Last year, Ohio passed a law which allowed people to apply for licenses to carry concealed firearms in public.
Itís not easy, though. The applicant has to pass a minimum level of training, submit their fingerprints, allow the sheriff to conduct a background check, and pay a fee.
Even after all that, the CCW license holder has many restrictions as to where they can go while armed. For example, they canít enter a school building or loiter on a campus. (And we all know how effective restricting legal firearms is when it comes to reducing school violence.)
One of the provisions in the law is that private citizens can bar CCW license holders from entering their property while armed, even if the property is a business open to the public. This is particularly distressing to me, a fully qualified self defense instructor, since it means that I probably wonít be able to protect anyone from violent attack even if the crime should happen right in front of me. Even so, I canít say that I object to the owner of a private business barring me from their establishment. Itís their property, after all, and they have the right to make such decisions. I just go somewhere else.
Lex has posted about a campaign to shut off television sets in bars, restaurants and other public places. A universal remote small enough to ride on a keychain will turn off virtually any TV. The idea is that those who donít like TV will lurk in the crowd, anonymous and unseen, and deploy their remotes whenever they feel like it. Should the owner or an employee turn the set back on, these activists will simply shut them down again. Watching TV in a public place would become impossible if enough people buy the remotes and use them religiously.
Iím afraid that I canít agree with Lex (and Mrs. Lex) about this at all. For one thing, theyíve decided to make the decision as to whether or not Iím going to watch television in a public place. It doesnít matter what my wishes or the wishes of the owner happen to be, theyíve already decided for us.
Another thing that bothers me is that theyíve decided to bypass the usual methods of making their displeasure known. They could picket the business, for example, or gather signatures on a petition to show general support. They could even try to get some legislation on the ballot in order to limit the number of televisions found in public places. Or they could just leave and never spend any money there again.
Iíd have to say that the one thing that bothers me the most about the proposal to hijack TV viewing is that it smacks of electronic vandalism. Instead of having some punk deface a building so it conforms to his ideal, we have a group of people who want to force their ideal of a perfect gathering place on the rest of us.
And, like a vandal, the only way they can get away with it is if they slink around in the shadows instead of standing up to be counted. I think this is a terrible idea. A simple glance at the comments left on some of the posts here will convince you that the people quickest to resort to insult, those least interested in any meaningful exchange, are those who hide behind pseudonyms. Iíve already listed a few ways to effect change that are legal and ensure that the wishes of the majority are respected. Why not try them?
It looks like Glenn has been seduced by the Dark Side.