Gunning for Levdansky’s Assembly Seat

State Representative David Levdansky has been talked about quite a bit on this blog, because he was the primary architect of the failed “Lost and Stolen” bill in the Pennsylvania General Assembly.  We’re fortunate that we have an opponent running for Levdansky’s seat this November.  Monica Douglas is a solid pro-gun candidate, but she needs help this election in order to successfully challenge the incumbent.

This may well be the most important race for Pennsylvania gun owners in the entire assembly this year, because if we can defeat Representative Levdansky, or even come close to defeating him, we will send a message to every other politician in the assembly that supporting gun control will cost them personally, and puts their seat in jeopardy.

This is how gun rights are won and kept.  Please consider donating money, or if you’re in our near her district, donating time to help her campaign.  If we can elect Monica Douglas to the General Assembly, we’ll be doing every gun owner in this commonwealth a great service.

A Society Gone Mad

They are actually talking about banning kitchen knives in the United Kingdom.  I just don’t have any extra commentary.  I don’t even have a category for something this friggin insane.  Do they make a straightjacket that would fit around the entire Palace of Westminster?

Civic Disengagement, Part I

Robert Putnam received a hail of criticism when he released his book Bowling Alone.  Some of it, in my opinion, is justified, but there is a grain of truth in there somewhere.  I do not think that there’s been any great decline in America’s social capital.  The type of community we have here online is a great example of how social networking can change to adapt to changing technology. It’s perhaps a testament to my generation that I don’t know my next door neighbors nearly as well as I know many of you.  But I tend to agree with Putnam that our civil society is in trouble. One major criticism I would make of Generation X and Y, is that we’re probably the most civically disengaged generation in American history.

I don’t think that’s because we’re selfish, spend too much time on the Internet, or play too many video games.  New technology has been distracting people for a long time.  No doubt thousands of years ago, tribe elders expressed concern that Og was more interesting in spending all his time painting up the cave by this newfangled fire, and wasn’t showing any interest in participating the fish cleaning committee.  Putnam was quick to blame technology for the problem, but I don’t think it’s that at all.

When it comes to civic engagement, what has failed our generation is not technology, but government.  High taxes have ensured that people have less free time to spend on civic activity.  Big government has fostered a culture of “let the professionals take care of it” that strongly discourages citizen involvement and participation.  Our public schools, colleges, and universities no longer teach civics and government, and are more interested in turning out people who can fill jobs than they are turning out people who can think, and who can participate in civil society.  We care about issues, we have energy, but because of the lack of understanding of how civil society functions, it gets send in random and unproductive directions much of the time.

I don’t think this was an accident.  Those in positions of power benefit greatly from a passive citizenry.  Politicians like Barack Obama want to force the schools to make us civically engage, and tax us even more.  This is only going to make the problem worse, not better.  Politicians like Obama recognize the problem, but will never accept their philosophy on government is the problem.  The solution is always more government.  It’s always more guys like him either telling people what to do, or even more damaging, taking care of people so they don’t have to take care of themselves.  You will never hear the Barack Obamas of the world talk about tapping the resources and ingenuity of the American people, getting the federal government the hell off their backs, and let people self-organize and self-govern in order to solve problems.  It always has to be experts. It always has to be bureaucrats.  To suggest otherwise would be to suggest that we don’t need them, and their egos and ambitions won’t allow for that.

In Part II, I’ll talk about how I think this kind of civic disengagement is affecting the gun rights movement.

That’s a Lot of Names

The Terrorists Watch List has hit 1,000,000 names.  Who’s on it?  How do you end up getting on there?  How do you get yourself off there if there’s a mistake?  We don’t know! Well we know at least one person on the list, and Ted Kennedy.

That’s the beauty of it for the gun control groups, and power hungry authoritarians like Senator Frank Lautenburg.  By making it illegal to sell a gun to anyone who is on this mystery list, we can take away the constitutional rights we don’t approve of, with no due process.  I thought only Bush was the one mugging our civil rights over the war on terror?

Pools Kill

Looks like the folks in New York State are in for some trouble, because local town officials in Massena, NY are demanding people erect fences and put alarms on inflatable pools.  I think this is a fine idea.  Pools kill far more kids each year than guns, and if I have to lock up my guns, they should have to lock up their pools!  Don’t these parents know that having a pool more than doubles the risk of your family experiencing a drowning accident?  If we’re going to be ridiculous, we might as well go whole hog.

It Takes Talent

It takes a real talent to contradict yourself in your own op-ed.  In Today’s New York Times, Barack They Call It Mellow Yellow Obama talks about his plan in Iraq.  In one paragraph:

Since then, more than 4,000 Americans have died and we have spent nearly $1 trillion. Our military is overstretched. Nearly every threat we face — from Afghanistan to Al Qaeda to Iran — has grown.

Then the next paragraph:

[Surge] tactics have protected the Iraqi population, and the Sunni tribes have rejected Al Qaeda — greatly weakening its effectiveness.

So which is it?  Is Al-Quaeda getting stronger or weaker?  Are we winning or losing?  Perhaps my chief problem with Obama is that 9/11 didn’t really have anything to do with either Afghanistan or Iraq.  We were not attacked by the Taliban government either, they were just sheltering Al-Qaeda.  But we’re not at war with a country, we’re at war with an ideology.  I still stand by Steven Den Beste’s analysis of the situation from 5 years ago.  Even if Al-Qaeda didn’t exist in Iraq before we invaded, and there’s evidence that it did in some measure, I don’t think, if you’re battling an ideology rather than a nation, that it’s a horrible idea to enter the heart of the region of the world that spurned that ideology, and fight anyone who wants to adhere to it.  If Iraq is soundly rejecting Al-Qaeda, because they have been shown for the butchers that they are, I think that’s a good outcome.

UPDATE: Richard Fernandez has more.