Politics – Page 422 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Butt Out

I am not nor ever have I been a smoker, nor do I particularly enjoy coming home reeking of cigarette smoke after a night on the town, but I’ve never presumed that I should force my preferences on bar and restaurant owners because I don’t like it.Â I avoid heavily smoky establishments, as a general rule, and that worked for me just fine.Â That’s why I’m dissapointed that Philadelphia’s smoking ban went into effect yesterday.Â There is one saving grace for bar owners in the city:

Private clubs and restaurants whose food sales are less than 20 percent may apply for an exemption.

But I’ve never bought the studies that second hand smoke is really that dangerous, or that public health is anything other than a cover for enforcing the majority’s preference onto business owners.Â Smoking bans are passing because most people find cigarette smoke objectionable, and for me, that’s never been a good enough reason to allow the government to interfere with a proprietor’s right to control what goes on in his or her establishment.

I know many will argue that there’s a serious public health concern here, but I just don’t trust statistical epidemiological studies that have reason to be politically motivated.Â I think showing a little tolerance, and accepting a little risk, is worth it for us to continue living in a society where people can still exercise property rights, and enjoy habits that the majority finds objectionable.

An Open Letter to Congressman Fattah

Congressman Fattah,

I read today in the Philadelphia Daily News about your crime plan for Philadelphia which is summarized as:

More cops investigating illegal guns, better rewards for tips about dirty firearms, and extra surveillance cameras to catch gun-toting bad guys.

Those are the basics of mayoral candidate Chaka Fattah’s plan to fight illegal guns, which he will announce today at Mercy Hospital of Philadelphia.

Philadelphia does not have a gun problem, it has a criminal problem. Until you shift the focus away from the guns and toward violent individuals that are committing crimes, you’re going to keep having this problem. I am happy to see that you at least admit this:

The majority of guns used to kill people in Philadelphia and around the nation are illegal,” said Fattah, a Democratic congressman.

Which is true. So why does your Congressional record and public statements contain so much support for restricting lawful gun ownership? Also, how does “targeted gun officers” that “clear firearms off the streets.” help anything? I am in favor of adding more officers to the city streets, but they need to go after the criminals, not the guns. The guns are a symptom, not the cause of your city’s social ills. Even if all the guns could be cleared off the street, if you left the criminals, they will just get more guns and commit more crimes, leaving the city right back where it started.

I’d also like you to explain how “a network of 1,000 police video surveillance cameras throughout the city” would help catch “gun-toting bad guys”. I’m fairly certain that gun toting bad guys aren’t openly carrying firearms around the city, such that they would be caught on camera. I also hope you are aware that there are approximately 32,000 citizens in your city who are lawfully licensed to carry firearms for self-protection, and approximately similar numbers in all the suburban counties. I hope your “gun officers” will treat these people with the respect and courtesy that they deserve.

We all want to see Philadelphia become a safer place, but I’m disappointed you’re perpetuating the myth that guns cause crime. We all know that’s not true. I would encourage you to focus on the criminals, and on finding productive ways to bring jobs and people back into the city. Focusing your energy on inanimate objects is only distracting people from the real problem, and doing a disservice to the city you want to be mayor of.

Sincerely,

Sebastian

Divorce In Virginia

Bitter has an interesting post up about some people who want to change divorce laws in Virginia that I think is worth a read:

So since a mandatory separation giving them a year to think about it already required, what is Clayton suggesting they change? It would appear from the article that the group really is trying to keep people from leaving a marriage if the other refuses to approve it. Itâ€™s not an ideal situation at all, but I think itâ€™s a bad path to go down if we refuse to let them out of it. If they really are just trying to add punishment like making custody rules tighter or something for the person who files, I really donâ€™t see how that does anything to improve a family.

I think Bitter is right here. If there’s a problem with people walking away from marriages too easily, the solution isn’t to pass more laws, and get the government to intrude more into people’s private lives. I don’t have too many issues with the government recognizing marriages, and dealing with the legal mess when they dissolve as a byproduct of that recognition, but I do have a problem, a big problem, with using it as a hook to meddle in people’s personal affairs. If the government ran my life as well as it runs itself, my life would be a mess. I agree that divorce is a problem, and people resort to it too quickly, but that’s not an issue for government to be concerned about.

It’s hard for me to understand how converatives like Clayton understand that the government is bad at running the economy, but somehow think it can be good at managing people’s lives. I don’t want people’s personal affairs becoming a political issue, no matter how messed up they are. People suck, and conservatives need to get over it, and stop looking for the government solutions to that basic fact.

Goodbye to My Former Congress Critter

I never really completely liked Curt Weldon (which is probably true of any politician), when I lived in PA’s 7th congressional District, but I’m not really happy to see him replaced by an asshole like Joe Sestak. Gil Spencer has an editorial in the Delaware County Times that I think is worth a read if you follow Southeastern Pennsylvania politics:

When Weldon said during the campaign that he entered Congress poor 20 years ago and would leave congress poor, he wasnâ€™t kidding. Exaggerating maybe, but only slightly. Compared to his peers, Weldon is poor. And not only poor, but under federal investigation for public corruption because he is suspected of helping friends and family make money off his political position.

The last spotting of Weldon I heard about was around Christmas time. He was at the Granite Run Mall, in jeans and a ball cap, pushing a stroller with one of his grandkids in it. His lawyer, Bill Canfield, says heâ€™ll probably go back to teaching. No doubt he is hoping it will not be at some federal prison camp.
Whatâ€™s true is that compared to many of his peers, Weldon is a piker when it comes to turning his office into a moneymaking machine.

Pennsylvania Democrat Jack Murtha ranks 335th among his fellow congressmen for personal net worth, but heâ€™s helped his brother, Kit, and others make tens of millions. William Jefferson (D-La.) is said to be worth between $842,000 and $1.7 million depending, I guess, on whether all his appliances have been searched.

I don’t have a soft spot for corrupt politicians, and if Weldon is really guilty of what he’s been accused of, then I’m glad to have him out, but I’m not happy to have him replaced by Sestak, who I think will be a disaster for Delaware County. Weldon’s seat was targeted by the Democrats at the national level, and Weldon had a tough time keeping up with Sestak’s money machine. It was a bloodbath for Republicans in the Philadelphia suburbs. The surprising thing in all this is that the man no one expected to keep his seat, Jim Gerlach, managed to eek out a victory over Lois Murphy. The defeat of my Congress Critter, Mike Fitzpatrick, by Pat Murphy, hadn’t garnered as much media attention since Fitzpatrick had only served a single term in Congress, and was an easy target.

At some point the Republicans are going to have to deal with a basic fact if they want these seats back in 2008; that George W. Bush’s version of conservatism is wildly unpopular in the traditionally heavily Republican Philadelphia suburbs. Under Bush’s reign, the suburbs are becoming more blue, and to reverse that trend, the Republicans will need a candidate who can appeal to the middle. Philadelphia Republicans are economic conservatives, and while they might go for some of the milder social conservatism of the party, Bush’s record of freewheeling spending, combined with embracing some of the more radical social conservative elements of the party have alienated him from voters in this area. The culture of corruption the Republicans fostered in Congress didn’t help either, but that can probably be said of voters anywhere.

Israel Planning Attack on Iran?

From around the blogosphere, we’re hearing reports again that Israel plans to strike Iran first with nuclear weapons. I have my doubts that Israel would do this, and I suspect this was leaked as a way to bolster the diplomatic effort underway to get Iran to give up it’s nuclear program. If you view it along side plans to move a second carrier battle group into the Persian Gulf, I think that’s the most likely scenario. Diplomacy without a real threat of military force is just a bunch of talk, and without it, the Iranians have no reason to concede anything to us.

But there are numerous tactical problems involved with an attack by Israel on Iran. Israel lacks the in-flight refueling capability to project power that far away from the Levant, and no Arab country would allow Israel basing rights to use for the attack. So I would be very surprised if these leaked plans are for real.

More PA Preemption Issues

From Gun Law News, we hear that the NRA warns us that the York, PA City Council is considering banning concealed carry on municipal property (sorry about the registration requirement, but here’s the gist):

“It’s important to pass this ordinance,” said Police Chief Don Klug. “First of all, there’s the issue of the safety of citizens using local facilities. And there’s the issue of the safety of city employees, who are sometimes not confronted by people who are not pleased with certain situations. There can be confrontations. It seems clear that the city facilities are not a place for firearms. They’re excluded from schools, and the park system is a natural extension of that. I encourage you to pass the resolution.”

Hey, Chief Klug, if you can give me any evidence that a PA LTC holders has ever been involved in the type of incident you mention, I’ll shut the hell up, but I suspect that you don’t have any. I think it’s likely that you just don’t like the idea of anyone having guns but you and your fellow police officers. I expect nonsense like this to come out of Philadelphia, but I thought officials in York were smarter than that. Apparently not. But before you get too excited about this pet project you have going here, might I point you to the PA Consolidate Statutes Â§ 6120 (a):

General rule.–No county, municipality or township may in any manner regulate the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms, ammunition or ammunition components when carried or transported for purposes not prohibited by the laws of this Commonwealth.

So go ahead and pass your little ordnance, and if I ever have an occasion to visit municipal property in York, I’ll gladly ignore it, since the ordinance is void according to the law.