Reaction to Brexit

A number of people have asked me about the Brexit vote, so I thought that I would share my reaction that I think that the decision to leave was a good idea. The economics of this is that smaller governments will generally imply more freedom, less regulation and lower taxes. Competition between governments will be greater if there are a lot of small governments. The main reason for having a large government in the past was to provide military protection against the USSR. You can have smaller governments and free trade. We have trade agreements with Canada and Mexico without having a common government.

An interesting question to me is why the stock prices in the UK fell less than the stocks in the rest of Europe or in places such as Japan.


This past week Hillary Clinton was caught jeopardizing security for the entire State Department so that she could avoid FOIA laws

So what about the news this week that Hillary hadn't turned over an important email where she order the entire State Department to turn off their email security measures so that she could continue using her private server? The email that she failed to turn over also shows that she lied about the reasons for doing this -- she was willing to turn off the security measures for all State Dept emails so that people wouldn't have FOIA access to her emails.



Gun licensing and corruption

From Fox News:
. . . Two high-ranking New York Police Department officials and a police sergeant who oversaw gun license applications were among the latest arrests in a case that has cast a cloud over the nation's largest municipal police force. 
A businessman who contributed heavily to the election campaign of Mayor Bill de Blasio already has pleaded guilty in the case. Earlier this month, federal prosecutors charged the head of the correction officers' union with taking kickbacks. De Blasio, a Democrat, hasn't been implicated in any wrongdoing. 
A criminal complaint accompanying the latest charges described how Brooklyn businessman Jeremy Reichberg exploited his connections within the police department to arrange arrests, speed up gun application processing, make tickets disappear, obtain police escorts for him and his friends, get assistance from uniformed personnel to resolve personal disputes and boost security at religious sites and events. . . .



On Canada's The Rebel: On the push for new background check rules after Orlando Massacre

Lott on the Rebel
Dr. John Lott talked to Ezra Levant about the new gun control background checks being pushed after the Orlando attack.


On The Mark Levin Show: Orlando Terror Attack, Gun-Free Zones & Gun Control

Mark Levin Picture

CPRC President, Dr. John Lott, talked with Mark Levin about the Orlando Mass Public Shooting & the dangers of gun-free zones.  Audio here.
(Monday, June 13, 2016 from 7:20 to 7:44 PM)



In the NY POST: Why Terrorists Target Gun-Free Zones

Screen Shot 2016-06-16 at 11.46.55 AM
Dr. John Lott has a new op-ed at the New York Post that starts this way:
When will politicians finally recognize that they can’t protect all the possible shooting targets?
Possibly the largest mass public shooting in US history occurred early on Sunday morning, leaving 50 dead. On Friday, also in Orlando, singer Christina Grimmie was murdered after a concert.
Both of these shootings had something in common: They both occurred in places where private citizens were banned from carrying permitted concealed handguns.
With the exception of Donald Trump, over the last few days politicians have talked about everything but gun-free zones. Hillary Clinton and President Obama have been talking background checks on the private transfers of guns or banning people who are on the “no-fly lists” from buying guns.
But not one of the mass shootings since at least 2000, including Sunday’s, would’ve been stopped by these laws. Nor would renewing the federal “assault weapons” ban solve the problem; even research paid for by Bill Clinton’s administration found no evidence the ban reduced any type of crime.
Just a couple of months ago, a young ISIS sympathizer planned a shooting at one of the largest churches in Detroit. An FBI wire recorded him explaining why he had picked the church as a target: “It’s easy, and a lot of people go there. Plus people are not allowed to carry guns in church. Plus it would make the news.”
Police are probably the single most important factor in stopping crime, but stopping a mass public shooting is an extremely dangerous proposition for officers and security guards alike. Attackers will generally first shoot any uniformed guards or officers who are present. During the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris last year, the first person killed was the guard who was protecting the magazine’s offices.. . .
The rest of the piece is available here.
Screen Shot 2016-06-16 at Thursday, June 16, 2.57 PM


NRA conventions and crime

Labels: ,


On Greg Garrison to discussion Katie Couric's distortedly edited movie on gun control

Greg Garrison WIBC Radio

I talked to Greg Garrison on WIBC in Indianapolis on Katie Couric's new movie that edits people's comments to distorts their responses (Friday, May 27, 2016 from 11:05 to 11:30 AM).

 Interview here.



On the Charlie Sykes Show on the big 50,000 watt WTMJ in Milwaukee: Benefits of Concealed Carry & Discussion of Katie Couric's new gun control movie

WTMJ Banner

talked with substitute host Mike Seigel about the benefits of concealed carry for self defense. Also discussed is Katie Couric's new gun-control documentary "Under The Gun." Couric interviewed Dr. Lott for almost 4 hours but ended up not using any of the material. Couric had no experts on the opposite side of the gun-control issue even though Dr. Lott was told they wanted to have balance in the documentary. (May 31st 2016 9:07am-9:24am CT)

Interview here.


A note on some recent Chicago gun control laws: Still no gun stores or shooting ranges in Chicago

People know that handguns were banned in Chicago up until 2010.  Then there were extreme restrictions on where you could posses a gun even in your home (e.g., not in your garage or on your porch).  There were other strict gun control laws.  It might be hard to believe, but Chicago has had rules that banned the sale or transfers of guns.  It has banned training facilities.
A federal judge on Monday [Jan 7, 2014] overturned Chicago's ban on the sale and transfer of firearms, ruling that the city's ordinances aimed at reducing gun violence are unconstitutional. 
U.S. District Judge Edmond E. Chang said in his ruling that while the government has a duty to protect its citizens, it's also obligated to protect constitutional rights, including the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. However, Chang said he would temporarily stay the effects of his ruling, meaning the ordinances can stand while the city decides whether to appeal. . . .
Now Cook County, like Seattle, has a tax on ammunition.  From the Illinois Business Daily (May 30, 2016):
A per-bullet tax on ammunition set to take effect in June in Cook County is expected to provide over $300,000 in new revenue a year, but the tax faces serious opposition at the state level. 
“The gun tax is nothing more than a modern day poll tax against the poor,” John Boch, executive director of the pro-gun Guns Save Life group told Illinois Business Daily in an email. “Gun control is racist, classist and sexist--we don't support those things.” 
The latest tax is part of a $4.5 billion budget approved last November for the county, which includes roughly $500 million in new spending funded primarily by various sales tax increases, including the ammo tax. 
A bill currently in the Illinois General Assembly, however, could stop those ammunition tax increases and even possibly roll back previous ones. House Bill 4348 would take away the power for local governments to impose sales tax increases on weapons and ammunition, stating that cities and home rule communities “may not impose any tax, fee or other assessment other than the normal sales tax rate for goods, on any firearms, firearm attachments or firearm ammunition.” Boch said he hoped the bill would preempt any legal action the group might take against the new taxes. . . . 
Besides the famous McDonald case, other Court cases that have cut back on Chicago's gun laws are: Ezell v. City of Chicago (7th Cir. 2011) (right to arms would be meaningless without right to “maintain proficiency” by “training and practice” at a shooting range); Illinois Ass’n of Firearms Retailers v. City of Chicago (N.D. Ill. 2014) (right to arms includes “the right to acquire a firearm” so city ban on all gun stores is void).  So the courts struck down the bans, but the question is how many shooting ranges or gun stores there are in Chicago.  It looks like there are currently no shooting ranges in Chicago. Try Googling "'shooting ranges' Chicago."  As of January this year there was one attempt at "pitching plans to open the city's only gun store and gun range," but nothing has happened so far.

Illinois is one of the 42 Shall-Issue states, so in an important sense it is more liberal than most of the 8 May Issue states, but, with a 16 hour training requirement and $150 fee, it takes about $500 to get a concealed handgun permit. This is by far the most costly of the different Shall-Issue states.

This inability to have easy access to training or a store as well as the costs of getting a permit means that law-abiding poor people will find it very difficult to legally defend themselves.


Criminal immigrants reoffend at "markedly higher than Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have suggested to Congress in the past"

In 2013, Obama administration released 36,000 illegal alien criminals awaiting deportation (Senator Ted Cruz has pointed out that if you add the 36,000 released from detention in 2013 and the 68,000 released that year under prosecutorial guidelines the total comes to 104,000).  In 2015 that number had grown to almost 90,000.  We have seen the Obama administration refusing to pick up illegal alien who is committing a misdemeanor and a felony.  Democrats have claimed that the recidivism rate for these illegals were about 15.9 percent (though the link to the study appears broken).  Well, a new study by the Boston Globe has found a recidivism rate in three years that is twice as high. 
. . . A Globe review of 323 criminals released in New England from 2008 to 2012 found that as many as 30 percent committed new offenses, including rape, attempted murder, and child molestation — a rate that is markedly higher than Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have suggested to Congress in the past.  
The names of these criminals have never before been made public and are coming to light now only because the Globe sued the federal government for the list of criminals immigration authorities returned to neighborhoods across the country. A judge ordered the names released in 2013, and the Globe then undertook the work that the federal government didn’t, scouring court records to find out how many released criminals reoffended. 
The Globe has also published, in conjunction with this story, a searchable database of the thousands of names that were disclosed to the news organization, so that crime victims, law enforcement officials, and managers of sex offender registries — who are often unaware of these releases — can find out if the criminals may still be in the United States. . . .


On The Blaze's Dana Show: Discussing Expanded Background Check Claims and Katie Couric's Gun Control Movie

Screen Shot 2016-06-03 at Friday, June 3, 10.01 AM 2

I talked to Dana Loesch about claims made in the Katie Couric movie on background checks and the EPIX channel's announcement on Tuesday that they are no longer going to be showing her movie.



So the Federal Government requires that you have to have one of three types of photo IDs to use PayPal, but you don't need an ID to vote

PayPal is requiring this photo ID because of federal regulations.  Even the states that have photo voter ID regulations aren't this restrictive in limiting you to so few types of IDs.  Yet, the Federal government has no problem requiring this to use PayPal.  Presumably the government is worried about people trying to cheat the government out of tax revenue.  So why isn't the government equally worried about vote fraud?



Newest op-ed at the Daily Caller: "Is Trump Right About Hillary’s Views On Guns?"

Daily Caller Header

My newest piece at Daily Caller deals with the current gun debate:
The media — from fact checkers to late night talk shows — has had a field day claiming that Trump is making false statements on guns. The media ought to have lost credibility by now. 
Last Friday at the NRA convention, Donald Trump forcefully repeated his challenge to Hillary Clinton on guns: “As I said before, she wants to abolish the Second Amendment. She wants to take your guns away. She wants to abolish — just remember that. … If she gets to appoint her judges, she will abolish the Second Amendment.” 
Hillary Clinton tweeted back “You’re wrong, @realDonaldTrump. We can uphold Second Amendment rights while preventing senseless gun violence.” 
CNN noted: “Clinton, who swiftly rebutted Trump’s remarks, has called for universal background checks and stricter controls on firearms, but has never called for the abolition of the 2nd Amendment. In fact, on her website, she calls gun ownership ‘part of the fabric of many law-abiding communities.’” Politifact asserted: “We found no evidence of Clinton ever saying verbatim or suggesting explicitly that she wants to abolish the Second Amendment, and the bulk of Clinton’s comments suggest the opposite. She has repeatedly said she wants to protect the right to bear arms while enacting measures to prevent gun violence.” 
But these are the same organizations that assured people that their concerns about Obama on guns were wrong. In 2008, FactCheck.org asserted that there was no evidence that Obama would “appoint Judges to the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Judiciary Who Share His Views on the Second Amendment.” Obama “always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms,” the website concluded. 
Politifact now tries giving people the same assurance: “The bulk of Clinton’s comments suggest the opposite [that she supports gun ownership].”  CNN says the same. . . . .
The rest of the piece is available here.



On Turkish TRT World's The Newsmakers to debate whether prison deters criminals

Turkish TRT 2016-05-27

I debated Baz Dreisinger from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice appeared on Turkish TRT World's The Newsmakers to debate whether prison deters crime and whether prison should be abolished (Thursday, May 26, 2016).


AWR Hawkins provides Second Amendment Voter’s Guide: Trump vs. Clinton

AWR Hawkins provides a breakdown of Trump and Clinton's positions on Universal Background Checks, “Assault Weapons” Ban, Gun-Free Zones, and the 2nd Amendment (see here).

Labels: ,


New op-ed at Fox News: "Obama just got one giant step closer towards creating a national gun registry"

Fox News Opinion

My newest piece at Fox News starts this way:
President Obama is taking a big step towards creating a national gun registry.  Hawaii looks like it is about to provide the federal government with the list of all the gun owners in the state.  Supposedly, keeping a list of gun owners’ names will enable the FBI to tell police if a gun owner ever gets arrested. 
But a national gun registry isn’t necessary to do this check.  The FBI isn’t the only organization that can do background checks on already existing gun owners.  
Hawaii already has a gun registry, and can regularly run its list of names to see if people have gotten arrested. 
Some concealed carry states do that for their concealed handgun permit holders.  For example, Kentucky checks its list of permit holders every month. 
Hawaii is going to pay for entering the names in the new federal registry by charging gun owners a new fee.  But, even if this registration reduced crime, it would hardly be just the gun owners who have registered their guns who would be the only ones who benefit.  Economics would indicate that the people who benefit from this proposal should be the ones to pay for it. 
If Hawaii officials really think that this will reduce crime for everyone and they aren’t just pushing this as a way to reduce gun ownership even further, they can pay for these checks out of general revenue. 
This will undoubtedly be a waste of money. Out of all the guns owned in the US, just hundredths of one percent are used in committing crimes, and the rate that registered guns are used in crimes is a tiny fraction of that.  For concealed handgun permit holders the revocation rate for any firearms related violation is thousandths of one percent, and almost all of those are trivial, nonviolent offenses. 
Gun control advocates have long claimed that gun registration will help solve crime. Their reasoning is straightforward: If a registered gun is left at a crime scene, it can be used to identify the criminal.
Unfortunately, it rarely works out this way. . . . .
The rest of the piece is available here.  Please share on Facebook.


If anyone else had done a fraction of the security violations that Hillary Clinton did, they would be in jail for a very long time

Here is a case of a sailor who took a photo of a nuclear sub for his personal use (no bad guys saw the picture).  From Politico:
. . . Prosecutors allege that Petty Officer First Class Kristian Saucier used a cellphone camera to take photos in the classified engine room of the nuclear submarine where he worked as a mechanic, the USS Alexandria, then destroyed a laptop, camera and memory card after learning he was under investigation. 
Last July, Saucier was indicted on one felony count of unlawful retention of national defense information and another felony count of obstruction of justice. He pleaded guilty Friday to the classified information charge, which is part of the Espionage Act, a prosecution spokesman confirmed. No charge of espionage was filed and no public suggestion has been made that he ever planned to disclose the photos to anyone outside the Navy. 
The sailor now faces a maximum possible sentence of up to ten years in prison, but faced up to 30 years if found guilty on both charges. Federal guidelines discussed in court Friday appear to call for a sentence of about five to six-and-a-half years, although the defense has signaled it will seek a lighter sentence. . . . 
“I just don’t think it’s fair,” said Gene Pitcher, a retired Navy sailor who served with Saucier aboard the Alexandria. “In reality, what [Hillary Clinton] did is so much worse than what Kris did. ... I think it’s just a blatant double standard.” . . .



Another list of vote fraud cases

For those who claim that there isn't vote fraud, you might find this site challenging.



New book out by my friend Frank Buckley that is well worth your time to read

I put up a review at Amazon.com on Frank Buckley's new book "The Way Back: Restoring the Promise of America."  My review is available here.  Highly recommended.