Hungary is loosening some of it’s gun laws, namely making permits last a lifetime, and simplifying the process for purchasing a firearm.
Month: March 2012
Missing the Target at the Courier Times
I don’t subscribe to the local county news rag, largely because I resent poorly argued political advocacy being sold to me as news, and because newspapers are about as relevant to me as giant tube televisions. This editorial from the Bucks County Courier Times represents why I do not and will never subscribe. Since everyone is so concerned about taxpayers footing the bill for the intransigence of towns who fly in the face of preemption, I have a suggestion. Why don’t we make the politicians themselves responsible for their votes? If you vote yes on a bill that’s found to violate Pennsylvania’s preemption law, you can be sued personally in court and found liable. That way it’s off the backs of the taxpayers. Sound fair?
The very easy solution to this problem is for towns not to violate state law by passing gun control laws. Firearm ownership is protected by the Pennsylvania constitution, and is a matter of statewide concern. The General Assembly has wisely forbidden towns from regulating the lawful use of firearms. That prohibition is meaningless is there’s no way to enforce it.
BTW, how much do you want to bet this editorial came straight from Bloomberg’s office, and was dutifully reproduced by the stooges on the editorial board of the Times?
A Blog Change for the Silent Majority
I’m thinking of adding a “Like” button on comments, so the silent majority can voice their support for a comment anonymously. I’m not going to do a dislike as well, because I don’t want to discourage commenters. Just if you like a comment, you’ll be able to express it.
Oh, Shit. It’s Going to be Mitt
By the sheer force of the man’s will to not lose, it seems it will be happening for Mitt Romney. I’ll be honest with you all, I was more willing to accept McCain, and heading into the silly season with McCain as the headliner was hard enough. My only comfort is that the alternative is Rick Santorum. Like I said previously, I’ll take the guy with no convictions over the guy with Rick Santorum’s convictions, or Obama’s convictions.
Clayton Cramer took part in the Idaho caucuses. I am not at all meaning to demean Clayton’s choice here, because we all ultimately have to make our compromises. If Santorum was the nominee, I’d vote for him over Obama. I wouldn’t like it, but Santorum would put nominees on the court who would strengthen Heller and McDonald. That’ll give me what I want right now, and I can leave the rest for future generations.
I think the caucus system has something going for it, because only the motivated are going to participate. It ultimately enforces compromises. I’d ideally like to see more caucuses going into the wee hours. This is a very personal, and local form of politics our country probably needs to see more of. In some ways I find it preferable than the political parties hijacking the election apparatus of the state, and giving any fool with a voter registration a say.
How do you feel about the not-so-super Tuesday results? How do you feel that this sorry lot is the best we can throw against the sorry lot of the Obama Administration, after people put so much hope in the tea party movement? Is this 1996 all over again? I don’t actually think so, because there’s a fundamental truth that the country is running out of other people’s money. What I’m not sure of, is whether this end result is going to be disaster.
The Shocking News for Super Tuesday
It’s not the fact that Mitt took Ohio. It’s not the fact that Dennis Kucinich finally lost his seat. It’s that in a Democratic primary with no serious challengers, Oklahoma Democrats made clear that they are not too fond of the President right now.
President Barack Obama collected the most votes in the Oklahoma Democratic primary, but lost in 15 counties.
With more than 90 percent of precincts reporting Tuesday, Obama won 55 percent of the vote. Four other candidates combined for 45 percent of the vote… (emphasis added)
In fact, this will result in the first non-Obama delegate to the Democratic convention awarded this year.
Let’s look at that again. These are Democrats. Nearly half of them wanted to vote for random dudes who got on the ballot for kicks than wanted to vote for the incumbent Democratic president. I love my home state. Even Sebastian said, “Yay Oklahoma!”
Ultimately, Obama’s team will ignore this since he will never have a shot at winning Oklahoma in the general. It’s the only state that went more red in 2008 because they didn’t like the guy with no real record back then, either. But, it does say something about the trouble a 50-state strategy could be for Obama this year.
It will be interesting to see what happens in the swing states this year. In 2008, the “excitement” had a damper put on it when Democratic canvassers from New York ripped out and tore up signs for any GOP candidates they recognized in our neighborhood. Considering 2010 drove people who never previously had signs out for elections to post really big signs for Republicans, our neighborhood could require a lot more time to “walk” for those folks.
Why Libertarians Get No Play
An ongoing debate happening over at Tam’s on the two parties being relatively the same. A commenter noted:
If that were true, it would be nice. Unfortunately, in America, one party believes in governmental regulation and government solutions to problems, and the other believes in governmental regulation and government solutions to problems. The only difference between the parties is which problems they want government to solve.
This is pretty much true. I lean GOP not because they are the party of liberty, but because, on balance, the places they want to take government which I don’t approve of have more Constitutional protections than where the Democrats would like to take the country. For instance, there’s more protection for abortion rights in this country than gun rights, and I think all but the most conservative courts would be wary of upsetting that apple cart.
So why don’t small government, libertarian ideas get any real play in the GOP? I think there’s a few reasons for that. One of the biggest is the fact that people with libertarian inclinations are generally horrified by the idea of running for office. Most prefer to make an honest living. I don’t mean that to be a joke about politicians, but I really do think that’s  prime reasons a lot of libertarian leaning people don’t want to run. Politicians tend to come from political families, and tend to start in lower political offices before making a run for higher office. How many libertarianism people do you know who’d be interested in running for dog catcher? Or Mayor? Or State Representative? Let’s get more concrete. How many of them are going to be comfortable doing the meat and potatoes of politics? Sticking your hand out and getting people to donate to help elect you? Attending rallies with lots of people cheering your name? Generally speaking, you need a bit of a narcissistic streak, and few libertarian types have that. Even if you found a candidate that did, a lot of others would be turned off by it.
The second reason is, for any movement to be successful, you need people who are fanatical and passionate about it beyond all reason. You need people who are willing to go deep into the game. You also need a lot of people who are more moderate, and less engaged with the issue, but are nonetheless sympathetic, who are willing to go along with the fanatics. Gun owners have that. The religious right has that. Libertarians do not. Libertarians spend quite a lot of time arguing over what is and what isn’t a libertarian, and defining people out of the movement if they are insufficiently ideologically sound. Theya re not about building coalitions of mostly likeminded people. This is a big reason that libertarian ideology tops out in the single digits of voters. The vast majority of voters, even ones with libertarian ideological sympathies, are not going to have a philosophically coherent set of beliefs, and you have to carry those people if you want to be a player in coalition politics, and at least see some of your ideas adopted.
Neither party are monolithic entities. There aren’t smoked filled rooms where candidates are picked anymore. Candidates are voted on by the members of the party (in closed primary and caucus states) and by the people at large (in open primary states). They are made up of coalitions of interests, and the candidates who come out of the process are a result of struggles between the coalitions. Mitt Romney is currently the front runner, in my opinion, because he’s a good fundraiser and doesn’t generally scare anyone that much, even if no one’s really excited about him. The best libertarians have been able to push to the top is Ron Paul, who’s gotten to the top, not because he’s a good candidate, but because he’s the only libertarian that’s ever been elected to federal office. He’s not going to win because he can’t bring moderate libertarians, or anyone else in the coalition, along for the ride; he’s got one too many kooky, quirky things about him. If libertarians are going to get any play, they are going to have to start fronting candidates who can carry that ideology, and surrender the notion that if the person isn’t ideologically pure, he’s not worth getting behind. I’m not saying that has to be someone like Romney, because Romney is far from ideal, but I’ll get behind Romney if he’s the nominee, because I think he’ll take the country to hell in a handbasket slower than Obama will, and might even help with a few things here and there. But the idea is to slow things down enough to give politics time to change, hopefully in our favor. Will they? Probably not, but I don’t think libertarians will have too many factors to blame other than themselves. With some polls showing libertarian leaning individuals representing about 1/3rd of the voting population, a winning coalition that includes libertarians should be possible.
Dennis Henigan: Wheel of Blame
It seems every time there is a tragedy, the other side looks to see how it can fit into their narrative so it can be exploited for political gain. Such is the case with Dennis Henigan’s latest, which suggests the wheel of blame this time has stopped on Child Access Prevention laws. Henigan says never mind the bullies, and never mind mental health, the issue is the gun. People will say otherwise, but trust him, it’s the gun, and only the gun.
UPDATE: Anyone notice Henigan is still the public face of the Brady Campaign? Where is this Dan Gross guy we’ve heard so much about? Has anyone seen him? Is he a real person?
Castle Doctrine Vetoed in Minnesota
He essentially used law enforcement for cover on vetoing it. None of the law enforcement groups opposing this represent the rank and file, but as is often the case, the leaders of many of these groups are willing to coddle the politicians that feed them, and offer them cover for vetoing bills the people’s representatives have voted for.
Righthaven Update
Apparently they are being stripped of all their assets, including the ones they don’t really own. They don’t even seem to be bothering showing up in court anymore. I’m waiting for Steve Gibson to disappear to South America.