The May 7, 2013 online edition of Forbes published my latest OpEd, “Why 3D-Printed Untraceable Guns Could Be Good For America“.

Here is the opening:

In the past few days, Forbes writer Andy Greenberg broke a pair of dramatic stories on Cody Wilson’s quest to build an untraceable plastic gun using commercially available 3D-printing technology. First, Greenberg published exclusive photos of the completed firearm, then he reported on a successful test firing of a live .380 cartridge.

Although the technology is still in its infancy, Wilson’s innovation has already sparked heated debate. Some gun rights advocates (including Wilson) argue this means current gun laws will soon be obsolete. They welcome the fact that home hobbyists may soon be able to build functioning firearms without any background check or government record. Others are alarmed, concerned that this would enable criminals to more easily obtain firearms. Congressman Steve Israel has already stated his intent to modify current laws to ban such guns.

However, Congressman Israel may be too late. Once thousands of motivated hobbyists start downloading open source gun designs and posting their refinements, we’ll likely see rapid technical advances. But Cody Wilson’s real impact on America may not be technological but political — and in a good way…

(Read the full text of “Why 3D-Printed Untraceable Guns Could Be Good For America“.)


Share This Post

 

Bob Levy, the Chairman of Cato’s Board, comes out in favor of background checks in the New York Times: A Libertarian Case for Expanding Gun Background Checks.

Extending background checks to unlicensed sellers shouldn’t be cause for alarm. Background checks are already required for purchases from federally licensed dealers, whether at stores or gun shows, over the Internet or by mail. Moreover, gun buyers would be exempt from background checks if they had a carry permit issued within the last five years.

That’s all the argument that he gives on that point, which shows a remarkable lack of concern for the well-grounded fears that background checks lead to registration, bans on sales, and then confiscation. On the other hand, we have this compelling argument:

Gun-rights advocates should use this interval to refine their priorities and support this measure, with a few modest changes. If they don’t, they will be opening themselves to accusations from President Obama and others that they are merely obstructionists, zealots who will not agree to common-sense gun legislation.

GRRR.

Granted, many Objectivist intellectuals have been lukewarm on gun rights, and they’ve said far worse. Still, I think that libertarians like Bob Levy know better — and that’s what makes this kind of aggressive compromise-peddling so worrisome to me. Based on my interview with John McCaskey on libertarianism’s moral shift, I have to think that we’ll see even more such calls for compromise in future.


Share This Post

Stay Classy, Colorado Democrats

 Posted by on 6 March 2013 at 12:00 pm  Activism, Colorado, Firearms
Mar 062013
 

Amanda Collins was a concealed carry permit holder, but due to university regulations at the time, not permitted to carry on campus. She was raped on campus. She testified against the proposed law that would ban concealed carry on campus in Colorado, and here, you can watch the reaction of a Republican and a Democratic state senator:

As much as I hate on Republicans — particularly our Colorado Republicans — they’re 100% on the side of the angels on this issue.


Share This Post

Reasons for Gun Control

 Posted by on 6 March 2013 at 10:00 am  Firearms, Rights
Mar 062013
 

I got a chuckle out of this:

I would have written “ignorance” instead… because wow, the most vocal advocates of gun control often seem to be woefully ignorant of the basic nature and workings of weapons, let alone the law and demands of self-defense. It’s just as embarrassing as seeing a creationist rant about how mere randomness couldn’t have created an eye.

But, as my friend Monica noted in reply to my remark:

Sometimes it’s ignorance, sometimes it’s stupidity, sometimes it’s because people really don’t believe the public can be trusted with weapons, and sometimes it’s because people don’t *want* the public to have weapons. I recently was involved in a thread in which a former military member rambled on about how much he loves operating rocket launchers but your average redneck shooting watermelons from the back of his truck simply can’t be trusted to operate firearms safely. That sort of attitude is fairly uncommon among members of the military, but it exists, and it has nothing to do with ignorance. It has to do with prejudice. I believe such a person belongs in the third or fourth category listed above (I’m honestly not sure which).

Indeed, I’ve definitely seen that kind of prejudice too. That’s part of why I think it’s so important for respected and trusted people to speak out to their friends and neighbors about guns, self-defense, and gun rights. Also, you might want to listen to — and share — tonight’s interview with Ryan Moore on How Guns Save Lives!


Share This Post

Colorado Governor Wavering On New Gun Laws

 Posted by on 23 February 2013 at 10:00 am  Activism, Colorado, Firearms, Politics
Feb 232013
 

CO Governor Hickenlooper is now wavering on some of the proposed new gun laws, in part due to the threat of Magpul Industries to leave the state if they pass and because of insensitive comments made by Democrats about women and rape that have made national news.

This is the perfect time for Colorado residents to contact his office and register an “AGAINST” position on the various gun bills.

Go to Contact the Governor. Then on the “Jurisdiction” dropdown menu, select “Legislation”. On the “Bill” dropdown menu, select the various gun laws up for consideration. You can then select “AGAINST” in the “For/Against” menu and leave a comment. (You also have to indicate your name, address, etc.)

I’ve already submitted my “AGAINST” comments. Comments don’t have to be long, because they’re mostly just tallying for/against. But I said the following:

On HB13-1224 (magazine restrictions): “If law enforcement officials might need more than 15 rounds to protect themselves and other innocent people, so might homeowners faced with multiple intruders.”

On HB13-1226 (concealed carry on college campus): “Experience from Colorado State University shows that concealed weapons holders can be responsible. Please don’t disarm women who the state of CO has already agreed are fit to carry a handgun for self-protection.”

Update from Diana: Here’s the text of the two emails that I just submitted to Governor Hickenlooper. Feel free to make use of them in crafting your own emails.

Please VETO HB13-1224

Please veto this bill. Just as law enforcement might need larger-capacity magazines, so might concealed-carry permit holders and people defending their homes against criminals.

This law is nothing but security theater, and it would not do anything to prevent mass shootings. Most people in Colorado know that. They support the right to self-defense, and they won’t support politicians who forcibly disarm law-abiding citizens.

Please VETO HB13-1226

Please support the right to self-defense on campus by vetoing this bill. Here’s what I wrote about it on my blog earlier this week:

When I was a graduate student at CU Boulder, I had to walk a few blocks off-campus, through a residential neighborhood, to get to my car. I took classes in the evening on occasion, and during those times, my walk was dark and lonely. Like other students, I’d receive periodic reports of sexual assaults just off-campus, and that worried me.

The police chief’s advice of carrying a “safety whistle” was pure absurdity to me. If I was attacked, that wouldn’t do me a lick of good. Also, I knew that I couldn’t hope to outrun my attacker: I’m a slow sprinter, and even in elementary school, I only ever beat the fat girl in running the 50-yard dash. Really, I wanted my “safety Ruger” — because that could have actually kept me safe! Instead, I often took Kate, my German Shepherd with me to those late classes. She probably wouldn’t have helped much if I’d been attacked, but she might have deterred a criminal.

Moreover, in the wake of school shootings, I hated to think of being disarmed and defenseless, particularly as a teacher in a classroom full of terrified students. I’d have an obligation to protect my students as best as I could, yet I’d be unable to do much of anything. I hated that with a passion.

***

Again, please support the right of people on campus to defend themselves. This laws will not prevent shooting on campus. It will only prevent the victims from defending themselves.


Share This Post

Feb 212013
 

PJ Media has published my latest OpEd, “Would New Gun Laws Spark Widespread Civil Disobedience?” (2/17/2013). I discuss why the gun issue could be so unusually volatile.

Here is the opening:

In his State of the Union address, President Obama doubled down on his gun-control proposals, again demanding that Congress ban so-called “assault weapons” and “high capacity magazines.” This is not a surprise. What has been a surprise are the increasingly open calls for defiance from gun owners, state legislatures, and local law enforcement. If the president’s proposals become law, he may move the country into turbulent waters we haven’t seen in many years.

Gun control has long been a controversial issue in American politics. However, there are three aspects to this issue that make this more volatile than other hot topics such as taxes, foreign policy, or abortion…

(For the rest, read the full piece: “Would New Gun Laws Spark Widespread Civil Disobedience?“, 2/17/2013)


Share This Post

Feb 202013
 

If you thought that only Republicans made idiotic comments about rape, think again. According to Colorado Democrat Joe Salazar, women on campus are incapable of understanding the basics of self-defense law, and so they should be disarmed so that they don’t “pop a round at somebody.”

Here’s what he said:

There are some gender inequities on college campuses. This is true. And universities have ben faced with that situation for a long time. It’s why we have call boxes. That’s why we have safe zones. That’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble — and when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop, pop a round at somebody.

Basically, the Democrats want to disarm women, so that they can’t fight off a rapist. Then the Republicans want to prevent those women from obtaining Plan B or an abortion, if they get pregnant. It’s lovely to see both sides united in the “War Against Women.”

Also, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs advises women to “Tell your attacker that you have a disease or are menstruating” and “Vomiting or urinating may also convince the attacker to leave you alone.” Because nothing could go wrong with that, right? (Note: That wasn’t posted in response to any of the recent debates about gun control, thankfully.)

Here’s what I said about the importance of allowing concealed carry on campus in a prior blog post:

When I was a graduate student at CU Boulder, I had to walk a few blocks off-campus, through a residential neighborhood, to get to my car. I took classes in the evening on occasion, and during those times, my walk was dark and lonely. Like other students, I’d receive periodic reports of sexual assaults just off-campus, and that worried me.

The police chief’s advice of carrying a “safety whistle” was pure absurdity to me. If I was attacked, that wouldn’t do me a lick of good. Also, I knew that I couldn’t hope to outrun my attacker: I’m a slow sprinter, and even in elementary school, I only ever beat the fat girl in running the 50-yard dash. Really, I wanted my “safety Ruger” — because that could have actually kept me safe! Instead, I often took Kate, my German Shepherd with me to those late classes. She probably wouldn’t have helped much if I’d been attacked, but she might have deterred a criminal.

Moreover, in the wake of school shootings, I hated to think of being disarmed and defenseless, particularly as a teacher in a classroom full of terrified students. I’d have an obligation to protect my students as best as I could, yet I’d be unable to do much of anything. I hated that with a passion.

I suspect (and even hope, somewhat) that the Democrats have reached their high-water-mark in Colorado with these new gun controls… if only the Republicans don’t out-stupid them before the 2014 election.


Share This Post

 

PJ Media has published my recent interview with my friend Ryan Moore:

“‘Carrying a Gun Saved My Life’: Meet Ryan Moore” http://pjmedia.com/blog/carrying-a-gun-saved-my-life-meet-ryan-moore/?singlepage=true

He talks about the time he needed to use his firearm in self-defense, what he learned from the experience, and what he thinks of proposed restrictions on gun magazines and so-called “assault weapons”.  Ryan offers an important perspective for anyone interested in the gun rights debate.

The interview has already gotten a nice Instapundit citation: http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/162482/


Share This Post

Letter to My US Senators on Proposed Gun Laws

 Posted by on 25 January 2013 at 10:00 am  Activism, Firearms, Politics
Jan 252013
 

I just sent e-mails to my two US senators opposing the proposed “assault weapons” ban.  I’ve included the text of my letter below, and others are welcome to adapt it for their own use.

You can contact your Senators using the link below.  (Most of them have a link on their websites to submit an e-mail.  Ours included drop down menus for topics, including “2nd Amendment”):

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state&Sort=ASC

My letter wasn’t super-polished, but I just wanted to hit a few key points:

Dear Senator [FILL IN NAME]:

I am a law-abiding Coloradan, a doctor, and a gun owner.  I’m also a swing voter who has voted for both Democrats and Republicans in the past few elections.

I’m writing to express my extreme opposition to Senator Feinstein’s proposed new “assault weapons ban”.  The guns she is trying to outlaw have legitimate uses for sporting and self-defense purposes.  Plus, the AR-15 platform and some of the affected features (such as the pistol grip) make it very ergonomic for shooters with less upper body strength (e.g., women), or older shooters with arthritis.  Outlawing such weapons would impose a disproportionate burden on such shooters.

Similarly, outlawing magazines with greater than 10-round capacity handicaps victims who may be caught by surprise by multiple attackers.

Finally, universal background checks are unnecessary and burdensome to honest citizens.  If one law-abiding citizen sells his used rifle to another, there is no victim and no harm.

Northeastern University criminology professor James Fox recently noted, “Most mass murderers do not have criminal records or a history of psychiatric hospitalization. They would not be disqualified from purchasing their weapons legally.”

Newtown killer Adam Lanza stole his mother’s guns — which would not have been prevented by a background check. Mandatory ID checks of law-abiding customers purchasing Sudafed in their local pharmacies have not stopped illegal meth labs. Similarly, mandatory background checks for private firearms purchases merely impose unnecessary new burdens on the law-abiding, but will not stop the bad guys.

I oppose every major provision of Senator Feinstein’s bill.  I’m writing to urge you to oppose the bill as well.

Paul Hsieh, MD Sedalia, CO

Hope others find this helpful!


Share This Post

 

Forbes has just published my latest OpEd, “Why Doctors Should Not Ask Their Patients About Guns“.

My theme is that physicians should not routinely ask patients whether they own guns, because it could compromise the integrity of the doctor-patient relationship.

Here is the opening:

Should doctors ask patients if they own guns? Currently, ObamaCare bans the federal government from using patient medical records to compile a list of gun owners. But following the Newtown, CT shootings, President Obama issued an executive order clarifying that “the Affordable Care Act [ObamaCare] does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.” The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) similarly encourages physicians to ask patients if they own firearms — in the name of protecting child safety.

As a physician, I consider this advice misguided. Instead, physicians should not routinely ask patients whether they own guns, because it could compromise the integrity of the doctor-patient relationship.

I cite Dave Kopel (who was one of many scholars who debunked the standard 43-to-1 flawed statistic about the danger of guns in the house) and also discuss the little-recognized fact that swimming pools are far more dangerous to kids than guns, yet no one asks for background checks for pool owners.

And many thanks to Dr. Matthew Bowdish for permission to quote him at the end of the piece!

(Read the full text of “Why Doctors Should Not Ask Their Patients About Guns“.)


Share This Post

Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha