THE SECRET HISTORY OF GUNS
In September’s issue of the Atlantic Monthly, Adam Winkler has a fascinating article on the history of guns and gun policy in America.
Here’s the sub head, which will explain, very succinctly what the story is about:
The Ku Klux Klan, Ronald Reagan, and, for most of its history, the NRA all worked to control guns. The Founding Fathers? They required gun ownership—and regulated it. And no group has more fiercely advocated the right to bear loaded weapons in public than the Black Panthers—the true pioneers of the modern pro-gun movement. In the battle over gun rights in America, both sides have distorted history and the law, and there’s no resolution in sight.
Read the rest.
THE NY TIMES OPINES ON THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE LAPD
If for some reason you missed it, The NYT’s Adam Nagourney wrote a good and to the point story about how much the LAPD has changed in the past ten plus years that I meant to include in yesterday’s Must Reads. Here’s how it opens:
It had all the makings of another turbulent moment for the Los Angeles Police Department, an agency once notorious for an “L.A. Confidential” style of heavy-handed policing, hostile relations with minorities and corruption. Two months after triumphantly announcing the arrest of a suspect in a brutal beating at Dodger Stadium, the police admitted that they had arrested the wrong man, and charged two other people with the crime.
But unlike other potentially explosive episodes that have rocked this department over the decades, there were no indignant denials or attacks on critics. Instead, the police chief, Charlie Beck, wrote an op-ed article in The Los Angeles Times explaining what had gone wrong and expressing regret at some of his own public comments. “We can do much better,” Chief Beck wrote.
The moment reflected what has been a revolution for the police department that was once the model for Sgt. Joe Friday and “Dragnet.” Twenty years after the police beating of Rodney King was caught on videotape, and 10 years after the Justice Department imposed a consent decree to battle pervasive corruption in the Rampart Division, this has become a department transformed, offering itself up — in a way that not so many years ago would have been unthinkable — as a model police agency for the United States.
“It’s been an amazing transformation,” said John W. Mack, a former head of the Urban League who is the president of the Police Commission, the civilian board that oversees the force. “The L.A.P.D. of today is very, very different than 10, 12 years ago, when I was one of the people who was constantly battling them.”
And so on. Read it, I tell you!
NOTE TO SELF: DON’T TAKE MOTOR OIL INTO CANADA WITHOUT ALSO BRINGING A DEFENSE LAWYER
Another fun story brought to you by the drug war. Here’s how the article for the Minn. Star Tribune about the wrongly-jailed non-drug smuggling Minnesotan grandma opens:
In April, Janet Goodin of Warroad, Minn., was crossing into Canada for an evening of bingo with her daughters when an officer with the Canadian Border Service conducted a routine search of her van. The officer found an old bottle of motor oil, did a field test and told her that it contained heroin.
“I can’t even describe the feeling of amazement,” Goodin, 66, said in an interview. “I said, ‘That’s not possible, it’s leftover oil.'”
The bottle was re-tested, and agents said it again revealed the presence of heroin. Goodin was arrested, handcuffed and taken to jail, where she was strip-searched. The motor oil was sent to a Canadian federal laboratory, which eventually determined there was no heroin in it. After 12 days behind bars, Goodin was released.
Goodin’s case has been seized upon by critics who question the reliability of field drug-test kits, which are used widely by law enforcement….
Y’think?
SEE HERE’S THE DEAL: IF YOU KILL PEOPLE WITH TYPEWRITERS YOU WRECK IT FOR THE REST OF US
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals just upheld the Nevada Department of Corrections’ policy prohibiting inmates’ personal possession of typewriters. And if you read the ruling, you’ll see the 9th Circuit’s point. (Thanks to Howard Bashman at How Appealing for flagging this ruling.)
LA TEACHERS TEST A BRAND NEW PILOT FOR TEACHER EVALUATION
Jason Song at the LA Times has the story about the pilot program and it sounds encouraging. Here’s how the story opens:
This is what one of Los Angeles Unified’s most ambitious reform efforts looks like: about 30 people gathered in a Gardena school auditorium, watching a video of a teacher trying to get her young students to understand a John Updike poem.
The viewers furiously type their observations into laptop computers and discuss their impressions of the lesson the next day. They ask open-ended questions — “What are some possible explanations for the lack of understanding of the vocabulary?” — all aimed at helping the teacher improve.
These training sessions are the school district’s first concrete steps toward replacing its age-old teacher evaluation system, which is widely regarded as a failure. The new version is based on more detailed observations, student and parent feedback, and students’ standardized test scores.
According to Song, LAUSD Supt. John Deasy hopes to have some kind of new evaluation in place by the 2012-13 school year. May it be so.
AND BECAUSE IT’S CHARLES BUKOWSKI’S BIRTH DATE TODAY…
The Atlantic piece is bizarre, but typical of the Atlantic.
It has interesting tidbits, but they don’t make an accurate whole. For most people in the world, race isn’t the whole story, and changes in opinions over periods of decades are hardly remarkable.
For example “They [NRA] also shared a profound mistrust of law enforcement.” is simply not even close to true. The NRA has a mistrust of BATF, which is one small but remarkably foolish part of law enforcement. NRA and law enforcement have long worked together and still do.
As for the Supreme Court decisions, the important fact is that the right to keep and bear arms has, for the very first time, been recognized as an individual right – on the same footing as privacy (hear that, abortion extremists?) and free speech. That Scalia recognized limitations is hardly a surprise – limitations are also recognized on free speech.
Here’s another for Bukowski – via Tom Russell…with a nod to Warren Zevon. “WitnessLA” indeed!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiEHzCs2W3o
Should we trust the people who brought us Fast and Furious?
Should we trust the people touching your privates at airports?
Should we trust the people who killed 76 including 20 children at Waco using Tanks and bombs?
Will our government order assassination of Americans?
Will our government force us buy products against our will?
Will our government jail people without trial?
Will our government monitor our communications?
Will our government ask citizens to spy on each other?
Will our government take away guns?
— THE BILL OF RIGHTS —
Protecting peoples rights – FROM THE GOVERNMENT
The explicit purpose of the Bill of Rights, is to protect the rights of the people from government tyranny.
The childish belief that it is impossible for our government to become tyrannical is to ignore the history of the world and to ignore what our founding fathers had fought for.
Guns rights are not for hunting of self protection. They are to keep the government in check.
“Guns rights are not for hunting of self protection. They are to keep the government in check.”
David Koresh, Randy Weaver and Huey Newton proved the genius and effectiveness of this state of mind.
“Will our government force us to buy products against our will?”
Simple answers to simple questions: They have at at least since 1782 when Congress passed a firearms mandate: “[E]ach and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia…[and] every citizen so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch with a box therein to contain not less than twenty-four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball: or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear, so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise, or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.”
This approach didn’t work out very well and was abandoned, but it had nothing to do with any suggestion that the government gun-buying mandate was unconstitutional. Actually, four years before the gun-buying-requirement, merchant seamen were mandated by law to buy health insurance. Both Thomas Jefferson and John Adams signed off on that one.
Reg, which enumerated constitutional power allowed Congress to do that? Oh, yeah, their war powers (you know, where they can not only make you buy a gun, but draft your ass and send it out to fight a war).
Now, which enumerated constitutional power allows Congress to force you to buy health insurance. Right. none.
Personally, I believe in gun rights for self defense, having fired a weapon in that situation once, with salutory effect. In the modern age, they aren’t that useful at keeping the government in check.
In your list of evils, you made a few mistakes. Koresh only fired in self defense, after being attacked, for no valid reason, by the very ATF that is the one law enforcement organization disliked by the NRA. You left out Marxist Lee Harvey Oswald, and Palestinian terrorist Sirhan Sirhan.
I don’t see anything in the “enumerated war powers” about forcing every private citizen (male) to buy a gun. Maybe Antonin Scalia can find it between the lines for you. Who knows? You’re engaged in your usual special pleading idiocy. Making shit up that serves your gun fetish. If you believe that “war powers” can be interpreted as a federal right to force people to buy and possess a gun at all times, you’ve got no credible case against universal health insurance. You don’t even rate “moron” IMHO.
“which enumerated constitutional power allows Congress to force you to buy health insurance”
You’ll have to check that with John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. My guess is that they had a better grasp of the Constitution when they both supported legislation that mandated the purchase of health insurance by merchant sailors than you do.
If you want to defend the David Koresh cult, that’s your call.
Have you called for the hanging of any journalists recently?
Reg, you are up to your usual despicable standards, with that last line.
Chill guys. Please don’t make it personal.
On another topic, Bruce, I LOVE the Tom Russell video!! Thanks so much for that!
Sorry, Celeste, but you know that reg always makes it personal. Sometimes I just can’t resist responding in kind.