| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Friday, April 26, 2013
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Webinar: Ludwig von Mises and Austrian Economics, with Prof. Ivan Pongracic
Ludwig von Mises was not the founder of the Austrian school of economic thought, but by outlining the school's methodological approach Mises defined the Austrian school and its unique position in mainline economics. In this webinar Professor Ivan Pongracic will discuss Ludwig von Mises' five main contributions to economics.
About the speaker: Ivan Pongracic is Ludwig von Mises Chair in Economics at Hillsdale College and a member of FEE Board of Scholars. Prior to coming to Hillsdale he taught at Indiana Wesleyan University and George Mason University. He earned his Ph.D. in economics from George Mason University.
Ludwig von Mises was not the founder of the Austrian school of economic thought, but by outlining the school's methodological approach Mises defined the Austrian school and its unique position in mainline economics. In this webinar Professor Ivan Pongracic will discuss Ludwig von Mises' five main contributions to economics.About the speaker: Ivan Pongracic is Ludwig von Mises Chair in Economics at Hillsdale College and a member of FEE Board of Scholars. Prior to coming to Hillsdale he taught at Indiana Wesleyan University and George Mason University. He earned his Ph.D. in economics from George Mason University.
Sunday, April 21, 2013
Topeka man fights for open-carry laws
By ANDY MARSO
The Topeka Capital-Journal
from the Sunday issue of the Wichita Eagle
at www.kansas.com
Topeka resident Earl McIntosh believes Kansas residents have the right to carry firearms openly, and he is willing to take on Kansas cities in court to fight for that right.By ANDY MARSO
The Topeka Capital-Journal
from the Sunday issue of the Wichita Eagle
at www.kansas.com
McIntosh, who served 21 years in the Marine Corps, is the Second Amendment chairman for the Kansas Libertarian Party. He also is party to a lawsuit against Prairie Village, a Johnson County suburb that enacted a local ordinance banning open carry.
To McIntosh, the issue is clear: Open carry should be allowed, and he has the U.S. Constitution, the Kansas Constitution and a recent Kansas Attorney General opinion on his side.
"They openly defy state law," McIntosh said of the open carry bans enacted in Prairie Village, Leawood, Wyandotte County and Lenexa.
McIntosh said the Kansas Libertarians also are involved in litigation with Leawood and Wyandotte County. Lenexa, he said, has expressed a desire to work out differences outside the courts, but the other local governments are too unbending in their opposition, he says.
Prairie Village City Council member Michael Kelly defended the ban in a letter to the Prairie Village Post.
"What would be the purpose of open-carry in Prairie Village?" Kelly wrote. "For sport, perhaps? To keep roving packs of Labradoodles at bay? Unlikely. I presume it would be for personal protection. If personal protection is the motive, then why is open-carry the answer? Especially given that PV has no restriction regarding conceal-carry. If a person is concerned for their safety while they are at the Hen House or strolling along the Tomahawk trail, then conceal-carry allows them to feel a sense of security without needlessly intimidating their neighbors."
McIntosh is certain the law is on his side. Attorney general opinions rendered by Derek Schmidt said that while state law allows municipalities to regulate "the manner" in which residents openly carry loaded firearms on public property, it doesn't allow for total bans on the practice and doesn't allow for any municipal regulation of unloaded firearms.
Attorney general opinions are nonbinding, and attorneys for the League of Kansas Municipalities have disagreed with the interpretation. House Bill 2111, which would have explicitly prohibited local governments from banning open carry, never came up for a vote after clearing committee this year.
Topeka allows open carry. Though Kelly worries about the intimidation factor of knowing who is carrying guns, Topeka resident Allyn Lockner said he is more concerned about not knowing.
At a forum hosted by the Shawnee County delegation Monday, Lockner asked why the state licenses residents to carry concealed weapons.
"Why concealed carry? Why not revealed carry, so I can know who has guns when I go into a room and I can decide whether or not I want to stay?" said Lockner, who was in a motorized wheelchair. "My ability and eligibility for carrying a gun is impossible."
Rep. Ken Corbet, R-Topeka, said the main benefit of concealed carry is that would-be criminals are deterred because they don't know who might be armed and ready to stop them.
Corbet said those with evil intentions find places that ban guns enticing.
"If you noticed, where do most of your problems happen?" Corbet asked the crowd gathered at the Topeka and Shawnee County Public Library. "Soft targets. We're sitting in one now."
Corbet, a gun-rights advocate who owns a hunting preserve, said he isn't against open carry, adding that those who intend to do others harm aren't likely to be open carriers or licensed concealed carriers who have passed a background check.
"I wouldn't be concerned about concealed carry or open carry," Corbet said. "I just wouldn't."
McIntosh voiced similar views, saying that though open carry might cause some to become "alarmed," he has never heard of Kansans carrying a gun on their hip to deliberately intimidate other law-abiding citizens, or of the combination of open carry and emotional discussions becoming combustible in a public place.
"We have no examples of people getting into an argument and shooting someone," McIntosh said.
So McIntosh says he will fight on in the courts.
Motions have been made that question his standing to sue, because he doesn't live in the municipalities in question. But McIntosh said if he is removed from the lawsuits, others will take his place.
"Even if they throw us out, it's not over," McIntosh said. "It's not even close to over."
Information from: The Topeka (Kan.) Capital-Journal, http://www.cjonline.com
© 2013 Wichita Eagle and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. http://www.kansas.com
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/04/20/v-print/2770186/topeka-man-fights-for-open-carry.html#storylink=cpy
Friday, April 19, 2013
On The Second Amendment, Kansas Points The Way
Posted By Mike Maharrey from www.dailycaller.com
Opponents of federal gun control won a victory in the Senate Wednesday. But without a doubt, Congress will pass some sort of gun-control legislation. And that act will certainly violate the Constitution.
Our founding document does not delegate firearm-regulating power to Congress or the president. No clause in the Constitution empowers the federal government to ban any type of gun or magazine, create a gun registry or implement a national system of background checks, and the Second Amendment actively restricts federal power in this area. It prevents the federal government from infringing on the right of people to keep and bear arms — even in the course of exercising otherwise legitimate federal powers. So although the feds have the power to regulate interstate commerce, they do not have the power to infringe on our Second Amendment rights in the process.
But the federal government long ago abandoned any pretext of constitutional restraint.
That elevates what happened in Kansas this week to the highest level of importance.
On Tuesday, Governor Sam Brownback signed the Second Amendment Protection Act, nullifying a wide range of federal attacks on the right to keep and bear arms in Kansas. Here’s the law’s text:
“Any act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation of the government of the United States which violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is null, void and unenforceable in the state of Kansas.”
In other words, the law prohibits state and local agents in Kansas from participating in any federal gun-control measures restricting the individual right to keep and bear arms as understood when Kansas became a state in 1861.
The new law also makes it illegal for any federal agent to enforce any law, treaty, order, rule or regulation regarding firearms manufactured, owned and remaining within Kansas’ borders. Violators could face felony charges. State prosecutors will serve federal agents violating the law with a complaint and summons.
In essence, Sam Brownback just told Barack Obama and his federal minions, “Bring it on!”
As Judge Andrew Napolitano recently pointed out, widespread noncompliance can make federal gun-control laws “nearly impossible to enforce.” Mass noncompliance with an unconstitutional federal act stands as both constitutionally sound and effective. In fact, the Northern states’ noncompliance with the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 was so effective, South Carolina listed nullification of the act in its Declaration of Causes of Secession.
The new Kansas law stands as the strongest and most sweeping defense of the right to keep and bear arms in the entire country so far.
Note that this bold defense of the Second Amendment did not come from Washington, D.C. — indeed, no bold defense of the Second Amendment ever will.
James Madison envisioned state action as a check on unconstitutional power before the Constitution was even ratified. He laid out the blueprint in Federalist No. 46.
Other states need to follow the Sunflower State’s lead.
Mike Maharrey serves as the national communications director for the Tenth Amendment Center. He is also the author of Our Last Hope: Rediscovering the Lost Path to Liberty. You may contact Mike at: michael.maharrey@tenthamendmentcenter.com.
Our founding document does not delegate firearm-regulating power to Congress or the president. No clause in the Constitution empowers the federal government to ban any type of gun or magazine, create a gun registry or implement a national system of background checks, and the Second Amendment actively restricts federal power in this area. It prevents the federal government from infringing on the right of people to keep and bear arms — even in the course of exercising otherwise legitimate federal powers. So although the feds have the power to regulate interstate commerce, they do not have the power to infringe on our Second Amendment rights in the process.
But the federal government long ago abandoned any pretext of constitutional restraint.
That elevates what happened in Kansas this week to the highest level of importance.
On Tuesday, Governor Sam Brownback signed the Second Amendment Protection Act, nullifying a wide range of federal attacks on the right to keep and bear arms in Kansas. Here’s the law’s text:
“Any act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation of the government of the United States which violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is null, void and unenforceable in the state of Kansas.”
In other words, the law prohibits state and local agents in Kansas from participating in any federal gun-control measures restricting the individual right to keep and bear arms as understood when Kansas became a state in 1861.
The new law also makes it illegal for any federal agent to enforce any law, treaty, order, rule or regulation regarding firearms manufactured, owned and remaining within Kansas’ borders. Violators could face felony charges. State prosecutors will serve federal agents violating the law with a complaint and summons.
In essence, Sam Brownback just told Barack Obama and his federal minions, “Bring it on!”
As Judge Andrew Napolitano recently pointed out, widespread noncompliance can make federal gun-control laws “nearly impossible to enforce.” Mass noncompliance with an unconstitutional federal act stands as both constitutionally sound and effective. In fact, the Northern states’ noncompliance with the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 was so effective, South Carolina listed nullification of the act in its Declaration of Causes of Secession.
The new Kansas law stands as the strongest and most sweeping defense of the right to keep and bear arms in the entire country so far.
Note that this bold defense of the Second Amendment did not come from Washington, D.C. — indeed, no bold defense of the Second Amendment ever will.
James Madison envisioned state action as a check on unconstitutional power before the Constitution was even ratified. He laid out the blueprint in Federalist No. 46.
“Should an unwarrantable measure of the federal government be unpopular in particular States, which would seldom fail to be the case, or even a warrantable measure be so, which may sometimes be the case, the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand. The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union, the frowns of the executive magistracy of the State; the embarrassment created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any State, very serious impediments; and were the sentiments of several adjoining States happen to be in Union, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.” (Emphasis added)Madison makes an important point: One state can create issues for the feds. If multiple states refuse to comply with unconstitutional federal actions, they can stop D.C. in its tracks.
Other states need to follow the Sunflower State’s lead.
Mike Maharrey serves as the national communications director for the Tenth Amendment Center. He is also the author of Our Last Hope: Rediscovering the Lost Path to Liberty. You may contact Mike at: michael.maharrey@tenthamendmentcenter.com.
Article printed from The Daily Caller: http://dailycaller.com
URL to article: http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/18/on-the-second-amendment-kansas-points-the-way/
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
Libertarian Party: Move Personal Independence Day from June to January
Every year, federal, state and local governments seize an enormous percentage of the money Americans earn. For several months of every year, taxpayers are effectively working for the government without compensation.
This year, according to the Tax Foundation, Americans must work until April 18, what they call Tax Freedom Day, to pay their taxes before they can finally start working for themselves instead, based on a total federal, state, and local tax burden of $4.22 trillion. If federal borrowing is added in, they point out, Tax Freedom Day would fall on May 9, another 21 days of Americans’ lives devoted to working for the government.
But is it really that soon?
As Nobel laureate economist Milton Friedman famously observed, “It cannot be emphasized too much that the real burden on the economy is what government spends (or mandates others to spend) rather than how much it receives in taxes.” In a 1974 Newsweek article, Friedman suggested giving a name to the day at which we stop working to pay all the expenses of government — total spending, not just current taxation. He dubbed it “Personal Independence Day.”
When total spending by all levels of government is taken into account, according to this estimate, the burden of government will reach $6.16 trillion for 2013.
This means that it won’t be until June 6 before Americans’ will finally be free to keep their earnings instead of paying for wasteful government spending. Personal Independence Day doesn’t arrive until nearly half the year has passed.
This enormous government burden is all attributable to Republicans and Democrats, who keep voting to increase the percentage of wealth confiscated year after year — forcing Americans to spend more and more of their lives as indentured servants to Big Government.
The Libertarian Party is the only political party that calls for an immediate end to high taxes, calling in its platform "for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution."
“As long as voters continue to cast ballots for Republicans and Democrats, they will continue to expand the number of days before workers can keep their earnings to support their families” said Carla Howell, Libertarian Party executive director. “The Libertarian Party calls for immediately slashing both taxes and government spending — permanently — and returning that money to the workers and taxpayers who earned it.”
“Vote Libertarian and move Personal Independence Day to January,” she said.
Paid for by the Libertarian National Committee
2600 Virginia Ave, N.W. Suite 200, Washington D.C. 20037
Content not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee.
Every year, federal, state and local governments seize an enormous percentage of the money Americans earn. For several months of every year, taxpayers are effectively working for the government without compensation.
This year, according to the Tax Foundation, Americans must work until April 18, what they call Tax Freedom Day, to pay their taxes before they can finally start working for themselves instead, based on a total federal, state, and local tax burden of $4.22 trillion. If federal borrowing is added in, they point out, Tax Freedom Day would fall on May 9, another 21 days of Americans’ lives devoted to working for the government.
But is it really that soon?
As Nobel laureate economist Milton Friedman famously observed, “It cannot be emphasized too much that the real burden on the economy is what government spends (or mandates others to spend) rather than how much it receives in taxes.” In a 1974 Newsweek article, Friedman suggested giving a name to the day at which we stop working to pay all the expenses of government — total spending, not just current taxation. He dubbed it “Personal Independence Day.”
When total spending by all levels of government is taken into account, according to this estimate, the burden of government will reach $6.16 trillion for 2013.
This means that it won’t be until June 6 before Americans’ will finally be free to keep their earnings instead of paying for wasteful government spending. Personal Independence Day doesn’t arrive until nearly half the year has passed.
This enormous government burden is all attributable to Republicans and Democrats, who keep voting to increase the percentage of wealth confiscated year after year — forcing Americans to spend more and more of their lives as indentured servants to Big Government.
The Libertarian Party is the only political party that calls for an immediate end to high taxes, calling in its platform "for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution."
“As long as voters continue to cast ballots for Republicans and Democrats, they will continue to expand the number of days before workers can keep their earnings to support their families” said Carla Howell, Libertarian Party executive director. “The Libertarian Party calls for immediately slashing both taxes and government spending — permanently — and returning that money to the workers and taxpayers who earned it.”
“Vote Libertarian and move Personal Independence Day to January,” she said.
Paid for by the Libertarian National Committee
2600 Virginia Ave, N.W. Suite 200, Washington D.C. 20037
Content not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee.
Friday, April 12, 2013
- Survey Results
- 2nd Amendment Progress Report
- Convention Reminder
Long time readers of these missives may recall that Kansas State Law permits open carry of fire arms anywhere in the state without a special license. State law specifically prohibits any political jurisdiction within Kansas from enacting an outright ban on open carry although they may more regulate the manner of openly carrying a loaded firearm.
In spite of this clear statute on the books, a number of jurisdictions, including Prairie Village and Leawood, have passed ordinances prohibiting open carry. Several months ago, we (the Libertarian Party of Kansas) filed suit against Prairie Village and Leawood to overturn their ordinances.
As filed, the suit had three plaintiffs: LPKS; Libertarian Party Chair, Al Terwelp, who lives in Osage County; and 2nd Amendment chair, Earl McIntosh, who lives in Shawnee County. A few days ago, the judge in the case dismissed LPKS as a plaintiff reasoning that LPKS, as a political party, can’t carry a weapon therefore is not harmed by the ordinance and thus does not have ‘standing’ to file the case.
For now, he has not ruled on the ‘standing’ of the other two plaintiffs.
This is not a set-back in our case and is a normal part of the legal wrangling we must endure. Even if he were to rule Terwelp and McIntosh lack ‘standing’ because they live outside Johnson County, we have an alternate Plan “B”.
Our State Convention is only one week off. It will be April 20 on the campus of Emporia State University. There is no cost to attend. However, if you want a box lunch on Saturday, you must reserve it SOON. With all that is going on in the state, this should be an active meeting with much information available on how to grow our party across Kansas.
We have started the arduous task of evaluating responses to our survey. Over the next several weeks, we will discuss the results. We also hope to have some fairly concrete information available next weekend in Emporia. If you have questions, please ask. Just hit ‘reply’ and let us know what you think. We will respond to as many as we are able.
Of course, one of our major areas of concern is how successfully we are getting our message out. We use these weekly emails. In addition, we send our quarterly publication Free Kansan. We have also started organizing Libertarian groups in many counties across the state.
We were pleased to learn that 87% of respondents receive our weekly emails. Of those who were directed to the survey from our web page, 43% receive these missives. Significantly, nearly everyone who doesn’t, asked to be added to the email list. [Welcome, newcomers to this effort.]
Readership is equally impressive. Less than 6% said they ‘seldom’ or ‘never’ read our publications. Over 75% said they “appreciate that [our e-pubs] keep [them] informed about activity across the state.” That goes up to a whopping 88% of respondents coming from our web page.
One respondent implored us to “Improve the quality of writing. It comes across as amateurish and unprofessional.” Ouch! Are you volunteering?
Not everyone was so critical. “I think the publications are a great tool. However, I don’t think enough people actually see it.” wrote one. “Libertarianism is one of those best kept secrets that needs to gain a wide audience.” added another. “Our current publications are aimed at the believer and do not talk about local libertarian issues.” observed a third.
This was a common thread in the responses to this question. The purpose of our e-publications is to keep Libertarians across the state ‘in the loop’ so we can present a better coordinated story. Outreach, we hope, will be accomplished by our network of groups in counties across the state.
Most respondents know of this effort and a third said they know of a group nearby. Of the others, nearly 40% would like to find a group nearby. In the comments, several made good suggestions on how our county groups can be improved or asked to be directed to a local group. As time permits, we will follow up on all of these requests.
That’s it for now. We look forward to visiting more with all our supporters at the convention next weekend. Don’t forget to reserve your lunch.
Incidentally, our legal challenge in support of the 2nd Amendment is expensive. Even though our attorney is serving Pro Bono (free), there are still filing fees and other expenses. They are adding up.
Please consider supporting this effort financially.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)