Apathy Online

Brad Jardis, Epping PD offi­cer and Anti-prohibition activist was kicked out from Law Enforce­ment Against Pro­hi­bi­tion for refus­ing to obey an immoral law and arrest peo­ple who use mar­i­juana for med­ical rea­sons. Ear­lier this month, Jardis cited his oath to uphold the con­sti­tu­tion of New Hamp­shire as super­sed­ing any laws that con­tra­dict it in a post on FreeKeene.com. In a let­ter writ­ten to Jardis, Jack Cole, Exec­u­tive Direc­tor of LEAP states that Jardis, “cho­sen to vio­late the oath you took on join­ing the police depart­ment; to enforce all the laws of the fed­eral and state gov­ern­ments in which your police depart­ment has juris­dic­tion.“
Full Let­ter below & Dis­cus­sion on the Free­Keene forum:

Dear Bradley Jardis,

I have tried but am unable to reach you by telephone.

It has come to LEAP’s atten­tion from the below blog entry, that you have
cho­sen to vio­late the oath you took on join­ing the police depart­ment; to
enforce all the laws of the fed­eral and state gov­ern­ments in which your
police depart­ment has juris­dic­tion. And worse, you are call­ing on other law
enforce­ment offi­cials to vio­late their oaths of office.

This is the oppo­site of what LEAP requires of our rep­re­sen­ta­tives. We have
always said that we will in no way ask that any law enforcer decline to do
his or her duty by refus­ing to enforce the laws as they are cur­rently
recorded. That would be uneth­i­cal and wrong. What we do call on them for is
take action on their off-duty time to help us change those laws.

Because you have so bla­tantly stepped over that line, your actions have
caused peo­ple to lose respect for our orga­ni­za­tion, which leads to a loss of
our cred­i­bil­ity within the pub­lic, the media and the pol­i­cy­mak­ers; the very
peo­ple whom we are try­ing to con­vince to change these laws.

The Exec­u­tive Board of Law Enforce­ment Against Pro­hi­bi­tion was made aware of
your actions in their Jan­u­ary 22, 2010 Board meet­ing. They were unan­i­mous in
their deci­sion that you must no longer rep­re­sent Law Enforce­ment Against
Pro­hi­bi­tion while espous­ing this belief.

As Exec­u­tive Direc­tor of LEAP, I there­fore am noti­fy­ing you that,
effec­tively imme­di­ately, you are to stop refer­ring to your­self as a speaker
for or mem­ber of LEAP in your pub­li­ca­tions, inter­views, and pub­lic or
pri­vate addresses.

Sin­cerely,

Jack A. Cole
Exec­u­tive Direc­tor
Law Enforce­ment Against Pro­hi­bi­tion
121 Mys­tic Avenue, Med­ford, MA 02155
(781) 393‑6985 LEAP Office (781) 393 2964 FAX
(781) 396‑0183 Home Office (617) 792‑3877 Cell
jack­a­cole [at] leap [dot] cc www.leap.cc

Share on Facebook

In an effort to get into peo­ples pants, Gov­ern­ment “offi­cials” are con­sid­er­ing pro­mot­ing or man­dat­ing uni­ver­sal cir­cum­ci­sion for all babies born in the US.

Share on Facebook

Pas­tor Geoff Sur­ratt joins the ranks of an increas­ing amount of peo­ple dis­sat­is­fied with what I call “Mod­ern Chris­tian­ity.” It is refresh­ing to see a pas­tor have the same views as I on the mod­ern chris­t­ian cul­ture. In his blog post, I’m through with Chris­tian­ity, he declares that he will no longer describe him­self as a Chris­t­ian, because he “can­not in good faith asso­ciate any more with what the label Chris­t­ian has come to rep­re­sent in Amer­ica.” This is a sad, but undoubt­edly a well thought out decision.

When peo­ple ask me if I am a Chris­t­ian, I some­times cringe, much the same way that I cringe when asked if I am a hacker or a lib­er­tar­ian. That cring­ing is well founded; some peo­ple, being dis­gusted at the actions of “Chris­tians,” refuse to talk to me after I say yes. Back in Florida, I had to append my yes with, “but I did not vote on amend­ment 2.” Only then could I talk with some peo­ple. And if I say no, what do I call myself? A “God fol­lower?” That phrase is taken.

I’ve noticed that a large amount of words are mis­con­strued to be things that they were never intended to be, and now the word Chris­t­ian has joined their them. I fear I live in a fas­cist soci­ety, where words are rede­fined so that you can’t read and under­stand intent out­side of what the state would have. What is worse, is that all the words I use to describe myself are being rede­fined to either asso­ciate me with a crowd of “crazy” peo­ple that make things explode dur­ing protests or a crowd of total­i­tar­ian sta­tists. My world is being polar­ized, and I am caught between two extremes I do not like, and am being forced to choose one.

Per­haps I will con­tinue to refer to myself as a Chris­t­ian, a fol­lower of Christ. When asked if I am, I might have to ask the per­son what their def­i­n­i­tion is. Per­haps we could start call­ing the sta­tist chris­tians some­thing else? I’m up for suggestions.

Share on Facebook