Tag: nanny state

I Lost My Freedom, Money, And Guns Based On No Evidence And With No Chance To Defend Myself

Three weeks. That’s how long I was separated from my daughter. No trial. No crime. No violence. Just a single sheet of paper — a Protection from Abuse Order, or PFA — a civil court order meant to prevent harm, often issued on little more than an accusation. It can strip someone of contact with his or her children, home, and firearms — without a criminal charge. That paper took my daughter away from me.

I was only 23.

My daughter was just a few months old. I was still learning how to be a dad — still learning the rhythms of fatherhood. Then she was gone. A sheriff handed me the order at my front door. I knew I was in for an uphill battle.

Over the next three weeks, I scrambled to find an attorney, build a defense, and dig through evidence to prove my innocence. Those weeks didn’t just take away my daughter. They took away my dignity. My voice. And for a time, my will to speak. 

The State of Exception

Legal theorist Carl Schmitt once wrote: “Sovereign is he who decides the exception.” In other words, the true power of the state lies not in making laws, but in deciding when the law no longer applies. The sovereign is the one who can suspend the rules in the name of security, order, or necessity. Philosopher Giorgio Agamben built on this idea, warning that modern states increasingly rule through exceptions — moments when the law suspends itself in the name of preserving order.

Most people think of these exceptions in cinematic terms, such as Abraham Lincoln suspending habeas corpus during the Civil War, the War on Terror and Guantanamo Bay, lockdowns during the Covid-19 pandemic.

But a quieter kind happens in family court every day. No headlines. No outrage. Just a form, a sheriff, and silence.

That’s what a PFA is. It suspends due process, assumes guilt, and punishes before harm occurs. It creates what Agamben called a “zone of indistinction” — where someone is both inside the law and excluded from its protections. The man served a PFA becomes what Agamben called the Homo Sacer: not just punished without trial, but guilty until proven innocent.

This isn’t tyranny in jackboots. It’s softer. Bureaucratic. A form, not a trial. Control, not compassion. It’s preemptive punishment. 

Keep reading

Vancouver BANS gun-shaped novelty lighters during crime wave

Vancouver’s City Council, led by Mayor Ken Sim, is enacting a “gun grab” not on actual firearms, but on gun-shaped novelty lighters. 

While Vancouver grapples with rising violent crime, tent cities, repeat offenders, and stranger attacks, the council’s focus is on these lighters, which carry a $1,000 fine for possession. This initiative, referred to as “silly novelty barbecuators,” is presented as a solution to violent crime.

This mirrors a past Toronto initiative called “gunplay no way,” a toy gun buy-back amnesty that offered politically correct toys in exchange for toy guns. 

Critics argue that such policies are mere “feel-good optics” and do nothing to address the root causes of illegal firearm problems. 

Politicians, often elected through popularity contests rather than expertise, are accused of lacking topic knowledge and ignoring experts, instead focusing on “silly novelty things that have no credible impact on public safety.”

One panelist, who was shot by a real gun, deemed the Vancouver initiative “madness.” They highlighted the irony of focusing on lighters while illegal border crossings potentially smuggle real guns and drugs into the country. It’s argued that “illegal guns that are the issue and the criminals who are handling that.”

Another panelist living in Vancouver questioned the priorities of the Mayor and Council, especially given that Vancouver is considered the “fentanyl capital of the world.” 

The mayor himself has faced serious threats, including bomb threats and family intimidation from anti-Israel protesters. 

The effectiveness of this Vancouver bylaw was questioned, with doubts about whether it will lead to even “one charge against somebody in Vancouver for having a lighter in the shape of a gun” in a year’s time. 

Keep reading

Trump Admin Will Encourage All Americans To Use Wearables, Says RFK Jr.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will soon start a massive advertising blitz to encourage uptake of wearables such as fitness trackers among Americans, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said on June 24.

“We’re about to launch one of the biggest advertising campaigns in HHS history to encourage Americans to use wearables,” Kennedy said on Capitol Hill in Washington during a congressional hearing.

Rep. Troy Balderson (R-Ohio) spoke positively about what he described as innovative wellness tools and asked Kennedy to describe how the government is promoting access to such tools. Balderson noted that research suggests that increased patient engagement can result in improved health.

“It’s a way people can take control over their own health, they can take responsibility, they can see what food is doing to their glucose levels, their heart rates, and a number of other metrics as they eat it, and they can begin to make good judgements about their diet, about their physical activity, about the way they live their lives,” Kennedy said.

“We think that wearables are a key to the MAHA agenda, Making America Healthy Again. My vision is that every American is wearing a wearable within four years.”

Balderson also asked about concerns over keeping data from wearables private. Kennedy declined to address that aspect of the matter.

In addition to his role as health secretary, Kennedy is chairman of the MAHA Commission, established by President Donald Trump to study ways to improve the health of Americans.

Keep reading

The Wearables Trap: How The Government Plans To Monitor, Score, And Control You

“When the states legalize the deliberate ending of certain lives… it will eventually broaden the categories of those who can be put to death with impunity.”—Nat Hentoff, The Washington Post, 1992

Bodily autonomy—the right to privacy and integrity over our own bodies—is rapidly vanishing.

The debate now extends beyond forced vaccinations or invasive searches to include biometric surveillance, wearable tracking, and predictive health profiling.

We are entering a new age of algorithmic, authoritarian control, where our thoughts, moods, and biology are monitored and judged by the state.

This is the dark promise behind the newest campaign by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Trump’s Secretary of Health and Human Services, to push for a future in which all Americans wear biometric health-tracking devices.

Under the guise of public health and personal empowerment, this initiative is nothing less than the normalization of 24/7 bodily surveillance—ushering in a world where every step, heartbeat, and biological fluctuation is monitored not only by private companies but also by the government.

In this emerging surveillance-industrial complex, health data becomes currency. Tech firms profit from hardware and app subscriptions, insurers profit from risk scoring, and government agencies profit from increased compliance and behavioral insight.

This convergence of health, technology, and surveillance is not a new strategy—it’s just the next step in a long, familiar pattern of control.

Surveillance has always arrived dressed as progress.

Keep reading

Court Ruling on TikTok Opens Door to Platform “Safety” Regulation

A New Hampshire court’s decision to allow most of the state’s lawsuit against TikTok to proceed is now raising fresh concerns for those who see growing legal pressure on platforms as a gateway to government-driven interference.

The case, brought under the pretext of safeguarding children’s mental health, could pave the way for aggressive regulation of platform design and algorithmic structures in the name of safety, with implications for free expression online.

Judge John Kissinger of the Merrimack County Superior Court rejected TikTok’s attempt to dismiss the majority of the claims.

We obtained a copy of the opinion for you here.

While one count involving geographic misrepresentation was removed, the ruling upheld core arguments that focus on the platform’s design and its alleged impact on youth mental health.

The court ruled that TikTok is not entitled to protections under the First Amendment or Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act for those claims.

“The State’s claims are based on the App’s alleged defective and dangerous features, not the information contained therein,” Kissinger wrote. “Accordingly, the State’s product liability claim is based on the harm caused by the product: TikTok itself.”

This ruling rests on the idea that TikTok’s recommendation engines, user interface, and behavioral prompts function not as speech but as product features.

As a result, the lawsuit can proceed under a theory of product liability, potentially allowing the government to compel platforms to alter their design choices based on perceived risks.

Keep reading

NHS plans to DNA test all babies to assess disease risk

Every newborn baby in England will have their DNA mapped to assess their risk of hundreds of diseases, under NHS plans for the next 10 years.

The scheme, first reported by the Daily Telegraph, is part of a government drive towards predicting and preventing illness, which will also see £650m invested in DNA research for all patients by 2030.

Health Secretary Wes Streeting said gene technology would enable the health service to “leapfrog disease, so we’re in front of it rather than reacting to it”.

It comes after a study analysing the genetic code of up to 100,000 babies was announced in October.

The government’s 10-year plan for the NHS, which is set to be revealed over the coming few weeks, is aimed at easing pressure on services.

The Department for Health and Social Care said that genomics – the study of genes – and AI would be used to “revolutionise prevention” and provide faster diagnoses and an “early warning signal for disease”.

Screening newborn babies for rare diseases will involve sequencing their complete DNA using blood samples from their umbilical cord, taken shortly after birth.

There are approximately 7,000 single-gene disorders. The NHS study which began in October only looked for gene disorders that develop in early childhood and for which there are effective treatments.

Currently, newborn babies are offered a heelprick blood test that checks for nine serious conditions, including cystic fibrosis.

The health secretary said in a statement: “With the power of this new technology, patients will be able to receive personalised healthcare to prevent ill-health before symptoms begin, reducing the pressure on NHS services and helping people live longer, healthier lives.”

Streeting added: “The revolution in medical science means that we can transform the NHS over the coming decade, from a service which diagnoses and treats ill-health to one that predicts and prevents it.”

Sequencing DNA gives a lot of information about a person which can then be used to make predictions about the likelihood of them having particular genetic diseases, according to Prof Robin Lovell-Badge, a geneticist at the Francis Crick Institute.

These include conditions like muscular dystrophy, liver diseases and some kidney problems, he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

Keep reading

Minnesota To Mandate Mental Health Warnings on Social Media; First Amendment Questions Loom

Minnesota has positioned itself at the forefront of a deeply contentious regulatory frontier by enacting the nation’s first law requiring social media platforms to display mental health trigger warning labels to all users.

Tied to the 2025 Special Session Health and Human Services bill and awaiting the governor’s signature, the law takes effect July 1, 2026, and imposes unprecedented obligations on digital platforms to act as public health messengers.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

Drafted by State Representative Zack Stephenson (DFL-District 35A), the measure compels platforms to display prominent mental health warnings on login, highlighting alleged risks associated with usage, particularly among youth, and directing users to crisis services like the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline.

These alerts must be acknowledged before access is granted, cannot be hidden in terms of service, and must not be dismissible without interaction. Content for the mandated warnings will be controlled by the Minnesota Commissioner of Health, alongside the Commissioner of Commerce.

Keep reading

Aspen Police Department Warns Kids Having Fun Is a Crime

“When you see this, do you think it’s just fun? Or do you think that it’s illegal? It is definitely the latter. Whether it’s fun or not.”

This is the beginning of a Facebook post by Colorado’s Aspen Police Department (APD). What is this possibly fun but definitely illegal activity?

The post includes a photo that shows two children on a bike—one child sitting on the seat and the other on the first rider’s lap—riding on a sidewalk. 

“Colorado law says that two-up riding on a single seat bike is against the law, and of course, bikes are not allowed on sidewalks,” the post continues. “These ‘Sidewalk Sallys’ could potentially hurt themselves or others.” (If you had to Google “Sidewalk Sally” you are not alone, as it’s not a real term. A daytime talk show seems to have coined and used it once, unrelated to riding a bike on a sidewalk.)

The APD post goes on to inform Aspen’s citizens that this behavior could result in a “ticket or a trip to the emergency room,” both of which seem like rather dramatic consequences for an activity that has been popular since the invention of bikes. The tone-deaf post is signed “The Aspen Police Department—protecting the Wild West on two wheels since the 1880s,” which seems to inadvertently imply that APD officers get around exclusively on bikes.

The post has garnered over 300 comments—far more than the department’s other posts—most of which are not thankful for the Department’s caution and concern:

“Tell me you don’t have real crimes in Aspen without telling me you don’t have real crimes.”
“‘Kids never go outside anymore!’ Proceeds to police every single thing kids do.”
“Lol yes. Our children should really be playing IN the traffic. Not away from it. Got it.” (That one really resonated. My mom made me ride on the sidewalks, so it’s not obvious to all of us that biking on the sidewalk is a crime.)

Keep reading

Britain Is Sleepwalking Into Total State Control of Our Daily Lives

In a gloomy piece for the Telegraph, Sam Ashworth-Hayes warns that Britain is blindly sleepwalking into total state control, sacrificing individual freedom to an ever-expanding, intrusive government that now dominates every aspect of daily life. Here’s an excerpt:

Thank God we won the Cold War. For a while there, it was touch and go, the future of the world on a knife-edge.

On one side, we had a system permeated top to bottom by an official state ideology. Employment and freedom was made contingent on adherence, an extensive network of censors and informers was established to maintain the illusion that dissenters were a minority, harsh punishments were meted out to political prisoners and the state took control of vast swathes of the economy.

On the other, the promise of freedom: freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and association, freedom to do as you would with your private property.

It was, as I said, close. But in the end, despite Thatcher’s brief, doomed fightback, the Socialists won.

It’s a tongue-in-cheek reading of British history, but it doesn’t take a great deal of exaggeration to see how it could be true.

As AJP Taylor once wrote, “until August 1914 a sensible, law-abiding Englishman could pass through life and hardly notice the existence of the state beyond the post office and the policeman”.

That is emphatically not the case today. Having won the wars, the advocates of freedom comprehensively lost the peace. They lost to such a degree that those of us born and raised afterwards find it hard to comprehend the scale of the change.

It’s easiest to start with the size of the state. To be sure, socialism in Britain has receded from its high point. The nationalisation of coal, iron, steel, electricity, gas, roads, aviation, telecommunications and railways has been mostly undone, although steel and rail are on the way back in.

But by comparison to our pre-war starting point, we live in a nearly unrecognisable country. In 1913, taxes and spending took up around 8% of GDP. Today, they account for 35% and 45% respectively. To put it another way, almost half of all economic activity in Britain involves funds allocated at the behest of the government, and over half of British adults rely on the state for major parts of their income.

And if anything, this understates the degree of government control. Outcomes which are nominally left to the market are rigged by a state which sees prices as less as a way for markets to clear, and more as a tool for social engineering.

Keep reading

Texas Ban On Social Media For Under 18s Fails To Pass Senate

Legislation that would have banned anyone under the age of 18 from using or creating social media accounts in Texas stalled in the Senate this week after lawmakers failed to vote on it.

House Bill 186, filed by state Rep. Jared Patterson (R-Frisco), would have prohibited minors from creating accounts on social media sites such as Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, and others by requiring the platforms to verify users’ age.

The measure previously passed the GOP-controlled state House with broad bipartisan support in April, but momentum behind the bill slowed at the eleventh hour in the state Senate this week as lawmakers face a weekend deadline to send bills to Gov. Greg Abbott’s desk.

The legislative session ends on Monday.

In a statement on the social media platform X late Thursday, Patterson said the bill’s failure to pass in the Senate was “the biggest disappointment of my career,” adding that no other bill filed this session “would have protected more kids in more ways than this one.”

The Republican lawmaker said he believed its failure to pass meant “I’ve failed these kids and their families.”

“I felt the weight of an entire generation of kids who’ve had their mental health severely handicapped as a result of the harms of social media,”  the lawmaker said. “And then there’s the others – the parents of Texas kids who’ve died as a result of a stupid social media ‘challenge’ or by suicide after being pulled down the dangerous rabbit holes social media uses to hook their users, addict them on their products, and drive them to depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation.”

“Finally, there’s the perfectly happy and healthy teens in Texas today, who will find themselves slowly falling off the edge before the legislature meets again in 2027,” he stated.

Patterson suggested he would try and pass the measure again when the Texas Legislature meets in 2027.

House Bill 186 would have prohibited a child from entering into a contract with a social media platform to become an account holder and required platforms to verify that a person seeking to become an account holder is 18 years of age or older before allowing them to create an account.

The legislation would have also required social media platforms to delete accounts belonging to individuals under the age of 18 at a parent or guardian’s request.

Keep reading