Concealed Carry and College Campuses

My column about why the Second Amendment and the rights of CHL holders shouldn’t be considered void on college campuses is up at Guns.com.

Guns.com is a new site I’m writing for and there are a few bugs as with any new publication. So forgive a few editing errors that pop up.

Here’s a taste.

“I was shot through the left thigh, both hips and right shoulder and I survived by playing dead,” said Colin Goddard, a survivor of the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007 who is now a student at the University of Texas in Austin.

He told his emotional story to try to sway Texas lawmakers to reject a coming bill in the 2011 legislative session that will add one more place that concealed handgun license holders are allowed while armed – college campuses.

“I was there that day. That was the craziest day of my life with one person with two guns. I can’t imagine what it would have been like with multiple students with multiple guns,” he said.

I can imagine it. And it’s not some Pollyanna scenario. It’s based on the facts on the ground at Virginia Tech in 2007

and in Texas in 1991 and 1966.

But before I get into that, I have to tell you this isn’t new territory for me. Nor is it for Texas. Texans have been fighting an incremental fight to expand gun rights that started with the massacre at a Luby’s in Killeen, Texas.

The massacre and its aftermath should be required reading for all sides in the gun debate.

Read the rest here.

The Utter Mendacity of the ‘Buy American’ Campaign

Take a look at what these gullible dumbassess over in the Snow White streets of Dallas are doing. No really. They’re emptying their home of anything foreign made. Because an “economist said that if everyone bought America made goods the economy would turn around faster.”

It’s the usual crap about how evil companies are outsourcing manufacturing jobs to third world hellholes and costing America jobs and money. (Seriously, man. You get 12 years of free education, endless community college programs, free education grants, public libraries and state level workforce training centers that are free. If after all that the best you can do is a job that an illiterate peasant living in a dirt shack can do, you have bigger problems.)

theytookourjobsThis is not just stupid. It’s absolutely wrong. Manufacturing in America is at an all time high by every measure except jobs. That’s because we’re really good at being productive, most of it is high-tech, and we have robots. Lots of robots. Robots that haven’t yet gone all SkyNet anyway.

Let me allow someone smarter to point out the obvious:

Ugh. Where to begin? Back in the “golden age” of 1960, when imports were oddities to marvel over in a disdainful way, the per-capita U.S. income was $2,914. In 2009, with imports ubiquitous, per-capita income was $46,411. (Economic Report of the President, 2010, Tables B-1 and B-34). In real, inflation-adjusted terms, even with a U.S. population increase from 181 million to 307 million, per-capita incomes in 2009 were almost triple what they were in 1960 ($42,277 vs. $15,669 in 2005 dollars—ERP, 2010, Tables B-2 and B-34). Oh, if only we could replicate the relative poverty, the limited consumer choices, the inefficient production processes, the massive trade barriers that compelled Americans to buy American, and the uneconomic work rules and wages commanded by once-powerful private sector labor unions. In 1960, before real economic liberalization spawned cultural and social liberalization, Diane Sawyer would never have dreamed of being a network news anchor, if she even dared to entertain the concept of working outside of the home. How can she pine for such an era?

It’s frustrating that so much research refuting the myth of manufacturing decline and supporting the conclusion that U.S. manufacturing is thriving—and is in fact leading the world in terms of value of output—is simply neglected by a media that is more committed to scaring than informing. Today Americans are less likely to find in their homes products manufactured in the United States because U.S. manufacturers have moved on to producing higher value products. American manufacturing isn’t focused on products that consumers find in retail stores, like furniture, hand tools, sporting goods, flatware, draperies, carpeting and clothes. American factories produce more value than any other country’s factories by focusing on producing the highest value products: pharmaceuticals, chemicals, airplanes, sophisticated componentry, technical textiles, and other items often sold directly to other businesses.

I and others have been making these points for several years, as U.S. manufacturing continues to thrive in every metric…except employment. Manufacturing employment peaked in 1979 and has been on a downward trajectory ever since. But that is the point that eludes ABC and everyone else who thinks U.S. manufacturing’s best days are in the past. Making more with less is the goal! That’s how an economy grows! The political imperative of “putting people back to work” regardless of the economic value of that work–remember the so-called stimulus?– spits in the face of economics. The fact that Americans are unemployed speaks to a mismatch of skills demanded and skills available, as well as to a business and regulatory environment that dissuades investment and hiring.

ABC’s proposition that Americans would support 10,000 new jobs by spending just $3.33 more (per year?) on U.S.-made goods obviously fails to consider the jobs lost by switching from imports to domestic or switching from savings (which is just money used for investment, which already supports jobs) to spending. Depriving foreigners of U.S. dollars just deprives U.S. producers of export sales.

Schadenfraught in Austin: Hoisted by His Own Petard

It’s a truism that almost all government-mandated licensing and regulation is codified not for the “protection of the public.” Almost to a rule, the regulations are pushed by players in an industry to create barriers to entry and to quash competition. This is true whether you’re talking about licensing of hair stylists, interior decorators, medical professionals or whatever.

Almost every function, inspection and quality assurance could be carried out by independent, third-party inspectors — think Underwriter’s Lab. Restaurant inspections, certifications and so on — all could be carried out without the force of law and with greater efficiency. The very image of a city restaurant inspector is a fat guy on the take. Competition would keep those giving out seals of approval honest.

That’s why this case out of Austin is so Schadenfraught.

I Believe the Germans Have a Word for This

| February 11, 2011

Incumbent food truck magnate in Austin develops totally-civic-minded-and-not-at-all-protectionist “health, safety and environmental concerns” over a massive increase in the number trucks that have sprung up to compete with him . . .

. . . demands city council pass stricter regulations of his own industry . . .

. . . now faces a bureaucratic nightmare as his own fleet of trucks can’t pass the regulations he insisted were necessary to protect the public.

Truth Comes Out in…Mother Jones?

Weird that this was the first media outlet to get it right.

At 2:00 a.m. on Saturday—about eight hours before he allegedly killed six people and wounded 14, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), in Tucson—Jared Lee Loughner phoned an old and close friend with whom he had gone to high school and college. The friend, Bryce Tierney, was up late watching TV, but he didn’t answer the call. When he later checked his voice mail, he heard a simple message from Loughner: “Hey man, it’s Jared. Me and you had good times. Peace out. Later.”

That was it. But later in the day, when Tierney first heard about the Tucson massacre, he had a sickening feeling: “They hadn’t released the name, but I said, ‘Holy shit, I think it’s Jared that did it.’” Tierney tells Mother Jones in an exclusive interview that Loughner held a years-long grudge against Giffords and had repeatedly derided her as a “fake.” Loughner’s animus toward Giffords intensified after he attended one of her campaign events and she did not, in his view, sufficiently answer a question he had posed, Tierney says. He also describes Loughner as being obsessed with “lucid dreaming”—that is, the idea that conscious dreams are an alternative reality that a person can inhabit and control—and says Loughner became “more interested in this world than our reality.” Tierney adds, “I saw his dream journal once. That’s the golden piece of evidence. You want to know what goes on in Jared Loughner’s mind, there’s a dream journal that will tell you everything.”

Full story on their site. And everyone using this incident to push their political points can suck it.

Repeat After Me: None of Your Business. Am I Free To Go?

My love of the TSA and the mouth-breathing pickpockets and gropers is widely known.images

So it should come to you as no surprise this guy — also a Reason contributor –  is my new man crush for how he handled overbearing Customs and Border Protection agents.

“Why were you in China?” asked the passport control officer, a woman with the appearance and disposition of a prison matron.

“None of your business,” I said.

Her eyes widened in disbelief.

“Excuse me?” she asked.

“I’m not going to be interrogated as a pre-condition of re-entering my own country,” I said.

This did not go over well. She asked a series of questions, such as how long I had been in China, whether I was there on personal business or commercial business, etc. I stood silently.

Read his whole encounter here.

NYT: All the News Unfit for Informed Readers

In one story we see everything wrong with the sheltered, uninformed readership of the New York Times.

Behold.

And in one paragraph within that one story, we see what lies at the heart of everything wrong with the New York Times.

But one day it occurred to me: how would they know? All of these buzzy social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter sort of crept up on us. The government never mailed fliers to every household explaining what it’s all about.

Emphasis mine. As if I really needed to add that.

I mean, just, wow.

Reason #312 No One Takes the New York Times Seriously

Just, damn.

In a Q&A with U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul, the New York Times interviewer actually nags Paul.

NYT: But in light of your distrust of the federal government, where are you on an issue like seat belts? Federal legislation requiring people to wear seat belts could obviously save lives.
Paul: I think the federal government shouldn’t be involved. I don’t want to live in a nanny state where people are telling me where I can go and what I can do.

NYT: You shouldn’t trivialize issues of health and safety by calling them nanny issues.
Paul: The question is, do you want to live in a nanny state where the government tells you what you can eat, where you can smoke, where you can live, what you can do, or would you rather have some freedom, and freedom means that things aren’t perfect?

Dallas Sign Ordinance Challenged by Lawsuit

I brought up the injustice of the city of Dallas’ small business sign ban, championed by Councilman Dwaine Caraway, last year in my feature on Nanny State Dallas in D Magazine.

The city’s justification for this intrusive, anti-First Amendment law was that it prevented robberies, and it controlled blight. Which is brilliant government thinking. After all, business owners have no incentive to want to prevent robberies at their own stores, and nothing ends blight like having businesses go out of business when they can’t advertise to their customers. 

Thankfully, the Institute for Justice has taken up the cause against the anti sign ordinance, and is suing the city of Dallas to have it overturned.

Yes, of course, you’re welcome.

No Thank You, Dear Leader

obamaleader2This nationwide address to children without their parent’s consent is just too Dear Leader, North Korea-style Orwellian for me.

Here’s the link to the “Recommended Study Materials” to go with Mr. Obama’s proposed Sep. 8 address to school children.

Select chapters and verse for this little trip down indoctrination lane:

Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?
What is the President asking me to do?
What specific job is he asking me to do? Is he asking anything of anyone else? Teachers? Principals? Parents? The American people?
No thanks. I don’t care if the president were zombie Milton Friedman, this is wrong.
The Girl will be at home Sep. 8 with me, reading either:
UPDATE: Tom asks a good question and I’m moving my response up to here.
Watching a general speech in school is one thing. Gotta learn civics and politics. No problem.

But one targeted to kids, with those kind of suggested, loaded questions such as “Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?” — that’ a horse of a different…ahem… that’s something else entirely.

And I’d object just as strong to McCain, to Reagan, to JFK — hell, like I said, if Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, Friedrich Hayek or Herbert Spencer were president, I’d object.

It’s not the role of the president, and it creates this idea that these politicians are somehow important and should be followed.

What they say isn’t important. What we say — as individuals — and what we do — as individuals — is far more important.

This didn’t start with Obama — see the third book I linked to — but we’re treading closer and closer every year towards an ugly, led society, instead of a republic of free individuals who should only have to deal with government when they violate the rights of their neighbors or pay a general tax to support the few, constitutionally mandated and delegated duties government should be performing.

Jesus Tap Dancing Christ — Seriously?

“I’d describe it as unfriendly,” said John Lamb, who lives across the street from the new $3.5 million home and its (8-foot) fence.

You know what’s even more unfriendly, John? Pissy little neighbors who won’t mind their own goddamn business. Hell, if I lived in Dallas my fence would be 12 feet high, topped with razor wire, and lined with Claymores.

“We feel it’s incompatible with the neighborhood,” said Lamb. “To have a fence like that forms a barrier.”

Who wouldn’t want a barrier from neighbors like that?