by Bob Barr | Jun 15, 2022 | Townhall Article |
Townhall No passion so effectually robs the mind of all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear. –Edmund Burke, 1757 Fear may serve as an effective motivator for individuals facing danger, but as a basis for law-making, it consistently leads to poorly crafted legislation and even dangerous public laws. So it is with gun control, a path on which a bipartisan group of Senators appears now committed. Fear of domestic terrorist attacks following the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and of further foreign terrorist attacks after 9-11, led directly to laws that demonstrably were far broader than necessary to address whatever shortcomings those incidents revealed, and which have seriously eroded individual liberty in the years since. In the current frenzy to guard against tragic mass shootings such as occurred last month at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, federal lawmakers appear ready once again to use “fear” as a motivating force for legislative action. This week a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers, led by Texas Republican John Cornyn and New York’s perennial gun control orchestrator Chuck Schumer, announced a framework for a gun control package aimed at easing the minds of “families [who] are scared.” Details beyond the initial framework are sparse, but we do know the bill seeks to tackle mass shooting violence by recycling many of the familiar policies of gun control past – red flag laws, “boyfriend” loopholes, and deeper background checks. There does appear to be some attention being afforded to mental health and school safety programs, but initial information indicates these will not be among the legislation’s main priorities. Begin with the enhanced background checks for gun...
by Bob Barr | Jun 14, 2022 | Daily Caller Article |
Daily Caller Despite an excessive degree of regulatory intervention, American-style free market economics remains the gold standard for organizing an economy. Unfortunately, one of Uncle Sam’s favored tools with which to attack the business sector – antitrust power – is being considered by both major parties in the U.S. Congress to undercut that advantage. American innovators have improved the lives of generations of citizens. Consider, just among recent success stories, the invention of the Apple iPhone, the Twitter method of communication, the Google search engine, Uber’s ride-sharing concept and the use of Facebook to keep up with family and friends. Amazon is a company that was critical in moving goods to people everywhere during the recent pandemic. While none of these companies are perfect, all are miracles of free market economics and rewards in a nation that embraces entrepreneurs. Now, those same wildly successful companies are under attack by liberals who have a profound distaste for private enterprise and success, fueled by a deep skepticism of free market capitalism. There is an emerging effort to give Washington power players even more power to attack so called “Big Tech,” under the pretext of antitrust law. This attack emanates from both major political parties — the populist right and progressive left, in a way that will greatly harm a struggling national economy. Giving more power to government bureaucrats to micromanage the economy has never been a good idea, but it is especially bad at this juncture. The current centerpiece of this attack on “Big Tech” is S.2992, mistitled the “American Innovation and Choice Online Act,” which singlehandedly will stifle innovation and limit consumer...
by Bob Barr | Jun 8, 2022 | Townhall Article |
Townhall Remember when the Atlanta Braves’ “tomahawk chop,” a long-established stadium rallying cry, came under attack for allegedly perpetuating racist stereotypes? That controversy, which flared up in the 1990s and resurfaced last year during the World Series, drew a mixed response from Indian tribes; some linked it to improper cultural appropriation, while others saw it as a distraction from serious issues facing Native Americans. The debate over the tomahawk chop generated a significant amount of media coverage at the time. However, if considered a matter of “cultural appropriation,” it pales in comparison to an issue currently working its way through the United States Congress. This ill-advised legislation would facilitate creation of brand new tribes out of thin air, and grant them the same rights as existing tribes. Typically, groups seeking to be recognized by the federal government as sovereign nations must go through a process at the Department of Interior during which their histories are reviewed and carefully examined. This process was established to ensure that legitimate tribes receive the proper recognition they deserve and are protected against groups making false claims. Several bills currently before Congress would upend this system and create a fast lane for groups who don’t want to — or just can’t — demonstrate their legitimacy; criteria many are unable to meet. For example, one of the groups seeking recognition through Congress has claimed descendancy from several different tribes over the years but has never been able to get its own story straight. The consequences of creating tribes without any factual or historic verification are significant for real tribal nations. When a group latches onto the identity of one...
by Bob Barr | Jun 6, 2022 | Daily Caller Article |
Daily Caller Last week, President Biden delivered a prime time address to the nation on “Gun Violence in America.” The speech was long on drama, including several explicit references to God and a maudlin display of candles behind the presidential podium. The occasion was in fact serious, coming as it did just days after two mass murders committed by a pair of obviously deeply troubled young men with the blackest of evil in their hearts and minds; but the speech offered nothing of real value. This failure to use the presidential bully pulpit to propose serious solutions to serious problems reflects a deliberate decision by Mr. Biden to not address the causes of recent mass homicides. Indeed, this has become the generational failure of Democrats to “do something” about what is now endemic violence in our culture. Democrats’ myopic focus on gun control is itself a tacit recognition that it is far more difficult, costly and politically sensitive to tackle the root causes of such tragedies than it is to rail against “guns!” Ah, yes — “root causes.” Following her visit to Central America in the summer of 2021, Vice President Kamala Harris repeatedly lectured us to address the “root causes” of migration. Too bad Biden did not heed her advice when addressing “gun violence” last week. Other than a passing reference in his June 2 speech to the “mental health” aspect of violence-prone individuals like the evildoers in Buffalo, Uvalde and other sites of mass shootings, President Biden failed to address any of the “root causes” of such tragedies. Even when he did refer briefly to “mental health,” it was as a “consequence” of gun violence rather...
by Bob Barr | Jun 1, 2022 | Townhall Article |
Townhall Many, perhaps most Americans are familiar with the Second Amendment to our Constitution — if not the precise phrasing, at least the key operative language confirming the “right to keep and bear arms.” Debates rage over the extent of that individual “right,” especially in the wake of a mass murder involving a firearm. These debates will continue, regardless of their relevance to particular situations, and usually obscuring rather than revealing solutions to the actual criminal activities. What little substantive consideration of the Second Amendment may arise in debates about whether its language “allows” an individual to possess a particular firearm or caliber of ammunition, may even touch on the history of the Amendment. An historic defense of the Second Amendment might even note that one of the very first armed confrontations between the American Colonies and British “Red Coats,” at Lexington and Concord in April 1775, transpired because the British were attempting to prevent the colonial citizens from accessing their stores of rifles and gunpowder. As presented in depth by noted firearms experts such as David Kopel, denying access to these tools for resistance to British rule became a primary goal of the Crown in the two years leading to the Declaration of Independence. All this is important in constructing an historically sound argument in defense of why the Second Amendment’s language appears in the Bill of Rights. But the critical factor, which reveals why the Amendment is as relevant and important today as in 1791 when it was ratified, comes in answer to the following inquiry: “Where does responsibility ultimately lie for protection of an individual’s life and their...
