GNN’S STANCE ON NEW YORK GUN LAWS LEAVES MUCH TO BE DESIRED

The Greater Niagara Newspapers on November 14th issued an editorial across all four newspapers entitled “Handgun law would foster troubling legal climate.” This piece was their analysis of the impending Supreme Court decision concerning gun ownership in Washington, DC.
Their editorial board’s approach was decidedly unconstitutional. They ignored not only the Constitution but also the primary tenets of Natural Law, taking the stand that…

1. The right to own arms is a collective one (militia)
2. New York’s gun laws are good as is and in no way should be loosened
3. Giving America’s greater gun rights will spell disaster

These observations are also in defiance of the gun rights platform of the Libertarian Party, defined here.

GNN columnist Bob Confer has written many pro-gun op-eds for that very same newspaper system and his ramblings (true to the LP’s interpretation) are in stark contrast to the editorial board. Here are some snippets from his past columns:

On collective gun rights where he focused on “the people” portion of the second amendment…

By picking apart language of the Second Amendment and looking at it as a stand-alone law independent of the rest of the Constitution these souls have ignored how it fits into the whole scheme of things and how this law, no, this right, should be appropriately interpreted. The amendment is properly written and, therefore, non-controversial as long as one looks at how its language is used in the rest of the Constitution.

The maligned “the people” appears throughout the original document, also showing up in amendments 1, 4, 9, and 10. The phrase is used in the same fashion on every occasion. If it were to be looked at in the collective sense every time our nation would be very short on personal rights.

On New York’s gun laws…

By any standard, becoming shut-ins fearful of the outdoors is the only route health-conscious women could take under such circumstances. With a monster on the loose, a jaunt in the park could become a dangerous thing because women’s rights to protect themselves were thrown under the bus by Albany politics. Every single option that is available on the market in most states by which to give a woman an edge over a sexual predator is not an option here.

What if she wants a small pistol to keep on her person? A woman has to go through loopholes to get a pistol permit in NY, one of only twelve states that require such a permit, something in extreme defiance of our second amendment.

What if she wants to possess a stun gun? She can’t in New York, one of only six states in the whole US in which they are illegal despite their incredible level of safety.

What if she wants to carry pepper spray as a weapon? She has only a few places where she can buy it and she can only buy so much for New York is, once again, one of just a handful of states (8) with a limitation.

On the natural right to protect oneself….

What happened at Virginia Tech was a tragedy, a dramatic example of is what is allowed to occur day in, day out across our country. Innocents - whose ranks on a daily basis far outnumber the victims at Virginia Tech - are robbed, raped, maimed, or killed by stronger or armed predators. Our government has assisted in making them the victims by denying them the right – or making it difficult to reclaim the right – of protection.

This proves that any of Man’s laws that override natural laws are destined for disaster. The scheme of nature is such that we cannot change or inhibit the act of survival. If we do, only the fittest will survive…the fittest being those who are the most evil.

It’s because of these beliefs that the Libertarian Party of Niagara County finds fault in the Greater Niagara Newspapers’ editorial.

Written by Bob Confer, Niagara LP

To pay or not toupe?

As a Libertarian, I want you to keep as much of your money as possible.

And some of your are - rightly - confused about the $25 fee that's been mentioned in the press we've gotten ... so I thought I'd clear that up.

I was going to talk about confusion BETWEEN parties today, but I'm having a little trouble either finding or creating a concise list of party stances ... so instead I'll talk about confution WITHIN this party.

Anyone that meets voter registration guidelines in New York State may register as a Libertarian with their local board of elections. I have done so and encourage all of you to do the same. Just download this form and fill it out. Since we didn't get 50,000 votes for our last candidate for governor, John Clifton, we don't have "ballot status." Instead, you have to select "other" and write in "Libertarian."

And when it comes time to vote in 2008, I hope that all who have registered as Libertarians keep in mind which of the candidates shares the majority of our ideals. I hope that come November, 2008, we have a bonafide Libertarian choice at the ballot box, like we did in 2004 with Michael Badnarik.

So far, nothing has cost you a dime.

But here's where that $25 comes into play: In order for the NY Libertarian Party to grant official permanent status to our new chapter, we need dues paying members. We're required to have seven. So far, I know we have a handful. I hope we get a bunch more.

When we have our organizational convention (hopefull in January), we'll invite anyone who's interested in the Libertarian Party to come on out and say "hi." We'll allow anyone who's registered Libertarian with the Board of Elections to take part in the discussion. But when it comes down to voting on a board (Chairman, Vice Chair, Treasurer, Secretary, whatever we determine neccesary) and on bylaws (Rochester's got great bylaws), you'll have to be not only registered LP with the local BOE, but also a dues paying member. We won't charge dues locally, but the state mandates it on their end. Those are the rules the state gave to me ... I'm just passing 'em along. Board members themselves, must be dues paying members as well.

So to summarize, if you want a leadership position, pony up $25 for your state dues. If you want to vote on a leadership position, pony up the $25 for state dues. If you just want to help out, it's free. But keep in mind that the money the state committee gets goes to promote the Libertarian Party in New York and you should want to do that anyway. Also, keep in mind that until seven of us pay our dues, we can't have that convention. Don't wait for someone else to do it. Do it yourself.

The fun doesn't end at the convention. Bob and I plan on bringing in speakers to Niagara County and spreading freedom like wildfire. More on that soon. (I'd say tomorrow, but I kind of bombed with the comparison thing, so I'm not promising anything).

Good press ...

The Niagara LP has benefitted these past few days from some remarkably good press.

Of course, as the line goes, there's no such thing as bad press.

Soon after hearing from Jeff Russell - former US Senate candidate and New York State Libertarian Party committeeman - that the state committee has appointed me as temporary chairman of the Niagara County party, I drew up a press release and sent it on to some of my friends in the local media - WLVL news, the Buffalo News, and the Lockport Union-Sun & Journal.

Immediately, I started to see the fruits of my labor when WLVL News Director Doug Young ran a story about the new fledgling party (link to audio) on Thursday. I followed it up with an entire hour about what the Libertarian Party is and why we need it in Niagara county (link to audio). I got some questions and commentary from some friends of the show asking what this meant and why I was doing it.

The following day, The Buffalo News ran a decent-sized brief about the LP (story link), which precipitated a bit of a spike in our web traffic. I began to get some emails from people asking for more information about us and what we planned to do. Happy to oblige.

Sunday, a story appeared on the front page of the Union-Sun & Journal with a headline "People's Choice?" which I thought was quite fitting. The same story ran on the front page of the Niagara Gazette Monday, headlined: "A Political Party for the Cynical?" (story link)(image link)

And this morning, GNN columnist and fellow Libertarian (and one of the Niagara Chapter's fellow founders) had a column published extolling the virtues of the party and why YOU should join. (column link).

All good.

But you know there are nay-sayers.

Friday, after the Buffalo News story ran, another Niagara County-based blog was kind enough to republish the news story (blog link). Commentary included a question of whether I could still do my job as talk show host while serving as temporary chair of the Niagara LP. It's a legitimate question. The answer is that I most certainly can. My predecessor, in fact, was acting chairman of the county GOP while hosting the same show I host.

One of the posters to the site wasn't so relevant, using it as an opportunity to bash me, saying: "Leff was tossed out by the Dems, I'm sure it's just a matter of time he alienates this group as well. Of course, I'm sure that this will now be the focus of his show, with him shoving Libertarianism down his listeners throats. Just another reason for me not to listen." For the record, I've been tossed out of a lot of places in my life. The Democratic Party was never one of them. Also, I've extolled the virtues of Libertarianism for some time and will continue to do so. I don't, however, plan to turn my talk show into a daily infomercial for the LP.

This morning, the same blog posted a critique of the US&J story, saying that it had unattributed opinion listed as fact in the body of the story. (blog link) Trivial, maybe, but true and legitimate nonetheless. But once again, the posters to the site took it as a cue to turn it into a virtual pinata, somehow claiming that WLVL, the US&J and LCTV are all on a liberal-driven agenda.

At least they're writing about us.

Then this afternoon, a poster on the Union-Sun website asks if any of the LP organizers looked into the Working Families Party. (link) That's like asking if the Green's considered joining the Right-to-Life Party.

But, again, at least they're writing about us.

The good news is that all of this press has gotten us several inquiries into joining the Libertarian cause and will - hopefully - help us to build "the party of prinicple" in this land so-lacking it.

Tomorrow I'll talk about party confusion.

Niagara LP - it's not for everyone ...

Thursday morning, I devoted my show to the topic of the Niagara County Libertarian Party and why Niagara County needs a new political party.

I didn't expect a lot of phone calls - It was more informational that conversational - and I didn't get many. But I did get one from a woman who was upset about the Libertarian stance on narcotics.

I think she thought she was telling me something I didn't know - that the Libertarian Party would like to legalize drugs.

Of course, I was familiar with this platform position and I, personally, endorse it. The thought is that if you do something in the privacy of your own home and it doesn't effect anyone but yourself, there shouldn't be a law preventing it. Or as I put it yesterday, "If you sit in your basement and get baked while watching That '70s Show, how does that effect me?"

But the caller was opposed to that part of the Libertarian Party. I gathered from her reaction that she opposed it to the degree where it negated the LP from serious consideration for her.

That's fine. You can't please all the people all the time.

In fact, I certainly didn't please another listener with the same discussion.

(S)He was upset that I would contend that it should be okay to do drugs in your basement and immediately wrote an email to the station owner saying (s)he was going to write the FCC.

There's another person who won't be in the Libertarian Party.

Fortunately, that's only two people from Niagara County that have voiced opposition so for. We still have 219,998 potential members to go.

My take on the local election ...

In Niagara County, the voters overwhelmingly chose to stick with the status quo when they went to polls yesterday.

Does this mean they're happy with the way things are? Were they more dissatisfied with the opponent than the incumbent? Did they not know the difference? Are the districts unfairly purportioned? Was there simply not a good choice at the polling booth? Or did the opposition lack adequate leadership?

Well ... probably all of the above.

Certainly some voters feel that the Republican dominated legislature has looked after their best interest. They like the GOP's stance on tax breaks for businesses. They like that the legislature is divesting itself of a public-run nursing home. And they feel their legislators answer their needs as a whole.

Voters often feel as they're making a choice of the lesser of two evils, so I'm sure that for some it was a "hold your nose and pull a lever" moment when they walked into that election booth. Some people have told me that they voted for the person that annoyed them the least (with advertising, teledialing and direct mailing). And some surely felt like the challengers had no plan.

Far too high a percentage of voters are uneducated about the issues. They don't know who the vice president is, much less who their legislator is. And as a result, they have no clue if he or she is doing a good job. What these people do is vote "out of civic duty," forgetting that the first part of that civic duty is to inform themselves on the issues and candidates. This class of voter walks into a booth, looks for familiar names and pulls those levers. This is one of the main reasons for high incumbent return in elections from dogcatcher to US senator. Frankly, these people are part of the problem. And moreover, "get out the vote" campaigns themselves are a part of the problem, too. I could go on with the topic ... and maybe I will another day, but for now, I've explained adequately.

Each legislative district in Niagara County seems to have a natural bent to it. It's easier for Republicans to win in Lockport ... and for Democrats to win in Niagara Falls. Not much we could - or should for that matter - do about that. It's just demographics ... or republigraphics as the case may be here in Niagara. The only "solution" to that would be abolishing the districts and having all legislators run "at large." That creates other problems that - again - I may get to in a later post. So with this point, it is what it is.

Some felt that they would have liked better candidates with cleaner backgrounds, more knowledge, etc. Two of the Democrats running for election has previously declared bankruptcy. This disqualified them immediately in the eyes of many voters. Another got a DWI recently. He was toast as soon as that came out. Outsiders - or non-incumbents as it were - are also simply not familiar enough with the way the county operates. Incumbents exploit that to make the challengers look ill-equipped to handle the job. Of course, the incumbents were clueless, too, before they got elected. They forget to remind us of that.

And lastly is the leadership issue. The chairman of the Niagara County Democratic Party knew he had an uphill battle going into this race. He knew he had some issues to work with and went to work on those issues. But from an outside perspective, it looked like he had blinders on. AES and Mount View were the only topics candidates seemed to regurgitate. Some mentioned the fact that we're the second highest taxed county in the whole country ... but most stuck with AES and Mount View. I have to assume that they were advised to "keep it simple." The incumbent Republicans, though, had their own share of problems (referring to the previous graph) and the Dems failed to take advantage of them. They had their own bankruptcies. Their own DWIs. And other misgivings. But the leadership decided not to exploit those opportunities. Maybe they were trying to "keep it clean." More likely, they just pooched it.

This all leads me to the fact that Niagara County NEEDS an opposition party. Currently we have five parties to choose from: Three controlled by the GOP and two by the Dems. And if the Dems aren't up to it, we need something else.

I'll pick this up tomorrow morning.

Thanks.