by Bob Barr | May 2, 2019 | Townhall Article |
Townhall.com In the wake of last week’s tragic shooting at a Jewish temple outside San Diego, California, attention is once again focused largely on the instruments used in the murder, rather on the root causes of the incident; especially the depraved internet community in which this and other recent murderers live. Except for the victims of these murderous rampages and the brave public safety first responders, we citizens are largely insulated from the actual horrors of mass murder. We are spared the horrendous visuals of bodies torn apart from bombs and bullets; the stomach-churning screams of victims as they’re stalked and murdered at point blank range; the stench of death mixed with ammunition propellant. These details are far too unsettling for public consumption (properly so), which is why conventional wisdom leads many to believe such violence is more common than it really is; as if picking up a gun and shooting-up a church is as easy as playing a video game. It is not. The mass killings of strangers is not a normal act for a human being; even for most hardened criminals. We simply are not programed for emotionless, indiscriminate killing; that is, unless we cease to view other people as human. This is how the Holocaust occurred in a highly educated, industrialized nation; or how a 19-year-old from San Diego could walk into a synagogue with a single goal in mind – to kill other people. By focusing our emotional attention after such tragedies debating (as we do with excruciating predictability) the type of firearm used, or whether the First Amendment should protect hate speech, we fail to address the greatest danger of all,...
by Bob Barr | Apr 29, 2019 | Townhall Article |
The Washington Times The world is changing, and in the “Internet Age” the pace of change is relentless. Examples abound of victims of such change. Kodak — the company that less than a generation ago was the world leader in providing film for the ubiquitous 35mm cameras around the necks of tourists from San Francisco to Cairo — is a pale shadow of its former self. Landline telephone companies that for over a century provided the primary communications link for families through two world wars, the Great Depression and the advent of the Space Age, is today a virtual technology dinosaur. The means by which virtually every American home receives television services is not immune from such change. The new kids on the block — streaming video services offered by Hulu, Netflix, Amazon Video, soon Disney, and many others — already are pulling serious numbers of customers from the established providers of paid TV services: Cable and satellite TV. Instead of letting this expanding market thrive, Congress is instead considering renewing a 30-year-old, outdated and totally unnecessary law offering unfair advantage to satellite providers. The initial legislative vehicle for this regulatory throwback was passed by Congress in 1988 as the Satellite Home Viewer Act (SHVA), and is now titled the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act Reauthorization (STELAR). Thirty years ago, the World Wide Web had not even been formally developed and made available to individuals and companies around the globe for mass use. At the time, a perhaps credible argument could be made that then-upstart satellite TV service providers needed a degree of help in competing against then well-entrenched cable providers. In...
by Bob Barr | Apr 22, 2019 | Townhall Article |
The Daily Caller The expression “cut off your nose to spite your face” has been in use for centuries. I’m not sure it translates easily into Spanish, but it reflects accurately what the Trump administration did earlier this month in nixing a pending agreement between Major League Baseball (“MLB”) and its Cuban counterpart (the “FCB”). The MLB had spent years hashing out an agreement with the FCB that would establish a lawful and workable process by which Cuban ballplayers could be scouted in Cuba by U.S. major league teams, and then signed to gainful contracts. The proposed deal would have freed Cuban players from having to rely — as they now must — on dealing with smugglers and unscrupulous agents in order to secure passage out of their home country and into the United States in order to participate in “America’s pastime.” This is because under the existing embargo rules governing U.S.-Cuba relations, players in that country cannot negotiate as free agents while still in Cuba. Thus, these players, including many eagerly sought-after by MLB scouts, have to find surreptitious (and dangerous) ways to leave their island nation; evading the many obstacles placed in their way by the Cuban government. The Dec. 19 agreement would have solved those problems, and by every reasonable standard would have been a win for players, MLB teams, and baseball fans. Importantly, the MLB made sure the proposed agreement was vetted through the U.S. Treasury Department Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC). This is the agency charged with ensuring that no U.S. national security interests are compromised in arrangements between American and foreign entities....
by Bob Barr | Apr 17, 2019 | Townhall Article |
Townhall.com Last week, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was dragged from the Ecuadorean embassy in London by a phalanx of British police officers; abruptly ending his nearly seven years of self-imposed political asylum in those cramped quarters. Far from ending the saga that began almost a decade ago when WikiLeaks published the trove of classified materials pilfered from the U.S. government by convicted spy Chelsea (formerly, Bradley) Manning, last week’s drama raises a slew of new questions about Washington’s sudden, high-level interest in this 48-year old Australian entrepreneur, computer programmer, and publisher. Extradition proceedings in the U.K. will launch what is certain to be a lengthy and complex legal battle that ultimately will determine if Assange will be prosecuted by the U.S. Department of Justice; or even if he can be prosecuted by our government. Where this will end up – and who will be the winners — is far from certain. The Justice Department last week unsealed a year-old indictment charging that Assange conspired with Manning in 2010 to break into Defense Department computers. According to this remarkably short (six-page) indictment, Manning then was able to download and copy hundreds of thousands of classified documents, mostly having to do with military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan; and many of which WikiLeaks published on its website over the course of the next year. Interestingly, Assange is not charged with any substantive offense; only with conspiring to help Manning in the acts that eventually saw her convicted of espionage by a court martial. Assange is sure to defend against federal prosecution based on the claim that — since he published the...
by Bob Barr | Mar 27, 2019 | Townhall Article, Uncategorized |
Townhall.com Every day, I thank America’s Founding Fathers for their prescience in providing a Bill of Rights to protect against the government arbitrarily undermining fundamental civil liberties. The actions undertaken by the government in New Zealand in response to the mass murder by a lone gunman earlier this month, provides but the most recent illustration of why our Bill of Rights is so vital to the preservation of freedom. The First, Second, and Fifth Amendments to our Constitution guarantee — among other fundamental liberties — the rights to free expression, the right to keep and bear arms, and the right to own property free from arbitrary confiscation. These civil liberties, which we enjoy here in America (and often take for granted), are being decimated by the New Zealand government in the name of “public safety.” Predictably, of course, has been the effusive praise with which many public officials and media outlets here in the United States have lauded New Zealand’s government for “moving swiftly” in the wake of the March 15th murder spree in Christchurch; actions making it even more difficult than previously for that country’s citizens to purchase or possess most handguns and many rifles. It would be surprising indeed, if the American Left had not quickly rallied in praise of New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern pressing for a sweeping ban on various firearms, including “military-style assault rifles” following the mosque murders. What is less understandable is the silence with which those same liberals who laud New Zealand and bemoan our own government for its gun-control lethargy, have reacted to the other edict issued by that...
by Bob Barr | Mar 12, 2019 | Townhall Article |
The Daily Caller The chemical DNA — or as it is more scientifically but less-commonly known, deoxyribonucleic acid — was first discovered in 1869 by a Swiss chemist. Now, 150 years later, DNA has become for government what the dog is to man — its “best friend.” Government is working feverishly to take full advantage of the power of this chemical — which provides the basis for human genetics — as a means to surveil its citizens. Arizona is the latest example; the state’s Republican state Sen. David Livingston proposed a bill that would create a statewide DNA database to track anyone who applies for a position that involves fingerprinting — including parent school volunteers, teachers, real estate agents and foster parents. The DNA could be shared with virtually any other government agency in the country. After widespread backlash, Livingston reportedly amended the bill to require DNA only from those who care for patients with intellectual disabilities. Regardless of what happens, the march toward ever-broader collection and data-basing of DNA materials by government at all levels is certain to increase. In this sense, Arizona is simply following a fast-growing trend of genetic curiosity. What once was available only to highly trained scientists working in massive research facilities is now available to virtually anyone with $50 to spend. In 2017 alone, some 12 million DNA “test kits” were sold to individuals; mostly in the United States. The key questions asked by privacy experts — but far too infrequently by purchasers of DNA test kits — are: What happens to all that extremely revealing and personal information gleaned from testing one’s saliva? Where is the...
