If what you see in the first video had been done by private service providers it would probably be possible to sue them, and at the very least you could change providers. Because they’re taxpayer funded they’ll probably get a slap with a wet bus ticket at worst, and most likely there are no private alternatives because they can’t compete with the “free” service. It looks like the fire and ambulance staff are guilty of medical malpractice, but no doubt the MacDoctor will be able to shed some light on this. Skip to 0:28.

This second video shows a much better response. Having the patient’s legs downhill will take blood away from the brain and other vital organs, but few non-medical personnel would think of that, let alone ones in a high stress situation. The police are using an AED, an automated external defibrillator, which measures the heart’s rhythm and delivers an appropriate electric shock if necessary.

I can never figure out why the Americans send a fire truck and an ambulance to medical emergencies. It would make sense if the patient had head stroke and needed to be hosed down .

Most of the chain of obedience is manufactured in state preschools, schools, and universities (that’s why Hitler outlawed homeschooling, a law which remains in force: German parents of today go to prison for teaching their own children and can lose custody). The chain of obedience is maintained by the mainstream media.

In a short while Little Red Riding Hood knocked at the door, and walked in, saying, “Good morning, Grandmother, I have brought you eggs, butter and cake, and here is a bunch of flowers I gathered in the wood.” As she came nearer the bed she said, “What big ears you have, Grandmother.”

“All the better to hear you with, my dear.”

“What big eyes you have, Grandmother.”

“All the better to see you with, my dear.”

“But, Grandmother, what a big nose you have.”

“All the better to smell with, my dear.”

“But, Grandmother, what a big mouth you have.”

“All the better to eat you up with, my dear,” he said as he sprang at Little Red Riding Hood.

Some people think that the state is a bit like a kind granny and get quite a shock when they realise that it’s really a predator. Similarly, Stuff reports that people are unhappy because Christchurch City Council has hired a private investigator to see if people are living in red-stickered homes where residents have told to leave because the council believes that the homes are danger of being hit by rockfalls. Whether or not that danger is real or imminent is irrelevant, and what matters are the following issues:

• The nanny state will not allow people to choose what risks to take, thereby assuming a role that only parents should have in relation to their children. Paternalism is another word for the council is doing.
• The nanny state violates the property rights of home owners by forcing them to leave their dwellings.
• When people do not comply with the orders of their masters the council bares its fangs and sends in a private investigator to gather evidence for prosecutions. Yes, occupying the home that you own can be a crime.
• To add insult to injury, home owners are forced to pay rates (taxes) on the homes that they’re not allowed to enter.

A commonsense approach to this situation

Let people freely choose what risks to take and exercise their full property rights, which include the right to occupy without hindrance.

Let these property owners bear the full cost of rescue and medical treatment if a rockfall does occur – that’s what insurance is for. This is just, unlike the present system wherein you, as a taxpayer, are forced to bear the cost of decisions that other people make (cf, in the past private fire brigades were contracted to protect specific properties, and there’s no reason why that cannot work again).

The interesting thing is that such properties would be extremely expensive to insure, so many home owners would leave of their own free will. The free market would protect property owners and their would be no “need” for the nanny state to bare its fangs.

The state can only “protect” you by taking away your freedom and controlling you.

Occupy Auckland is an offshoot of Occupy Wall Street that is camped in Aotea Square and one evening I spent three hours there observing and photographing. This left me with many thoughts regarding the group and today I’d like to share a couple of ironies.

Irony #1: it is a group dominated by the far left, yet that group is using the products of capitalism to spread their message. E.g., I saw one person using a MacBook with webcam to broadcast their activities via Livestream. Perhaps they have forgotten that everything they love they owe to capitalism, and that only the profit motives drives individuals to provide such products to other individuals at affordable prices. In the Soviet empire high tech items were for the exclusive use of the ruling class, and in North Korea today the proles do not have access to the internet: both situations are a direct outcome of the ideology dominant in Occupy Auckland, yet I expect that the majority of the group would be appalled if they did not have access to the internet and the latest gadgets.

Irony #2: in the midst of an encampment seething with anticapitalists one of them approached me and asked if I’d like to buy two items that he had for sale .

Imagine that you’re a political prisoner in a Soviet gulag and you, along with your fellow captives, are given the option of voting for porridge or porridge with salt. Although the outcome of the election may make a slight difference to your comfort levels your jailers will still have absolute power and a monopoly of force, the election will not bring you freedom, your daily activities will still be unjustly controlled, you will still be unable to cross the border fence without permission, the products of your labour will continue to be stolen by your jailers, and essentially nothing will change. This is exactly the situation that arises in New Zealand triennially.

On that cheery note, I’m off to vote.