Pew just released a poll on gun control, and it shows support for restricting gun ownership keeps dropping, and is dropping precipitously among women. Support among blacks and hispanics continues to be high, but those groups are dropping as well. Half of Americans believe that local communities should not be able to ban handguns. The number of supporters of that is under half. Other good news is Independents are with us on the general issue, and Democrats are increasingly coming around as well. In fact, across the political spectrum, you notice a sharp spike post-Heller.
Month: March 2010
Why Not Force Guns on People?
Jennifer makes a really good point that if health care is a right, so the government can force you to buy it, why can’t they force you to buy a gun? I’ll take it a step further and argue that at least forcing people to buy a gun and keep it would likely be a legitimate exercise of Congress’ military powers, and power to arm, train and discipline the militia. Such a law certainly would not be without precedence in this country, and the practice certainly wasn’t unknown to our founders.
It is at least an enumerated power of Congress to force everyone to buy a gun. It’s a bit of a stretch to say forcing me to buy health insurance is a necessary and proper component of Congress’ regulation of the national health insurance market. If forcing me to engage in commerce is necessary and proper, what isn’t? Congress’ power is effectively limitless because they can force me to subject myself to its jurisdiction.
The Benefits to Volunteering
I know this sounds cheesy, but I just can’t help it. Volunteering makes me feel a little more connected to my community. And it feels good.
As most of you know, we were particularly active with the GOTV efforts in 2008 during the last few days of the campaign. Sebastian took Monday and Tuesday of the election week off, and we spent Saturday through Tuesday walking precincts and calling voters.
Somehow we managed to pick the oddest walks through precincts. There was one house that had no driveway. It was run down, and I wasn’t even sure that someone was living there. There was someone registered to vote there, that was for sure. But this thing looked like it was ready to collapse in the next few years. Today, when I went to pick up m new glasses, I saw that house again. Only now it has new siding, a new railing that leads up the pathway to the door, and even a real driveway. It looks like a nice little home.
I don’t know if the same person lives there as when we came by in November 2008. But if they do, I really want to go congratulate them on their tremendous home improvement projects. And I like that feeling. Even though they aren’t in my neighborhood, I feel a kind of neighborly pride for them. Who knows, maybe I will get to compliment them for their good work if I pick their precinct again.
Hatboro Votes to Look Into Ballot Measure
In an unexpected vote [after the defeat of the Lost and Stolen ordinance], council decided 4-3 to look into putting a referendum on the May or November election ballots to ask the voters if Hatboro should support the legislation at the state level.
Truth is we would have been better off if Hatboro had just passed this. Why? Because if you put it on the ballot, it’s probably going to pass, and probably pretty overwhelmingly. This fact will then be used to further weaken preemption, and put pressure on Harrisburg do something. Voters are generally inclined to approve ballot items, and you’d probably get something like “Should residents be required to report Lost or Stolen house keys to the police.” it would probably pass too.
If this ends up on the ballot, it will be a bigger victory for MAIG than if Hatboro had just been another town to pass an ordinance. This will cost us to fight it, we’ll probably lose, and they will use this against us in future battles.
I agree with Councilwoman Nancy Guenst. This is a total waste of local dollars. It amazes me that so many local towns are signing up to spend money they don’t have as part of Bloomberg’s plan to end preemption in Pennsylvania piecemeal.
Permitless Carry Moving Ahead in Arizona
The Senate gave preliminary approval to legislation that would make Arizona the third state, after Alaska and Vermont, allowing people to carry concealed weapons without a permit.
The Senate approved the measure in a voice vote, setting the stage for a formal vote in the Senate. Passage would send it to the House.
The measure would make it legal for U.S. citizens 21 or older to carry concealed weapons in Arizona without permits now required.
Currently, carrying a concealed weapon in the state without a permit is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and a fine of up to $2,500.
Looks good, but we’ll see how it does on a formal vote and then in the house. But this is pretty far along in the process.
Mass Killing in China
Guns are banned strictly in China, but that didn’t stop a lunatic with a knife from killing 8 kids.
Six Million And Counting
According to this article, we’ve hit six million people licensed to carry in the United States:
From its beginnings in the 1980s, the “right-to-carry†movement has succeeded in boosting the number of licensed concealed-gun carriers from fewer than 1 million to a record 6 million today, according to estimates from gun-rights groups that are supported by msnbc.com’s research.
I’ve been using 5 million, but I’ll switch to 6 now. Hat tip to Dave Hardy, who adds, “It’s far more balanced than you would have seen ten years ago.” This is true. As bad as the media environment is now, the media’s treatment of guns in the 90s is part of what radicalized me on this issue. They have gotten a bit better.
A Dependent Class
I agree with what Uncle says here:
Aside from my moral objection from congress mandating that I have to purchase goods and services, the US is creating a dependent class along with a vast entitlement program. That, in addition to the fact we can’t afford the two entitlement programs we already have. Yes. I see the pattern. A government creating a dependency on a significant portion of the population. This, folks, is the issue. And they’ve done it before with Social Security and Medicare. They’re creating a group beholden. A group that will vote a certain way or risk losing benefits. Another lobby group rivaling the AARP can spring from this and be a player under the guise of preventing what I talked about earlier from happening. But still complicit in the dependence.
The bill is so long there’s bound to be a lot of crap it in it that are really going to piss off voters. There’s even vending machine requirements that require posting nutrition information. That could be a problem for my club, who has a machine for members. I suspect given federal requirements, we’d just as soon scrap the whole thing. Nice thought, you see, but we don’t want to risk offending the federal requirements. You’d think the vending machine industry would be against such practices, but probably not. It’s regulatory capture. Vending providers will make out because they’ll be the only ones that can afford to deal with the regulations. Vending machine makers will make money on an entirely new class of machines that meet the requirements. How many other nanny state requirements are in this bill? Plenty, I’m sure. The people need to get pissed, and ride these mothers until things change. You can’t depend on the free market to save you. Corporations are now in bed with big government, and it’s all of us who will be the losers.
As for vandalizing private property, it would seem the three percent movement has adopted the tactics of Palestinian school children, and I expect all this to work out just about as well for liberty in this country as it has for the Palestinians. The brick hurlers can wrap themselves in the imagery of the founders all they like, but the founders deplored this kind of mob violence:
Some modern scholars have argued that this interpretation is a myth, and that there’s no evidence that Adams had anything to do with the Stamp Act riots.[58] After the fact, Adams did approve of the August 14 action because he saw no other legal options to resist what he viewed as an unconstitutional act by Parliament, but he condemned attacks on officials’ homes as “mobbish”.[59] According to the modern scholarly interpretation of Adams, he supported legal methods of resisting parliamentary taxation—petitions, boycotts, and nonviolent demonstrations—but he opposed mob violence, which he saw as illegal, dangerous, and counterproductive.[60]
The mob violence was mostly instigated by a gang leader and well known rioter and instigator Ebenezer McIntosh. Fortunately for this country, the movement against the Stamp Act would be taken up by cooler heads. There will always be “herds of fools, tools, and synchophants,” as Sam Adams once said, in any movement. The trick is identifying them and distancing yourself from them. Vandalizing private property is not civil disobedience, or righteous protest. It is, to borrow a term from Sam Adams, “mobbish,” and is not at all within the realm of what the founders would have viewed as legitimate action. If you want to stand with the founders, use the system they created and join us in helping vote these bastards out come November. Then we can see what our options are in terms of getting rid of the monstrosity.
Two More Communities Adopt Illegal Ordinances
This time West Conshokocken and Bridgeport. This was another case of not being aware, though neither of these boroughs publish an agenda online that could even be monitored. It’s like like living in Scotland and Northern England during the Viking raids. You never know where they are going to strike next. You just wake up to find a neighboring village on fire.
UPDATE: Hatboro rejected even the resolution compromise measure. When we have time and room to act, we win.
Culture Wars
Eric over at Classical Values seems to hate the fact that Health Care is going to make the culture wars explode like we’ve never seen before. I too am not looking forward to that:
It used to be that the term “Culture War” meant — for one “side” — being against gays simply for being gay (supporting discrimination and favoring sodomy laws), wanting to imprison women for having abortions, favoring censorship (of pornography, “anti-family” TV shows, Howard Stern, etc.), and engaging in all sorts of personal attacks on people for things like having long hair, wearing the wrong clothes, or smoking pot. For the most part, many of those on the other side wanted to be left alone, laissez-faire style. The majority of gays, for example, would like to be left alone. However, the situation has been compounded by activists who don’t want to leave anyone alone. They believe in identity politics, in-your-face lifestyle activism, inquisitory behavior like “outing” people, and in many cases their tactics have exceeded anything the other side has done.
Sounds all too familiar. Those of us active in the Second Amendment community are immersed in a culture war issue as well. I remember Eric once writing that he couldn’t stand activists. As an activist in the pro-2A issue, you’d think I’d take exception to that, but I know exactly what he means. I’m firmly in the “leave me the hell alone” category. I involve myself in this game (and make no mistake about it, it is a game) because no one is going to leave me alone just because I shout it loudly enough. You have to make them leave you alone, and that means fighting collectively as a community. Your ends might be individual, but you can only achieve goals through the political process by collective action. Even the revolutionary elements of our movement don’t escape the collective action problem, though that type of collective action is more emotionally appealing to many people.
Saul Alinsky says you need to paint the struggle in terms of black and white to be an effective organizer. Your side has to be on the side of the angels, and the other side is evil incarnate. I think he’s correct in that. There’s a deep need for people to feel they are on the side of the angels in a righteous struggle against pure, unadulterated evil. I think that is the essence of the culture war, and it’s become that on both sides. It’s tough business for someone who just wants everyone to agree to leave everyone else in peace, and not hijack the political process or cultural institutions to impose one way of living over another. I’ve never been able to bring myself to adopt Alinsky’s tactic, even though I know it can powerfully motivate people to action. To me, once you unleash that kind of thinking, it’s very difficult to get the genie back in the bottle. There are plenty of historical calamities that have resulted from it. Too many to name.