Pennsylvania – Page 38 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Transparency, Government, and Gun Rights

Thanks to David Post for pointing to these excellent thoughts on the Wikileaks scandal, because I think it has a useful concept that also speaks to some recent happenings in the gun rights movement here in Pennsylvania:

On the other hand, human systems canâ€™t stand pure transparency. For negotiation to work, peopleâ€™s stated positions have to change, but change is seen, almost universally, as weakness. People trying to come to consensus must be able to privately voice opinions they would publicly abjure, and may later abandon. Wikileaks plainly damages those abilities. (If Aaron Badyâ€™s analysis is correct, it is the damage and not the oversight that Wikileaks is designed to create.*)

And so we have a tension between two requirements for democratic statecraft, one that canâ€™t be resolved, but can be brought to an acceptable equilibrium. Indeed, like the virtues of equality vs. liberty, or popular will vs. fundamental rights, it has to be brought into such an equilibrium for democratic statecraft not to be wrecked either by too much secrecy or too much transparency.

So how does this relate to the gun rights movement? Because it explains why it’s not really possible for NRA, or any other group that may be in a position to know legislatively sensitive information, to share that information with grassroots activists who aren’t made privy to it. I think the root of much of the tension is that negotiation and dealings happen behind closed doors, and there’s not enough trust that the people who are in the smoked filled room will do the right things.

There’s always the argument that perhaps there ought to be more transparency in the process, and I think there is merit to the argument that NRA hasn’t been transparent enough in what it’s doing when lobbying legislatures. But it can’t be perfectly transparent. There will be some point where John Hohenwarter goes into the smoke filled room, and you’re stuck having to live with whatever comes out of that process. There might be times when it’s someone else headed into the smoked filled room to negotiate on our behalf. But it’s going to be someone, and can’t be everyone. And that someone is going to keep his cards very close to his chest, if he or she is a smart negotiator.

That’s one reason I’m not sure what cooperation between pro-gun groups in Pennsylvania is really going to look like. Not all groups are going to be on equal footing in the minds of the elected officials who control access to the smoke filled room, which means not all groups will have the same information. Not all of that information will be of a nature that can be shared broadly without risking compromising the overall legislative agenda. If the first requirement for harmony is for everyone to be on equal footing, information and access wise, that’s a non-starter out of the gate.

So I suppose it comes down to who you trust? Do I trust John Hohenwarter of NRA? Do I trust Kim Stolfer of FOAC? Do I trust Dan Pehrson of PAFOA? I would trust any of them to do the best they could for gun owners behind closed doors, because I think they all sincerely care about the issue, and have the best interests of our movement at heart. That’s really all I can ask for. I don’t expect a poker player to win every hand at poker, and I don’t expect a lobbyist to win every vote in a legislative battle either. Obviously, someone visibly incompetent at playing would be another matter, but I don’t think we have anyone who fits that bill in Pennsylvania.

EZ-Pass Unintended Consequences

So we were told that the EZ-Pass system would make things more efficient, and with fewer toll workers to pay, more of your toll dollars could go to road maintenance. But one problem with EZ pass is that it hides costs from the consumer:

When Tolls Increase …

… on the Pennsylvania Turnpike in January, drivers aren’t going to see the new fares on their tickets, our friends at the Patriot-News report this morning.

The argument for snookering drivers?

Tolls are increasing 3 percent a year, so PTC officials say they’ll save money by not printing up a new batch of tickets every year. Besides that, about two-thirds of Turnpike drivers use EZ-Pass, and thus, probably neither know nor care how much they’re paying anyway.

When I paid with the ticket on the PA Turnpike every day, I knew exactly what the tolls were for pretty much all the exists out to Reading, because I forked over the change with ticket every day. Now with Z-Pass, I couldn’t honestly tell you what the tolls are on the PA Turnpike. This is going to give transportation authorities a lot more leeway in boosting tolls, since a majority of people will hardly notice. Sure, you can look, but it takes effort to find out.

This isn’t very libertarian of me, but I tend to disfavor tolls as a means for paying for roads. It’s not practical to toll every road, and for those of us who have to take toll roads, we pay for our road with the toll, while our tax dollars pay for the roads everyone else gets to drive on. To me roads are a public resource, and funding them with tax dollars is my preferred way to pay for them.

“Is Rendell French?”

So asks Robin Quillon of the Johnstown Tribune-Democrat. I guess not all papers in Pennsylvania are enthusiastic about the Governor’s veto. That was in response to Rendell’s quote:

â€œWhat this would do is expand the Castle Doctrine to outside the home, to a city street, for example, and eliminate the principle of law that weâ€™ve had since English common law: The duty to retreat.â€

As I mentioned in a previous study of English Common Law, the duty to retreat only applied to individuals who had become involved in an affray. Under Common Law, one could use deadly force to stop a felony without having to retreat, so someone trying to rob you, or who had broken into your home by night could be responded to with lethal force without any further qualifications. If Ed Rendell would like to go back to this, I’d have little issue. Many states still use this more traditional standard, such as Virginia.

Shot Across the Bow

The Philadelphia Inquirer is already trying to goad Corbett into giving up his support of self-defense and gun rights right out of the gate:

If the General Assembly returns next year with a similar proposal to expand the so-called “castle doctrine,” the new governor will be faced with endorsing what Rendell calls a “shoot first, ask questions later” mentality that fails to “protect the sanctity of human life.”

The misguided legislation that Rendell rightly vetoed over the weekend would expand a homeowner’s right from being able to blast away at an intruder to shooting someone if threatened outside a home or vehicle.

Self-defense is one topic where elite opinion is drastically different than what ordinary people think about the subject. That’s one reason this vote was so lopsided. The Inquirer is just going to further distance themselves from their dwindling reader base with positions like this.

Not Something You See Everyday

Lancaster County is taking a look at park rules, and getting rid of some. Among them are the rules banning firearms in county parks:

Currently, the regulations manual outlaws the carrying of firearms in county parks by anyone except law-enforcement officers.

“Obviously, that is not consistent with the Uniform Firearms Act,” Weiss said.

The Act authorizes people to openly carry handguns in Pennsylvania, or to carry them with a concealed weapons permit, anywhere in the state except for a few places, such as schools and court facilities.

Technically speaking, the act doesn’t authorize open carry. There’s just no law against the practice, and the UFA preempts the counties from making one. But that’s nitpicking. Lancaster County is doing the right thing here, and for that they should be commended. Most of the time, government loves to just add laws. You hardly ever see them looking existing laws over to see if they still make sense. We need more of this.

Displeasure Among the Gun Control Ranks

Seems some didn’t particularly care for Ed Rendell’s departing surrender on the issue of gun control. Chief among them Joe Grace, who Kinney reports as “pained by the glum talk about guns.”Â Joe’s pain is my content. It doesn’t look like Representative Tim Briggs thinks to highly of it either:

Montgomery County progressive Democrat Tim Briggs became a loyal CeaseFirePA soldier in his first term, but frets that building a broad coalition might be for naught if Corbett and Co. “try to push an extreme social agenda.” Indeed, Corbett has said he would happily sign the “castle doctrine” expansion.

Broad coalition? 159 Pennsylvania representatives voted for Castle Doctrine the first time, only 38 voted against it. 38 out of 202 seats is a broad coalition? I’d say you were tilting at windmills out of the gate, Rep. Briggs. Second time around he lost two votes from his “broad coalition.”

Ed Rendell sees the writing on the wall because he can count. I have no doubt Rendell did what he thought he could to advance the issue, particularly pushing Democrats who would run on gun control vocally. But that ultimately failed. Having failed, Ed is giving up, and riding off into the sunset, leaving suckers who bought his line on the issue, like Tim Briggs, in the dust.

Onorato’s Political Future

Capitol Ideas is reporting on what’s-his-name’s political future. Sounds like he’s mulling a run for Auditor General. I don’t think Onorato is an impressive fundraiser or campaigner. While this was a Republican year, I think Onorato would have struggled even if this election was in 2008. If I were advising him, I’d suggest County Executive was as high as he is meant to go in this game, and that a return to private law practice is probably the best path forward for him. My own political views aside, I’m not sure he has the talent to run for state wide office, absent being able to ride in on a much stronger candidate’s coattails. You can do that as Auditor General, but who is that much stronger candidate going to be?

Chastising Rendell for Vetoing Castle Doctrine …

… from Investors Business Daily? I’ll take any allies I can get.

Rendell’s Departing Words to Us

Despite having screwed us on Castle Doctrine, Rendell thinks his gun control efforts are a failure:

“It’s a lost cause in Pennsylvania,” Rendell said in a conference call with reporters. He accused the General Assembly of kowtowing to the National Rifle Association.

“The legislature proved consistently in my eight years that they are scared to death to buck the NRA,” he said. “It’s incredibly frustrating, the hold the NRA has over the legislature. It’s embarrassing.”

Yep. Let’s keep it that way.

Some Parts of Pennsylvania are Great

I love this roundup of York-area lawmakers speaking out on the Castle Doctrine veto.

“I was very disappointed,” said [Rep. Seth] Grove, R-Dover Township.
“I’m certainly disappointed, but we’re going to do it again,” [Rep. Scott] Perry said.
“Hopefully, we’ll revisit both of those next term,” [Rep. Eugene] DePasquale said.

It must be nice to live in such an area where all three are ready to pass more pro-rights legislation.