It turns out that the 2nd Amendment is alive and well in Arizona. NPR reports that in roughly 90 days (plus the time it takes AZ legislators to go home) you’ll be free to pack just about anywhere, joining Alaska and Vermont.

You’ll find many of the entries on this site left-leaning (until someone responsible on the right steps up to contribute). But,… this is one decision that makes sense. While it seems armed rebellion against the government would be doomed to failure (even with no gun control laws, how often will a local ‘militia’ have access to tanks?), and while it’s never a good thing to be ignorant (take the damned gun safety class, will you?), steps like this move placeholder issues off the table and allow our elected officials to get back to concentrating on more important matters. Like financial market maker reform.

If you’re on the right, go ahead, claim this one as a victory if you want. There are worse things that can happen. If you’re on the left and think this is yet another sign of the apocalypse, get over it.

As far as “safety” is concerned, we as a people have far more pressing and effective measures to attend to, like ensuring good parenting, tackling homelessness and hunger, and making sure the BankerBarons are held accountable (which will also go toward tackling homelessness and hunger).

This is rich. HuffPo reports that Mayor Bloomberg is upset with President Obama for, get this, “not enforcing existing gun control laws”. A Republican wants Barack “He’s going to take your guns away, so buy all the ammo you can, while you still can” Obama to be tougher on guns?

What has the world come to?

Ok. It’s one thing to have a legitimate gripe about the contents of legislation. It’s something else entirely to make a mockery of the legislative process by introducing amendments not crafted to solve a legitimate problem but to play political Jenga and see if you can make the other party topple the tower.

The NPR article and the quotes within really speak for themselves. Be sure to follow the CBS link to the more detailed descriptions of the amendments too…

For the record and on the topic of “just how silly is it”, it’s not clear (in the summaries) whether this ridiculous amendment is meant as a permanent ban or only while these individuals are being punished for their crimes. I can just imagine a prison doctor prescribing levitra for an inmate. Sure. And once released from punishment, are we now going to claim that, among other rights deemed forfeit, the right to medical care is one of them?

I’ll give Mr. Coburn this, he can craft a devious turn of phrase.

Bill Maher has it right: the ultimate responsibility for whether children learn properly lies with the parents. Not the day care, not the school, not the (bloated, overpaid) administrative elements of schools, not even the teachers, even though some of them do wonders overcoming the challenges presented by all of the above and more.

No, if you are a parent, and your child isn’t learning, look squarely in the mirror. You don’t have to know everything, but know that the example you set will be reflected in your offspring.

(Via @MessageWorksCom) http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/07/nsfw-hey-america-our-draconian-copyright-law-could-kick-your-draconian-copyright-laws-ass/

While the image of Nero is a solitary one, it seems he could be proxy for the group of legislators involved in this.

Whether it’s a good thing to do or not as a matter of policy, I don’t know. What I might say though is WTF are they thinking? With the US up to its eyeballs in important issues (regardless of on which side of the fence you sit), you think this might be able to wait a little while?

We’ve waited 93ish years so far…

So it seems that the (D)s are finally deciding to lead rather than wilt in the corner under the bluster of blowhards. Argue all you want about whether that leadership is in the right direction or not (and trust me, there will be arguing for years to come), but the majority that was swept to power appears to finally be willing to use it.

Per CNN, the (D)s are preparing to use a parliamentary procedure to ensure healthcare reform finally passes into law. It’s about time.

Of course, there is the requisite hypocritical whining from the other side, but to hell with that. There are millions of people counting on reform and time and again those who would benefit from “free market solutions” prove themselves unable to self-regulate (and with built-in benefits like anti-trust exemptions, which hopefully will be repealed, market competition doesn’t really exist, so there is no way for it to govern itself).

It’s time for the (R)s to wake up and genuinely participate in the debate instead of spouting off every other day (on a good week, every day otherwise) and simply being obstructionist.

What’s the saying? Lead, follow, or get out of the way. (R)s had their chance to lead, and the results are why they no longer have that chance. To this point, they’ve shown no willingness to follow.

That only leaves one choice.

According to CNN, the number of contractors at the Department of Homeland Security outnumber the full-time payroll.

Is this proof that the stimulus creates jobs?

Why aren’t the Republicans happy about this? Technically, it’s smaller government.

Will these contractors be part of the proposed crackdown on worker misclassification(NYT)?

And finally, what the money quote:

“Over the past year, we have been actively converting contractor positions to government positions and will continue to build on these efforts at an even more aggressive pace this year. We are working across the department to identify and make additional conversions as quickly as possible while sustaining the work force required to carry out our critical mission,” Stevens [Clark Stevens, spokesman for Homeland Security] said.

Excuse me, but that strongly implies that the situation was significantly worse before?

The NYT has a startling article concerning the catch-all nature of “sobriety checkpoints” in California… unlicensed? Lose your car for a minimum of 30 days? WTF?!? Do note in the article that the ratio of impounding to actual DUI related arrests is (in most cases listed) more than 10:1, and as high as 60:1. The motivation? Clearly money, as the fines add to millions of dollars, split among municipalities, the state, and the tow operators. What else could it be, considering the action is characterized as defying a federal court ruling prohibiting this? (To be fair, there are separate court rulings that are at odds with each other, but as the article points out:

In that decision [in 2005, Ninth Circuit, a case from Oregon] the court held that law enforcement could not impound a vehicle if the only offense was unlicensed driving. The only exception permitted the police to impound a car was if it posed a threat to public safety, was parked illegally or would soon be vandalized if left in place.

Add to this a somewhat related story from the LA Times where a tussle is breaking out about who is “entitled” to the funds generated by red-light cameras (on top of sabre-rattling concerning expanding the program both in volume and, potentially in purpose).

So much for our police forces being the keepers of “public safety”. From the Federal to the States to the local level, whether (R) or (D), it really seems everyone has lost their minds when it comes to what’s reasonable, what is a tax (and when is it called a tax), and what is the purpose of the power we the people actually give to those in charge. The rights of those who govern are not the end in itself, regardless of what the officials believe. The power is vested in these individuals and these organizations solely to provide the ability to do the peoples’ work.

It’s high time our governmental officials remembered this.

Who is it again that has a fundamental right to privacy, and against unreasonable search and seizure?

In a blow to the “grab everything we can and trust us, if it doesn’t matter, we won’t use it” approach the US Government has applied in the name of fighting global terrorism, the European Parliament effectively told the US to get stuffed (BBC).

Lawmakers in Strasbourg voted 378-196 against the deal, with 31 abstentions.

Why might this be? Are the Europeans giving aid and comfort to our enemies? Maybe the fact that we’ve already been trampling all over the privacy rights of various countries’ citizens for years has something to do with the change in tone.

The US started accessing Swift data after the 11 September 2001 terror attacks on New York and Washington.

But the fact that the US was secretly accessing such data did not come to light until 2006.

I do expect that another deal will be reached and the monitoring of SWIFT will return. Let’s just hope that Americans will wind up getting equal or stronger protections against privacy invasions. After all, aren’t we supposed to be the standard against which we want other countries to measure themselves?