Posts Tagged ‘gun control’

PetitionI was at a small, but very lively gathering of local libertarians this past week, and at the end, I was asked by one of the attendees if I would like to sign his petition to repeal the Firearms Act.

I asked if he meant the whole thing, including licensing and handguns. He said the whole thing. I told him I’d have to think about it some more and get back to him.

For not wanting to sign his petition, he said: “You’re not much of a libertarian.”

It’s my choice to sign the petition, and I don’t vote for any party that wants to increase gun regulations, and I won’t personally take your guns from you, so how does that make me not much of a libertarian?

If you have a petition to end all public funding for abortions except for saving the life of the mother, I’m with you, and if you have a petition to end the public school teachers’ monopoly, I’m with you, and if you have a petition to end all redistributive pork barrel spending in the “public interest” like the $5.8 million video game research grant, I’m with you.

But if you want to end all gun regulations in one stroke, I’m not with you, because it’s politically tone-deaf, and it’s a reason why most Libertarian Party candidates only get hundreds of votes instead of tens of thousands.

This is Canada, after all, with no history of violent revolution, no history of slavery, no bloody civil war and no Second Amendment, and if the United States has gun licensing, it’s political fantasy to push for an all-out, single-stroke repeal of all gun regulations in Canada.

If the petition is to change licensing from may issue to shall issue, I’m with you. But I’m not with you if you want to strike down legislation that could suddenly legally allow machine guns in the hands of the mentally ill, or of non-residents who aren’t liable for any of the responsibilities of citizenship or residency, as a possible and likely consequence of suddenly repealing the entire Firearms Act.

Read Full Post »

English: AK-47 assault rifle

In my article, The Great Canadian-American gun divide, I highlighted the cultural divide over guns between Canada and the U.S., including one prominent Canadian TV host calling Americans “gun crazy.”

However, the divide isn’t so much about the rate of gun ownership; contrary to popular belief, Canada has a high firearms ownership rate.

According to gunpolicy.org:

In a comparison of the rate of private gun ownership in 179 countries, Canada ranked at No. 13.

Unlike in the U.S., the gun-grabbers in Canada have been in retreat in the past few years, due to the documented failure of Canada’s long-gun registry, as I documented in my article, Canada’s long-gun registry: a feel-good failure and in my interview, Shot holes in gun control arguments on Radio Liberty with Dr. Stan Monteith.

Read Full Post »

Colored Bullseye

As the investigation into the July 20, 2012 Colorado movie theatre shooting progresses, there remains a missing piece, and that is the discussion of private property rights.

While the political debate has been framed as more gun control versus less gun control, I see the real debate as private property rights versus no private property rights.

While more government-mandated gun control is palatable to many, an overt limitation of private property rights is less palatable, in the absence of fear-mongering.

The mass media –our self-appointed opinion leaders — frame the debate as more gun control versus the fear of another mass shooting, but for me, the debate is over private property rights versus no private property rights.

It should be evident that more gun control laws can’t stop all mass shootings. The solution, to me, is to protect the private property rights of business owners, and let them be responsible for their own security, and let their patrons assume full personal responsibility for their decision to patronize the business, barring negligence and malice.

If the business is negligent, there is the civil remedy of suing it for negligence, and if there is malice, there is also a possible criminal remedy.

Nearly everyone claims that they don’t want to be enslaved, but government security goons at movie theatres, and government laws barring all guns in private businesses, would serve that purpose.

Instead of enacting laws that grab guns from mostly law-abiding citizens, why not allow private property owners to provide for their own security, as they best see fit?

In a mass market like the United States, and especially in big cities, there would be the opportunity for some cinemas to offer more security, including full pat-downs, which are completely constitutional. I have no problem with private businesses choosing to mandate full pat-downs, since it’s up to individuals whether they choose to patronize that business.

For me, I’d prefer to take the risk, which is comparable to winning a lottery jackpot, of being a potential victim of a mass shooting, and not patronize a movie theatre with full pat-downs, but for others, they may not want to take that minuscule risk. If there was truly enough of a demand for such security, individuals would choose their theatre and other venues appropriately, despite what some cynical power-hungry freedom-grabbers in government may claim they want.

Read Full Post »

As a follow-up to my September 13, 2010 article on Canada’s long-gun registry: a feel-good failure, I was interviewed by Dr. Stan Monteith of Radio Liberty on September 22, and shared breaking news of Canada’s parliamentary vote on repealing its failed long-gun registry, which ultimately went down to defeat by only two votes.

There were some great calls, including by one who argued that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution doesn’t protect an individual right to keep and bear arms, despite the Supreme Court of the United States ruling otherwise, twice since 2008. Tune in to see what Dr. Stan and I had to say!

Read Full Post »

I came across this article about Ebay pulling sales of a T-shirt critical of gun control, with Hitler, Mao and Stalin above the caption “Mass Murderers Agree – Gun Control Works!” with the reason, “Images depicting high ranking Nazi officers are not permitted to be sold on the site.” This, despite other T-shirts depicting Hitler still for sale on Ebay.

It reminded me of Bilderberger Heather Reisman (as this article by Canada’s national broadcaster, CBC shows), owner of Canada’s book selling monopoly, Chapters Indigo, banning sales of Hitler’s Mein Kampf in 2001, yet having no problem profiting from sales of the far less known anti-Jewish tract by Martin Luther, The Jews and Their Lies, as you will see here.

Read Full Post »