Contacting Me

I welcome all feedback on Zero Gov.

In theory, of course; in practice, I may become giddy or sulk (thanks, Boston1775).

If you have something to say about a particular posting on Zero Gov, please feel free to use each entry’s comment function. There’s a little character-recognition puzzle before posting a comment to discourage spam-bots. If you must use the “anonymous” toggle, please sign the comment with your name or pseudonym. (Choose one in eighteenth-century style, like “Tiberius” or “A Country Farmer”!) I’m a bit dubious about anonymous postings in general, but having several anonymous people at once gets confusing.  I will, on occasion, edit comments for GRAMMAR and SPELLING only.

To send messages or questions about notions of liberty, history, guns, preparedness and this blog, visit my forum at

You may email me at thirdgun AT hotmail DOT com.

I’m delighted to hear what folks are looking for when it comes to liberty, preparedness and history. I can’t promise I’ll have anything to say in response, though.   Please bear in mind:

  • I’m happy to receive news about upcoming events, media, books, etc, but I don’t have a firm schedule for announcements or reviews.
  • Yes, I comment on modern and ancient politics but I am affiliated with no formal political Party, not even the Libertarian Party. I will continue to prattle on about politics until our ability to do so is suspended which I actually anticipate in the future.
  • Cross examination is the engine of truth and I accept all reasoned barbs and arrow.  This site challenges so many assumptions and things people take for granted that it can at times be overwhelming so please let’s advance together in a civil discourse.
  • While I am a great fan of satire, personal attacks on me will simply make me yawn.

10 thoughts on “Contacting Me

  1. Bill,
    I hope all is well. I paid a short visit to SGM “Paul”, and he said that you had left the “pit”. Wherever you are, I hope all is well. I just finished reading Brute. The prose is a little choppy for my tastes, but it was a great book about a great man. Thanks. As pay-back, allow me to recommend Theodore and Woodrow by Judge Napolitano.

    • Steve,

      Great to hear from you, I will be in your neck of the woods (relatively) in Lancaster NH in June.

      Keep SAFE in NY.


      • Hey Bill, I just got back from my annual physical at the spinal cord unit in San Diego. While in the TV/computer room in the ward one night, a couple nurses came in and plopped down on the couch. I’ve been going there about a decade and had never seen that because the sign on the door clearly stating in large bold font that the room is only for use of spinal cord inpatients and their guests.

        So I just hang back and listen. One nurse (the newer one) is telling the more experienced one that with the new program, they can no longer sign all their reports in the beginning of the shift because they are time stamped. She continues by stating that the copy and paste functions no longer work either. She went on to elaborate but began whispering so I couldn’t copy more.

        Later I asked one of the good nurses if paperwork is such a problem that they usually copy and paste reports, signing them all at the beginning of the shift. Her only reply was that yes, paperwork was a big problem for them.

        • Peter,

          How interesting if technology makes bureaucracy even more loathsome than it is but gov is bad no matter how wired it is.

  2. Just watched your interview with adam kokesh on youtube, loved every bit of it!!!

    Thanks for the great info and for what you do!

  3. Love the interview with Adam Bill,

    I myself am a Disabled Retired Veteran of the U.S. Army, I have always been somewhat awake, but it wasn’t until 2001 when I became fully awoken to many things. I myself, am also trying to wake many people about our LE agencies, it has been a real task, many have been indoctrinated to believe what isn’t so and also to misinform people about the real meaning of LE. I say keep up the good work, we need alot of people speaking the truth like you and I. Just in case you have got this information, which I feel you have already done your research on, in Fact Law Enforcement have no legal duty to respond and prevent crime or protect the victim. There have BEEN OVER 10 various supreme and state court cases the individual has never won. Notably, the Supreme Court STATED about the responsibility of Law Enforcement for the security of your family and loved ones is “You, and only you, are responsible for your security and the security of your family and loved ones. That was the essence of a U.S. Supreme Court decision in the early 1980’s when they ruled that the Law Enforcement do not have a duty to protect you as an individual, but to protect society as a whole.”

    “It is well-settled fact of American law that the Law Enforcement have no legal duty to protect any individual citizen from crime, even if the citizen has received death threats and the Law Enforcement have negligently failed to provide protection.”


    On June 27, in the case of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, the Supreme Court found that Jessica Gonzales did not have a constitutional right to individual police protection even in the presence of a restraining order. Mrs. Gonzales’ husband with a track record of violence, stabbing Mrs. Gonzales to death, Mrs. Gonzales’ family could not get the Supreme Court to change their unanimous decision for one’s individual protection. YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN FOLKS AND GOVERNMENT BODIES ARE REFUSING TO PASS THE Safety Ordinance.

    (1) Richard W. Stevens. 1999. Dial 911 and Die. Hartford, Wisconsin: Mazel Freedom Press.
    (2) Barillari v. City of Milwaukee, 533 N.W.2d 759 (Wis. 1995).
    (3) Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982).
    (4) DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989).
    (5) Ford v. Town of Grafton, 693 N.E.2d 1047 (Mass. App. 1998).
    (6) Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. 1981).
    “…a government and its agencies are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen…” -Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App. 1981)
    (7) “What makes the City’s position particularly difficult to understand is that, in conformity to the dictates of the law, Linda did not carry any weapon for self-defense. Thus by a rather bitter irony she was required to rely for protection on the City of NY which now denies all responsibility to her.”
    Riss v. New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579,293 N.Y.S.2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 806 (1958).
    (8) “Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others; instead their duty is to preserve the peace and arrest law breakers for the protection of the general public.”
    Lynch v. N.C. Dept. of Justice, 376 S.E. 2nd 247 (N.C. App. 1989)
    New York Times, Washington DC

    Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone By LINDA GREENHOUSE Published: June 28, 2005
    The ruling applies even for a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.

    I hope to see more work and reports from you in the future, and I will be picking up your book.

  4. I always listen to Anarchast, which is how I came across you. I never have any involvement in what I hear; but I listen anyway just for amusement. Mostly I am too lazy to respond to anything I hear said but today I will just make a little response.

    It amused me to hear you say you are against slavery when you seem to be married. The only firm conclusion that my life has provided me with ( I am well over sixty) is that marriage is the ultimate slavery. The slavery is double fold. It comes from within from that part of instinct which drives out all reason, and it comes from without by laws which mean that the married man is not an individual at all – indeed in law he is hardly human at all.

    May be you will need to be married for the nearly forty years that I have endured to be able to see what I mean.

  5. Greetings Bill. I recently heard an interview in which you mention that somebody you know – maybe one of your sons but I’m not sure – is about to marry a foreigner, and you mentioned you’d advise them not to naturalize their wife, that she should essentially stay in her illegal status forever. What would be your suggestion for a couple that wishes to live a normal married life and raise a family in the US while residing here illegally?

    • I didn’t mention an illegal status but a green card status in which she remains a resident alien with no intention whatsoever of getting USSA citizenship.

Let us know what you think...