by Bob Barr | Jun 6, 2022 | Daily Caller Article |
Daily CallerLast 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 than a cause of gun violence (which it...
by Bob Barr | Jun 1, 2022 | Townhall Article |
TownhallMany, 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 rights?”If the answer to...
by Bob Barr | May 30, 2022 | Daily Caller Article |
Daily CallerThe 2022 National Rifle Association of America (NRA) convention took place this past weekend in Houston, Texas. I was there as both an attendee and as a member of the association’s Board of Directors. Over the course of three days, as tens of thousands of people wandered through the exhibit hall and meeting rooms, I once again witnessed the NRA for what it is — an organization comprised of millions of men and women from all walks of life who believe in and cherish our country, our history and the American people.The NRA was founded 151 years ago, and remains to this day an organization focused on protecting the Second Amendment to our Constitution. Notwithstanding that focus, its members and the men and women who direct its affairs, understand and support the entire Bill of Rights, including the right of the protestors who congregated outside the convention hall in Houston to level baseless and ridiculous charges against them.The men and women of the NRA also understand human nature, perhaps better than do those who protest them, or at least more honestly than those detractors. NRA members know that despite the basic goodness of the American people, and the fact that the vast majority of them are law-abiding and cherish life, there are exceptions — people who commit wrong, unlawful and sometimes truly evil acts. The difference (or at least one of many differences) between these NRA members and those who accuse them of complicity in the actions of last week’s mass murderer in Uvalde, Texas, is that the association’s members do not blame other, unrelated individuals or entities for the...
by Bob Barr | May 25, 2022 | Townhall Article |
TownhallSince my days as a student at USC (the real USC – the University of Southern California), I have been a die-hard fan of college football. I love to watch the competition, skill, and heart that players, teams, and coaches put into this truly all-American sport. But the sport I love is changing, and not for the better. In this, I agree with Clemson coach Dabo Swinney, who recently levelled a modest criticism of those changes, saying, “I’m not against NIL at all, what I am against is anything that devalues education — that’s what I’m against.” For this and similar comments, the coach was pilloried as regressive, racist, and hypocritical, and attacked personally for his strong Christian faith and trademark Southern drawl.In fact, his recent statement merely clarified remarks made a month before, in which he warned against “tampering . . . and manipulating young people” as a part of the NCAA’s “name/image/likeness” (NIL) endorsement program, which allows collegiate athletes to make money from their on-field talents. Once again, it was a modest critique, and in hindsight, Swinney’s comments were clearly prescient.Thus is the vindication of Dabo Swinney, and all the collegiate sports fans who are witnessing their beloved sports crumble away. To say college athletics have gone off the rails is an understatement. Even supporters of the NIL system would be hard-pressed to disagree with the “Wild West” scenario predicted by coaches like Swinney. Education? Only in-between meetings with the agent, and only if the athlete cannot go pro in three years. Some schools do better than others with graduating players, but education, at least in the cash-cow sports of football and basketball,...
by Bob Barr | May 23, 2022 | Daily Caller Article |
Daily CallerThe New York Court of Appeals soon may decide whether “Happy,” a 50-something-year-old elephant in the Bronx Zoo, possesses human rights.While this may appear on its face to be a preposterous proposition, it is one being considered seriously by the highest court in the state of New York.The case in favor of granting human rights to non-human animals is being pressed by the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) via a habeas corpus petition, the ancient and constitutionally enshrined principle that an individual has a fundamental right to force the government to prove it has a legal right to detain that person.The question as to whether animals possess or should be granted “rights,” has been a topic of debate going back at least to the mid-18th century in England. Only recently, with the 2007 establishment of NhRP (originally called the Center for the Expansion of Fundamental Rights), has the issue gained legal traction in the United States.Not surprisingly, these earlier lawsuits filed by NhRP were docketed in New York state courts on behalf of chimpanzees Tommy, Kiko, Hercules and Leo. While these habeas corpus petitions were not granted by the New York court at the time, as with many fringe legal theories, if advocates press their theories consistently and patiently, the odds for a favorable result increases. Hence, the current case on behalf of Happy the elephant.It is easy to dismiss the legal theory that non-human animals should be recognized as having human legal rights. The consequences of permitting such a principle to advance and take hold even to a limited extent in our judicial system, however, are profound. The Maryland-based, animal-rights non-profit The Humane League,...
