hold
[00:25.080 --> 00:30.880]  some prisoners at Guantanamo indefinitely without any charges. Judge Bates said after
[00:30.880 --> 00:36.560]  9-11 Congress gave the President authority to hold anyone involved in planning, aiding
[00:36.560 --> 00:43.880]  or carrying out the terrorist attacks. A Pentagon report said 74 released Guantanamo detainees
[00:43.880 --> 00:51.120]  returned to terrorism. However, the Pentagon has provided no way of authenticating 45 unnamed
[00:51.120 --> 00:57.880]  recidivists while only a few of the 29 people identified can be independently verified as
[00:57.880 --> 01:04.120]  having engaged in terrorism since their release. This news brief brought to you by the International
[01:04.120 --> 01:10.880]  News Net. A new Cornell University survey on trends on union intimidation is providing
[01:10.880 --> 01:16.960]  labor supporters with critical ammunition in their struggle to pass a card check bill.
[01:16.960 --> 01:22.720]  The survey singled out a baked goods company called Earthgrains for its strong arm tactics.
[01:22.720 --> 01:28.760]  In 2000 when its Kentucky plant tried to organize, Earthgrains videotaped employees talking to
[01:28.760 --> 01:34.360]  union representatives, confiscated union literature, interrogated employees about whether their
[01:34.360 --> 01:40.160]  co-workers supported unions and threatened their jobs and retirement plans. According
[01:40.160 --> 01:47.720]  to the study of over 1000 union organizing drives, such tactics are now standard practice.
[01:47.720 --> 01:52.440]  Management threatened to close plants and cut wages and benefits in half the cases.
[01:52.440 --> 01:57.760]  The survey found that what distinguishes the current organizing climate from previous employer
[01:57.760 --> 02:04.360]  opposition to unions is intense and aggressive anti-union campaigning of a kind previously
[02:04.360 --> 02:10.760]  found only at Walmart. Fifty-five percent of non-managerial workers say they would vote
[02:10.760 --> 02:15.040]  for a union but only 12.4 percent are actually organized.
[02:15.040 --> 02:21.400]  Top of the hour news brought to you by INN World Report.
[02:21.400 --> 02:27.040]  World renowned biologist Pushpa Bhargava says genetically modified organisms, GMOs, are
[02:27.040 --> 02:34.280]  a major contributor to Americans sharply deteriorating health. Investigations in India revealed most
[02:34.280 --> 02:41.960]  buffalo that ate GM cotton seed had complications such as premature deliveries, abortions, infertility
[02:41.960 --> 02:48.880]  and prolapsed uteruses. Many calves died. In the US, farmers reported thousands of pigs
[02:48.880 --> 02:55.400]  became sterile after consuming GM corn. Some had false pregnancies and others gave birth
[02:55.400 --> 03:01.480]  to bags of water. Cows and bulls also became infertile when fed the same corn.
[03:01.480 --> 03:09.880]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at ruleoflawradio.com. Live free speech
[03:09.880 --> 03:35.280]  talk radio at it's best.
[03:35.280 --> 04:02.560]  This is the Rule of Law.
[04:02.560 --> 04:11.800]  Many Kelton and Debra Stevens. Yes, they are acting like bloody fools. The FCC, the legislature
[04:11.800 --> 04:17.560]  trying to push through legislation that just ain't going to fly. We've got John Bush with
[04:17.560 --> 04:24.280]  us this evening talking about some victories in the legislature as of this week and I'll
[04:24.280 --> 04:29.840]  be railing on the FCC in a little while. John, thanks for joining the show this evening.
[04:29.840 --> 04:35.440]  Thanks for having me as always, Debbie. All righty. All right, so give us the update on
[04:35.440 --> 04:41.360]  the big win or the apparent big win. Yeah, so everybody that helped out and participated
[04:41.360 --> 04:46.540]  in the wonderful, not so wonderful times, legislative process, whether it be making
[04:46.540 --> 04:51.120]  a call or actually showing up through the Senate Bill 298, the sobriety checkpoint bill
[04:51.120 --> 04:56.480]  of hearing, now it's time to give yourself a pat on the back because we'll know for sure
[04:56.480 --> 05:02.120]  after tomorrow, but based on many different reports, Senate Bill 298 is going to be left
[05:02.120 --> 05:09.440]  pending in committee, which means that it will be officially dead for this 2009 session.
[05:09.440 --> 05:17.680]  So chalk up another victory for Liberty. They used to be few and far between, but it seems
[05:17.680 --> 05:25.720]  more and more they are occurring and it's definitely exciting. So. Yeah, it shows the
[05:25.720 --> 05:32.200]  importance of just showing up and actually participating in the legislative process and
[05:32.200 --> 05:37.160]  holding our representatives accountable and it shows just how important a simple phone
[05:37.160 --> 05:45.340]  call or a simple trip down to the Capitol and a stare in the face really is because
[05:45.340 --> 05:50.580]  we defeated 298. It had the highest chance of passing that it has since it was introduced
[05:50.580 --> 05:55.680]  in 95 or 93. They've hit it every single session. This one was supposed to be the most
[05:55.680 --> 05:59.160]  watered down and had the most restrictions and it was the most favorable and had the
[05:59.160 --> 06:03.840]  most compromises. So this one was actually teetering on the edge of passing, but thanks
[06:03.840 --> 06:09.840]  to the hard work of some dedicated activists and patriots, we were able to effectively
[06:09.840 --> 06:13.800]  take advantage of the legislative process or the remnants that we still have in this
[06:13.800 --> 06:18.960]  country and in this state, the great state of Texas, and we made it work and we had a
[06:18.960 --> 06:23.280]  victory for the Constitution and for the people and I'm very happy that everybody helped us
[06:23.280 --> 06:26.240]  out. Well, John, thank you for all your hard work.
[06:26.240 --> 06:32.360]  I want to thank everybody for all their hard work. Staying up late hours, waiting and waiting
[06:32.360 --> 06:38.520]  and waiting for hours and hours from 2 p.m. till 1 a.m. to put a stop to this and Sheila
[06:38.520 --> 06:44.080]  Dean of 511 Campaign had a similar victory a couple of weeks ago regarding the implementation
[06:44.080 --> 06:49.400]  of the Real ID Act here in Texas. Looks like that's left pending in committee as well because
[06:49.400 --> 06:54.000]  of everyone's hard work. That's great. Yeah, and we'll know for sure 100%
[06:54.000 --> 06:57.920]  by tomorrow on both of those bills and countless others. Pretty much anything that's left in
[06:57.920 --> 07:02.080]  committee and didn't get reported favorably out of committee to go to the calendars committee
[07:02.080 --> 07:07.320]  and in turn possibly go to the House floor is going to be dead after tomorrow. So a lot
[07:07.320 --> 07:13.000]  of terrible, bureaucratic, tyrannical, just trash that's going to just float away.
[07:13.000 --> 07:17.840]  But I promise you, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance and they will rear their
[07:17.840 --> 07:22.720]  ugly heads once again. And here's another good victory. Looks like the statewide smoking
[07:22.720 --> 07:25.640]  ban failed too. Woohoo!
[07:25.640 --> 07:30.000]  Wow. Yeah, that was a big one.
[07:30.000 --> 07:37.360]  What was the nature of the statewide smoking ban? Was that no smoking in the state of Texas?
[07:37.360 --> 07:43.600]  No smoking in the state of Texas in public places, restaurants and bars and the like.
[07:43.600 --> 07:50.680]  Yeah. Total tyranny. Now, just for the record, I am not a smoker.
[07:50.680 --> 07:57.520]  I have never smoked. If people blow smoke in my face, it makes me want to vomit sometimes.
[07:57.520 --> 08:05.880]  But I'm glad this passed. This is not about my personal comfort. This is about all of
[08:05.880 --> 08:10.720]  our liberty. And I'm pleased to hear this one.
[08:10.720 --> 08:15.920]  For sure. It's already passed in 22 other states. Twenty-two states have a statewide
[08:15.920 --> 08:20.920]  smoking ban. And we have a citywide smoking ban in Austin, which I still disagree with.
[08:20.920 --> 08:24.840]  But at least these things should be decided upon at the local, the utmost local level.
[08:24.840 --> 08:30.280]  And I still think it's total crap here for Austin. But a statewide smoking ban, 22 states
[08:30.280 --> 08:34.520]  already have it. The next step, of course, the next logical conclusion would be a countrywide,
[08:34.520 --> 08:38.000]  a federal smoking ban. Of course, they don't have the authority to do that. But I don't
[08:38.000 --> 08:41.920]  think they have authority to do it at the state level either, let alone the city level.
[08:41.920 --> 08:47.240]  Either way, Texas prevailed once again. Lance Armstrong and his Cancer Foundation came out
[08:47.240 --> 08:52.280]  against that. But here we see another example of there's so many instances where the road
[08:52.280 --> 08:56.120]  to hell is paved with good intentions, just like with all the DWI stuff and protecting
[08:56.120 --> 09:00.560]  us from terrorists or protecting us from economic collapse or protecting us from secondhand
[09:00.560 --> 09:06.360]  smoke and cancer. They always are just raping our civil liberties. But we got some victories
[09:06.360 --> 09:10.240]  here. So it's not as bad as everybody makes it out to be.
[09:10.240 --> 09:16.440]  Yeah, we are winning. And I have to say, I just want to comment on this smoke ban in
[09:16.440 --> 09:23.160]  public places here in Austin and secondhand smoke. Research has shown secondhand smoke
[09:23.160 --> 09:28.760]  is much more dangerous and hazardous to your health than smoking. And personally, I know
[09:28.760 --> 09:36.100]  a couple, I grew up next door to them. The wife was a smoker. The husband was not. He
[09:36.100 --> 09:43.840]  died of lung cancer and she's still alive. Okay. And I cannot eat around people that
[09:43.840 --> 09:48.160]  are smoking. I just can't. It will make me sick. I mean, I just can't do it. And so the
[09:48.160 --> 09:53.840]  thing is, I don't think that it's very nice. I don't think it's very polite for people
[09:53.840 --> 09:58.880]  to be smoking around other people that are eating. I think it's really rude. All right.
[09:58.880 --> 10:04.560]  But the thing is to pass laws regarding that sort of thing just doesn't make sense to me.
[10:04.560 --> 10:10.360]  And if push comes to shove, if there's no ordinances at the local level, well, then
[10:10.360 --> 10:15.560]  it'll just get taken out on the restaurant owner. All right. Because me and other people
[10:15.560 --> 10:21.480]  like me, like Randy, who we just cannot, literally we just cannot eat in places where people
[10:21.480 --> 10:25.800]  are smoking, well, then they'll just lose my business. Okay. And so if they want to
[10:25.800 --> 10:31.320]  be good restaurant owners and make everyone happy, what they'll do is they'll section
[10:31.320 --> 10:36.640]  off a smoking area and a non-smoking area. I remember there was a certain restaurant,
[10:36.640 --> 10:43.800]  Trudy's, I believe it was here on South Lamar, and they had a bar inside the restaurant.
[10:43.800 --> 10:50.760]  And so what they did was they actually had special filtration systems and like they had
[10:50.760 --> 10:56.640]  an airtight sealed bar where people could smoke inside the bar and a whole separate
[10:56.640 --> 11:00.840]  ventilation and climate controlled system where the smoke would not go into the restaurant
[11:00.840 --> 11:05.560]  at all. And so, I mean, that's taking it to a little extreme, but I mean, honestly, it
[11:05.560 --> 11:10.960]  should come down to the restaurant owners really to make all their customers happy,
[11:10.960 --> 11:16.200]  not the federal government or the state government. So again, victory.
[11:16.200 --> 11:24.120]  Definitely. Yes, that was going to be exactly what I wanted to say. If I go into a restaurant
[11:24.120 --> 11:30.160]  and people are blowing smoke in my face and make me sick, I don't go back to the restaurant.
[11:30.160 --> 11:36.040]  And if that becomes a problem for the restaurant, that's a decision for the restaurant to make,
[11:36.040 --> 11:43.760]  not my government. Right. This is socialism. And I am not interested in socialism. I don't
[11:43.760 --> 11:48.480]  want smoke blowing in my face, but if somebody blows smoke in my face in a restaurant, I
[11:48.480 --> 11:55.120]  won't go back to the restaurant. It's up to us as free individuals to make our positions
[11:55.120 --> 12:03.960]  clear and exercise our freedom to choose what business we go to and get the government out
[12:03.960 --> 12:04.960]  of it.
[12:04.960 --> 12:09.960]  Absolutely. So great. So it looks like the statewide smoking ban isn't going to pass.
[12:09.960 --> 12:15.120]  Looks like sobriety checkpoints are not going to pass. It looks like implementation of real
[12:15.120 --> 12:21.560]  ID is not going to pass. What else, John? What else do we have coming down the pike?
[12:21.560 --> 12:28.720]  There's more. So yeah, start with the good news. Those are the victories right there.
[12:28.720 --> 12:32.840]  The work isn't over. Again, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. So there's still two
[12:32.840 --> 12:37.080]  bills that Texans for Accountable Government is focusing on right now. And we would definitely
[12:37.080 --> 12:45.280]  love any of the listeners' help. You can get all this information at tagtexas.org. Basically,
[12:45.280 --> 12:49.800]  the last three bills that we're going to focus on to finish the session out, it's going to
[12:49.800 --> 12:57.120]  be Senate Bill 1426. This is a bill that would authorize license plate scanning cameras for
[12:57.120 --> 13:00.160]  the federal government to use on our own state highways.
[13:00.160 --> 13:01.160]  Oh, boy.
[13:01.160 --> 13:06.680]  Yeah, the language is absolutely disgusting. It basically says here it is right here. The
[13:06.680 --> 13:11.600]  department may enter an agreement with the Department of Public Safety or a federal law
[13:11.600 --> 13:16.240]  enforcement agency that authorizes the DPS or the federal law enforcement agency to all
[13:16.240 --> 13:20.800]  maintain and operate an automatic license plate identification camera on the right-of-way
[13:20.800 --> 13:25.920]  of a state highway. It's not even an interstate highway. It's any state highway, really. And
[13:25.920 --> 13:31.120]  they basically, it's basically a carte blanche for the federal government to scan our license
[13:31.120 --> 13:32.120]  plate.
[13:32.120 --> 13:33.120]  Oh, boy.
[13:33.120 --> 13:36.720]  We haven't committed a crime or haven't suspected of committing a crime.
[13:36.720 --> 13:40.200]  So is there a committee hearing on this?
[13:40.200 --> 13:48.040]  This bill has passed out of the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee, and it is going to be in the Calendars
[13:48.040 --> 13:53.680]  Committee probably tomorrow or if not then on Monday. And from the Calendars Committee,
[13:53.680 --> 13:58.620]  it could be put on the House floor for a vote. So on tagtexas.org, we have the phone numbers
[13:58.620 --> 14:03.040]  for all of the Calendars Committee members, and we're encouraging everybody to call not
[14:03.040 --> 14:07.640]  only the representative who represents you, but also call the entire Calendars Committee
[14:07.640 --> 14:14.080]  and let them know that you do not want to see Senate Bill 1426, the license plate scanning
[14:14.080 --> 14:18.440]  cameras for the Fed's bill, to come out of the Calendars Committee and to be put on the
[14:18.440 --> 14:24.960]  floor for a vote because it's terrible, not Texas at all.
[14:24.960 --> 14:25.960]  All right.
[14:25.960 --> 14:31.440]  Yeah, another thing on that, of course, every plate that gets scanned, because we have this
[14:31.440 --> 14:36.160]  wonderful fusion center now, will simply go into the fusion center, and they'll be able
[14:36.160 --> 14:41.080]  to keep that data for as long as they want. So if they ever have the need to go back and
[14:41.080 --> 14:47.200]  trace the trends of traffic or the trends of your travel patterns for the past five
[14:47.200 --> 14:52.560]  or ten years, then they would be able to do that. And that's surprisingly a reality that
[14:52.560 --> 14:53.560]  we may be facing.
[14:53.560 --> 14:58.240]  So we need to stop this bill because it definitely has all sorts of implications. Another one
[14:58.240 --> 15:03.440]  that we're focusing on is Senate Bill 261. Senate Bill 261 would increase the instances
[15:03.440 --> 15:09.400]  where somebody can forcibly take your blood against your will if you're suspected of a
[15:09.400 --> 15:15.240]  drunk driving, to be drunk driving. Specifically, they would allow for forcible blood withdrawals
[15:15.240 --> 15:19.680]  without a warrant. As of right now, it's only when there's a serious bodily injury this
[15:19.680 --> 15:24.400]  bill would allow for forcible blood withdrawals if there's a child involved in the accident
[15:24.400 --> 15:29.440]  and or if somebody goes to the hospital for any reason. Whereas before it was serious
[15:29.440 --> 15:33.600]  bodily injury, which is a pretty big deal, and I agree with forcible blood taking in
[15:33.600 --> 15:37.840]  that instance because you violated somebody else's rights and you may or may not be drunk
[15:37.840 --> 15:41.160]  and it takes it to a whole other level. But now they're just slowly down the slippery
[15:41.160 --> 15:46.320]  slope incrementally expanding the instances where they can take your blood against our
[15:46.320 --> 15:50.920]  will and it's no good. And this one definitely has a pretty big chance of passing unless
[15:50.920 --> 15:57.240]  we put a large uproar. So call the Calendars Committee again on tagtexas.org and tell them
[15:57.240 --> 16:03.200]  no for Senate Bill 261. And then the final bill, on a positive note, is of course House
[16:03.200 --> 16:08.760]  Concurrent Resolution 50, which is Texas' sovereignty bill. That bill was recently put
[16:08.760 --> 16:15.200]  voted favorably out of the State Affairs Committee, got placed in the Calendars Committee, got
[16:15.200 --> 16:21.240]  voted favorably out of the Calendars Committee to the House floor. Then a state representative,
[16:21.240 --> 16:27.360]  a Democrat not surprisingly, called point of order and came up with some old archaic
[16:27.360 --> 16:32.320]  reason and it had to be put back to the Calendars Committee. And I can, I'm sorry, sent back
[16:32.320 --> 16:35.820]  to the State Affairs Committee. Then they passed it again. Now it's back in the Calendars
[16:35.820 --> 16:39.520]  Committee and I can imagine that the Calendars Committee is going to vote for it again to
[16:39.520 --> 16:42.840]  go back to the House floor. But still, if you're already calling the Calendars Committee,
[16:42.840 --> 16:48.840]  encourage them to again push HCR 50 through. But also call all of your representatives
[16:48.840 --> 16:52.560]  and ask them to pass HCR 50 once it comes to the House floor.
[16:52.560 --> 16:55.520]  Okay. All right. We're going to break. John, hang with us to the other side and we'll
[16:55.520 --> 16:57.520]  go over these bills one more time.
[16:57.520 --> 16:58.520]  Okay.
[16:58.520 --> 17:05.680]  Are you looking for an investment that has no stock market risk? Has a 100% track record
[17:05.680 --> 17:12.440]  of returning profits? Is not affected by fluctuations in oil prices and interest rates? Is publicly
[17:12.440 --> 17:17.480]  traded and SEC regulated? If this kind of peace of mind is what you have been looking
[17:17.480 --> 17:23.020]  for in an investment, then Life Settlements is the investment for you. Our annual rate
[17:23.020 --> 17:30.120]  of return has been 15.83% for the last 17 years. Our investments are insurance and banking
[17:30.120 --> 17:36.360]  commission regulated. Our returns are assured by the largest insurance companies. Even qualified
[17:36.360 --> 17:42.760]  retirement plans such as 401Ks and IRAs are eligible for transfer. We charge absolutely
[17:42.760 --> 17:51.000]  no commissions. 100% of your investment goes to work for you. Please visit sleepwellinvestment.com
[17:51.000 --> 18:16.680]  or call Bill Schober at 817-975-2431. That's sleepwellinvestment.com or call 817-975-2431.
[18:16.680 --> 18:34.800]  All right. We are back. The Rule of Law, Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens. We're here with
[18:34.800 --> 18:40.400]  John Bush. He's one of our hosts. His show is the Austin Liberty Beat, which is Wednesday
[18:40.400 --> 18:47.440]  evenings from 6 to 8 p.m. Central Time. Great new show here on Rule of Law Radio Network.
[18:47.440 --> 18:53.320]  Okay. So John, quickly let's just run through these bills one more time.
[18:53.320 --> 18:58.000]  So there's three bills that we're focusing on. Two of them are terrible. One of them
[18:58.000 --> 19:05.000]  is excellent. The two that we want to be shot down is Senate Bill 1426 and Senate Bill 261.
[19:05.000 --> 19:11.640]  Again, you can get all this information at tagtexas.org. Senate Bill 1426 would effectively
[19:11.640 --> 19:15.880]  allow the federal government to place license plate scanning cameras all over any state
[19:15.880 --> 19:20.800]  highway here in Texas and gather all that information, keep it for as long as they want,
[19:20.800 --> 19:25.800]  put it in the fusion center, cross-referencing, track us all, bring up dociles on us on where
[19:25.800 --> 19:32.280]  we've traveled in the past 10, 20 years. Who knows? So that's Senate Bill 1426, absolute
[19:32.280 --> 19:38.120]  police state technological tyranny. And then we have Senate Bill 261, another bill dealing
[19:38.120 --> 19:43.760]  with drinking and driving that aims to destroy our civil liberties. Senate Bill 261 would
[19:43.760 --> 19:49.120]  increase the instances where blood can be taken against your will without a warrant.
[19:49.120 --> 19:53.560]  Senate Bill 261, this one has a high probability of passing unless we all stand up and fight
[19:53.560 --> 19:59.120]  it. And then again, HCR 50, House concurrent resolution 50. This is the bill that affirms
[19:59.120 --> 20:05.880]  the state of Texas as a sovereign state under the 10th Amendment. It's largely symbolic.
[20:05.880 --> 20:09.360]  There was a stronger one. It's still out there. It's not going to go anywhere. House concurrent
[20:09.360 --> 20:15.880]  resolution 76, which actually called on the state to come together in sort of a meeting
[20:15.880 --> 20:19.120]  outside the purview of the federal government in order to discuss their grievances with
[20:19.120 --> 20:24.160]  the federal government. This one merely says anything that's unconstitutional or that
[20:24.160 --> 20:28.000]  the United States government doesn't have the authority to do under the Constitution
[20:28.000 --> 20:34.480]  will not be followed here in Texas. But it's largely, I mean, Rick Perry endorsed HCR 50.
[20:34.480 --> 20:39.440]  Rick Perry is not a fan of state sovereignty, let alone national sovereignty. He's a big
[20:39.440 --> 20:44.160]  Bilderberg goon. So you got to know something like that. And it's just, I don't know, it's
[20:44.160 --> 20:48.440]  symbolic though. And it definitely is a step in the right direction, but not every, and
[20:48.440 --> 20:53.640]  I'm still kind of dogging the bill as I encourage people to try to get it passed. Again, I think
[20:53.640 --> 20:56.720]  it's largely symbolic and it is a step in the right direction, but don't think like
[20:56.720 --> 21:01.440]  this is going to save the day and the state of Texas will be free from any federal tyranny.
[21:01.440 --> 21:06.720]  It takes actual action, actual movement. For example, the same gentleman, Representative
[21:06.720 --> 21:12.680]  Berman, who authored the HCR 76, which is the stronger sovereignty bill, he authored
[21:12.680 --> 21:16.960]  another bill. I forget what it is right now. I think it's 18 SB, I'm sorry, House Bill
[21:16.960 --> 21:24.000]  1826, that would not allow federal regulation over firearms manufactured within the state,
[21:24.000 --> 21:29.520]  every part manufactured within the state. So while HCR 50 says that, other bills like
[21:29.520 --> 21:35.960]  this HB 826 actually have teeth on them and they would actually reduce the tyranny that
[21:35.960 --> 21:40.360]  we see, the corrosion of the 10th Amendment. So that's something to work on next session.
[21:40.360 --> 21:43.720]  We need to focus on more bills that actually have teeth, but I'm still encouraging everybody
[21:43.720 --> 21:49.000]  by all means to encourage the representative to vote for House Concurrent Resolution 50
[21:49.000 --> 21:52.160]  because this one definitely will go back to the House floor.
[21:52.160 --> 21:59.280]  All right, excellent. And can you tell us, John, what is the most pending, imminent bill
[21:59.280 --> 22:03.400]  that we should be paying attention to? Like what needs to be taken care of right away?
[22:03.400 --> 22:08.600]  What fire needs to be put out immediately?
[22:08.600 --> 22:14.000]  Now there are some bills that are being heard right now. I've tried to narrow my focus,
[22:14.000 --> 22:19.800]  but there's also TERF, go to Texas TERF, T-U-R-F, Texas TERF, that's Texas United for Reform
[22:19.800 --> 22:25.960]  and Freedom. Terri Hall, she's a power activist. She's been taking on her and that group and
[22:25.960 --> 22:31.240]  other groups like it. I've been fighting the trans-Texas corridor and the tolling of existing
[22:31.240 --> 22:37.480]  highways. There's a couple of bills. I think one of them is like House Bill 300 and another
[22:37.480 --> 22:41.560]  one. I forget exactly what they are, but those are definitely, those are up for a vote probably
[22:41.560 --> 22:50.000]  tomorrow or on Monday. So check out TexasTERF, T-U-R-F dot org. Those are urgent, urgent
[22:50.000 --> 22:58.920]  like happening now. These three bills, 1426, 261, and 50 will be coming to a House vote
[22:58.920 --> 23:04.560]  and maybe on Monday or Tuesday. Now again, we don't want 1426, the license plate standing
[23:04.560 --> 23:10.400]  camera and we don't want 261, the blood withdrawal bill to go to the House floor. So everybody
[23:10.400 --> 23:14.080]  be sure that you call the entire calendars committee. It takes about 10 minutes total
[23:14.080 --> 23:17.840]  to call every single one of them, maybe not even that long. And these calls definitely
[23:17.840 --> 23:22.880]  do make a really big difference. Indeed, as we have seen over the last couple of weeks,
[23:22.880 --> 23:28.000]  we really can make a difference. It's encouraging. Definitely encouraging. All right, excellent
[23:28.000 --> 23:33.920]  John. Well, thank you for calling in with the update. Thanks for having me. Thanks everybody
[23:33.920 --> 23:38.960]  out there for working hard together. We definitely can do this. I mean, if we all fight, not
[23:38.960 --> 23:44.680]  just one person's voice. And another way that these calls help is when we go, when people
[23:44.680 --> 23:49.320]  show up to the Capitol to lobby them and to speak, you know, face to face, to give testimony
[23:49.320 --> 23:53.720]  at the hearings and we're speaking about these bills and that very day or the day before
[23:53.720 --> 24:00.080]  they received 200 phone calls, angry phone calls against the bills, then not only does
[24:00.080 --> 24:05.320]  it show that people are against it, but it also makes our words and our sway a little
[24:05.320 --> 24:10.240]  bit stronger. So it's like an inside outside game and it all comes together quite nicely
[24:10.240 --> 24:15.800]  as we saw with Senate Bill 298. So everybody, if you can, just put a little time aside.
[24:15.800 --> 24:19.280]  You can do it on your lunch break tomorrow if you got to work. It takes about 10 minutes.
[24:19.280 --> 24:23.840]  Tagtexas.org has all the bills and all the phone numbers. So thanks a lot, Debbie. I'll
[24:23.840 --> 24:28.000]  keep up the good work and have a good evening. All right. Thanks, John. We appreciate it.
[24:28.000 --> 24:34.520]  Appreciate the call. All right. Bye bye. Okay. Before we start going to your calls, I have
[24:34.520 --> 24:41.320]  a rant and a bit of news report. It would appear that the buffoonery never ends when
[24:41.320 --> 24:48.760]  it comes to the federal government. The FCC has released a press release or statement
[24:48.760 --> 24:55.520]  to the press, I should say, to Wired Magazine, basically saying that they have the right
[24:55.520 --> 25:03.560]  to search anyone's home, their private home, for compliance with the FCC guidelines and
[25:03.560 --> 25:10.880]  policies if they're using any RF device, any radio frequency device that is. Doesn't matter
[25:10.880 --> 25:19.920]  if it's a baby monitor, wireless router, garage door opener, cell phone, whatever. Okay. So
[25:19.920 --> 25:24.320]  I'm going to read some bits and pieces from a couple of articles here that I have. One
[25:24.320 --> 25:31.920]  was written by Kurt Nemo. All right. And another one is actually from Wired Magazine. All right.
[25:31.920 --> 25:36.680]  And I'm going to start off with this Kurt Nemo article. This is just incredible. Okay.
[25:36.680 --> 25:41.280]  He says, it's bad enough that two-thirds of the entire US population live in what is effectively
[25:41.280 --> 25:48.120]  a constitution-free zone, an area that encompasses 100 miles of land and coastal borders. Now
[25:48.120 --> 25:51.920]  the government is claiming it has authority to enter your home without a search warrant
[25:51.920 --> 26:02.440]  under an arcane FCC policy. If you have a wireless router, a cell or cordless phone,
[26:02.440 --> 26:07.880]  baby monitor, and even a garage door opener, the feds can enter your home at any time and
[26:07.880 --> 26:14.120]  inspect it. Quote, anything using RF energy, we have the right to inspect it to make sure
[26:14.120 --> 26:23.040]  it's not causing interference. End quote. FCC spokesman David Fisk told Wired News.
[26:23.040 --> 26:26.960]  According to the FCC, it gets the right to ignore the Fourth Amendment under the Communications
[26:26.960 --> 26:34.960]  Act of 1934. Back in the day, home transmitters were used mostly by ham radio and CB radio
[26:34.960 --> 26:40.720]  operators. In 2009, however, nearly every house in America has some sort of device that
[26:40.720 --> 26:48.200]  uses radio waves. The FCC policy came to light after an FCC agent investigating a 100-watt
[26:48.200 --> 26:56.440]  transmitter in Boulder, Colorado, left behind a copy of the FCC's inspection policy. All
[26:56.440 --> 27:01.840]  right. Quote, whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization
[27:01.840 --> 27:06.660]  from the commission comes with an obligation to allow inspection, end quote, the policy
[27:06.660 --> 27:12.720]  state. Quote, this is an intimidation thing. The leader of Boulder Free Radio told Wired.
[27:12.720 --> 27:18.720]  Quote, most people aren't dedicated to the cause. I'm not going to let them in my house.
[27:18.720 --> 27:27.200]  Okay. I'm going to jump to this article in Wired magazine, where they discuss a situation
[27:27.200 --> 27:35.040]  with electronic frontier foundation lawyer Lee Tien, T-I-E-M. Quote, this is what Tien
[27:35.040 --> 27:41.520]  says. Quote, it's a major stretch beyond case law to assert that authority with respect
[27:41.520 --> 27:45.560]  to a private home, which is at the heart of the Fourth Amendment's protection against
[27:45.560 --> 27:50.320]  unreasonable search and seizure. When it is a private home and when you're talking about
[27:50.320 --> 27:55.240]  an overpowered Wi-Fi antenna, the idea that they could just go in without a warrant is
[27:55.240 --> 28:01.480]  honestly quite bizarre. All right. The FCC claims it has a right to do this under this
[28:01.480 --> 28:10.360]  Communications Act of 1934, which is just preposterous because now there's, okay, there's
[28:10.360 --> 28:17.720]  case law, however. George Washington University Professor Oren Kerr, K-E-R-R, a constitutional
[28:17.720 --> 28:23.880]  law expert, also questions the legality of the policy. Quote, the Supreme Court has said
[28:23.880 --> 28:30.480]  that the government cannot make warrantless entries into homes for administrative inspections.
[28:30.480 --> 28:38.840]  Lawrence Kerr said via email, referring to a 1967 Supreme Court ruling camera versus
[28:38.840 --> 28:46.240]  municipal court. Okay. I guess no pun intended here, but C-A-M-A-R-A, the municipal court
[28:46.240 --> 28:55.200]  387 U.S. 523. This is a 1967 case. Okay. The Supreme Court ruling says that the government
[28:55.200 --> 29:00.680]  cannot go into people's homes without warrants for administrative inspections. This had to
[29:00.680 --> 29:05.040]  do with housing authority. Housing inspectors needed warrants to force their way into private
[29:05.040 --> 29:16.040]  residences. The FCC's online FAQs do not explain how the agency gets around this ruling. Okay.
[29:16.040 --> 29:22.600]  So Randy, what do you have to say about this? Okay. It looks to me like they're just pushing
[29:22.600 --> 29:26.120]  the envelope, pushing the envelope, pushing the envelope again. Okay. But hold on. Let
[29:26.120 --> 29:31.800]  me read this first. All right. In 2007. All right. Well, we're going to go to break. All
[29:31.800 --> 29:36.400]  right. When I go, after we get back from break, I'm going to go into how the FCC tried to
[29:36.400 --> 29:45.440]  find a man in Corpus Christi, $7,000 for refusing FCC to have entrance into his home under these
[29:45.440 --> 29:50.920]  administrative requirements, apparently. We'll be right back. This is the rule of law, Randy
[29:50.920 --> 30:00.960]  Kelton and Deborah Stevens on ruleoflawradio.com. Gold prices are at historic highs. And with
[30:00.960 --> 30:05.400]  the recent pullback, this is a great time to buy. With the value of the dollar, risks
[30:05.400 --> 30:10.000]  of inflation, geopolitical uncertainties, and instability in rural financial systems,
[30:10.000 --> 30:15.440]  I see gold going up much higher. Hi, I'm Tim Fry at Roberts and Roberts Brokerage. Everybody
[30:15.440 --> 30:19.800]  should have some of their assets in investment grade precious metals. At Roberts and Roberts
[30:19.800 --> 30:24.680]  Brokerage, you can buy gold, silver, and platinum with confidence from a brokerage that specialized
[30:24.680 --> 30:29.720]  in the precious metals market since 1977. If you are new to precious metals, we will
[30:29.720 --> 30:34.000]  happily provide you with the information you need to make an informed decision whether
[30:34.000 --> 30:38.440]  or not you choose to purchase from us. Also, Roberts and Roberts Brokerage values your
[30:38.440 --> 30:42.420]  privacy and will always advise you in the event that we would be required to report
[30:42.420 --> 30:47.220]  any transaction. If you have gold, silver, or platinum you'd like to sell, we can convert
[30:47.220 --> 30:54.220]  it for immediate payment. Call us at 800-874-9760. We're Roberts and Roberts Brokerage, 800-874-9760.
[31:17.220 --> 31:24.220]  Okay, when are you going to stop abusing your power? All right, this is the rule of law,
[31:24.220 --> 31:31.220]  Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens. Okay, the FCC trying to abuse power. All right, I say
[31:31.220 --> 31:38.220]  down with the FCC anyways. All right, so let me read a bit about this 2007 case, refusing
[31:38.220 --> 31:45.220]  the FCC, this is in the Wired Magazine article, refusing the FCC admittance can carry harsh
[31:45.220 --> 31:52.220]  financial penalty in 2007, Corpus Christi, Texas, a man got a visit from the FCC direction
[31:54.000 --> 32:01.000]  for abusing power. The FCC is trying to abuse power. All right, so let me read a bit about
[32:01.100 --> 32:08.100]  this 2007 case, refusing the FCC, this is in the Wired Magazine article, refusing the
[32:08.220 --> 32:13.220]  FCC admittance can carry harsh financial penalty in 2007, Corpus Christi, Texas, a man got
[32:13.220 --> 32:18.820]  a visit from the FCC direction finders after rebroadcasting an AM radio station through
[32:18.820 --> 32:25.820]  a CB radio in his home. Oh boy, what damage that could cause, huh? An FCC agent tracked
[32:27.180 --> 32:32.460]  the signal to his house and asked to see the equipment. Donald Winton refused to let him
[32:32.460 --> 32:38.900]  in but did turn off the radio. Winton was later fined $7,000 for refusing entry to the
[32:38.900 --> 32:45.900]  officer. The fine was reduced to $225 after he proved that he had very little income.
[32:47.980 --> 32:52.020]  Administrative search powers are not rare, at least as directed against businesses. Fire
[32:52.020 --> 32:56.980]  safety, food and workplace safety regulators generally don't need warrants to enter a business,
[32:56.980 --> 33:03.460]  but despite the broad power, FCC agents aren't cops, said Fisk. This is the guy from the
[33:03.460 --> 33:08.260]  FCC. They only have the right to inspect the equipment. If they want to seize after you
[33:08.260 --> 33:13.360]  work with the U.S. Attorney's Office. But if inspectors should notice evidence of unrelated
[33:13.360 --> 33:19.300]  criminal behavior, say a marijuana plant or something else of this sort, Supreme Court
[33:19.300 --> 33:25.820]  decisions suggest that the search could be used against the resident. Okay, so the bottom
[33:25.820 --> 33:29.980]  line, don't let these people in your house. Okay, so Randy, what do you have to say about
[33:29.980 --> 33:36.980]  this? Well, it's another one of those issues. Sometimes I think that we may have people
[33:36.980 --> 33:43.980]  on the inside working on our behalf. Oh, because it's so preposterous, this press release?
[33:43.980 --> 33:49.980]  Exactly. It is just, I mean, what kind of an idiot is going to come out on the news
[33:49.980 --> 33:56.980]  in a major mainstream newspaper, I mean, magazine in this case, Wired Magazine, and say that
[33:57.260 --> 34:04.260]  we have the right to search anybody's home under administrative authority without a warrant
[34:04.260 --> 34:11.260]  if they're using a cell phone or a baby monitor or some Wi-Fi, a wireless router. Give me
[34:11.380 --> 34:15.660]  a break. Yeah, and it's like this memo that showed
[34:15.660 --> 34:22.660]  up in Missouri about anybody with an American flag is considered a terrorist. I mean, that
[34:24.820 --> 34:29.820]  was so... Over the top. So over the top.
[34:29.820 --> 34:36.820]  Yeah, that... I almost think that there are people on our side deliberately screwing up
[34:37.500 --> 34:44.500]  the works for these guys. And this is one of those issues. This is so brain dead. It's
[34:45.980 --> 34:52.300]  like they're saying, here's my big behind, put that third shoe right square in the middle
[34:52.300 --> 34:59.300]  of it for me. And it's not like they made a good legal argument. They just drug up some
[35:00.500 --> 35:07.500]  nonsense that was passed when a radio frequency transmitter was a rare item and a specialty
[35:09.660 --> 35:16.660]  use item. Now that radio frequency items are in common everyday use, absolutely the first
[35:16.660 --> 35:23.660]  time they attempt to do this, the Supreme Court will stuff it down their throats.
[35:23.660 --> 35:30.660]  Well, it looks like they already have. There's a 1967 Supreme Court ruling that says administrative
[35:31.820 --> 35:38.260]  searches are illegal without a warrant. And this came about because of these housing code
[35:38.260 --> 35:43.340]  inspectors wanting to just bust into people's homes for doing inspections to make sure their
[35:43.340 --> 35:48.260]  houses were up to code under administrative searches. Supreme Court has already struck
[35:48.260 --> 35:49.540]  it down.
[35:49.540 --> 35:56.540]  There are stacks of case law on that sort of an entry. And absolutely, as far as building
[35:58.260 --> 36:04.640]  inspectors or municipal inspectors, in the article the person mentioned that fire inspectors
[36:04.640 --> 36:07.860]  could come in without a warrant, no they can't.
[36:07.860 --> 36:11.900]  They were saying for businesses, but yeah, I don't think that that's true either.
[36:11.900 --> 36:18.900]  Only a business that's open for public, and they may only enter those areas of the business
[36:20.100 --> 36:25.380]  wherein the business owner has no reasonable expectation of privacy.
[36:25.380 --> 36:27.620]  Yeah, but in your home you do...
[36:27.620 --> 36:34.620]  Right, they can't enter the owner's private office, only the places that are open to public.
[36:35.020 --> 36:38.260]  So this is really well established in law.
[36:38.260 --> 36:45.140]  Now Randy, weren't you also saying something about FCC regulations or laws governing the
[36:45.140 --> 36:52.140]  FCC that basically says that they can't do this anyway, and that if there's a potential
[36:52.500 --> 36:58.140]  problem of interference of one frequency or another, that the person has to put up a filter
[36:58.140 --> 37:01.020]  or something like that? Weren't you telling me that earlier?
[37:01.020 --> 37:07.540]  When CBs were a big thing, people's CBs were coming in over televisions all the time. A
[37:07.540 --> 37:12.460]  guy gets a CB in his truck, he puts a 100 watt linear in it, and he blows right over
[37:12.460 --> 37:14.580]  your TV signal.
[37:14.580 --> 37:21.580]  So we call the FCC, and they very clearly stated, sorry Bubba, if you are receiving
[37:22.300 --> 37:28.780]  a signal you don't want to receive, it's up to you to filter out the signals you don't
[37:28.780 --> 37:31.820]  want to receive.
[37:31.820 --> 37:38.820]  My problem, so if I have something on my property that's throwing off a signal, which when I
[37:41.140 --> 37:46.820]  strike an arc on a welder, I imagine I took out every radio in the neighborhood that wasn't
[37:46.820 --> 37:52.740]  well filtered, because that thing will throw an incredible amount of static and it'll throw
[37:52.740 --> 37:59.300]  it all across the spectrum. So you'll hear it on your TV, you'll hear it on your CB,
[37:59.300 --> 38:00.980]  you'll hear it on your cell phone.
[38:00.980 --> 38:05.780]  You could potentially get the FCC all over you because you're welding. Because you're
[38:05.780 --> 38:07.740]  welding. Give me a break.
[38:07.740 --> 38:14.740]  See, that's their problem. You don't want to hear my signal, filter it out. And they'll
[38:14.820 --> 38:21.820]  say well your signal's too strong, too bad. My welder is not regulated by the FCC, and
[38:21.820 --> 38:28.820]  I haven't studied the statute on this, but I am relatively certain that under a certain
[38:34.900 --> 38:41.900]  power level you can transmit anything you want to. My wireless is going to be low enough
[38:41.900 --> 38:48.900]  that I can transmit any frequency on that thing I want to and don't fall under FCC.
[38:53.020 --> 38:57.620]  So I haven't done the research, but I'm certain this is going to come up utter nonsense.
[38:57.620 --> 39:01.500]  Well, I'll tell you, I don't use a wireless router because I don't want to give anybody
[39:01.500 --> 39:06.900]  the chance of hacking into my router just off the street. They're going to have to work
[39:06.900 --> 39:12.060]  pretty hard, so they can't come at my house under that excuse. You get that FCC? I do
[39:12.060 --> 39:17.300]  not have a wireless router so don't come to my house. And I don't use a cell phone inside
[39:17.300 --> 39:21.260]  my house either, so take those cookies.
[39:21.260 --> 39:24.940]  And you don't have a wireless handset for the phone either?
[39:24.940 --> 39:31.940]  No, I don't. I'm a wired house from top to bottom, that's for sure.
[39:31.940 --> 39:38.940]  Yeah, we just did some wiring on it the other day a while back. Okay, we have a caller.
[39:39.260 --> 39:46.260]  We have a caller that's been waiting. Anybody, maybe if you've had any encounters with FCC
[39:46.980 --> 39:53.100]  and either liked or disliked the outcome, give us a call and let us know how it went.
[39:53.100 --> 39:57.620]  Alright, we are going to go now to Newman in Georgia, I believe a first time caller.
[39:57.620 --> 40:00.180]  Newman, thanks for calling in. Are you a first time caller?
[40:00.180 --> 40:01.940]  Yes, ma'am. How are you?
[40:01.940 --> 40:05.260]  I'm doing very well. Thank you for calling in. Thank you for calling in for the first
[40:05.260 --> 40:07.700]  time. What's on your mind tonight?
[40:07.700 --> 40:14.700]  Good evening, Mr. Calhoun. This is Newman. I have a question regarding a criminal complaint,
[40:17.900 --> 40:24.900]  filing a criminal complaint. I mean the process.
[40:25.020 --> 40:26.020]  The process?
[40:26.020 --> 40:33.020]  Well, an ideal way of structuring it. I just got into all of this less than six months
[40:37.660 --> 40:40.420]  ago and I've been fired up.
[40:40.420 --> 40:43.940]  Wait, I missed that last part.
[40:43.940 --> 40:50.940]  No, I said I just got into the areas of learning about the law and for the past six months
[40:50.940 --> 40:57.940]  it's as though my previous 59 and a half years I have been just asleep, just walking around
[41:01.900 --> 41:04.540]  like a walking dead.
[41:04.540 --> 41:10.500]  Okay. Well, let me explain how a criminal complaint works.
[41:10.500 --> 41:12.060]  Thank you.
[41:12.060 --> 41:19.060]  In most every state, you have a duty to report crime. In the commonwealth, that's not necessarily
[41:19.060 --> 41:26.060]  the case. In Georgia, it's one of the Spanish law states. If you have knowledge of a crime,
[41:27.660 --> 41:34.660]  you have a duty to report it. The way you legally report a crime is not running over
[41:35.300 --> 41:42.300]  to a police officer and say, hey, that guy just committed a crime. That's just conversation.
[41:42.300 --> 41:49.300]  In law, reporting crime is filing a criminal complaint. Anyone who has knowledge of a crime,
[41:52.380 --> 41:59.380]  be it personal knowledge or hearsay knowledge, can file a complaint for the purpose of notifying
[42:00.660 --> 42:07.660]  the court that there exists reason to believe that a crime was committed and that this particular
[42:07.660 --> 42:14.660]  person committed it. Now, the reason I explained it that way is because a lot of people will
[42:14.660 --> 42:21.660]  raise a question about, don't you have to have personal knowledge in order to file a
[42:21.660 --> 42:28.660]  criminal complaint? No, you don't. Say, Deborah comes to me and she says she saw someone commit
[42:28.660 --> 42:34.660]  a heinous murder, but she knows this guy and he knows her and she's terrified of this guy.
[42:34.660 --> 42:39.660]  She's afraid to go report him because he's likely to come back after her. If I believe
[42:39.660 --> 42:44.660]  Deborah, then I can go report the crime. Having no personal knowledge that the crime has been
[42:44.660 --> 42:51.660]  committed, I could say, I have reason to believe this, I have reason to believe and I have
[42:51.660 --> 42:58.660]  reason to believe that this person committed this criminal act based on this information.
[42:58.660 --> 43:03.660]  That's all you need to file the criminal complaint. And the way you do that is you write up, there's
[43:03.660 --> 43:10.660]  a very specific document and each state has a somewhat different form, but that's pretty
[43:11.660 --> 43:16.660]  easy to find. We're going to go to break it down. We're going to go to break it down.
[43:16.660 --> 43:23.660]  I won't launch into too much of that until after the break, but you can go to the court
[43:26.660 --> 43:31.660]  and look up a complaint against someone and look at how the complaint is structured. They
[43:31.660 --> 43:36.660]  will all be structured almost the same. Thank you very much. Yes, yes, and hang on the line
[43:36.660 --> 43:41.660]  there, Newman, because Randy's going to finish this. We've got a lot more to say about it.
[43:41.660 --> 43:46.660]  Yeah, we've got a lot more to say about it. I've got some stuff to say about it too. Callers,
[43:46.660 --> 43:53.660]  if you'd like to call in, 512-646-1984. This is the rule of law. We'll be right back.
[43:55.660 --> 44:00.660]  Stock markets are taking hit after hit. Corrupt bankers are choking on subprime debt. The
[44:00.660 --> 44:07.660]  Fed is busy printing dollars, dollars and more dollars to bail out Wall Street banks
[44:07.660 --> 44:13.660]  and the U.S. car industry. As investors scramble for safety in the metals, in the face of a
[44:13.660 --> 44:19.660]  further devaluation of the dollar, the price of silver will only increase. Some of the
[44:19.660 --> 44:24.660]  world's leading financial analysts believe that silver is one of the world's most important
[44:24.660 --> 44:31.660]  commodities with unparalleled investment opportunity for the future. Now is the time to buy silver
[44:31.660 --> 44:38.660]  before it heads for $75 an ounce, and the yellow metal roars back past $1,000 an ounce
[44:38.660 --> 44:48.660]  to new highs. Call Maximus Holdings now at 407-608-5430 to find out how you can turn
[44:48.660 --> 44:55.660]  your IRA and 401K into a solid investment, silver, without any penalties for early withdrawal.
[44:55.660 --> 45:02.660]  Even if you don't have a retirement account yet, we have fantastic investment opportunities
[45:02.660 --> 45:26.660]  for you. Call Maximus Holdings at 407-608-5430 for more information.
[45:32.660 --> 45:39.660]  For more information visit www.mooji.org
[46:02.660 --> 46:29.660]  Okay, we are back. The rule of law. We're talking with Newman in Georgia about criminal
[46:29.660 --> 46:35.660]  complaints. Go ahead, Randy. Yeah, and Newman, your first call and you bring up my favorite
[46:35.660 --> 46:45.660]  subject, criminal complaints. Okay, if you go down and look in the, preferably look in
[46:45.660 --> 46:52.660]  the district court, or what do they call it in Florida, the one that handles felonies,
[46:52.660 --> 47:02.660]  look in the court record, just pull a file, and there will be an information in there.
[47:02.660 --> 47:08.660]  That's the charging instrument, and what an information is, is a criminal complaint filled
[47:08.660 --> 47:16.660]  out by the prosecutor. Criminal complaints are intended to be filed by citizens who don't
[47:16.660 --> 47:22.660]  necessarily have a clue as to what the law is, and it's not intended that they should
[47:22.660 --> 47:32.660]  have to know what it is. So if you substantially make an allegation that you have reason to
[47:32.660 --> 47:40.660]  believe and you do believe a person's committed a crime, and you give the court enough information
[47:40.660 --> 47:47.660]  to make a determination of probable cause, then that's a complaint. Or even if it's not
[47:47.660 --> 47:51.660]  quite enough information, if you just generally make a statement that someone's committed
[47:51.660 --> 47:58.660]  a crime, that is a criminal complaint, whether you get it right or not. And then they say
[47:58.660 --> 48:04.660]  to the prosecutor, okay, when you get it, we want you to make up an information that is
[48:04.660 --> 48:13.660]  substantially the same except legally correct. So if you look at the information and take
[48:13.660 --> 48:19.660]  information off the top and put complaint on the top, that's what a complaint should
[48:19.660 --> 48:26.660]  look like. They make it look like that, just the basic form. On my website, I have a form
[48:26.660 --> 48:35.660]  for Texas. And it, like most states, the law says the complaint must run in the name of
[48:35.660 --> 48:41.660]  the state of Texas. So it starts out in the name under the authority of the state of Texas.
[48:41.660 --> 48:48.660]  That's required by law. And then the next paragraph is pretty well prescribed in the
[48:48.660 --> 48:57.660]  Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. And as most codes are taken from the federal model code,
[48:57.660 --> 49:03.660]  then you'll find codes all over the country that read exactly the same. And the states
[49:03.660 --> 49:08.660]  take a model code so they don't have to come up with every single law all by themselves.
[49:08.660 --> 49:16.660]  Other people's already done it. No need to remake this wheel. So they take those laws
[49:16.660 --> 49:22.660]  and adopt all the ones they like. So you'll find a lot of them the same. And in Texas
[49:22.660 --> 49:32.660]  it says, the wording goes, I, Randall Kelton, have reason to believe and do believe. It
[49:32.660 --> 49:38.660]  says that because I don't have to have personal knowledge. I just have to have reason to believe
[49:38.660 --> 49:44.660]  and personally, I do believe that what I'm stating here, based on these facts, and you
[49:44.660 --> 49:51.660]  give a little section of facts, and then after that you say, therefore, owner about, the
[49:51.660 --> 49:59.660]  owner before a certain date, I allege that certain person committed a certain criminal
[49:59.660 --> 50:04.660]  act. That's basically a criminal complaint. Different states will have slight variations,
[50:04.660 --> 50:13.660]  but that's pretty close. The federal government requires you to state the complaint in the
[50:13.660 --> 50:22.660]  terms of the statute. So instead of saying, I saw this guy shoot somebody, it says, you'd
[50:22.660 --> 50:31.660]  say, I saw someone, you would read the statute on murder and write it in the wording of the
[50:31.660 --> 50:42.660]  statute on murder, where it says, if a person inflicts bodily injury and death occurs, then
[50:42.660 --> 50:48.660]  they've committed murder. I don't know exactly how it's quoted, but only the feds, it's
[50:48.660 --> 50:52.660]  the only ones I've ever seen that has that particular requirement. Generally a complaint
[50:52.660 --> 51:00.660]  can say most anything. It can be very informal, as long as it has these things in it. You
[51:00.660 --> 51:05.660]  have reason, it runs in the name of the state, you have reason to believe and do believe,
[51:05.660 --> 51:12.660]  you have a set of basic facts, and then you state that you accused the person of committing
[51:12.660 --> 51:21.660]  this crime, and the date of the accusation must be after the date of the crime. That's
[51:21.660 --> 51:30.660]  the only thing I found on a complaint that was fatal. If you make a mistake on the date,
[51:30.660 --> 51:38.660]  so that maybe you put 08 instead of 09, so you wind up accusing the guy of committing
[51:38.660 --> 51:46.660]  a crime in January of 09, and your document is dated March of 08, it's fatal, it's gone,
[51:46.660 --> 51:48.660]  you'd have to do it over again.
[51:48.660 --> 52:06.660]  No, Randy, he's saying that the person is asleep at the wheel because they dated the
[52:06.660 --> 52:10.660]  crime like a year ahead of the date on the calendar.
[52:10.660 --> 52:20.660]  I was making sure that I wasn't jumping to a contusion. Essentially, if you're careless,
[52:20.660 --> 52:27.660]  generally a complaint is not real technical. That's the only thing that I've seen that
[52:27.660 --> 52:35.660]  makes one fatal. Any other mistake in a complaint can be fixed, or if it's not a major mistake,
[52:35.660 --> 52:40.660]  if it's something that the information can correct, then you don't even have to fix the
[52:40.660 --> 52:47.660]  complaint, usually. But if it's a bad thing, if it's a serious, wrong name or something,
[52:47.660 --> 52:55.660]  then if somebody complains about it, then you can fix it and things go on. If the date's
[52:55.660 --> 53:01.660]  wrong in that one particular way, then the complaint can't be fixed, but that's the
[53:01.660 --> 53:12.660]  only one. Now to strategy. Once you've put up together one complaint, you'll find it's
[53:12.660 --> 53:19.660]  real simple. What is not so simple is why you're filing the complaint, what you want
[53:19.660 --> 53:27.660]  to accomplish with it. If it's just to get someone, just to let the police know that
[53:27.660 --> 53:32.660]  you think a crime's been committed, and you have no involvement, you don't really care
[53:32.660 --> 53:37.660]  what they do, you just want them to know so they can check it out, you take it to the
[53:37.660 --> 53:44.660]  police department. Actually, you can go to the police department and enter a voluntary
[53:44.660 --> 53:51.660]  statement. But when you go to the police department, that's not really filing a complaint,
[53:51.660 --> 53:59.660]  that's complaining. And the police take it that way. That you're just letting them know
[53:59.660 --> 54:06.660]  you think something's wrong, but that's not official. That's informal. And then the police,
[54:06.660 --> 54:12.660]  they appreciate you're telling them that, and then they go look into it themselves.
[54:12.660 --> 54:17.660]  And you would hope that they would really go look to see if a crime had really been
[54:17.660 --> 54:25.660]  committed. But that's not their primary purpose. What they're really going to do is see if
[54:25.660 --> 54:32.660]  it looks like they can get a conviction or easily find enough information to get an easy
[54:32.660 --> 54:36.660]  conviction. If it looks like it's going to be a lot of work and use up a lot of the
[54:36.660 --> 54:42.660]  department's budget, they're going to say, oh well, we don't have enough information
[54:42.660 --> 54:49.660]  to do anything, they're just trashing. Or, if the complaint is against a public official,
[54:49.660 --> 54:56.660]  they will trash it as a matter of policy. So, this goes to strategy, and mostly I work
[54:56.660 --> 55:05.660]  with public officials. If you want the complaint to be official, don't give it to the police.
[55:05.660 --> 55:15.660]  Give it to either some magistrate or to a prosecuting attorney. And I generally give
[55:15.660 --> 55:22.660]  them to a prosecuting attorney if I want to beat up the prosecuting attorney. Because
[55:22.660 --> 55:28.660]  I know he's going to screw it up, especially if it's a complaint against a public official.
[55:28.660 --> 55:34.660]  He's not going to want to prosecute one of his buddies that he works for. So, he's going
[55:34.660 --> 55:42.660]  to throw it in the trash. And then I file charges against him for shielding from prosecution
[55:42.660 --> 55:51.660]  or misfeasance in office, failing to perform a duty he's required to perform. And the reason
[55:51.660 --> 55:57.660]  I do that is say I want to file a complaint against a judge. Well, there's no way the
[55:57.660 --> 56:04.660]  prosecutor's going to want to prosecute one of the judges. So, he's going to do everything
[56:04.660 --> 56:09.660]  he can to interfere with me. So, the first thing I want to do is get him out of the way.
[56:09.660 --> 56:15.660]  So, I'll go to him with the complaint, file it with him. He will refuse to give it to
[56:15.660 --> 56:21.660]  the judge. I come back and file against the prosecutor, accusing him of shielding the
[56:21.660 --> 56:28.660]  judge from prosecution and go to the grand jury myself and demand that the prosecutor
[56:28.660 --> 56:35.660]  stand down because I'm making the complaint against him. It would be inappropriate for
[56:35.660 --> 56:42.660]  him personally to be before the grand jury in this case because he's compromised. Now,
[56:42.660 --> 56:48.660]  if he wants to hire his own attorney and have his attorney come and talk, ask the grand
[56:48.660 --> 56:55.660]  jury if they want to talk to him, fine. But you stay out of here. And that gets the prosecutor
[56:55.660 --> 57:00.660]  out of the way so that when I go to the grand jury, I give them the complaints against
[57:00.660 --> 57:08.660]  the prosecutor and then tell them, oh, yeah, by the way, I just happened to have this other
[57:08.660 --> 57:13.660]  set of complaints. Just happened to be in my back pocket. Check this out. Then I file
[57:13.660 --> 57:17.660]  against the one I wanted to in the first place, but the prosecutor's not in there to argue
[57:17.660 --> 57:24.660]  against it because I set him up. Does that make sense to you?
[57:24.660 --> 57:33.660]  It makes every good sense in the world. Well, the strategy I've chosen to use in my case
[57:33.660 --> 57:50.660]  has been contacting the Georgia State Administrative Office is the department I contacted so that
[57:50.660 --> 58:02.660]  the county that I'm up against is not aware of the way that I have chosen to set them
[58:02.660 --> 58:12.660]  up. Okay, I've missed something. I had a dog bark.
[58:12.660 --> 58:22.660]  Can you do that again a little more clearly? Yeah, actually, we're going on break. We only
[58:22.660 --> 58:28.660]  got a few seconds left to go to the top of the hour break. So, Newman, if you would just
[58:28.660 --> 58:33.660]  hang on to the other side and we can finish up. We also have Mark from Wisconsin, our
[58:33.660 --> 58:39.660]  affiliates, broadcasting us up there. And we also have Terry from Michigan. So, Mark
[58:39.660 --> 58:43.660]  and Terry, please hang on the line. We will take your calls on the other side. And we
[58:43.660 --> 58:47.660]  will finish up with Newman as well. This is the Rule of Law Radio, Kelton and Debra Stevens,
[58:47.660 --> 59:12.660]  ruleoflawradio.com. We will be right back.
[59:12.660 --> 59:19.660]  Thank you.
[59:42.660 --> 01:00:06.660]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at ruleoflawradio.com, live free
[01:00:06.660 --> 01:00:13.660]  speech talk radio at its best.
[01:00:36.660 --> 01:00:51.660]  Thank you.
[01:00:51.660 --> 01:01:06.660]  Thank you.
[01:01:06.660 --> 01:01:21.660]  Thank you.
[01:01:21.660 --> 01:01:41.660]  All right, chant down Babylon. That's what we are doing here on Rule of Law Radio. Okay,
[01:01:41.660 --> 01:01:46.660]  we are speaking right now with Newman and Georgia. We've got Mark and Terry up on the
[01:01:46.660 --> 01:01:54.660]  caller bridge. We will go to y'all in just a few very short minutes. Okay, so again,
[01:01:54.660 --> 01:01:58.660]  Newman, thank you very much for calling in and thank you very much for listening to our
[01:01:58.660 --> 01:01:59.660]  show.
[01:01:59.660 --> 01:02:02.660]  Let me clarify just a little bit.
[01:02:02.660 --> 01:02:06.660]  Yeah, let's talk about exactly what this complaint is about and where you went.
[01:02:06.660 --> 01:02:07.660]  Okay.
[01:02:07.660 --> 01:02:09.660]  Go ahead, Randy.
[01:02:09.660 --> 01:02:16.660]  No, Newman, re-explain what that was. I got interrupted and I'm not sure if I missed
[01:02:16.660 --> 01:02:20.660]  something. I don't think I did, but state that again, please.
[01:02:20.660 --> 01:02:32.660]  Okay. My position now, I am going up against this small county of less than 800 people
[01:02:32.660 --> 01:02:40.660]  in the county and I was driving down the highway coming from Florida back to Georgia
[01:02:40.660 --> 01:02:48.660]  one night at about 11, 15 p.m. and I drove past several police officers on my way.
[01:02:48.660 --> 01:02:55.660]  Never stopped because I had my cruise control on, on the speed limit. I went past this
[01:02:55.660 --> 01:03:03.660]  little city. All of a sudden, the police officer pulls me over and claims that I was
[01:03:03.660 --> 01:03:13.660]  traveling at a speed of 93 miles per hour. So, and I'm going up against this little
[01:03:13.660 --> 01:03:22.660]  county, so today I just filed a notice on demand for a definite statement of
[01:03:22.660 --> 01:03:32.660]  allegation of bona fide jurisdiction because I have an arraignment on Tuesday,
[01:03:32.660 --> 01:03:42.660]  the 26th. However, they have circumvented every rule or procedure in the book.
[01:03:42.660 --> 01:03:48.660]  Okay. Here's what I suggest, and this is the direction that I've mostly been
[01:03:48.660 --> 01:03:58.660]  taking, is if the court violates any law or fails to appropriately apply the law
[01:03:58.660 --> 01:04:06.660]  to the facts, one thing to do is file motions and actions in the court to that
[01:04:06.660 --> 01:04:13.660]  effect, but there's something else going on here. The judge has a ministerial
[01:04:13.660 --> 01:04:22.660]  duty to correctly apply the law to the facts in the case. The appeals court are
[01:04:22.660 --> 01:04:28.660]  the ones that decide what the legislature meant when they passed a law, not the
[01:04:28.660 --> 01:04:35.660]  trial judge. He cannot do that. He can only take the law as it comes to him from
[01:04:35.660 --> 01:04:43.660]  the legislature, as explained by the court of appeals, and apply that law the
[01:04:43.660 --> 01:04:51.660]  way he gets it to the facts. If he fails to do that, he's violated a ministerial
[01:04:51.660 --> 01:04:57.660]  duty and denied you informed free access to or enjoyment of a right, and that's
[01:04:57.660 --> 01:05:04.660]  a crime in most every state. File against the judge and ask the judge to step down.
[01:05:04.660 --> 01:05:13.660]  You can also file a countersuit against the judge personally for denying you in
[01:05:13.660 --> 01:05:19.660]  your rights in violation of a ministerial duty. Now, it's important that you charge
[01:05:19.660 --> 01:05:28.660]  him with violating a ministerial duty, and don't charge him with the improper
[01:05:28.660 --> 01:05:36.660]  decision that he made. The decision that he makes in court is immune from civil
[01:05:36.660 --> 01:05:45.660]  suit, but the violation of the ministerial duty is not. Now, granted he did both at
[01:05:45.660 --> 01:05:51.660]  the same time. He rendered the bogus ruling. You can sue him for that. You can
[01:05:51.660 --> 01:05:57.660]  sue him for violating a ministerial duty. This will really get their attention.
[01:05:57.660 --> 01:06:04.660]  Right. We need to start going after the judges. They are the problem. And the
[01:06:04.660 --> 01:06:10.660]  rest of those guys are just minions. They're just toadies. They're gobbling
[01:06:10.660 --> 01:06:15.660]  around the judge's feet. You start kicking the judge in his teeth, and that's
[01:06:15.660 --> 01:06:21.660]  the one thing everybody needs to realize they can do. Once you kick that judge in
[01:06:21.660 --> 01:06:29.660]  his teeth, now everything he does looks like retaliation. When I make my first
[01:06:29.660 --> 01:06:34.660]  allegation against the judge, if he doesn't disappear, everything he does I
[01:06:34.660 --> 01:06:41.660]  don't like gets felony retaliation, another civil suit, amended civil suit,
[01:06:41.660 --> 01:06:51.660]  and added that to it, motion to disqualify. Sound like a plan?
[01:06:51.660 --> 01:06:52.660]  Thank you very much.
[01:06:52.660 --> 01:06:55.660]  All right. Thank you, Newman. And also, before you go, I have a question for
[01:06:55.660 --> 01:06:59.660]  you. How long have you been listening to our show?
[01:06:59.660 --> 01:07:05.660]  A friend told me about this show just recently, and I sent Mr. Kelton an
[01:07:05.660 --> 01:07:12.660]  email. And there's another question I wanted to ask, but I don't know if I
[01:07:12.660 --> 01:07:14.660]  could ask it on the air.
[01:07:14.660 --> 01:07:19.660]  Okay. Send it an email. After you were talking, I remembered reading your
[01:07:19.660 --> 01:07:20.660]  email.
[01:07:20.660 --> 01:07:21.660]  Thank you.
[01:07:21.660 --> 01:07:24.660]  Yes. So what, you've been listening for a couple of weeks?
[01:07:24.660 --> 01:07:27.660]  No. This is my very first time.
[01:07:27.660 --> 01:07:31.660]  Oh, wow. So your first-time listener tonight and first-time caller.
[01:07:31.660 --> 01:07:32.660]  Yes, ma'am.
[01:07:32.660 --> 01:07:35.660]  All right. Thank you so much for tuning into our show.
[01:07:35.660 --> 01:07:36.660]  You're very welcome.
[01:07:36.660 --> 01:07:38.660]  And thank you for the call.
[01:07:38.660 --> 01:07:40.660]  Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Kelton.
[01:07:40.660 --> 01:07:41.660]  All right.
[01:07:41.660 --> 01:07:42.660]  You are welcome.
[01:07:42.660 --> 01:07:45.660]  All right. Thank you, Newman. All right. We're going to go now to our
[01:07:45.660 --> 01:07:51.660]  affiliate in Madison, Mark in Wisconsin. Thanks for calling in, Mark. What's on
[01:07:51.660 --> 01:07:53.660]  your mind tonight?
[01:07:53.660 --> 01:07:56.660]  Is this the Eddie Craig show?
[01:07:56.660 --> 01:07:59.660]  Not tonight.
[01:07:59.660 --> 01:08:05.660]  Put your face close to the microphone. I'm going to push my mic taser.
[01:08:05.660 --> 01:08:07.660]  What's on your mind, Mark?
[01:08:07.660 --> 01:08:10.660]  Hey, back to that FDC thing.
[01:08:10.660 --> 01:08:11.660]  Yes.
[01:08:11.660 --> 01:08:18.660]  They don't have any power even under their administrative powers to go into
[01:08:18.660 --> 01:08:22.660]  someone's house who's not licensed because there's no contract.
[01:08:22.660 --> 01:08:24.660]  There you go.
[01:08:24.660 --> 01:08:30.660]  I think what they were saying is when you purchased the item.
[01:08:30.660 --> 01:08:35.660]  Well, this all had to do with the Boulder case where they were saying that
[01:08:35.660 --> 01:08:40.660]  they have the right to inspect any RF equipment, period.
[01:08:40.660 --> 01:08:44.660]  Yes, they were saying that when you purchased the item, you agreed to a
[01:08:44.660 --> 01:08:51.660]  contract. Well, I don't remember seeing anything about FCC in a contract.
[01:08:51.660 --> 01:08:56.660]  Yeah, you know, I bet they're using it. I bet they're supposed to inspect it
[01:08:56.660 --> 01:08:59.660]  before it's sold to the general public.
[01:08:59.660 --> 01:09:00.660]  Right.
[01:09:00.660 --> 01:09:04.660]  They're just saying that, you know. I mean, that's just ridiculous. You know,
[01:09:04.660 --> 01:09:08.660]  they just try and get away with whatever they can get away with.
[01:09:08.660 --> 01:09:15.660]  It says here, this is what this guy Fisk says, okay, this idiot from the SEC.
[01:09:15.660 --> 01:09:19.660]  All right, quote, whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio
[01:09:19.660 --> 01:09:25.660]  device, your authorization from the commission comes with the obligation to
[01:09:25.660 --> 01:09:27.660]  allow inspection.
[01:09:27.660 --> 01:09:32.660]  See, that's, there it is right there, Debbie, with your authorization.
[01:09:32.660 --> 01:09:36.660]  I mean, you have to be contracted with these people.
[01:09:36.660 --> 01:09:38.660]  Yeah.
[01:09:38.660 --> 01:09:42.660]  In other words, if it's pirate radio, you never made a contract with them, so
[01:09:42.660 --> 01:09:46.660]  you don't have to allow them anyway, even under their administrative crap.
[01:09:46.660 --> 01:09:50.660]  Right. You have no contract with the, with the FTC.
[01:09:50.660 --> 01:09:54.660]  Yes. And we have a lot of that's going on now, especially in Ohio. We've got
[01:09:54.660 --> 01:10:00.660]  like 70 some odd decisions from the federal judge over contract.
[01:10:00.660 --> 01:10:04.660]  Yeah. And also they can't even, they can't even say, well, when you bought the
[01:10:04.660 --> 01:10:08.660]  equipment, you agreed to the contract. They can't even say that because what
[01:10:08.660 --> 01:10:11.660]  if you bought the equipment overseas?
[01:10:11.660 --> 01:10:17.660]  Well, wait a minute. Show me the contract, Bubba.
[01:10:17.660 --> 01:10:22.660]  Right. And I can't think of any other product on earth where you fall under
[01:10:22.660 --> 01:10:30.660]  any sort of administrative laws simply by purchasing something. You know what
[01:10:30.660 --> 01:10:33.660]  I mean? Except for maybe a gun. And we know they're not even supposed to be
[01:10:33.660 --> 01:10:39.660]  messing around with the guns either, according to the US constitution.
[01:10:39.660 --> 01:10:40.660]  Yeah, I know.
[01:10:40.660 --> 01:10:46.660]  Unless it's a mattress tag, do not remove under penalty of law.
[01:10:46.660 --> 01:10:52.660]  Right, right. C.W. Herman had to go around with that.
[01:10:52.660 --> 01:10:59.660]  Yeah, I don't, I'm just thinking this is so dumb and so outrageous.
[01:10:59.660 --> 01:11:04.660]  They just want to see how much the public can swallow and we're not swallowing
[01:11:04.660 --> 01:11:05.660]  any of it.
[01:11:05.660 --> 01:11:13.660]  I'm wondering if that's what it is or if we have people inside who are doing
[01:11:13.660 --> 01:11:19.660]  this to demonstrate to us how draconian the government will become if we don't
[01:11:19.660 --> 01:11:20.660]  do something about it.
[01:11:20.660 --> 01:11:22.660]  It's probably a little bit of both.
[01:11:22.660 --> 01:11:25.660]  I'm hoping that's what we've got here.
[01:11:25.660 --> 01:11:29.660]  It's programming too. A lot of Americans are programmed to believe that anything
[01:11:29.660 --> 01:11:33.660]  that the government says is true without checking on it. So all they have to do
[01:11:33.660 --> 01:11:36.660]  is put that article up and people think in their mind, well, that's the law.
[01:11:36.660 --> 01:11:37.660]  That's the way it is.
[01:11:37.660 --> 01:11:38.660]  Exactly.
[01:11:38.660 --> 01:11:43.660]  Speaking of programming, this is an issue I took up several years ago with my
[01:11:43.660 --> 01:11:49.660]  state representative and he actually petitioned a bill, but he could get no
[01:11:49.660 --> 01:11:55.660]  interest in it. I maintain that the reason we only have five to ten percent
[01:11:55.660 --> 01:12:01.660]  turnout on elections is because of the schools. The schools are required to
[01:12:01.660 --> 01:12:04.660]  instill in the child a deep and inviting faith in and respect for the American
[01:12:04.660 --> 01:12:10.660]  form of government. They do that, but at the same time they clearly demonstrate
[01:12:10.660 --> 01:12:14.660]  to all our school children, while you have all these great and wonderful rights
[01:12:14.660 --> 01:12:19.660]  and privileges, don't even think about trying to express one of them while
[01:12:19.660 --> 01:12:23.660]  you're in bed school or the whole way to the world will fall right on your head.
[01:12:23.660 --> 01:12:31.660]  We put our children through twelve years of that hypocrisy and when they get out
[01:12:31.660 --> 01:12:37.660]  all of a sudden we expect them to become empowered citizens. I suggested that we
[01:12:37.660 --> 01:12:43.660]  separate the counselor from the school system and designate the counselor an
[01:12:43.660 --> 01:12:48.660]  ombudsman for the children. If the child has a problem, don't go to the principal.
[01:12:48.660 --> 01:12:53.660]  Go to the ombudsman. The ombudsman takes you to the principal and takes the
[01:12:53.660 --> 01:13:00.660]  principal and puts him on the dot. Win, lose or draw, you come out at least
[01:13:00.660 --> 01:13:06.660]  feeling like you made the system answer to you. We put our children through twelve
[01:13:06.660 --> 01:13:09.660]  years of that, we'll have empowered citizens.
[01:13:09.660 --> 01:13:17.660]  Alright, let me read this from the FCC. Okay, this is from the FCC website.
[01:13:17.660 --> 01:13:22.660]  Regarding this inspection authority. This comes from this pamphlet that was left
[01:13:22.660 --> 01:13:30.660]  on the doorstep of this Boulder, Colorado gentleman's home. Section 303
[01:13:30.660 --> 01:13:37.660]  of the Communications Act of 1934 as amended act gives the Federal
[01:13:37.660 --> 01:13:41.660]  Communications Commission, quote, the authority to inspect all radio
[01:13:41.660 --> 01:13:48.660]  installations associated with stations required to be licensed by any act or
[01:13:48.660 --> 01:13:53.660]  which the commission by rule has authorized to operate without a license
[01:13:53.660 --> 01:13:59.660]  under Section 307E1 or which are subject to the provisions of any act, treaty
[01:13:59.660 --> 01:14:07.660]  or convention binding on the United States, end quote, 47 USC 303N. Both
[01:14:07.660 --> 01:14:12.660]  Section 303N of the act and the rules which implement the act grant the right
[01:14:12.660 --> 01:14:18.660]  to inspect most radio operations to the commission and by delegated authority to
[01:14:18.660 --> 01:14:22.660]  the commission's bureau and agents. The Enforcement Bureau conducts inspections
[01:14:22.660 --> 01:14:26.660]  of radio installations as part of the bureau's function to enforce the
[01:14:26.660 --> 01:14:35.660]  commission's rules and regulations 47 CFR 0.111A. Both licensees and
[01:14:35.660 --> 01:14:41.660]  non-licensees must allow an FCC agent to inspect their radio equipment along
[01:14:41.660 --> 01:14:46.660]  with the privilege of possessing a licensee, excuse me, along with the
[01:14:46.660 --> 01:14:49.660]  privilege of possessing a license come responsibilities such as knowing the
[01:14:49.660 --> 01:14:54.660]  applicable rules including allowing the station to be inspected. Licensees
[01:14:54.660 --> 01:14:59.660]  should be aware of the commission's right to inspect blah, blah, blah.
[01:14:59.660 --> 01:15:00.660]  Licensees.
[01:15:00.660 --> 01:15:01.660]  Exactly.
[01:15:01.660 --> 01:15:07.660]  And so if they have not authorized you to have a license, you're not
[01:15:07.660 --> 01:15:12.660]  culpable to their administrative codes. It's pretty clear to me.
[01:15:12.660 --> 01:15:20.660]  Right. Well, it says all radio installations associated with stations
[01:15:20.660 --> 01:15:26.660]  required to be licensed by any act. So they're saying whether you're licensed
[01:15:26.660 --> 01:15:32.660]  or not, if you're required to be licensed, they're claiming this authority also.
[01:15:32.660 --> 01:15:37.660]  Right. But don't these acts have to be in compliance with the U.S. Constitution?
[01:15:37.660 --> 01:15:43.660]  Well, the thing is it doesn't apply when it comes to a private residence
[01:15:43.660 --> 01:15:48.660]  because that was struck down by the Supreme Court in 1967 that the
[01:15:48.660 --> 01:15:52.660]  government, any level of government, cannot do administrative inspections
[01:15:52.660 --> 01:15:57.660]  without a warrant, period, if it's a private residence.
[01:15:57.660 --> 01:16:00.660]  So why are they trying to claim that right?
[01:16:00.660 --> 01:16:05.660]  Because they're pushing, pushing, pushing the envelope as usual.
[01:16:05.660 --> 01:16:09.660]  See, this is just another example of people think, people have so much faith
[01:16:09.660 --> 01:16:13.660]  in the federal government. Here's another example of them just outright lying.
[01:16:13.660 --> 01:16:18.660]  They don't have, the FCC does not have a rebuttal for that Supreme Court
[01:16:18.660 --> 01:16:22.660]  decision in 1967 of how they get around that decision.
[01:16:22.660 --> 01:16:28.660]  They quote this law that was passed in 1934, which I just read part of it to you,
[01:16:28.660 --> 01:16:35.660]  but they do not rebut anything regarding the Supreme Court decision in 1967
[01:16:35.660 --> 01:16:39.660]  that says they can't do an administrative search without a warrant
[01:16:39.660 --> 01:16:43.660]  on a private residence even under this act. They're just pushing the envelope
[01:16:43.660 --> 01:16:44.660]  as usual.
[01:16:44.660 --> 01:16:45.660]  Yep.
[01:16:45.660 --> 01:16:48.660]  Okay, Mark, you want to hold, you can hold on to the other side if you like.
[01:16:48.660 --> 01:16:49.660]  Okay.
[01:16:49.660 --> 01:16:51.660]  All right, we're going on break. This is the rule of law,
[01:16:51.660 --> 01:17:20.660]  Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens. We'll be right back and take more of your calls.
[01:17:20.660 --> 01:17:21.660]  Thank you.
[01:17:50.660 --> 01:17:58.660]  This is Bill Shover at 817-975-2431. That's sleepwellinvestment.com
[01:17:58.660 --> 01:18:17.660]  or call 817-975-2431.
[01:18:17.660 --> 01:18:24.660]  Don't bore us. You're not going to pull the wool over our eyes anymore.
[01:18:24.660 --> 01:18:29.660]  Words of wisdom from my husband, Jerry Stevens there, three shoes posse.
[01:18:29.660 --> 01:18:34.660]  Okay, and Mark, I was just going to read just a little bit more from this pamphlet,
[01:18:34.660 --> 01:18:40.660]  which is also on the FCC's website. It says equally important FCC agents
[01:18:40.660 --> 01:18:45.660]  are also allowed to inspect the radio equipment of non-licensees.
[01:18:45.660 --> 01:18:49.660]  Non-licensees include those individuals or entities operating in accordance
[01:18:49.660 --> 01:18:51.660]  with Part 15 rules.
[01:18:51.660 --> 01:18:55.660]  Non-licensees include those who should have a license to operate their equipment
[01:18:55.660 --> 01:19:03.660]  but have not obtained a license and are operating equipment without authority.
[01:19:03.660 --> 01:19:07.660]  So they're trying to say that, and I didn't read that anywhere in the law
[01:19:07.660 --> 01:19:11.660]  that I just quoted in the above paragraph.
[01:19:11.660 --> 01:19:16.660]  That law looks to me like they're specifically talking about licensed individuals
[01:19:16.660 --> 01:19:19.660]  and that's it.
[01:19:19.660 --> 01:19:23.660]  Okay, but they're just making their own interpretation and saying,
[01:19:23.660 --> 01:19:28.660]  well, it includes non-licensees as well, which means people who should have a license.
[01:19:28.660 --> 01:19:32.660]  So we're going to lump them in that category too, and we're just going to blow off
[01:19:32.660 --> 01:19:39.660]  this 1967 Supreme Court ruling that says that we can't make administrative inspections
[01:19:39.660 --> 01:19:42.660]  without a warrant. Just never mind that.
[01:19:42.660 --> 01:19:47.660]  Right. That's why the federal government is going to be getting rid of rule of law
[01:19:47.660 --> 01:19:52.660]  when Internet 2 comes around because you guys have the ability to pick apart
[01:19:52.660 --> 01:19:56.660]  an article to put it under a magnifying glass and find out what's right
[01:19:56.660 --> 01:20:01.660]  and what's not right and broadcast that information to the masses.
[01:20:01.660 --> 01:20:03.660]  Well, I don't think they're ever really going to be able to do away with the Internet
[01:20:03.660 --> 01:20:07.660]  as we know it. I think that they're going to try to build an Internet 2
[01:20:07.660 --> 01:20:11.660]  and try to get people to use it and that they're also going to do things
[01:20:11.660 --> 01:20:19.660]  like what they're doing in Canada, which is selling ISP not as a service
[01:20:19.660 --> 01:20:25.660]  to access the Internet per se, but it's more like a subscription to cable
[01:20:25.660 --> 01:20:30.660]  where you get a list of websites like a subscription package that you're allowed to go to,
[01:20:30.660 --> 01:20:35.660]  and if you want to browse the Internet or go to any websites that are not on that list,
[01:20:35.660 --> 01:20:39.660]  then you've got to pay per, like pay per view or something on cable,
[01:20:39.660 --> 01:20:48.660]  but there's just really no way. I know people who work in the infrastructure of the Internet
[01:20:48.660 --> 01:20:51.660]  and it's so many layers deep and there's so many hackers.
[01:20:51.660 --> 01:20:56.660]  America, the land of the hackers, they're never going to be able to completely shut down the Internet.
[01:20:56.660 --> 01:20:58.660]  They're just not going to be able to.
[01:20:58.660 --> 01:21:02.660]  It will go the way of the Internet superhighway.
[01:21:02.660 --> 01:21:06.660]  They're just going to restrict people's access to it and they're going to build an Internet 2
[01:21:06.660 --> 01:21:10.660]  and try to get people to use it, but, you know, honestly,
[01:21:10.660 --> 01:21:15.660]  as long as there's any communications whatsoever, as long as there's a telephone line
[01:21:15.660 --> 01:21:18.660]  and people have modems, there's going to be an Internet.
[01:21:18.660 --> 01:21:24.660]  People will be able to communicate with each other. I'm serious.
[01:21:24.660 --> 01:21:34.660]  The Annette Lundby case, I set up an email account for that case
[01:21:34.660 --> 01:21:39.660]  and I opened an attachment and I've got a Trojan horse that put my computer down
[01:21:39.660 --> 01:21:43.660]  that broadcasts your show on my radio station.
[01:21:43.660 --> 01:21:47.660]  I'm running your show off a laptop right now,
[01:21:47.660 --> 01:21:53.660]  but someone's none too happy with Annette Lundby trying to free her child from the federal authorities.
[01:21:53.660 --> 01:21:57.660]  It would seem so.
[01:21:57.660 --> 01:22:01.660]  Do you have any way of tracing that Trojan back?
[01:22:01.660 --> 01:22:04.660]  I don't. I'm sure Deborah could do it.
[01:22:04.660 --> 01:22:07.660]  Well, you can trace the IP address of any email.
[01:22:07.660 --> 01:22:12.660]  I mean, it's actually in the header of the email.
[01:22:12.660 --> 01:22:17.660]  If you know what email it came from, you can find out. I mean, it's very easy.
[01:22:17.660 --> 01:22:19.660]  Oh, I know which email it was.
[01:22:19.660 --> 01:22:24.660]  Yeah, you can easily find out the IP address that the email came from.
[01:22:24.660 --> 01:22:31.660]  And these idiots are so stupid, they don't even try to disguise their IP address by going to a coffee shop or something.
[01:22:31.660 --> 01:22:38.660]  I mean, we had a gentleman on right at the beginning of our broadcast a couple years ago
[01:22:38.660 --> 01:22:43.660]  who was fighting checkpoints in Arizona.
[01:22:43.660 --> 01:22:46.660]  Terry, I can't remember what his last name was.
[01:22:46.660 --> 01:22:49.660]  Checkpointusa.org is his website.
[01:22:49.660 --> 01:23:01.660]  And these dumb spooks, I mean, they're hitting up his website from within the CIA in the Department of the CIA.
[01:23:01.660 --> 01:23:04.660]  I mean, they just don't even try to disguise their IP address.
[01:23:04.660 --> 01:23:07.660]  They don't even go somewhere like to a coffee shop or anything.
[01:23:07.660 --> 01:23:13.660]  So I'm sure you just look at the header, just do a search in the properties of the email,
[01:23:13.660 --> 01:23:17.660]  and you can see what IP address it came from.
[01:23:17.660 --> 01:23:21.660]  What can be done about it is another story, however.
[01:23:21.660 --> 01:23:27.660]  Maybe I can call you off the air, but I've got SurvivorSeeds.com set up now too, and it's a whole survival kit.
[01:23:27.660 --> 01:23:34.660]  And what I wanted to do is donate $10 for each package sold to Rule of Law Radio,
[01:23:34.660 --> 01:23:36.660]  and I just wondered the best way to set that up.
[01:23:36.660 --> 01:23:40.660]  All right. All right, let's talk off air, Mark.
[01:23:40.660 --> 01:23:41.660]  We'll do that.
[01:23:41.660 --> 01:23:43.660]  All right. I'll call you after the show.
[01:23:43.660 --> 01:23:45.660]  Okay. You have a good night. Thank you.
[01:23:45.660 --> 01:23:46.660]  All right. You do as well.
[01:23:46.660 --> 01:23:47.660]  All right.
[01:23:47.660 --> 01:23:48.660]  Okay.
[01:23:48.660 --> 01:23:55.660]  So, Randy, any comments about this statute that I just read or the FCC's interpretation thereof?
[01:23:55.660 --> 01:24:06.660]  Yeah, I think I was thinking that maybe we should make up a letter to all of the prominent people in, say, Austin
[01:24:06.660 --> 01:24:16.660]  and tell them that it's from the FCC, Fast Communications Criticizers.
[01:24:16.660 --> 01:24:18.660]  Just don't put that part. Just call it FCC.
[01:24:18.660 --> 01:24:22.660]  I used to have a logo that was ICC.
[01:24:22.660 --> 01:24:23.660]  Okay.
[01:24:23.660 --> 01:24:26.660]  It was an Interstate Commerce Commission. It was ICC.
[01:24:26.660 --> 01:24:36.660]  And we send them one from FCC telling them that they have radio frequency transmitting devices in their house,
[01:24:36.660 --> 01:24:46.660]  and we will be contacting them in order to do a complete search of their house to examine any item
[01:24:46.660 --> 01:24:52.660]  that could possibly transmit radio frequencies and ensure that it falls within our requirements.
[01:24:52.660 --> 01:24:53.660]  Oh, boy.
[01:24:53.660 --> 01:24:58.660]  If you have any questions, call this number and give them the number of the FCC.
[01:24:58.660 --> 01:25:00.660]  Uh-huh. Yeah.
[01:25:00.660 --> 01:25:01.660]  Okay.
[01:25:01.660 --> 01:25:03.660]  Give them some good feedback.
[01:25:03.660 --> 01:25:04.660]  Yeah, really.
[01:25:04.660 --> 01:25:09.660]  Okay. Let's go on now. Callers, if you'd like to call in 512-646-1984.
[01:25:09.660 --> 01:25:12.660]  We're going to go to Terry in Michigan.
[01:25:12.660 --> 01:25:15.660]  Terry, thanks for calling in. What's on your mind tonight?
[01:25:15.660 --> 01:25:17.660]  Hey. Thanks for talking to me.
[01:25:17.660 --> 01:25:23.660]  First of all, I wanted to tell you I'm really interested in your traffic seminar you're talking about,
[01:25:23.660 --> 01:25:26.660]  driving down from Michigan to attend. That would be great.
[01:25:26.660 --> 01:25:33.660]  Oh, my goodness. Well, keep in mind, it's mostly going to be regarding Texas traffic code,
[01:25:33.660 --> 01:25:38.660]  but many principles may apply to your state.
[01:25:38.660 --> 01:25:43.660]  Exactly. I had one subject I wanted to talk about,
[01:25:43.660 --> 01:25:46.660]  but since you guys had brought up something about the schools there,
[01:25:46.660 --> 01:25:50.660]  I just wanted to tell you about a little incident with my son.
[01:25:50.660 --> 01:26:00.660]  He was late for class one day, and they told him he had to come in for detention on Saturday,
[01:26:00.660 --> 01:26:07.660]  and I tried to tell them that it wasn't a big enough deal, that it's my job to discipline my kid,
[01:26:07.660 --> 01:26:10.660]  and they started telling me, well, each time he doesn't show up,
[01:26:10.660 --> 01:26:13.660]  he's going to get another discipline and another discipline,
[01:26:13.660 --> 01:26:17.660]  and then he's going to end up failing and all this kind of stuff.
[01:26:17.660 --> 01:26:23.660]  So instead of fighting, and I figured I'll pick my battles in a different spot,
[01:26:23.660 --> 01:26:31.660]  and so he went to his thing with the school there.
[01:26:31.660 --> 01:26:35.660]  When he got there, this was in the middle of the winter, it's like eight degrees out,
[01:26:35.660 --> 01:26:40.660]  and they sent all these kids over to this building and put them all in a room,
[01:26:40.660 --> 01:26:44.660]  and he had to sit there for eight hours, and they didn't have enough chairs for everybody.
[01:26:44.660 --> 01:26:52.660]  So my son and eight other kids had to sit on a cement floor for eight hours.
[01:26:52.660 --> 01:26:54.660]  Interesting.
[01:26:54.660 --> 01:27:03.660]  Yeah, I mean, what could that be conditioning them for?
[01:27:03.660 --> 01:27:10.660]  Have you read the requirements for the educational requirements?
[01:27:10.660 --> 01:27:13.660]  Is there something that requires them?
[01:27:13.660 --> 01:27:16.660]  Oh, wait a minute, how many people can be in that room?
[01:27:16.660 --> 01:27:17.660]  I don't know.
[01:27:17.660 --> 01:27:19.660]  They didn't have them in the regular school.
[01:27:19.660 --> 01:27:22.660]  They had them in the special ed building across the road.
[01:27:22.660 --> 01:27:26.660]  Yeah, number one, they probably were violating fire code.
[01:27:26.660 --> 01:27:31.660]  Art Patton went to court in North Carolina,
[01:27:31.660 --> 01:27:34.660]  and he looked in the courtroom and people were everywhere.
[01:27:34.660 --> 01:27:37.660]  They were sitting on the floor, standing against the walls.
[01:27:37.660 --> 01:27:41.660]  He called the fire marshal, asked him how many people could be in this space,
[01:27:41.660 --> 01:27:44.660]  and they said X amount of feet.
[01:27:44.660 --> 01:27:47.660]  I think in most places it would be 16 square feet per person.
[01:27:47.660 --> 01:27:54.660]  So you do a quick tally on how big the room is, divide it by 16,
[01:27:54.660 --> 01:27:58.660]  and that will tell you how many people can be in there.
[01:27:58.660 --> 01:28:01.660]  Yeah, you could also press criminal charges for child abuse,
[01:28:01.660 --> 01:28:05.660]  for making them sit on the concrete floor if it's eight degrees.
[01:28:05.660 --> 01:28:10.660]  That means that floor is probably just about that cold.
[01:28:10.660 --> 01:28:13.660]  Yeah, awful cold, awful cold.
[01:28:13.660 --> 01:28:18.660]  And if there are too many people in the room, violates fire code,
[01:28:18.660 --> 01:28:24.660]  and puts the fire code is there to protect the health and safety of the public.
[01:28:24.660 --> 01:28:25.660]  Yeah.
[01:28:25.660 --> 01:28:31.660]  If these guys want to exercise their authority, we help them out.
[01:28:31.660 --> 01:28:33.660]  We show them how it's done.
[01:28:33.660 --> 01:28:39.660]  I had a teacher call me once and tell me my son was failing chemistry.
[01:28:39.660 --> 01:28:42.660]  And I went straight to the school, want to know what's going on.
[01:28:42.660 --> 01:28:45.660]  Why is this the first I know about this?
[01:28:45.660 --> 01:28:48.660]  Well, he wouldn't turn in his homework. Why don't I know about it?
[01:28:48.660 --> 01:28:51.660]  And how does he get a zero? I've looked at all his test scores.
[01:28:51.660 --> 01:28:53.660]  They're all 90 and 100. How did he get a zero?
[01:28:53.660 --> 01:28:57.660]  When he doesn't turn in his homework, I have to give him the zero.
[01:28:57.660 --> 01:29:02.660]  House Bill 72 mandates the grade shall reflect demonstrated master subject matter.
[01:29:02.660 --> 01:29:07.660]  If you attempt to juxtapose discipline and grading, I'll put you in front of a grand jury, Bubba.
[01:29:07.660 --> 01:29:12.660]  Well, what am I supposed to do? Call me. It's real easy.
[01:29:12.660 --> 01:29:15.660]  This problem would have went away a long time ago.
[01:29:15.660 --> 01:29:20.660]  It's easier to give the zero, but once you know the law,
[01:29:20.660 --> 01:29:23.660]  you can take it back to them. They're public officials.
[01:29:23.660 --> 01:29:25.660]  That'll get their attention.
[01:29:25.660 --> 01:29:32.660]  One of the other things they had done was he had a problem with his teeth.
[01:29:32.660 --> 01:29:38.660]  And I tried to get him into the dentist and I couldn't get him in.
[01:29:38.660 --> 01:29:40.660]  And then all of a sudden they called me and said, hey, we got an opening.
[01:29:40.660 --> 01:29:42.660]  You can get him in in an hour.
[01:29:42.660 --> 01:29:46.660]  OK, wait a minute. Hold on. Hold on, Terry. We're going to break. We're going to break.
[01:29:46.660 --> 01:29:50.660]  We've got Dennis from Texas, also Freeman from Minnesota.
[01:29:50.660 --> 01:29:52.660]  We'll be taking your calls on the other side as well.
[01:29:52.660 --> 01:29:58.660]  Rule of law, Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens. We'll be right back.
[01:29:58.660 --> 01:30:00.660]  Gold prices are at historic highs.
[01:30:00.660 --> 01:30:03.660]  And with the recent pullback, this is a great time to buy.
[01:30:03.660 --> 01:30:07.660]  With the value of the dollar, risks of inflation, geopolitical uncertainties
[01:30:07.660 --> 01:30:11.660]  and instability in rural financial systems, I see gold going up much higher.
[01:30:11.660 --> 01:30:14.660]  Hi, I'm Tim Fry at Roberts and Robert's Brokerage.
[01:30:14.660 --> 01:30:18.660]  Everybody should have some of their assets in investment grade precious metals.
[01:30:18.660 --> 01:30:21.660]  At Roberts and Robert's Brokerage, you can buy gold, silver and platinum
[01:30:21.660 --> 01:30:27.660]  with confidence from a brokerage that specialized in the precious metals market since 1977.
[01:30:27.660 --> 01:30:30.660]  If you are new to precious metals, we will happily provide you with the information
[01:30:30.660 --> 01:30:35.660]  you need to make an informed decision whether or not you choose to purchase from us.
[01:30:35.660 --> 01:30:38.660]  Also, Roberts and Robert's Brokerage values your privacy
[01:30:38.660 --> 01:30:43.660]  and will always advise you in the event that we would be required to report any transaction.
[01:30:43.660 --> 01:30:48.660]  If you have gold, silver or platinum you'd like to sell, we can convert it for immediate payment.
[01:30:48.660 --> 01:30:52.660]  Call us at 800-874-9760.
[01:30:52.660 --> 01:30:54.660]  We're Roberts and Robert's Brokerage.
[01:30:54.660 --> 01:31:17.660]  800-874-9760.
[01:31:24.660 --> 01:31:46.660]  Thank you.
[01:31:46.660 --> 01:32:04.660]  Okay, we are back.
[01:32:04.660 --> 01:32:06.660]  The rule of law.
[01:32:06.660 --> 01:32:07.660]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens.
[01:32:07.660 --> 01:32:12.660]  We're taking your phone calls, 512-646-1984.
[01:32:12.660 --> 01:32:16.660]  All right, we're talking with Terry from Michigan right now.
[01:32:16.660 --> 01:32:21.660]  And, Terry, you were telling us about you got an opening for the dentist.
[01:32:21.660 --> 01:32:24.660]  You'd been waiting for a while to get him in.
[01:32:24.660 --> 01:32:26.660]  Your son was having a problem with the teeth.
[01:32:26.660 --> 01:32:27.660]  I can see it coming now.
[01:32:27.660 --> 01:32:32.660]  The school didn't want to let him go, and they wanted to punish him for going to the dentist, right?
[01:32:32.660 --> 01:32:34.660]  Exactly.
[01:32:34.660 --> 01:32:37.660]  When I got the call, they said you got an hour.
[01:32:37.660 --> 01:32:41.660]  I went over, I got him, and I took him to the dentist.
[01:32:41.660 --> 01:32:43.660]  The next day I went back, talked to the secretary.
[01:32:43.660 --> 01:32:45.660]  I said, here, he was with me.
[01:32:45.660 --> 01:32:49.660]  He had to go to the dentist, and she said, well, he's getting unexcused absence
[01:32:49.660 --> 01:32:54.660]  because nobody can give him permission to leave the school except for his teacher.
[01:32:54.660 --> 01:32:57.660]  And I said, that's a bunch of crap.
[01:32:57.660 --> 01:32:58.660]  I'm his parent.
[01:32:58.660 --> 01:33:00.660]  You people have nothing to say about it.
[01:33:00.660 --> 01:33:02.660]  If I say he's going, he's going.
[01:33:02.660 --> 01:33:07.660]  And she said, well, if you ever try to come get him again, and we catch you, we're not going to let him go.
[01:33:07.660 --> 01:33:08.660]  I said, fine.
[01:33:08.660 --> 01:33:09.660]  Don't let him go.
[01:33:09.660 --> 01:33:16.660]  I've got my cell phone right here, like Randy says, 911, kidnapping, and that's where I'm charging it.
[01:33:16.660 --> 01:33:25.660]  And he's still heeding hard and said, I don't care what you say, but the situation hasn't arose again.
[01:33:25.660 --> 01:33:37.660]  But it's just amazing at the gall they have of what they're saying they can do and what I can't do as a parent.
[01:33:37.660 --> 01:33:40.660]  It's getting dangerous.
[01:33:40.660 --> 01:33:41.660]  It's getting dangerous, Terry.
[01:33:41.660 --> 01:33:44.660]  It's getting more and more dangerous.
[01:33:44.660 --> 01:33:51.660]  I had a superintendent tell my daughter when she said something was her right.
[01:33:51.660 --> 01:33:55.660]  He told her, when you're in this school, you don't have any rights.
[01:33:55.660 --> 01:33:58.660]  That sounds about right.
[01:33:58.660 --> 01:34:08.660]  Yeah, the problem wasn't so much that he said that, but that he would even imagine such a thing.
[01:34:08.660 --> 01:34:12.660]  And he didn't know who I was.
[01:34:12.660 --> 01:34:15.660]  I got him broke from that.
[01:34:15.660 --> 01:34:21.660]  But that he would even think to say such a thing to one of the children.
[01:34:21.660 --> 01:34:22.660]  They get very arrogant.
[01:34:22.660 --> 01:34:25.660]  They're used to pushing around children.
[01:34:25.660 --> 01:34:33.660]  And I don't advocate, you know, being at odds with the school.
[01:34:33.660 --> 01:34:47.660]  But on occasion, we have to come down there and remind them who we are and who they are and the kind of dignity they're to treat our children with.
[01:34:47.660 --> 01:35:00.660]  In Texas, corporal punishment is legal, or it was at the time, and I told the principal that I didn't want them putting their hands on my children.
[01:35:00.660 --> 01:35:01.660]  I don't beat them up.
[01:35:01.660 --> 01:35:03.660]  I don't want you beating them up.
[01:35:03.660 --> 01:35:08.660]  They said, well, if they need licks, we'll give them licks.
[01:35:08.660 --> 01:35:14.660]  So if I feel like you need licks, I get to come down here and give you licks.
[01:35:14.660 --> 01:35:16.660]  Is that the deal?
[01:35:16.660 --> 01:35:18.660]  Well, no, Mr. Kelton.
[01:35:18.660 --> 01:35:19.660]  Oh, I see.
[01:35:19.660 --> 01:35:20.660]  We have a different standard.
[01:35:20.660 --> 01:35:27.660]  Well, I'm a very...
[01:35:27.660 --> 01:35:31.660]  You just keep that in mind.
[01:35:31.660 --> 01:35:32.660]  I'm a fair sort of an individual.
[01:35:32.660 --> 01:35:34.660]  Keep that in mind.
[01:35:34.660 --> 01:35:35.660]  And we won't have any problems.
[01:35:35.660 --> 01:35:37.660]  They didn't beat up my children.
[01:35:37.660 --> 01:35:39.660]  Yeah, I guess not.
[01:35:39.660 --> 01:35:56.660]  I've found, too, I've talked to other parents, and it seems that very few do, but the ones that do stand up, that it seems to make a difference only in their cases, but they still continue with everybody else.
[01:35:56.660 --> 01:36:00.660]  There's just nothing we can do about that unless more people stand up.
[01:36:00.660 --> 01:36:03.660]  Well, I like the 911 idea.
[01:36:03.660 --> 01:36:11.660]  Yeah, frankly, I'm getting to where I don't like to warn them.
[01:36:11.660 --> 01:36:14.660]  I just like to do it.
[01:36:14.660 --> 01:36:21.660]  Anytime a public official, something like the school or something, they give me just a little bit of stuff.
[01:36:21.660 --> 01:36:23.660]  I ask them to go find...
[01:36:23.660 --> 01:36:26.660]  You have a local security officer here, don't you?
[01:36:26.660 --> 01:36:27.660]  Find him.
[01:36:27.660 --> 01:36:28.660]  Get him here.
[01:36:28.660 --> 01:36:29.660]  I need him.
[01:36:29.660 --> 01:36:33.660]  That really works.
[01:36:33.660 --> 01:36:37.660]  Generally, they want to call security on you.
[01:36:37.660 --> 01:36:44.660]  I did that to a Justice of the Peace's clerk recently, and she just broke into tears.
[01:36:44.660 --> 01:36:54.660]  And all I did was ask her to see the warrant that this Justice of the Peace had issued, and she said, well, didn't you check at the county court?
[01:36:54.660 --> 01:36:55.660]  I said, yes, I did.
[01:36:55.660 --> 01:36:57.660]  Well, didn't they have it?
[01:36:57.660 --> 01:36:58.660]  I said, yes, they did.
[01:36:58.660 --> 01:36:59.660]  Well, you'll have to go there.
[01:36:59.660 --> 01:37:02.660]  No, ma'am, you have to show it to them.
[01:37:02.660 --> 01:37:04.660]  Well, we don't have it.
[01:37:04.660 --> 01:37:05.660]  You'll have to go to the clerk's office.
[01:37:05.660 --> 01:37:07.660]  I said, OK, wait right here.
[01:37:07.660 --> 01:37:08.660]  I need to go get security.
[01:37:08.660 --> 01:37:10.660]  I'll be right back.
[01:37:10.660 --> 01:37:12.660]  And that's all I did, and that's the way I did it.
[01:37:12.660 --> 01:37:16.660]  And I turned and walked out of the office.
[01:37:16.660 --> 01:37:19.660]  This woman lost it.
[01:37:19.660 --> 01:37:24.660]  She could not believe I was going to get security on her so quickly.
[01:37:24.660 --> 01:37:32.660]  With no argument, no telling her what my rights were and what her duties were, I just walked out for security.
[01:37:32.660 --> 01:37:36.660]  And I wanted security to document the incident.
[01:37:36.660 --> 01:37:39.660]  By the time I got back, they had my stuff.
[01:37:39.660 --> 01:37:42.660]  Yeah, I bet they did.
[01:37:42.660 --> 01:37:43.660]  That really works.
[01:37:43.660 --> 01:37:46.660]  Use security to your advantage.
[01:37:46.660 --> 01:37:48.660]  All right, Terry, do you have anything else for us?
[01:37:48.660 --> 01:37:54.660]  Yeah, actually, my original purpose for calling was I had an incident here.
[01:37:54.660 --> 01:37:56.660]  My son, he's 16.
[01:37:56.660 --> 01:37:59.660]  And he's always been a pretty good kid.
[01:37:59.660 --> 01:38:06.660]  And I gave him permission to go up to some property that we have to go camping with one of his buddies.
[01:38:06.660 --> 01:38:11.660]  And without me knowing about it, some other kids showed up.
[01:38:11.660 --> 01:38:18.660]  And when they were there, there was some stuff that went on.
[01:38:18.660 --> 01:38:24.660]  And there was some incidents that were some mailbox smashing.
[01:38:24.660 --> 01:38:28.660]  And I don't know for sure if my son was involved or not.
[01:38:28.660 --> 01:38:35.660]  But in the meantime, after some of that had happened, he told one of the kids,
[01:38:35.660 --> 01:38:42.660]  one of the kids that didn't have a driver's license or anything, wanted to take off with my son's truck.
[01:38:42.660 --> 01:38:44.660]  And he told him absolutely not.
[01:38:44.660 --> 01:38:47.660]  Well, in the meantime, another kid that had a driver's license said,
[01:38:47.660 --> 01:38:50.660]  well, can I use the truck to go to the store to get some, I don't know,
[01:38:50.660 --> 01:38:53.660]  I want to get some pop or something like that.
[01:38:53.660 --> 01:38:55.660]  And so he gave that kid the keys.
[01:38:55.660 --> 01:39:00.660]  Well, they went out and they used the truck and went out to smash the mailbox.
[01:39:00.660 --> 01:39:05.660]  And in the meantime, he left the kid that didn't have the driver's license,
[01:39:05.660 --> 01:39:10.660]  who my son had told, you cannot drive, drive the truck.
[01:39:10.660 --> 01:39:18.660]  Well, he was driving like a maniac and ended up rolling the truck and pulling it out.
[01:39:18.660 --> 01:39:25.660]  And my son was so worried about what would happen with me that when they got ahold of the police,
[01:39:25.660 --> 01:39:29.660]  he told the police that him and the kid that was driving the truck said that,
[01:39:29.660 --> 01:39:35.660]  well, the kid stole the truck while everybody was sleeping.
[01:39:35.660 --> 01:39:47.660]  Now, in the meantime, we, all his parents got together afterwards and three kids that were involved,
[01:39:47.660 --> 01:39:57.660]  their parents and I went up and replaced 30 mailboxes that got smashed with a baseball bat.
[01:39:57.660 --> 01:40:02.660]  The kid who told my truck, his parents didn't get involved at all.
[01:40:02.660 --> 01:40:04.660]  They didn't go.
[01:40:04.660 --> 01:40:09.660]  Now, the mother right now is, the kid's been in a lot of trouble before.
[01:40:09.660 --> 01:40:11.660]  Okay, we need to move quickly.
[01:40:11.660 --> 01:40:12.660]  Yeah, yeah.
[01:40:12.660 --> 01:40:16.660]  Yeah, give us the gist of it because we have like four other callers and we're coming to the end of the show.
[01:40:16.660 --> 01:40:17.660]  Here's the gist of it.
[01:40:17.660 --> 01:40:18.660]  Here's the gist of it.
[01:40:18.660 --> 01:40:22.660]  Instead of her disciplining the kid, she's coming back at me and saying,
[01:40:22.660 --> 01:40:27.660]  well, we found out that these kids went up without any adult supervision.
[01:40:27.660 --> 01:40:28.660]  You weren't there.
[01:40:28.660 --> 01:40:30.660]  It was on your property.
[01:40:30.660 --> 01:40:34.660]  We also found out that a couple of the kids had a six-pack of beer.
[01:40:34.660 --> 01:40:37.660]  It's all your fault.
[01:40:37.660 --> 01:40:40.660]  Well, is anyone pressing any criminal charges right now for anything?
[01:40:40.660 --> 01:40:46.660]  Not yet, but I'm looking at pressing criminal charges against this kid for driving without permission
[01:40:46.660 --> 01:40:54.660]  because I'm stuck with a truck that's totaled out and his parents don't want to pay for it.
[01:40:54.660 --> 01:40:55.660]  They don't want anything to do with it.
[01:40:55.660 --> 01:41:00.660]  They're saying, too bad, we want to file charges against you for letting the kids go there without supervision.
[01:41:00.660 --> 01:41:09.660]  The only criminal that I see here is a traffic driver without a license.
[01:41:09.660 --> 01:41:10.660]  That's it.
[01:41:10.660 --> 01:41:13.660]  What about theft of the automobile, Randy?
[01:41:13.660 --> 01:41:19.660]  No, you can't give someone for theft unless they intended to permanently deprive you.
[01:41:19.660 --> 01:41:23.660]  Well, no, that's grand theft, but I think there's other forms of theft of automobiles.
[01:41:23.660 --> 01:41:25.660]  Joy riding.
[01:41:25.660 --> 01:41:27.660]  Yeah, exactly.
[01:41:27.660 --> 01:41:31.660]  You might get that, but this is...
[01:41:31.660 --> 01:41:34.660]  What about damage to property?
[01:41:34.660 --> 01:41:37.660]  He crashed the car.
[01:41:37.660 --> 01:41:38.660]  That's civil.
[01:41:38.660 --> 01:41:40.660]  That was where I was going.
[01:41:40.660 --> 01:41:43.660]  Most of this goes to civil.
[01:41:43.660 --> 01:41:47.660]  I was hoping maybe a judge would say you have to make restitution.
[01:41:47.660 --> 01:41:50.660]  That's a civil case.
[01:41:50.660 --> 01:41:51.660]  He may be right.
[01:41:51.660 --> 01:41:55.660]  A judge can order restitution.
[01:41:55.660 --> 01:41:57.660]  You might have a good point there.
[01:41:57.660 --> 01:42:02.660]  You might get around having to file civil action if you file criminal against a child,
[01:42:02.660 --> 01:42:09.660]  but I suggest what's going to happen, as soon as you file criminally against a child,
[01:42:09.660 --> 01:42:12.660]  the parents will sue you.
[01:42:12.660 --> 01:42:13.660]  So sue them.
[01:42:13.660 --> 01:42:17.660]  If you're going to file against a child, sue the parents first.
[01:42:17.660 --> 01:42:18.660]  For what?
[01:42:18.660 --> 01:42:19.660]  Immediately.
[01:42:19.660 --> 01:42:20.660]  Yeah.
[01:42:20.660 --> 01:42:27.660]  The parents are complaining that you let them on your property without your being there.
[01:42:27.660 --> 01:42:33.660]  Will you complain that their parents let him on your property without them being there?
[01:42:33.660 --> 01:42:34.660]  Well, you can file criminal trespass.
[01:42:34.660 --> 01:42:36.660]  Say, I never allowed your kid to be on my property.
[01:42:36.660 --> 01:42:38.660]  How about that?
[01:42:38.660 --> 01:42:39.660]  Yeah, that's a good point.
[01:42:39.660 --> 01:42:43.660]  No, you can't get criminal trespass unless they told him to leave and he didn't.
[01:42:43.660 --> 01:42:51.660]  But they can't make the charge that you allowed their child on your property without supervision.
[01:42:51.660 --> 01:42:52.660]  We never did.
[01:42:52.660 --> 01:42:55.660]  You have no duty to supervise their children.
[01:42:55.660 --> 01:42:56.660]  Yeah, exactly.
[01:42:56.660 --> 01:43:05.660]  But the problem is from the sound of the parents, they're going to sue you to protect themselves.
[01:43:05.660 --> 01:43:06.660]  That's right.
[01:43:06.660 --> 01:43:11.660]  So if you file criminally, file civilly against them at the same time.
[01:43:11.660 --> 01:43:13.660]  Okay.
[01:43:13.660 --> 01:43:15.660]  That way you get the advantage.
[01:43:15.660 --> 01:43:17.660]  Whoever files first has a tremendous advantage.
[01:43:17.660 --> 01:43:18.660]  You really need to move along.
[01:43:18.660 --> 01:43:19.660]  Yes.
[01:43:19.660 --> 01:43:20.660]  The board is stacking up.
[01:43:20.660 --> 01:43:21.660]  Yeah, the board is stacking up.
[01:43:21.660 --> 01:43:22.660]  All right.
[01:43:22.660 --> 01:43:23.660]  All right.
[01:43:23.660 --> 01:43:24.660]  Thank you, Terry.
[01:43:24.660 --> 01:43:25.660]  Okay.
[01:43:25.660 --> 01:43:28.660]  Okay, we're going to go now to Dennis in Texas.
[01:43:28.660 --> 01:43:29.660]  Thank you.
[01:43:29.660 --> 01:43:31.660]  Hey, Dennis, what's on your mind tonight?
[01:43:31.660 --> 01:43:32.660]  What's your question?
[01:43:32.660 --> 01:43:33.660]  We only got 20 seconds.
[01:43:33.660 --> 01:43:35.660]  No, we're going to skip through the break because we have too many callers.
[01:43:35.660 --> 01:43:36.660]  What's on your mind, Dennis?
[01:43:36.660 --> 01:43:40.660]  I'm the one that called the other night about the occupational license.
[01:43:40.660 --> 01:43:42.660]  I'm a locksmith in Austin.
[01:43:42.660 --> 01:43:43.660]  Yes.
[01:43:43.660 --> 01:43:45.660]  And DPS has been following me.
[01:43:45.660 --> 01:43:47.660]  Well, now this week I've not seen anyone.
[01:43:47.660 --> 01:43:52.660]  And I don't know if they've just given up or if they're just better at it, so I don't see them.
[01:43:52.660 --> 01:43:55.660]  My main question is not them following me.
[01:43:55.660 --> 01:44:00.660]  It's my working in the occupation I've been doing for 29 years.
[01:44:00.660 --> 01:44:03.660]  They've been licensing now for four years.
[01:44:03.660 --> 01:44:05.660]  What rights do I have?
[01:44:05.660 --> 01:44:09.660]  I've only been telling them when they call, and they have about four times,
[01:44:09.660 --> 01:44:15.660]  I just tell them that I choose not to contract with them, and I get off the phone quickly.
[01:44:15.660 --> 01:44:23.660]  I even told them once, put me on their do not call list, which he called me back in five minutes.
[01:44:23.660 --> 01:44:24.660]  That's good.
[01:44:24.660 --> 01:44:30.660]  Put the DPS on your do not call list and then file against them with the FCC.
[01:44:30.660 --> 01:44:36.660]  Maybe the FCC will come and search their offices.
[01:44:36.660 --> 01:44:39.660]  Why are they calling you?
[01:44:39.660 --> 01:44:47.660]  They're calling me and asking me if I have a license and if I'm doing locksmith duties.
[01:44:47.660 --> 01:44:48.660]  I don't answer that.
[01:44:48.660 --> 01:44:53.660]  What does a DPS have to do with enforcing an occupational license?
[01:44:53.660 --> 01:44:58.660]  That is who regulates the occupational license in Texas for locksmiths.
[01:44:58.660 --> 01:44:59.660]  Interesting.
[01:44:59.660 --> 01:45:05.660]  And for changing a mine bolt battery out in one of the localized panic bar alarms
[01:45:05.660 --> 01:45:07.660]  and things like that.
[01:45:07.660 --> 01:45:09.660]  It's been this way for four years.
[01:45:09.660 --> 01:45:10.660]  Okay.
[01:45:10.660 --> 01:45:12.660]  So are you licensed?
[01:45:12.660 --> 01:45:13.660]  No, sir.
[01:45:13.660 --> 01:45:14.660]  I refuse to license.
[01:45:14.660 --> 01:45:17.660]  I don't say mother may I very easily to work.
[01:45:17.660 --> 01:45:19.660]  I've been doing this for 29 years.
[01:45:19.660 --> 01:45:23.660]  I refuse to ask permission to do so.
[01:45:23.660 --> 01:45:29.660]  What my question really I guess is since I've not accepted their license,
[01:45:29.660 --> 01:45:33.660]  am I correct in my thinking that I'm not under their jurisdiction?
[01:45:33.660 --> 01:45:35.660]  No.
[01:45:35.660 --> 01:45:36.660]  No.
[01:45:36.660 --> 01:45:38.660]  No.
[01:45:38.660 --> 01:45:41.660]  You'll be under their jurisdiction.
[01:45:41.660 --> 01:45:43.660]  This is a commercial enterprise.
[01:45:43.660 --> 01:45:48.660]  It's not covered by the Constitution.
[01:45:48.660 --> 01:45:52.660]  So there is no way that I could prevail in this if they come out.
[01:45:52.660 --> 01:45:53.660]  I don't think so.
[01:45:53.660 --> 01:45:59.660]  There's a dentist doing eight years in jail because these guys from the Republic of Texas
[01:45:59.660 --> 01:46:02.660]  told him, oh, you're not under their jurisdiction.
[01:46:02.660 --> 01:46:05.660]  You don't need their license.
[01:46:05.660 --> 01:46:07.660]  So he didn't renew.
[01:46:07.660 --> 01:46:09.660]  And I've been in eight years in jail.
[01:46:09.660 --> 01:46:11.660]  Yeah, you'll lose that one.
[01:46:11.660 --> 01:46:16.660]  So they can turn my job into a privilege then?
[01:46:16.660 --> 01:46:17.660]  Yes.
[01:46:17.660 --> 01:46:19.660]  That they can do.
[01:46:19.660 --> 01:46:24.660]  Any commercial enterprise, they can turn it into a privilege.
[01:46:24.660 --> 01:46:26.660]  I said any, most any.
[01:46:26.660 --> 01:46:29.660]  There are things they can license.
[01:46:29.660 --> 01:46:31.660]  And yeah, they can do that.
[01:46:31.660 --> 01:46:35.660]  I agree with you on principle, Dennis, but we don't have enough control of our
[01:46:35.660 --> 01:46:42.660]  government or our courts yet to be able to push our libertarian views through
[01:46:42.660 --> 01:46:46.660]  and get them enforced really.
[01:46:46.660 --> 01:46:50.660]  We've got to win some other more basic battles before we can start winning
[01:46:50.660 --> 01:46:52.660]  battles concerning licensing.
[01:46:52.660 --> 01:46:56.660]  I mean, they license our right to travel right now.
[01:46:56.660 --> 01:47:01.660]  I mean, we've got to get over that one first before we can even start
[01:47:01.660 --> 01:47:09.660]  conceiving of practically lifting the restrictions on businesses and business
[01:47:09.660 --> 01:47:10.660]  licenses.
[01:47:10.660 --> 01:47:13.660]  I think that's a little bit further down the road before we can win that one.
[01:47:13.660 --> 01:47:16.660]  I'm sad to say.
[01:47:16.660 --> 01:47:25.660]  I hate to have to say this, but at this point in time, you may be creating more
[01:47:25.660 --> 01:47:29.660]  problems than you can win with.
[01:47:29.660 --> 01:47:33.660]  They literally put you in jail for this.
[01:47:33.660 --> 01:47:39.660]  So they can, at the point of a gun, force me into that contractual agreement
[01:47:39.660 --> 01:47:40.660]  regardless.
[01:47:40.660 --> 01:47:41.660]  There's no...
[01:47:41.660 --> 01:47:43.660]  Well, no, they can't.
[01:47:43.660 --> 01:47:48.660]  I mean, you can always opt to not be a locksmith.
[01:47:48.660 --> 01:47:52.660]  That's the only option, yeah.
[01:47:52.660 --> 01:47:53.660]  And yeah, they can.
[01:47:53.660 --> 01:47:57.660]  There are some things that they can do.
[01:47:57.660 --> 01:48:01.660]  Well, what I'm saying is that they can't force him at a point of a gun to be a
[01:48:01.660 --> 01:48:03.660]  locksmith and get a license.
[01:48:03.660 --> 01:48:08.660]  They can force him to get a license if he wants to be a locksmith, but he
[01:48:08.660 --> 01:48:11.660]  doesn't have to be a locksmith.
[01:48:11.660 --> 01:48:12.660]  I mean, you do have that option.
[01:48:12.660 --> 01:48:16.660]  Well, I'm too old to change professions.
[01:48:16.660 --> 01:48:18.660]  Dennis, I'm sorry.
[01:48:18.660 --> 01:48:21.660]  I don't think this is one you're going to win.
[01:48:21.660 --> 01:48:23.660]  Yeah, I want to win them all.
[01:48:23.660 --> 01:48:26.660]  Not any time in the foreseeable future.
[01:48:26.660 --> 01:48:27.660]  Okay.
[01:48:27.660 --> 01:48:33.660]  If anybody's feeding you any baloney, say it, oh, yeah, no problem.
[01:48:33.660 --> 01:48:35.660]  You're not under their jurisdiction.
[01:48:35.660 --> 01:48:36.660]  That's baloney.
[01:48:36.660 --> 01:48:39.660]  To my knowledge, I'm the only one doing this.
[01:48:39.660 --> 01:48:41.660]  I don't know of any others that are doing it.
[01:48:41.660 --> 01:48:44.660]  And in 29 years, I know quite a few in Austin.
[01:48:44.660 --> 01:48:50.660]  You made a comment the other night about DPS being outside of my house and
[01:48:50.660 --> 01:48:53.660]  when I come out and following me.
[01:48:53.660 --> 01:48:56.660]  That is not legal or is that legal?
[01:48:56.660 --> 01:48:57.660]  That's legal.
[01:48:57.660 --> 01:48:59.660]  That's legal.
[01:48:59.660 --> 01:49:04.660]  Yeah, but they don't want to try to follow me and let me catch them.
[01:49:04.660 --> 01:49:08.660]  Well, I tried to get them to pull over and all she did was she left
[01:49:08.660 --> 01:49:10.660]  and then came back around behind me again.
[01:49:10.660 --> 01:49:12.660]  This went on for about 30 minutes.
[01:49:12.660 --> 01:49:14.660]  And I called 911.
[01:49:14.660 --> 01:49:15.660]  I got it.
[01:49:15.660 --> 01:49:16.660]  I was going to do that.
[01:49:16.660 --> 01:49:17.660]  Okay.
[01:49:17.660 --> 01:49:22.660]  I'm going to tell you what I did once and it actually worked pretty good.
[01:49:22.660 --> 01:49:25.660]  I was passing a rock truck and it was two lanes.
[01:49:25.660 --> 01:49:31.660]  I was passing under I-35 on Highway 114 and it was two lanes.
[01:49:31.660 --> 01:49:34.660]  This guy was going slow and I moved over and was going to pass him
[01:49:34.660 --> 01:49:40.660]  while I was going to the bridge in the outside lane.
[01:49:40.660 --> 01:49:43.660]  Well, when I got right next to him, he pulled his truck over
[01:49:43.660 --> 01:49:47.660]  and hit the quarter panel of my car with the trailer wheels
[01:49:47.660 --> 01:49:52.660]  and turned me sideways under his trailer.
[01:49:52.660 --> 01:49:57.660]  He drug me all the way out the other side and shoved me down in the ditch.
[01:49:57.660 --> 01:50:01.660]  And when I hit the ditch and wasn't dead because I thought he was going to kill me,
[01:50:01.660 --> 01:50:03.660]  I was pretty ticked off.
[01:50:03.660 --> 01:50:06.660]  So I took off down the ditch and passed him in the ditch.
[01:50:06.660 --> 01:50:09.660]  And about a quarter mile down, I came out of the ditch
[01:50:09.660 --> 01:50:15.660]  and that little pinto I was driving launched and landed in the middle of the road in front of him
[01:50:15.660 --> 01:50:18.660]  and I slammed on the brakes.
[01:50:18.660 --> 01:50:20.660]  He slammed on the brakes.
[01:50:20.660 --> 01:50:21.660]  He stopped.
[01:50:21.660 --> 01:50:26.660]  He almost stopped, let off the brakes and let it roll up and bump into me.
[01:50:26.660 --> 01:50:29.660]  He knocked me about six feet.
[01:50:29.660 --> 01:50:34.660]  I stuck it in reverse and hit him just as hard as I could.
[01:50:34.660 --> 01:50:36.660]  Had my foot all the way to the floor when I hit him
[01:50:36.660 --> 01:50:43.660]  and locked down the emergency brake with my little pinto embedded in the front of his truck.
[01:50:43.660 --> 01:50:48.660]  And then let him try to explain what his truck is doing embedded in my pinto.
[01:50:48.660 --> 01:50:52.660]  He told the police officer that I hit him.
[01:50:52.660 --> 01:51:00.660]  The police officer looked at the little pinto and looked at the big truck and said, sure he did.
[01:51:00.660 --> 01:51:03.660]  But if they want to follow me too close...
[01:51:03.660 --> 01:51:04.660]  Just slam on the brakes.
[01:51:04.660 --> 01:51:07.660]  It's an old trick.
[01:51:07.660 --> 01:51:10.660]  Stop at a light.
[01:51:10.660 --> 01:51:14.660]  Okay, listen, we have about six minutes left and we have two other callers.
[01:51:14.660 --> 01:51:15.660]  Okay, thank you.
[01:51:15.660 --> 01:51:17.660]  Okay, yeah, we could talk about this some more.
[01:51:17.660 --> 01:51:21.660]  But yeah, we're not going to get our libertarian principles adjudicated right now.
[01:51:21.660 --> 01:51:24.660]  We're too far away from that.
[01:51:24.660 --> 01:51:25.660]  Okay, all right.
[01:51:25.660 --> 01:51:26.660]  Thank you, Dennis.
[01:51:26.660 --> 01:51:27.660]  All right, we're going to move on now.
[01:51:27.660 --> 01:51:29.660]  We're going to go to Jerry in Oregon.
[01:51:29.660 --> 01:51:31.660]  Hey, Jerry, thanks for calling in.
[01:51:31.660 --> 01:51:35.660]  Are you listening to us on one of the AM stations out there?
[01:51:35.660 --> 01:51:41.660]  No, actually, I was listening to you on the calling line because I no longer have a computer anymore.
[01:51:41.660 --> 01:51:42.660]  Okay.
[01:51:42.660 --> 01:51:43.660]  Do you have a...
[01:51:43.660 --> 01:51:45.660]  Oh, there is a listener line.
[01:51:45.660 --> 01:51:51.660]  I mean, yes, I was listening to you on the listening line and then I called in.
[01:51:51.660 --> 01:51:52.660]  Oh, okay, great.
[01:51:52.660 --> 01:51:53.660]  What's your question?
[01:51:53.660 --> 01:51:54.660]  Well, I did it right this time.
[01:51:54.660 --> 01:51:55.660]  All right.
[01:51:55.660 --> 01:52:05.660]  I was actually kind of curious if you were going to have Harmon Taylor as a guest some night then.
[01:52:05.660 --> 01:52:07.660]  Yes, I would very much like to.
[01:52:07.660 --> 01:52:10.660]  Yes, he's been a guest on our show several times.
[01:52:10.660 --> 01:52:13.660]  I'm glad you called me because I'm supposed to call him back.
[01:52:13.660 --> 01:52:19.660]  He's coming to Austin and I'm not sure exactly when I need to find out.
[01:52:19.660 --> 01:52:21.660]  Yes, I would very much like to have Harmon on.
[01:52:21.660 --> 01:52:26.660]  There are a couple of issues I want him to address in depth.
[01:52:26.660 --> 01:52:30.660]  Yeah, I would love to listen to that show.
[01:52:30.660 --> 01:52:39.660]  I wanted to ask you, Randy and Debra, you know that when you guys are going over the traffic laws for Texas,
[01:52:39.660 --> 01:52:44.660]  does that mimic the federal transportation code?
[01:52:44.660 --> 01:52:51.660]  Do they derive their kind of origin from the federal or what?
[01:52:51.660 --> 01:52:52.660]  I can't say for sure.
[01:52:52.660 --> 01:52:53.660]  I'm sure Eddie, our co-host.
[01:52:53.660 --> 01:52:54.660]  Eddie would probably.
[01:52:54.660 --> 01:52:55.660]  Our co-host.
[01:52:55.660 --> 01:52:57.660]  He's a co-host now?
[01:52:57.660 --> 01:52:58.660]  That's what.
[01:52:58.660 --> 01:53:00.660]  Our frequent guest.
[01:53:00.660 --> 01:53:02.660]  Yeah, Eddie is a frequent guest.
[01:53:02.660 --> 01:53:04.660]  He would know.
[01:53:04.660 --> 01:53:07.660]  We'll probably have him on tomorrow night.
[01:53:07.660 --> 01:53:12.660]  So based on what you've gone over thus far with Eddie,
[01:53:12.660 --> 01:53:22.660]  how confident do you two feel that there's some real pearls of wisdom in what you're uncovering?
[01:53:22.660 --> 01:53:24.660]  Oh, there's quite a lot.
[01:53:24.660 --> 01:53:27.660]  There's absolutely a lot.
[01:53:27.660 --> 01:53:33.660]  What Eddie does is he doesn't do legal theory.
[01:53:33.660 --> 01:53:38.660]  He says this is what the law says, and it's very clear.
[01:53:38.660 --> 01:53:41.660]  And I've been doing research behind him.
[01:53:41.660 --> 01:53:42.660]  Yeah, me too.
[01:53:42.660 --> 01:53:43.660]  He's clear.
[01:53:43.660 --> 01:53:45.660]  He's right on.
[01:53:45.660 --> 01:53:46.660]  Yeah, it's in the code.
[01:53:46.660 --> 01:53:49.660]  I kind of stop that.
[01:53:49.660 --> 01:53:58.660]  You know, I don't have the advantage of being able to follow along by being able to look it up myself online at the same time as right now.
[01:53:58.660 --> 01:54:08.660]  But I was kind of wondering how you guys felt about what you were uncovering and the truth behind what you're finding out.
[01:54:08.660 --> 01:54:14.660]  Well, it is the truth because Eddie's pretty much reading straight down the code.
[01:54:14.660 --> 01:54:19.660]  He's the first one to give me the tool that I need.
[01:54:19.660 --> 01:54:22.660]  I need absolute chapter and verse.
[01:54:22.660 --> 01:54:24.660]  And case law to back it up too.
[01:54:24.660 --> 01:54:35.660]  Right, and case law so that I can show that the judge is not properly applying the law to the facts so that I can go after the judge's throat.
[01:54:35.660 --> 01:54:36.660]  Right.
[01:54:36.660 --> 01:54:39.660]  And that's what I really want to do.
[01:54:39.660 --> 01:54:45.660]  And I have three crummy little traffic tickets in Austin, and we're going to fight.
[01:54:45.660 --> 01:55:02.660]  What you may want to do, Jerry, for tomorrow when we're going to try to get Eddie on again is get yourself a copy of the transportation code in Oregon and maybe try to read along with that while Eddie's reading along through the code in Texas and see what you can match up.
[01:55:02.660 --> 01:55:19.660]  I can almost assure you that all of the codes are going to be very similar because the traffic laws are so complex and there's so many of them to cover so many different circumstances.
[01:55:19.660 --> 01:55:25.660]  Well, depending on whether the traffic code is on the civil side or the criminal side, some states it's on the civil side.
[01:55:25.660 --> 01:55:26.660]  A lot of states it is.
[01:55:26.660 --> 01:55:36.660]  In either case, having to for a legislature to have to come up with every single code would be incredibly burdensome.
[01:55:36.660 --> 01:55:45.660]  So it's almost certain that, and this is something that the federal government has been pushing for uniformity of law.
[01:55:45.660 --> 01:55:49.660]  Yeah, and I hate that because that's just plain old wrong.
[01:55:49.660 --> 01:55:59.660]  Well, it's almost certain that all of the states are following a standard model law.
[01:55:59.660 --> 01:56:03.660]  All right, listen, Jerry, try to get the traffic code and then read along tomorrow night.
[01:56:03.660 --> 01:56:06.660]  We've got two minutes left and I want to go to our final caller.
[01:56:06.660 --> 01:56:07.660]  Thank you, guys.
[01:56:07.660 --> 01:56:08.660]  All right, thanks, Jerry.
[01:56:08.660 --> 01:56:11.660]  All right, we're going to go to Freeman in Minnesota.
[01:56:11.660 --> 01:56:13.660]  Hey, Freeman, what's on your mind?
[01:56:13.660 --> 01:56:15.660]  What's your question?
[01:56:15.660 --> 01:56:19.660]  Yeah, I was going to say I had a number of things going on.
[01:56:19.660 --> 01:56:31.660]  I had a court date the day after a reconstructive orthopedic surgery procedure, and I got sick at that date, so I got an extension.
[01:56:31.660 --> 01:56:39.660]  So I got a little bit of time that I might be able to do something about this charge, which is a DWI charge.
[01:56:39.660 --> 01:56:50.660]  I'm not fighting, where they claim no sample that I blew registered properly or was sufficient, so they dubbed it a refusal.
[01:56:50.660 --> 01:57:00.660]  But at the same time, one of the samples registered 200 under the limit.
[01:57:00.660 --> 01:57:06.660]  Have you subpoenaed that sample?
[01:57:06.660 --> 01:57:08.660]  Subpoenaed the sample itself?
[01:57:08.660 --> 01:57:10.660]  Yeah.
[01:57:10.660 --> 01:57:11.660]  No.
[01:57:11.660 --> 01:57:12.660]  Subpoenaed?
[01:57:12.660 --> 01:57:19.660]  Well, they say it wasn't sufficient, so I don't know if there's – you mean on paper, the paper record of it?
[01:57:19.660 --> 01:57:21.660]  Yeah.
[01:57:21.660 --> 01:57:27.660]  Well, they gave me a copy at the time, and it's in the file, right?
[01:57:27.660 --> 01:57:28.660]  Oh, you have a copy.
[01:57:28.660 --> 01:57:31.660]  Okay, good, and move to dismiss.
[01:57:31.660 --> 01:57:39.660]  Well, it's because they say that it wasn't a sufficient sample, which is kind of funny.
[01:57:39.660 --> 01:57:43.660]  Petition for a bill of particulars.
[01:57:43.660 --> 01:58:02.660]  Ask them specifically what exactly is sufficient, and how is the law sufficiently clear to give you notice of what you are to do in order to sufficiently abide by the law?
[01:58:02.660 --> 01:58:05.660]  Make them state it specifically.
[01:58:05.660 --> 01:58:08.660]  Look up bill of particulars.
[01:58:08.660 --> 01:58:10.660]  It's just if they're hot, are we done now?
[01:58:10.660 --> 01:58:11.660]  I can tell them, huh?
[01:58:11.660 --> 01:58:14.660]  Yes, yeah, we have just – we have about 20 seconds left.
[01:58:14.660 --> 01:58:16.660]  Okay, well, we'll have a little more time tomorrow.
[01:58:16.660 --> 01:58:17.660]  I'll call back.
[01:58:17.660 --> 01:58:18.660]  Thank you.
[01:58:18.660 --> 01:58:19.660]  Okay, all right, thanks.
[01:58:19.660 --> 01:58:21.660]  Yep, bye-bye.
[01:58:21.660 --> 01:58:26.660]  All right, I'm sorry, we had another caller, Mark from Austin – or, I'm sorry, Mark from Texas.
[01:58:26.660 --> 01:58:31.660]  Mark, you're going to have to call back in tomorrow night because we're at the end of the show.
[01:58:31.660 --> 01:58:34.660]  Callers, try to call back in a little sooner tomorrow night.
[01:58:34.660 --> 01:58:38.660]  We'll be going for four hours on our four-hour Friday info marathon.
[01:58:38.660 --> 01:58:43.660]  This is the rule of law, Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens on Rule of Law Radio.
[01:58:43.660 --> 01:59:11.660]  We'll be back tomorrow night.
[01:59:13.660 --> 01:59:40.660]  Thank you.
[01:59:40.660 --> 01:59:59.660]  Thank you.