OK, Ok, you might be questioning this somewhat off the path title on my blog. But I love to read obituaries in the weekend newspapers. In a time when we are so distracted with technology I recommend reading them to get a better perspective.
One of my favorite obituaries that remains firm in my mind was that of Maureen O’Donnell. She passed away in Annandale, Virginia on February 20, 1989 at the young age of 58 of cancer. She had suffered greatly in life – losing 4 of her 6 children to cystic fibrosis. But that did not stop her. She only channeled her love to her students at W.T. Woodson High School where she taught Latin. She was viewed as both a mother and teacher by her students.
She was remembered as a “small woman infused with boundless energy, [who] built one of the nation's strongest high school Latin programs from scratch, inspiring hundreds of students not only to study a "dead" language but to revere such traits as honor, compassion and understanding.” She was awarded with an honorary doctorate by Yale and as Virginia Teacher of the Year in 1982 for the program she created.
Book Ad
If you enjoy Liberty Takes Effort posts and pages, please consider my recent books.
Brotherhood and Borders
A thoughtful look at immigration, compassion, division, and the rule of law in America.
Buy on Amazon
Small-Town Boomers
A nostalgic look back at growing up in Randolph, Massachusetts, and the small-town Boomer experience.
Buy on AmazonThe workforce is doing well
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) today released its “Employment
Situation Report” for July, 2018. It is
a very positive report that continues to reflect an improved workforce environment.
Workforce health is related to the overall health of the
economy: Gross Domestic Product (GDP) reportedly increased 4.1% in the second quarter
of this year – a high growth rate; measures
of business and consumer confidence are high; wages may finally be rising in a tight labor market;
inflation is holding at about 2%; the
stock market remains at very high levels.
Constitutional Education Opportunity – Kavanaugh Confirmation
The impending confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court promise once again to be an education bonanza for the American people – as long as Senators do not muck it up with too much partisan bickering.
The Supreme Court history can be broken down, according to Cass R. Sunstein’s “Unanimity and Disagreement on the Supreme Court” into two periods: 1800-1941 and 1941 to present. The earlier period was one of great harmony with a very high rate of unanimous decisions and almost no dissenting opinions. After 1941 there was a major shift to a Court that was less based on consensus and more like “nine separate law offices.” Consenting opinions, dissents, and 5-4 decisions were far more common.
The Supreme Court history can be broken down, according to Cass R. Sunstein’s “Unanimity and Disagreement on the Supreme Court” into two periods: 1800-1941 and 1941 to present. The earlier period was one of great harmony with a very high rate of unanimous decisions and almost no dissenting opinions. After 1941 there was a major shift to a Court that was less based on consensus and more like “nine separate law offices.” Consenting opinions, dissents, and 5-4 decisions were far more common.
Post Parkland (and now Santa Fe) - Call to action
Immediately following the Parkland mass public shooting, I
asked readers of the Liberty Takes Effort blog to ACT by contacting their
governors and state legislators to demand immediate passage of Extreme Risk
Protection Order (ERPO) laws within their states.
If you acted - great.
I am going to ask you to do more to protect children in our schools. If you did not – you can jump on board now.
The fatal shooting of 10 and wounding of 14 at Santa Fe High
School in Texas last week is just one more warning that this can happen
anywhere.
Florida passed an ERPO law within weeks of the Parkland mass
public shooting. Reasonable people
demanded reasonable action and reasonable elected officials acted. Florida’s new law has been used several
times already to intervene and separate a person at the intersection of
dangerousness and fire arm access.
Vermont and Rhode Island recently passed ERPO laws and 20
additional states are considering them (AK, AL, AZ, HI, IA, IL, MA [legislature
voting very soon], ME, MI, MN, MS, NJ, NV, NY, OR, PA, TN, TX, VA, WY.) Is your state listed? Is it not?
Have you expressed your opinion to your state legislator and governor? Have you encouraged your family and friends
to take action? Waiting for the next
election is not the answer!
Post Parkland – dangerousness and fire arm access
Dangerous people should not have access to fire arms. On this subject there seems to be near universal agreement. Laws, regulations, and enforcement are required to intervene and prevent people who are dangerous from purchasing or possessing fire arms.
Controversy arises largely in the defining of dangerousness. Mental health professionals fear the mentally ill generally will be further stigmatized and isolated. Civil rights defenders fear abuse of civil rights without clear definitions and strict adherence to due process. These are legitimate concerns that must be addressed in the development of policies.
There are existing federal and state laws that prohibit specific categories of dangerous people from purchasing fire arms. For example, people involuntarily committed to a mental institution, or found not guilty by reason of insanity, or who committed a violent act towards others and are the subject of a domestic violence restraining order, or have been convicted of a felony, or have been convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor.
Controversy arises largely in the defining of dangerousness. Mental health professionals fear the mentally ill generally will be further stigmatized and isolated. Civil rights defenders fear abuse of civil rights without clear definitions and strict adherence to due process. These are legitimate concerns that must be addressed in the development of policies.
There are existing federal and state laws that prohibit specific categories of dangerous people from purchasing fire arms. For example, people involuntarily committed to a mental institution, or found not guilty by reason of insanity, or who committed a violent act towards others and are the subject of a domestic violence restraining order, or have been convicted of a felony, or have been convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor.
Post Parkland: Fire Arms – Inventories, statistics, and definitions
How many households
have fire arms?
There are approximately 327 million people usually resident
in the United States (the population).
Of those, about 77% or 252 million are over the age of 18 (adults). Of those adults about 100 million (40% of
adult population) live in a household with a fire arm.
By comparison, in 1972 the U.S. population was 209
million. Of those, about 65% or 136
million were over the age of 18 (adults).
The population has aged significantly since 1972 from 65% to 77%
adults. Of those adults, about 70
million (51%) lived in a household with a fire arm.
How many fire arms
are there?
There are an estimated 350 million fire arms in circulation
in the US. Though there are only 100
million households with fire arms owners may have multiple firearms. Over 65% of fire arm owners report having
more than one fire arm and about 30% have more than five. The average household with fire arms has 3.5
weapons present.
No statistics were found indicating how many fire arms were
in circulation in 1972. However, if the
3.5 average of the present were applied to that time it would be about 245
million.
The adult population has grown 85% in 45 years. The fire arm inventory has grown about
44%. Though the total number of fire arms
in circulation has grown from 245 million to 350 million the adult per capita
number of fire arms has decreased from 1.8 fire arms per adult to 1.4.
Post Parkland – Constitutional constraints to action
In 2008, Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority of the Supreme Court in the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL. v. HELLER case said after acknowledging the Court has full awareness of fire arm deaths in the country, “the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table.”
Any proposed action in response to the mass public shooting at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida must be lawful. Fire arm regulation must not violate 2nd Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. Seizure of weapons from dangerous persons and involuntary confinement of the mentally ill must not violate the 4th Amendment right to due process. Reporting of dangerousness by health and school officials must not violate due process and 5th Amendment privacy rights.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)