My dear friend Scott Resnick is campaigning for Alderman in Madison. He has just released his first policy paper on alcohol policy, available here: http://www.resnickfordistrict8.com/
Check it out!
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
The Tuscon Tragedy: Fallout
First, let me start off by expressing my deepest condolences for those affected by the shooting in Tucson. My deepest sorrow is reserved Christina Taylor Green, the nine-year-old cut down before she reached her true potential. That she was born on September 11th and died in this horrible event is saddening; a life bookended by terror. It is indicative, I think, of how we live in an age of fear.
I won't be discussing the events directly, or the shooter, or the debate over the causes. We've heard them all, repeatedly. I am interested in solutions; finding means to insure tragedies like this become rarer, and eventually non-existant. What follows is a list of ideas.
Immediate Solutions
1. Outlaw the sale of high-capacity magazines. Why does the civilian population need a magazine that holds twenty or thirty rounds? Hunters shouldn't need more than two, maybe three bullets to take down game. If you need more than two rounds to defend yourself, you need the police more than you need your gun. Bottom line, I cannot think of a rational justification for civilians to own high-capacity magazines.
2. Improve the background check system. Currently the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) works like this: a prospective purchaser fills out a form. This form asks relatively simple questions, such "have you been convicted of a crime," or "do you currently suffer from mental illness." Notice the first problem. While it is relatively simple to ascertain the truth regarding criminal record, mental illness can go undetected and there may be no record. If the dealer is in a Point-of-Contact (POC) state, the dealer will then contact the POC, an automated system that accesses the NICS, which is linked to a number of federal information systems (criminal records, basic identifications). These records are federal only. They do not contain records held by the state, and some states do not run background checks on their own records. I would recommend that all states run additional background checks on the state level in addition to the federal background check.
Intermediate and Long-Term Solutions
3. Increase funding, at all levels, for mental health care. As a particular few of my friends will tell you, the brain is perhaps among the least-understood organs. From what I gather, care for mental illness barely reaches parity with physical illness. I am hoping that some of my more medically-inclined friends can expand on this point, but I don't think I am far off in recommending better funding for, access to, and education about mental illness and mental health care.
4. Better parenting. This is probably going to sound really soft. The origin of the Tucson tragedy, as with many tragedies, is hate. Loughner shot Giffords because, among other things, he hated the government. Shelley Shannon killed George Tiller because Shannon hated abortion, Sirhan shot RFK because Sirhan hated Israel (and Kennedy's support for that state), James Earl Ray killed King because Ray hated black people. Like it or not, hate is the primary motivator for people to take a gun to other people. We need to do a better job teaching that it's not ok to hate. Look at the bullying incidents of the past few years; those kids were not taught that it is not ok to hate. In some cases, they were taught it was OK to hate. Until people are able to know the difference between disagreement, dislike, and hate, then there will be more killings.
What else can we do to avoid future Tucsons?
I won't be discussing the events directly, or the shooter, or the debate over the causes. We've heard them all, repeatedly. I am interested in solutions; finding means to insure tragedies like this become rarer, and eventually non-existant. What follows is a list of ideas.
Immediate Solutions
1. Outlaw the sale of high-capacity magazines. Why does the civilian population need a magazine that holds twenty or thirty rounds? Hunters shouldn't need more than two, maybe three bullets to take down game. If you need more than two rounds to defend yourself, you need the police more than you need your gun. Bottom line, I cannot think of a rational justification for civilians to own high-capacity magazines.
2. Improve the background check system. Currently the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) works like this: a prospective purchaser fills out a form. This form asks relatively simple questions, such "have you been convicted of a crime," or "do you currently suffer from mental illness." Notice the first problem. While it is relatively simple to ascertain the truth regarding criminal record, mental illness can go undetected and there may be no record. If the dealer is in a Point-of-Contact (POC) state, the dealer will then contact the POC, an automated system that accesses the NICS, which is linked to a number of federal information systems (criminal records, basic identifications). These records are federal only. They do not contain records held by the state, and some states do not run background checks on their own records. I would recommend that all states run additional background checks on the state level in addition to the federal background check.
Intermediate and Long-Term Solutions
3. Increase funding, at all levels, for mental health care. As a particular few of my friends will tell you, the brain is perhaps among the least-understood organs. From what I gather, care for mental illness barely reaches parity with physical illness. I am hoping that some of my more medically-inclined friends can expand on this point, but I don't think I am far off in recommending better funding for, access to, and education about mental illness and mental health care.
4. Better parenting. This is probably going to sound really soft. The origin of the Tucson tragedy, as with many tragedies, is hate. Loughner shot Giffords because, among other things, he hated the government. Shelley Shannon killed George Tiller because Shannon hated abortion, Sirhan shot RFK because Sirhan hated Israel (and Kennedy's support for that state), James Earl Ray killed King because Ray hated black people. Like it or not, hate is the primary motivator for people to take a gun to other people. We need to do a better job teaching that it's not ok to hate. Look at the bullying incidents of the past few years; those kids were not taught that it is not ok to hate. In some cases, they were taught it was OK to hate. Until people are able to know the difference between disagreement, dislike, and hate, then there will be more killings.
What else can we do to avoid future Tucsons?
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Prof. Feingold: Class is In Session
Former U.S. Senator and all-around good guy Russ Feingold has been appointed as a visiting professor of law at Marquette University. In addition to writing a book (something all of us in academia must do at some point), Professor Feingold will be teaching a course entitled Current Legal Issues: The U.S. Senate. This upper-level elective will be offered this coming semester.
It goes without saying that, with few exceptions, Russ Feingold is uniquely suited to teach this course. (Interestingly, Arlen Spector is also entering academia at UPenn's law school). Many professors are able to teach about American legislature, how bills are made into law, and the nuances of Congress. Few have actually been in office long enough to tell you how everything really works. I have a feeling that Professor Feingold's class will be invaluable to any law student with political aspirations, whether that student agrees with the professor's politics or not.
Now, to proceed to a question I am sure all Badgers are asking: why is Russ Feingold teaching at Marquette, and not at UW? He's a Badger alum (B.A. '75), he lives in nearby Middleton, and the University of Wisconsin is the flagship of the public university system of the state. Well, allow me to hazard a couple guesses.
First, as a state school, UW is under scrutiny by a deeply partisan legislature; you cannot deny this. If the university were to hire a former Democratic senator who was just ousted in the last election, I would venture to say there would be bickering going on in the Capitol. The university doesn't need that right now, especially with a new governor and legislature. Marquette, on the other hand, is a private university that doesn't have to answer to the state with regards to who it hires. Besides, if I were a Dem who lost in 2010, I just wouldn't want to hang around Madison just now.
Second guess, and far more mercenary: Marquette offered a better financial package. Or, Russ, in addition to teaching and writing, will be back practicing law, and he wanted to work somewhere besides Madison.
Overall, I'm glad Marquette hired Russ, and I'm insanely jealous of the students who will attend his class. Obviously, there are some blowhards out there that think it's wrong for Russ to be in the classroom, influencing the opinions of the youth and all that crap. Well, 1st: the youngest law student is 22, plenty old enough to think for himself. Russ isn't teaching kindergarten here. 2nd: what else should he do? This way he continues to give back to the community in the form of teaching, and he imparts his particular experiences and knowledge to the next generation.
Well, what else should he do?
It goes without saying that, with few exceptions, Russ Feingold is uniquely suited to teach this course. (Interestingly, Arlen Spector is also entering academia at UPenn's law school). Many professors are able to teach about American legislature, how bills are made into law, and the nuances of Congress. Few have actually been in office long enough to tell you how everything really works. I have a feeling that Professor Feingold's class will be invaluable to any law student with political aspirations, whether that student agrees with the professor's politics or not.
Now, to proceed to a question I am sure all Badgers are asking: why is Russ Feingold teaching at Marquette, and not at UW? He's a Badger alum (B.A. '75), he lives in nearby Middleton, and the University of Wisconsin is the flagship of the public university system of the state. Well, allow me to hazard a couple guesses.
First, as a state school, UW is under scrutiny by a deeply partisan legislature; you cannot deny this. If the university were to hire a former Democratic senator who was just ousted in the last election, I would venture to say there would be bickering going on in the Capitol. The university doesn't need that right now, especially with a new governor and legislature. Marquette, on the other hand, is a private university that doesn't have to answer to the state with regards to who it hires. Besides, if I were a Dem who lost in 2010, I just wouldn't want to hang around Madison just now.
Second guess, and far more mercenary: Marquette offered a better financial package. Or, Russ, in addition to teaching and writing, will be back practicing law, and he wanted to work somewhere besides Madison.
Overall, I'm glad Marquette hired Russ, and I'm insanely jealous of the students who will attend his class. Obviously, there are some blowhards out there that think it's wrong for Russ to be in the classroom, influencing the opinions of the youth and all that crap. Well, 1st: the youngest law student is 22, plenty old enough to think for himself. Russ isn't teaching kindergarten here. 2nd: what else should he do? This way he continues to give back to the community in the form of teaching, and he imparts his particular experiences and knowledge to the next generation.
Well, what else should he do?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)