by Bob Barr | Dec 15, 2018 | Uncategorized |
The Daily Caller As much as the media obsesses over President Trump, and as much as he exhibits to the media the behavior they love to hate, it is amazing how little the media remembers. The latest flap over immigration policy, and especially the televised Oval Office meeting just last Tuesday with soon-to-be Speaker Nancy Pelosi and still-Senate Minority Leader Schumer, has the left and its media darlings all in a tizzy. The fact is, the episode and its aftermath are vintage Trump — pure stagecraft. And anything the president said at that meeting had a shelf life of precisely one news cycle. The White House meeting was orchestrated by Trump not to announce new substantive policy or signal a major change in policy. Trump has been railing about building the wall since long before he was elected in 2016. His base continues to support him on that issue, and he knows this. He also must know the polling on the question of whether to build a wall has remained relatively constant over the course of his presidency and does not spike or crater depending on what he says. It’s all about negotiating. Think Bill Clinton. Even more important than Trump’s oft-demonstrated ability to control the news cycle, is his notorious habit of maneuvering his adversaries into chasing critters down rabbit holes. This is simply a ploy to then strengthen his own bargaining position by appearing to back away from one of those red herrings. The bottom line for this president is that virtually everything is negotiable, including “the wall.” Well, not the wall itself, but any aspect of it,...
by Bob Barr | Dec 12, 2018 | Uncategorized |
Townhall.com Last week I wrote about a spate of bills in the New York State Senate, sponsored by a liberal Senator from Brooklyn, intending to squash gun ownership across the entire Empire State. On the other side of the Hudson, New Jersey politicians are upping the ante, with a measure signed into law last month that criminalizes speech. Not just any speech, mind you; but speech relating to the Second Amendment. You can still rant in New Jersey about Donald Trump, or call conservatives any manner of vile names. But, if you try to communicate online about certain firearms matters, Bingo! The “Garden State” authorities will come after you for daring to provide instructions for readers to learn how to print plans for a 3-D firearm. This is not about criminalizing the possession of such an instrument (New Jersey competes with its older brother in making it extremely difficult to legally own a firearm at all). The new law makes it illegal to even communicate how to print one. Insidiously, New Jersey political leaders, whose fear of the right to keep and bear arms knows no bounds, have constructed this latest Second Amendment speech infringement in such a way that it effectively makes it unlawful for anyone to place such plans online anywhere, not just in their state. What prompted this draconian measure? One small company — Defense Distributed, a non-profit defense firm based not in Newark or Jersey City, but in Austin, Texas. Defense Distributed had the audacity to provide instructions for individuals who want to try their hand at printing a 3-D firearm to do so. There is, of course, more to...
by Bob Barr | Dec 5, 2018 | Uncategorized |
Townhall.com Not content with enacting some of the most stringent anti-gun laws in the country and abusing its regulatory power by browbeating insurance carriers to not do business with the NRA, New York has launched a new broadside against the Second Amendment. In a move that should set off alarm bells with privacy advocates everywhere and with anyone who uses or has used social media, legislation has been introduced in the state legislature that would force residents seeking to either purchase a rifle or a shotgun from a lawful dealer, or seeking to obtain or renew a pistol permit, to surrender to law enforcement access to their social media history along with their use of internet search engines for the previous three years. This monstrosity of a bill undermines not only an individual’s Second Amendment rights, but those guaranteed by the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments as well. State Sen. Kevin Parker, a Democrat from Brooklyn, is the proud sponsor of the legislation. And, knowing that a majority of his colleagues in the legislature have in the past demonstrated as little regard for constitutional rights as Parker when it comes to the Second Amendment, his bill could very well find its way to Gov. Cuomo’s desk, where it would be gleefully signed into law. In Parker’s view of things, invading a person’s privacy as his bill would do, apparently is a reasonable response to the tragic shooting at a Pittsburgh Synagogue in October. The reality is that Parker’s idea is nowhere close to reasonable or constitutional. What, exactly, would New York’s Finest be looking for, in such canvassing...
by Bob Barr | Dec 4, 2018 | Uncategorized |
The Daily Caller In one of the more blatant examples of a federal agency abusing its power and usurping the power of Congress to legislate, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), reportedly is ready to declare that “bump stocks” are “machine guns” and therefore unlawful to be possessed, except under strict licensing. Gun control activists certainly will cheer this action once it is finalized (which reportedly will be later this month), and the average citizen, if asked, likely would agree that bump stocks should be illegal following the well-publicized use of such a device by mass murder Stephen Paddock in Las Vegas in October 2017. The manner by which the administration is going about making the devices unlawful, however, should be of great concern to all Americans who care not only about sound federal firearms policies but, even more important, the rule of law. Normally, and according to Article I of our Constitution, if the government deems certain activity — such as possessing a machine gun — to be of sufficient danger and therefore should be illegal, the Congress (not an Executive Branch agency) passes legislation to that effect. If signed by the president, that activity becomes unlawful. This is what occurred in the immediate aftermath of Prohibition when the National Firearms Act of 1934 went into effect. That Act defined what a “machine gun” is (essentially a firearm capable of firing more than one round with a single pull of the trigger) and declared that only licensed persons strictly regulated would be permitted to possess such a firearm. The Gun Control Act of 1968 added further restrictions in this area....
by Bob Barr | Nov 28, 2018 | Uncategorized |
Townhall.com In many ways, President Donald Trump’s border fight is a battle on two fronts; one at the border with Mexico, and the other in the federal court system. Reports of violence against U.S. Border Agents at our southern border with Mexico should remind us that securing the border is a fundamental responsibility of the President. To at least some left-leaning federal judges, however, that responsibility is so unimportant that they have attempted to tie both of Trump’s arms behind his back as he tries to gain control of the chaos down south. It is fast reaching the point at which a fundamental decision must be made; one with profound consequences: who runs our country, the president or the unelected judges? The spark igniting this constitutional fire may very well be upon us if President Trump closes the border with Mexico, in the face of an imminent threat of a horde of non-citizens pressing to cross into our country unlawfully, and keeps it shut down until Mexico deals with the problem on its side of the border. If a federal judge is then found who is more sympathetic to improving the quality of life for citizens of other countries than to reaffirming the authority of an American president to protect our constitutional Republic, and enjoins Trump from thus acting, we will have to confront the question that worried our Founding Fathers – are there any limits to what judges can decree? As constitutional conservatives, our default position is, and should be, that we are a “nation of laws not of men”; a sentiment dating back to 1803’s Marbury v. Madison opinion by Chief Justice...
by Bob Barr | Nov 21, 2018 | Uncategorized |
The Washington Times By Bob Barr and Ronnie Shows For decades, starting in the mid-1960s, the federal government has fought to reduce the number of Americans who smoke cigarettes and use other forms of tobacco. This was a good thing, since there are a number of ill-health effects clearly attributable to using tobacco products. In recent years, a product has entered the marketplace that provides a cheaper alternative to smoking tobacco that does not cause the bad health side effects as smoking: Vaping. A vaping device, which can be as small as a computer thumb drive, has a tiny, battery-driven heating element and a small container of liquid containing flavored nicotine. When the user draws on the device, the heating element heats a small amount of the liquid, which becomes a vapor (technically, an “aerosol”). The vapor or aerosol thus produced appears like smoke, but it isn’t; and current research has found that it contains none of the carcinogens that make smoking tobacco so harmful. There are between 9 million and 10 million regular adult “vapers” in the United States alone, many of whom are former tobacco smokers. While vaping is not “healthy,” it is much healthier than smoking and millions of Americans who were or would be tobacco smokers are not, thanks to the advent of vaping. Of course, as with any burgeoning industry, companies have sprung up that develop, produce and market the components of vaping devices. One of these is Juul, a company with roots in the start of the vaping industry in 2007, but which boomed in 2017 with the introduction of the sleek, Juul device. So, here...
