arizonawatch

Trayvon Amendment

US House Democrats have proposed an amendment with mechanisms to force states with “stand your ground” laws to remove them using the coercion of the purse strings.

This will serve to make it official. Only our wise government overlords and criminals (yes, these are one in the same) can use force.

Don’t be fooled. This has nothing to do with Trayvon. Regardless of what really happened with Trayvon (contrary to popular belief, the media is not a jury of anyone’s peers — remember Duke Lacrosse), he is now both unfortunately dead and a pawn of a ruling class bent upon preserving preserving their monopoly on deadly force.

Nullification (not secession) in Arizona

I’m a little behind on posting here, but it’s never too late to criticize.

In a blog post last week, E.J. Montini wrongly misinterpreted intent and history of a recently filed application for citizens initiative in Arizona relating to nullification of federal law.

Montini writes:

According to the Arizona Capitol Times a group of citizens is trying to do what the Legislature has tried and failed to do not so long ago – secede from the union.

A reading of the initiative as filed reveals that Montini is sensationalizing the scope of the initiative, and/or is entirely unclear of the states rights notion of nullification, as opposed to secession.

The initiative clearly affirms the right of the State of Arizona to reject any federal law deemed unconstitutional.  It is clearly not a call for the State of Arizona to secede from the Union should it deem a law unconstituional

The doctrine of nullification invoked in this initiative has a long and valid history.  Our Founders and those instrumental in the authoring of the US Constitution supported the notion of states nullifying federal law as an important check on federal power.  The concept was discussed and supported as a necessary factor for ratifying the US Constitution in the 1788 Virginia ratifying convention.  Thomas Jefferson introduced the term “nullification” in the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798.

Far from the radical notion of secession, nullification, although mostly forgotten, is a critical check on federal power, and could act as such today.

Montini’s lumping nullification into the more radical notion of secession, and his mockery of it , demonstrate his disregard for history, and his inability to accept the idea that anyone besides our wise federal overlords can possibly govern.  In Montini’s mind, dissent at the state level violates the status of ordinary citizens as chattel of our federal masters, and is thus worthy of mockery.

Tom Woods, a best selling author and a far smarter and more studied historian and scholar that Montini might ever dream of becoming, has written extensively on the doctrine of nullification.

George Takei & Apple Asian Labor: Where’s Your Apology, George?

I recently posted a rebuttal to a blog post by George Takei on alleged mistreatment of Asian plant workers by companies used by Apple for manufacturing.

In summary, George Takie expressed shock and dismay over Asian workers treatment as they exercised the opportunity presented by industrialization to better their lives by moving from communal subsistence farming to factory jobs.

Setting aside Takei’s ignorance of the economics of emerging economies and his overflowing western guilt, his post turns out to have one major flaw.

It’s based upon lies.

It turns out that This American Life, the radio show who broadcast the piece by Mike Daisey that set off the firestorm of liberal guilt did some fact checking after airing the piece, and found it lacking one of the basic elements of good journalism:  truth.  BBC reports on their retraction here.

The problem is that George Takei hasn’t issued a retraction or follow-up on his blog post.  In fact, the liberal media and anti-capitalist pundits have largely ignored the retraction, and continue to whine about the unfairness of horrible capitalism.

I offer an explanation of this lack of follow-up.  They don’t care about the workers for whom they expressed concern.  They were merely easy weapons to be used in an ongoing attack on capitalism.

I like George Takei and his blog.  I hope he proves me wrong.  I doubt he will.

Follow-up on Arizona Concealed Carry and Violent Crimes

A Facebook comment I made summarizing my earlier post on an E.J. Montini article‘s complete lack of statistics on safety in Arizona due to fairly unrestrictive gun laws drew a comment that deserves mention here.

The comment, questioning the accuracy of my claim that Arizona’s law allowing registered conceal carry of guns was passed in 1994, is brief but deceptive in it’s importance.

Rich Moss ‎@ jack we just passed the conceal carry law so your data does not show any changes made by the law yet…. if we passed it in 1994, then it would show proof.

Simple enough:  Rich confused the recent unrestricted concealed carry law with the much earlier law allowing concealed carry with permit (CCW).  He was mistaken (and yes, I’m the jerk who points this out).  I was correct, and his comment turned out to support my claim that violent crime began to decrease immediately after passage of the registered conceal carry law.

Bully for me.

There’s much more importance to this.

Rich, who is politically aware enough to specifically question another comment’s accuracy on the Facebook page of a veteran Arizona Republic columnist, has been unaware that his fellow Arizona citizens have been legally carrying concealed guns since 1994.

Wait!  The anti-firearm crowd would have us believe that Arizona is the wild west (if the wild west were actually wild, lawless, and full of frequent shoot-outs) due to our gun laws.

But here’s a seemingly rational, informed guy who had no idea that his neighbors were packing heat for the last 18 years.  He likely hasn’t been shot as a result, or shown the business side of a gun.  Easy access to guns by his law abiding neighbors changed his life so little that he never noticed them carrying guns.

In this sense, EJ Montini is right.  Arizona gun owners are indeed responsible.

Arizona Concealed Carry & Violent Crime Rates

In a blog post on 3/15/2012, the Arizona Repugnant’s Big-Fish-In-A-Small-Pond E.J. Montini posted a remarkably neutral view on Arizona’s gun laws.

In his post, he states,

The easy access to firearms in Arizona has NOT made us the safest state in the nation.

Nor has it made us the UNSAFEST.

The problem here is Montini’s application of statistics.  He fails to define what he means by safe.  However, let’s assume his notion of safe relates to crime.  Comparing crime rates between a state like Arizona, with nonrestrictive gun laws, to states with more restrictive gun laws is a false comparison.  It fails to take into account the myriad of other factors influencing crime rates in a given locality.

The better comparison is to look at crime rates within Arizona before and after significant changes in gun laws.  A graph of such a comparison is included below.  It charts violent crimes in Arizona per 100,000 in population.

Note that the graph takes a marked downturn after 1994.

Arizona began allowing concealed carry guns in 1994.

Source: DisasterCenter.com

Holding Out Hope for a Brokered Convention

Rick Santorum’s strong showing in southern primaries today reinforced the division within the GOP between Santorum-style social conservatives and old-guard Romney-style more moderate Republicans. While I consider both of these camps unsavory, the division increases the possibility of a