I travel to Nebraska on occasion, so seeing the passage of LB 430 is welcome. Joe has the details.
What I’m looking for is reciprocity. Texas honors Nebraska’s license, it’ll be nice for Nebraska to honor Texas’.
Update: LB 430 isn’t law yet. It’s passed out of the legislature and is headed to the Governor’s desk for his signature, which I’m pretty sure he’ll sign.
On the surface, I’m pleased with this. Evil by definition doesn’t follow the rules. We good, well-intended folk might draw a line somewhere and say “sorry, you can’t cross this” and other good, well-intended folk will obey that… but evil won’t. When people go hiking in the backwoods of our national parks and risk running across people engaged in illegal activity (e.g. illegal drug operations, such as marijuana cultivation), those criminals tend to shoot first and ask no questions at all. Why should we good folk be disadvantaged, and forcefully so, by the laws that we cherish and obey?
If the measure becomes law “it would not only put park visitors and wildlife at risk, it would change the character and the peaceful and safe atmosphere in our parks,” [Bryan Faehner, associate director of the National Parks Conservation Association, an advocacy group that opposes guns in parks] said.
So tell me how visitors are not already at risk? Tell me how evil is already warded off and parks are 100% safe havens. And wildlife will be at risk? How? This law only permits lawful concealed carry of a handgun by a segment of the population that are statistically more law-abiding that your average citizen. So now they’re going to break hunting and other game laws? I mean, you can hunt in national parks, per hunting laws, which means wildlife isn’t any more or less at risk because of this. How is this going to change? Oh that’s right… once you put a gun in someone’s hand they turn into bloodthirsty killers bent on shooting everything they see. The law no longer applies. We’re above the law! MUHAHAHA! That’s right… I forgot. Silly me. 🙄 Gosh, and you’d think that with all the years of data we have regarding concealed carry would mean something… the fears of OK Corral shootouts and how the streets would be flowing with blood… gosh, none of that has yet come to pass; in fact, violent crime went down. Golly gosh jeepers, what to do.
But while I’m happy to see this, I’m not happy to see how it’s being done. It’s being attached as an amendment to a credit card reform bill. This is a bill that many feel needs to pass into law, given our current economic climate. So attaching this amendment — which has nothing to do with the bill — really doesn’t fly with me. The bill is one that needs to become law and likely will, which is part of the (sneaky) strategy in putting the amendment on this very bill. This strategy is sneaking the concealed carry stuff in through the back door, with a high chance that will allow it to become law (no line-item veto, so we’ll have to see how it fairs in committee when House and Senate reconcile). Folks, we bitch when people do this about things we don’t favor, so we need to bitch even when they do things in our favor. We can’t like the backdoor when it favors us and dislike it when it doesn’t.
Updated: Yea! It’s nice to see another gun blogger with mixed emotions over this one. It’s really interesting to watch most of your “pro gun blogs” out there, that bitch and moan about such legislative tactics, but now that the tactic is favoring them are oddly silent on the tactic and all happy to see legislation favoring them.
Louisiana is a step closer to allowing concealed carry on campus. Here’s hoping it makes it.
“Guns and campuses simply do not mix,” [Higher Education Commissioner Sally Clausen] said. “This is not a 2nd Amendment right; this is a safety issue.”
It’s exactly a safety issue. If being safe is a matter of keeping people from harm, please tell me how “gun free zones”, such as college campuses, keep people from harm? There’s no invisible shield surrounding the campus keeping the evil out. We’ve got years of data showing that once you allow concealed carry, violent crime goes down. Where’s your data showing otherwise? We’ll be waiting.
…then it’s worth it, right?
Read the story of Nicole Goeser (via Linoge).
Or at least, this 25 year veteran cop doesn’t. (h/t to Linoge)
Pens and pencils don’t make you misspell words; cars don’t make you drive drunk, run red lights or speed; and, no, not even a “morning star” can swing itself.
The logic behind banning firearms in order to lower crime is as ridiculous to me as banning cars because so many people are injured and killed every year in accidents and drunken driving crimes. It is not the car that is at fault; it’s the driver who is at fault. And, by the same token, it isn’t the gun … It is the criminal who commits the crime and it is the criminals who need to be addressed and dealt with, not any device they use in the commission of their crimes.
As our government steadily changes more and more to the Left, gun control and outright gun ban issues will become very hot topics. So, I think it’s imperative Americans use some common sense in this area and realize gun control is in no shape, form or fashion crime control.
If someone commits a crime with a gun, follow the law and punish the person, but leave the Second Amendment alone, it is in the Constitution for a reason.
… doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
So they’re thinking about taxing soda and sugary drinks to pay for The chOsen One’s proposed healthcare legislation. (h/t to The Volokh Conspiracy)
Not only this is just asinine in and of itself, it’s going down a familiar road.
We need to pay for something. I know, we’ll tax something that we think is evil… which will fund our pet project and have the side-effect of making the evil thing less affordable and appealing to people, which will save people from the evil (aren’t we so altruistic!). But then, when people are saved from the evil, we won’t have any more funding for our project… so we’ll have to find something new to tax.
And so on we go… spiraling down the toilet.
But of course, it’s all in our best interests… we can’t make our own choices, we can’t be responsible for ourselves, we need someone to make every decision for us. We’re not even allowed to be responsible for our bad decisions no… we must be saved before we can make them. Thank God for the folks in Washington. I wouldn’t know how to wipe my ass without them… oh, and probably be taxed for that too.
</sarcasm>
Howard Nemerov provides some perspective on the rumors of an ammunition ban.
Bottom line: Buyers help keep prices high because of concerns over what might happen in the future. As prices spiral and demand clears the shelves, people worry about getting ammunition in the future. Add a few rumors, people worry more and demand goes up even more. It may be best to stop stockpiling ammunition for now to reduce demand. Instead, spend your energy on convincing Congress that the civil right of self-defense is an idea whose time has come.
The NRA is running a promotion where you can join free for one year.
If you live in Texas, you should also join the Texas State Rifle Association. If you don’t live in Texas, you should join your equivalent local/state organization.
If you choose to do neither, at least be politically active. With the Internet, it doesn’t take long to find your Congresscritters and send them a quick email. When you contact them, keep it polite, respectful, to the point.
Via Roberta X I read an interesting article about the effects of Congress upon the financial markets.
You could have invested only when Congress is on vacation. It may sound a little crazy, but I am totally serious. When Congress works – and by “works” I mean “meddles” – it destroys wealth. When Congress doesn’t work, wealth grows by itself.
From 1965 through 2008, looking at a total of 11,000 trading days, the annualized daily price gain of the S&P 500 Index is just 0.31 percent when Congress is in session. Out of session, that figure jumps to 16.15 percent, a daily difference of 50 times.
As government power and influence grow, the trend has intensified in recent years. From 2000 through 2008, in-session performance of the S&P is –12.4 percent. The out-of-session performance: +8.8 percent.
In other words, had you invested $10,000 only when Congress was in session from the beginning of 2000 through 2008, putting aside dividends, you’d have $4,615 today. Had you invested that same $10,000 only on days when Congress was on vacation, you’d have $13,416 today.
The article continues with an excellent baseball analogy, then goes to list many recent things Congress has done that meddle in the markets. Truly an eye-opening read, that is, if your eyes weren’t already open.
One thing to note is it matters not who is in power: Republicans or Democrats. They’re both meddlers, they both seek to grow Government, they both spend as much of your and my money as they possibly can. Constitutional limits matter not when there’s contracts and favors and pet projects to manage! The money just flows… they spend it faster than they can take it from us or print it up.
I’m not saying one way or the other that you should invest or not in The Congressional Effect Fund… what you do with your money is your business and not mine. But it’s a damn sight interesting, that’s for sure.
From Reason. Your yard sale is illegal now… well, unless you take care of all the testing and paperwork.
Murdoc reports on how a man was pulled over for his “Don’t Tread On Me” bumper sticker. There’s a bit of doubt cast over the story, but given the antics going on these days it sadly doesn’t seem impossible to happen.
Regardless, one thing I found cool was learning the significance of the rattlesnake:
The commentator wrote, “The bumper sticker is based on the famous flag designed by American Revolution era general and statesman Christopher Gadsden. The yellow flag featured a coiled diamondback rattlesnake ready to strike, with the slogan ‘Don’t Tread on Me!’ underneath it. Benjamin Franklin helped make the rattlesnake a symbol of Americans’ reluctance to quarrel but vigilance and resolve in defense of their rights. By 1775 when Gadsden presented his flag to the commander-in-chief of the Navy, the rattlesnake was a symbol of the colonies and of their need to unite in defense of threats to their God-given and inherited rights.”
Updated: Xavier casts even more doubt on the story. Who knows the truth.
Stuff From Hsoi 