Wednesday, May 02, 2007

Alberto Gonzales Works to Thwart 2nd Amendment

Gun Control Bill Seeks to Close 'Terror Gap'; By Susan Jones;; May 02, 2007.

( - A Second Amendment group says Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should resign as the nation's highest ranking law enforcement officer, given his "troubling support" for a new gun control bill that seeks to close the "terror gap" in federal law. S. 1237 would give the attorney general, a presidential appointee, the authority to suspend or cancel someone's Second Amendment right, even if that person has never been charged with a crime, the Second Amendment Foundation warned. At the Justice Department's request, the bill was introduced last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), whom SAF describes as one of the most extreme anti-gunners in Congress.

Comment: It is getting tiring everyday reading about the questionable actions coming out Gonzales’ office. Gonzales has done a lot that is often tagged as incompetent because MSM has the agenda to topple this administration, but this story if accurate makes me mad as hell.

Just today the Von Mises Institute published an article on the fallacy of gun control analyzed through the theory of value and the idea of substitutes.

As readers know, in economics, we discuss the idea of substitutes. These are goods that can be used to replace each other such as Coke vs. Pepsi, contact lenses vs. eyeglasses, Macs vs. PCs. When a person has ends, a person can select among different means to achieve those ends. These different means are substitutes.

Cho wanted to kill many people, and he wanted it to be visible and spectacular. To that end, he purchases guns, bullets, chains, and locks (to prevent survivors from escaping). Would gun control have prevented this? Or would Cho — who apparently planned this attack for weeks, based on the fact that he acquired guns, bullets, chains, and locks for weeks — have used substitute goods?

What would Cho's substitutes have been? What others means are there by which he could engage in mass murder? Well, he could have purchased a knife, although that is probably a weak substitute for guns and bullets in achieving his ends. He has to be right next to his victim, and he might be defeated in personal combat by another person. Likewise, he could not kill a lot of people in the same time frame, and it would not be as spectacular.

The disheartening aspect of politics lately is not watching the Democrats act like fools, this is to be expected; but rather Republicans behaving like Democrats. Why is it so hard to keep to our cultural norms, and rights that are affirmed in the U.S. Constitution? Why is that Republicans continued to thwart those very ideals we elected them for? This will be the down fall of the Republican Party as Conservatives and Republicans alike will not stand for it. I know I am growing tired of it and will surely move to the Libertarian Party. Yet, in the end fault lies with President Bush. I stand behind the office in the prosecution of the war, but I can only take so much.

A friend of mine told me shortly after 9/11 the only thing we should fear is loss of our civil liberties; and he was 100 percent correct. While I know much of the threat from Islamist is real, nevertheless, much of this is looking like “fear being manufactured.” I have asked myself, how is that 30 or 40 al-Qaeda camel jockeys can hurt America; and my conclusion is they can’t. So why do we need to restrict our Constitutional rights because of 40 thugs? We shouldn’t! This is manufactured fear and manipulation of our rights by the beltway insiders.

Additional Information:

Why Economists Tend to Oppose Gun Control Laws

S.1237 Title: A bill to increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of firearms or the issuance of firearms and explosives licenses to known or suspected dangerous terrorists.

Sponsor: Sen. Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ]
Co-Sponsor: Sen. Kennedy, Edward M. [MA]

No comments: