Category: politics

Guns in Restaurants and Bars

Posted by – June 5, 2009

Rustmeister has a clever business card to be dropped off at restaurants in Tennessee sporting the “No Guns” signs. I think this is a great idea. Going one step further: make several designs with or without links to firearms organizations. If a business owner gets ten identical cards he will assume he is being spammed by a small number of people. If he gets ten different cards it might make him realize the amount of business he is missing out on.

I live in a state where you are allowed to carry your concealed firearm into restaurants that serve alcohol and you are allowed to drink. You are prohibited from carrying a firearm into any areas of the restaurant (such as the bar) that are off limits to people under 21. Strangely this doesn’t seem to generate any sort of “wild-west” behavior. The nightclub shootings seem to center around areas of high gang and drug activity (to include “underage” dance clubs.)

Military use of Less-lethal weapons

Posted by – May 2, 2009

Hell-in-a-handbasket has a post up about the military use of less lethal weapons.

Throughout most of history military weapons development has tried to make them more lethal. Changes to the rules of engagement and media coverage have driven the development of this. Historically, if you attacked the soldiers they would kill you. This has the advantage of eliminating the troublemakers and the disadvantage of creating a lot of animosity among the occupied population. I would say that there is a lot more historical precedent for this plan working than there is for a kinder, gentler, less lethal military.

Armed Students

Posted by – April 13, 2009

Snowflakes in hell has some analysis of the 20/20 piece “If I only had a gun”

A couple of quick thoughts:
The police don’t normally get as much training as the show says they do. Typically, basic law enforcement training is 720 class hours. This includes all of the law, driving, procedures, and firearms training. In my state the firearms portion of this is about 40 hours. I don’t know that they teach some zen-like control of heart rate.

Active Shooters don’t tend to be trained firearms instructors. While some active shooters have gone to the range and practiced with their guns, none of the recent ones that I know of were trained shooters.

Armed students wouldn’t always sit in the same seat in the classroom. From the video it appears that the defensive shooter was always seated in the same spot in the classroom.

There is no guarantee that there is only one defensive shooter. In the general population of my state roughly one person in twenty has a concealed weapons permit. I can’t speak to what is a normal class size, but I don’t recall many courses where we only had roughly eighteen or twenty students.

Some people in the classroom might have more training than law enforcement. There are a lot of students and teachers in colleges right now that have recent combat experience. For many of these people the active shooter scenario wouldn’t even be the second gunfight they were ever in.

Real Community Policing

Posted by – March 24, 2009

I was having a discussion the other day with Mostly Genius regarding the controversial statements made by Brian Stratton, the Mayor of Schenectady, New York, and that led to a more general discussion of how to fix a lot of the problems regarding law enforcement in the US today. The solutions proposed by the Mayor are misguided, but in any case, they are intended only as temporary measures until they can terminate the problem officers and hire new ones. They would not make any fundamental changes to how they operate.

Other options might include outsourcing policing to private companies. Private contractors could easily fill the gaps or even replace the entire department. Some gated communities already have what amounts to a private police force, but this only works because the community is actually private property and their “police” are technically security guards. There are numerous reasons why privatizing law enforcement duties would not be a wildly popular option, one of which, as MG pointed out, is that there would be problems with the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

My proposal is hardly original or new but I think it could help address several problems simultaneously. I suggest rejuvenating the office of Sheriff and revive the idea of deputizing responsible, capable citizens under Posse Comitatus. This would be the ultimate form of “community policing”. It would encourage active participation in the community, not only for deterring regular street crime, but also in an emergency like an active shooter situation or in a civil defense (natural disaster, nuclear attack, etc.) context as well. The office of Sheriff is an ancient one that predates modern policing and has many advantages. In the United States, it is an elected office, which adds to its appeal as far as accountability to the community.

I envision it as something like a vetted, trained neighborhood watch program on steroids, supervised and trained by the local Sheriff’s Office. It could organized in a similar fashion to the military reserves:

  • an initial training program
  • a small number of full time cadre
  • a much larger number of part-time, on-call members
  • mandatory monthly duty and continuing education/refresher training
  • a comprehensive annual training seminar
  • the duty (and vested interest) to respond to emergencies

This program could work really well when you consider that in any given community, there are often retired or discharged people with law enforcement, firefighter/paramedic and/or military backgrounds that already have a lot of relevant training and experience. This could create a much larger pool of people to call on in the event that an officer is sick, injured, suspended, terminated, killed in the line of duty, etc. Some of the part timers may have relevant areas of expertise and could be a great help in training academies or seminars and so forth.

In the event of an unusual emergency that is beyond the capabilities of a small number of full time deputies (active shooter, escaped convict, search and rescue, AMBER Alert, etc) a large group of trained volunteers could be quickly mobilized to address the problem. When the problem is resolved, the volunteers go back to their normal lives. This is not only more economical and more responsive to specific problems, but it also builds a sense of camaraderie and reinforces bonds of community.

The overall goals of such a program would be to reduce the burden on law enforcement, make it more accountable and encourage the citizenry to take an active interest in the safety of their own communities instead of abrogating those responsibilities to some faceless agency.

Even Barack Obama recognizes the need for a different approach:

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.”

While I am not sure it would be a “… just as strong, just as well funded” as the military, it could be a significant improvement over the current situation in several ways. I don’t believe that merely throwing money at a problem leads to successful solutions. This idea would not require a lot of money to implement, to the contrary, I think it would make maximum use of already existing resources.

There are indications that Americans would embrace a program like this. People are already doing citizen patrols.

Against his wife’s loud protestations, the young steamfitter joined a dozen other neighborhood men and set up the Rosewood night patrol.

Armed with nothing but flashlights and cellphones, the group followed suspicious cars and even set up an impromptu sting when a neighbor left town and forgot to close his garage door. They called in police to arrest the suspects after a brief chase.

High foreclosure rates, a spike in brazen break-ins, and slashed police budgets are causing turmoil in America’s transitioning urban communities, auguring what Atlanta anticrime activist Larry Ely calls an “urban war.”

Why not organize, train and deputize them? No doubt many people, who are quite comfortable with the idea of an almighty state and a dependent, helpless citizenry squealing for the federal government to “do something!”, will decry this idea as promoting “vigilante” justice. I am sure they will invoke the images of Billy the Kid, the Lincoln County Wars and the Lattimer Massacre. I would counter by pointing out that significant numbers of innocent people are already being killed by allegedly professional SWAT teams. Many people made dire predictions of rampant duels and blood running in the streets if concealed weapons permits became commonplace and that has proven to be completely inaccurate.

Obviously, there could be nepotism, corruption and incompetence in a program like this, but I don’t think that those problems would be any worse than in any currently existing situations, and actually, they would probably be less frequent. Widespread, active citizen involvement in the program makes it more likely that a whistleblower could draw attention to problems within the office. Also, I think that active involvement by local citizens makes it less likely that deputies will kick down the wrong door when serving a warrant, unlike what we see today with SWAT teams frequently raiding the wrong home (and often killing innocent people in the process). After all, many of them could be your friends and neighbors.

(HT: Walls of the City )