User Profile: Holger Danske

Member Since: June 17, 2011

CommentsDisplaying Holger Danske's 10 most recent comments.

  • One thing that did strike me during the filibuster was how respectful Senator Paul was at all times. My own Senator (Cruz) was clearly more willing to take a partisan position, but Paul debated the issue only and did not attack any individuals. A class act. I am sorry Senator McCain was incapable of acting with the same level of decency.

  • If you ignore the data, discourage others from collecting data, and listen only to statist ideology, then the chief is correct. However, if you actually look at the data as a study did almost 30 years ago now (Gary Kleck 1988 in the journal “Social Problems”), you find that in a given year:

    * 1500-2800 felons were legally killed by gun-wielding civilians
    * 8700-16000 felons were non-fatally wounded
    * Guns were used defensively about 1 million times.

    I would suggest that we collect data to update these figures, but I’m sure there would be all sorts of efforts to keep that kind of information from getting out … because it doesn’t help the statist cause.

  • Reminds me of this classic scene from Mel Brooks’ History of the World Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk47saogI8o.

    “They are my people, I am their sovereign. I love my people. Pull.”

  • The Constitution says that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. It says nothing about “unless it is for profit.”

  • Regarding Straw Man #7 — besides, it is not the effort that counts, it is the performance. If a person, regardless of the color of their skin, their gender, their age, etc., is able to get the job done twice as well as me in half the time, they should get paid twice what I get paid. That’s true even if I worked really hard at it.

  • The mother is a hero, but this is far from rare. As any reader of NRA’s “First Freedom” can attest to, guns are used to protect citizens with great regularity. Moreover, as (former liberal professor) Gary Kleck’s classic and still relevant 1988 article “Crime Control Through the Private Use of Armed Force” (Social Problems, Vol 35, No 1 for those wishing to look it up) this illustrates why burglary is less frequent in the US than in “gun free” countries like the UK and more specifically, why burglars avoid breaking and entering when people are in their homes in the US to a far, far greater degree than in the UK, where there is no threat of immediate punishment.

  • Whether or not we can compare the lessons from Britain and Australia to the U.S. remains to be seen. However, the stats presented in the article are certainly better than the usual misinformation presented by activists, members of Congress, and your average journalist. As you note, there are a myriad factors that make cross-national comparisons bogus. Which is why it is helpful to examine “natural experiments” holding as many things constant as possible (for example by focusing on just within a country) and varying only one thing — in this case passage of gun laws. On this account, examining outcomes in Britain and Australia is very relevant. It is, however, completely flawed to point to gun crimes between countries (so comparing gun violence in Australia and the U.S., Denmark and the U.S., etc.) as there are way too many intervening variables. One major factor that is invariably ignored is cultural homogeneity. By definition, this is impossible to achieve in a nation of immigrants. While this will result in conflict, it also breeds genius and innovation, making the U.S. the great country that it is.

  • You left out “unexpectedly”. The revision will be unexpected once again…

  • This was obviously satirical, but it does highlight an important point: Why does Toure think that these things would be good for the nation? Two years of national service — presumably it teaches some valuable skills in terms of showing up for work, learning to take orders, being dedicated, acquiring a diversity of skills, etc. But why have we lost this? Because the very same government has priced and regulated kids out of the market. While the minimum wage law was well-intended, hiking it by 40 percent (by a Dem Congress and Pres Bush) effectively removed the youth from the labor force. Further regulating what kids under 18 are allowed to do eliminates them from those experiences. Again, well-intentioned, but without any thought about unintended consequences. If they just stopped to think about the unintended consequences of these absurd new mandates, we would be a good deal better off today.

  • And good for the parents for teaching the kids. Seems like those parents ended up enriching the education of a whole class, not just their own kid.