|
THE VILLAGE CHOICE - Volume 4, Issue 36
|
Manhattan Libertarian Party
|
Sep 16, 2005 14:05 PDT
|
THE VILLAGE CHOICE
A Weekly Rundown of News, Views and Events Affecting Freedom in NYC
Volume 4, Issue 36 * September 16, 2005
THE VILLAGE CHOICE is brought to you by the Manhattan Libertarian Party.
http://www.manhattanlp.org
In this issue:
* Ferrer’s $10 million run-off with himself!
* Silk calls out Bloomberg’s lying ads!
* MTA lobbies for $3 billion in new state debt!
* Your calendar of pro-freedom events!
* Much more!
==============
* News Bites *
Meaningless Election (Or Is That Redundant?)
Even though Anthony Weiner has abandoned his mayoral bid, the city will
have to hold a meaningless runoff Sept. 27 - costing taxpayers up to $10
million - if Fernando Ferrer doesn't get 40% of primary votes. John
Ravitz, executive director of the Board of Elections, said the law
requires a runoff must be held if the 40% threshhold isn't met - no
matter how much it costs, no matter if the second-place finisher has
dropped out. "A court would have to tell us to stop," he said.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/story/346640p-295852c.html
Expensive and Misleading
Thus far, the mayor’s ad campaigns have been expensive and, according to
the Libertarian candidate for mayor, Audrey Silk, misleading as well.
The founder of CLASH (Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment), she
disputes the mayor’s reports of the effectiveness of the smoking ban and
the increase in tourism measured by hotel occupancy rates. Ms. Silk, who
is a former city police officer, cites the lost revenue caused by closed
bars and other restaurants due to the ban.
http://tinyurl.com/b8on4
Crazy Train
The MTA is kicking off a campaign this week to convince riders to back
the state's $2.9 billion transportation-bond act, saying it is crucial
to the future of two major subway-expansion projects. The Metropolitan
Transportation Authority has printed up about 15,000 large advertisement
cards promoting the bond act that goes before voters in November,
officials said. The ads will be displayed beginning later this week in
agency buses, subways and commuter rail cars.
http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/53371.htm
Tough Times Ahead
Costs rising at a rate twice of inflation, slow growth in revenue, and
forced reliance on more debt means more tough times are likely ahead for
local taxpayers, a state comptroller's analysis shows. State Comptroller
Alan Hevesi's recent study said local governments are depending more
often on sales tax increases to boost revenues. Many municipalities are
borrowing more and approach their tax limit despite continued population
declines.
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--localtaxpayers0911sep11,0,6620509.story
====================
* Rant of the Week *
Mistakes We Make in the Gun Culture, or
How to Be a More Effective Advocate for Freedom
by John Ross
One of the biggest mistakes that freedom advocates make is we often fail
to take the moral high ground on freedom issues, and we let our enemies
define the terms. This is a huge mistake. Never forget: We are in the
right on this issue. We are on the side of the Founding Fathers. They
are on the side of Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung, Pol Pot, Saddam
Hussein, and every other leader of an oppressive, totalitarian regime.
Let me give some common examples I’ve often heard when Second Amendment
advocates debate gun control supporters:
THEY SAY: “We’d be better off if no one had guns.”
WE SAY: “You can never succeed at that, criminals will always get guns.”
(FLAW: the implication here is that if you could succeed at eliminating
all guns, it would be a reasonable plan.)
WE SHOULD SAY: “So, you want to institute a system where the weak and
elderly are at the mercy of the strong, the lone are at the mercy of the
gang. You want to give violent criminals a government guarantee that
citizens are disarmed. Sorry, that’s unacceptable. Better we should
require every citizen to carry a gun.”
THEY SAY: “Those assault rifles have no sporting purpose. You don’t need
a 30-round magazine for hunting deer--they’re only for killing people.”
WE SAY: “I compete in DCM High Power with my AR-15. You need a
large-capacity magazine for their course of fire. My SKS is a fine deer
rifle, and I’ve never done anything to give my government reason not to
trust me blah blah blah.” (FLAW: You have implicitly conceded that it is
OK to ban any gun with no sporting use. And eventually they can replace
your sporting arms with arcade-game substitutes.)
WE SHOULD SAY: “Your claim that ‘they’re only for killing people’ is
imprecise. A gas chamber or electric chair is designed for killing
people, and these devices obviously serve different functions than guns.
To be precise, a high-capacity, military-type rifle or handgun is
designed for conflict. When I need to protect myself and my freedom, I
want the most reliable, most durable, highest-capacity weapon possible.
The only thing hunting and target shooting have to do with freedom is
that they’re good practice.”
THEY SAY: “If we pass this License-To-Carry law, it will be like the
Wild West, with shootouts all the time for fender-benders, in bars, etc.
We need to keep guns off the streets. If doing so saves just one life,
it will be worth it.”
WE SAY: “Studies have shown blah blah blah” (FLAW: You have implied that
if studies showed License-To-Carry laws equaled more heat-of-passion
shootings, Right-To-Carry should be illegal.)
WE SHOULD SAY: “Although no state has experienced what you are
describing, that’s not important. What is important is our freedom. If
saving lives is more important than the Constitution, why don’t we throw
out the Fifth Amendment? We have the technology to administer an annual
truth serum session to the entire population. We’d catch the criminals
and mistaken arrest would be a thing of the past. How does that sound?”
THEY SAY: “I don’t see what the big deal is about a five day waiting
period.”
WE SAY: “It doesn’t do any good, criminals don’t wait five days, it’s a
waste of resources blah blah blah.” (FLAW: You have implied that if
waiting periods did reduce crime, they would be a good idea.)
WE SHOULD SAY: “Shall we apply your logic to the First Amendment along
with the Second? How about a 24-hour cooling-off period with a
government review board before the news is reported? Wouldn’t that
prevent lives from being ruined, e.g. Richard Jewell? And the fact that
this law applies to people who already own a handgun tells me that it’s
not about crime prevention, it’s about harassment. Personally, I want to
live in a free society, not a ‘safe’ one with the government as chief
nanny.”
THEY SAY: “In 1776, citizens had muskets. No one ever envisioned these
deadly AK-47s. I suppose you think we should all have Atomic bombs.”
WE SAY: “Uh, well, uh...”
WE SHOULD SAY: “Actually, the Founders discussed this very issue--it’s
in the Federalist Papers. They wanted the citizens to have the same guns
as were the issue weapons of soldiers in a modern infantry. Soldiers in
1776 each had muskets, but not the large field pieces that fired
exploding shells. In 2005, soldiers are each individually issued M16s,
M249s, etc. but not atomic bombs. Furthermore, according to your logic,
the laws governing free speech and freedom of the press are only valid
for newspapers whose presses are hand-operated and use fixed type. After
all, no one in 1776 foresaw offset printing or electricity, let alone
TV, satellite transmission, FAXes, and the Internet.”
THEY SAY: “We require licenses on cars, but the powerful NRA screams
bloody murder if anyone ever suggests licensing these dangerous
weapons.”
WE SAY: Nothing, usually, and just sit there looking dumb.
WE SHOULD SAY: “You know, driving is a luxury, whereas firearms
ownership is a right secured by the Constitution. But let’s put that
aside for a moment. It’s interesting you compared guns and vehicles.
Here in the U.S. you can at any age go into any state and buy as many
motorcycles, cars, or trucks of any size you want, and you don’t need to
do anything if you don’t use them on public property. No license at all.
If you do want to use them on public property, you can get a license at
age 16. This license is good in all 50 states. No waiting periods, no
background checks, nothing. If we treated guns like cars, a
fourteen-year-old could go into any state and legally buy handguns,
machine guns, cannons, whatever, cash and carry, and shoot them all with
complete legality on private property. And at age 16 he could get a
state license good anywhere in the country to shoot these guns on public
property. Sounds great to me.”
FINAL COMMENT, useful with most all arguments:
YOU SAY: “You know, I’m amazed at how little you care about your
grandchildren. I would have thought they meant more to you than
anything.”
THEY SAY: “Hunh?”
YOU SAY: “Well, passing this proposal won’t have a big immediate effect.
I mean, in the next couple of years, neither George W. Bush nor Hillary
Clinton is going to open up internment camps for Americans like
Roosevelt did sixty-odd years ago. But think of your worst nightmare of
a political leader. Isn’t it possible that a person like that might be
in control here some time in the next 30, 40, or 50 years, with 51% of
the Congress and 51% of the Senate behind him or her? If that does
happen, do you really want your grandchildren to have been stripped of
their final guarantee of freedom? And do you really want them to have
been stripped of it by you?
Let me know if any of these points make you more effective the next time
a "gun control" advocate starts in on his favorite subject.
===================
* Upcoming Events *
Monday, September 19, 6:30 p.m.
Bring Them Home Now Tour
Speakers include Cindy Sheehan
The Cathedral Church of St. John the Divine, Amsterdam Avenue at 112th
Street
http://www.bringthemhomenowtour.org/userdata_display.php?modin=50&uid=27
Monday, September 19, 10:30 p.m.
"The Libertarian Alternative"
A Libertarian political talk show
Time Warner Cable Ch. 34, RCN Cable Ch. 110, MNN Ch. 1
http://www.libertarianalternative.org
================================
* Manhattan Libertarian Party Honor Roll *
Benefactors (have given at least $1,000 to the MLP in 2005)
Ron Moore
Victor Niederhoffer
Founders (have given at least $500 to the MLP in 2005)
Your Name Here?
================================
* News tips, rants and events wanted! *
Help us improve THE VILLAGE CHOICE. Send news bites, rants and event
announcements to village-@manhattanlp.org. Please include a web
link whenever possible. We will occasionally consider broader topics,
but our strong preference is for items pertaining to freedom (or the
lack thereof) in New York City.
THE VILLAGE CHOICE is edited by Jim Lesczynski.
To subscribe to THE VILLAGE CHOICE, simply send a BLANK email to:
villagechoic-@topica.com
Read the current issue or back issues of THE VILLAGE CHOICE on the web
at:
http://www.topica.com/lists/villagechoice/read
If you like THE VILLAGE CHOICE, please FORWARD it to your friends and
encourage them to subscribe.
If you're offended by anything in this newsletter, you're obviously a
humorless socialist of either the right-wing or left-wing variety.
See you next week!
|
|
 |
|
