by Bob Barr | Jun 29, 2022 | Townhall Article |
Townhall Last week’s Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen was a historic moment for gun rights in America. Lest Second Amendment advocates engage in a lengthy celebration, however, they had best prepare for more pitched battles at the state and local levels, where firearms opponents will fiercely defend their turf. An individual right to possess a firearm was – finally – recognized by the Supreme Court in its 2008 Hellerdecision, and extended to all the states two years later in McDonald. Extending that fundamental natural right to self-preservation outside one’s home, which is the essence of last week’s ruling, serves also as a welcome update to the Court’s almost plodding effort to reclaim gun rights from decades of liberal encroachment. Nevertheless, the decision, important as it is, merely shifts the theater of operations from the national to the state and local levels where Justice Clarence Thomas’ opinion in Bruen, excellent in form and substance, in effect ushers in a new phase of Leftist scheming on gun control. Like Heller, Bruen is pivotal in impact, but limited in scope. In a concurring opinion supplementing Thomas’ six-member majority opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh (joined by Chief Justice Roberts), stressed that the ruling would not necessarily limit the ability of states to establish requirements for concealed carry – only that they cannot arbitrarily deny the right to carry. As with Heller, in the uncertainty created by Kavanaugh’s opinion, we now will be forced to contend with myriad regulatory tricks by local and state governments to undermine this latest ruling. Immediately after Heller, for example, District of Columbia officials went to work finding loopholes around the “individual right” to keep and...
by Bob Barr | Jun 22, 2022 | Townhall Article |
Townhall This month’s public bruhaha among Washington Post writers, stemming from a colleague’s retweet of a banal joke, was a sight to behold. One of the most prominent newspapers in the nation became a national headline itself, as “professional” reporters jumped to social media to air dirty laundry and call each other names. Where were the adults in the room? Where indeed. The dust-up illustrates the progressive playbook. First, take any perceived slight and assume the evilest intent. Then claim it represents some fantastical hyperbole of doom “if not addressed.” Every incident becomes an outrage campaign that makes the participants, who seem perpetually dour and unhappy, insufferable as individuals and ruinously disruptive as employees. This most recent Washington Post drama was unusual only in how public it became, but it is far from unique in its suffering from a plague of progressive employees whose “woke” zealotry bleeds across the workplace. The “cancel culture” mentality leveraged by progressives against their enemies, including those from its own ranks, has become a paralyzing maelstrom within organizations that employ them. As one recently resigned executive director of a Leftist organization told The Intercept — “So much energy has been devoted to the internal strife and internal bull____ that it’s had a real impact on the ability for groups to deliver . . . I was spending 90 to 95 percent of my time on internal strife.” The Intercept paints a picture of what you might imagine if the same people pushing Cancel Culture were all put into a room and then expected to come up with solutions for cultural issues. Navigating a minefield wearing a blindfold would be easier –...
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 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 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...
by Bob Barr | May 25, 2022 | Townhall Article |
Townhall Since 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...
