Suboptimal

A Maryland gerrymandering case, this one brought by the Republican Party, after it lost an election in the newly gerrymandered district, was before the Supreme Court this week.

One of the plaintiffs’ arguments is that the redistricting “violated Republican voters’ free-expression and political-association rights.”

Justice Sam Alito had the correct response to that bit of nonsense:

[I]f understand it, I really don’t see how any legislature will ever be able to redistrict[]

If the Republicans don’t have anything more than whining about losing an election, how can their legitimate gerrymandering complaints be taken seriously?

School Shootings and Gun Control

At a Parkland high school, a thug went in and killed 17 while injuring several more; he was captured elsewhere and after several hours.  At a Maryland school, a thug went in, wounded two, and was killed.

There are some critical differences in the two situations.

The Parkland thug had a semi-automatic rifle, while the Maryland thug had a hand gun.

The Parkland thug obtained his rifle legally, if with some trouble (one potential seller refused the sale, having developed his own suspicions while interacting with the thug).  The Maryland thug obtained his pistol illegally.

At Parkland, the armed responder was a cop, stationed outside the school (I’m eliding his failure to enter).  At the Maryland school, the armed responder was inside the school.

There are a couple of lessons here.  One is that gun control laws didn’t keep the Maryland thug from getting his illegal weapon.  The other is that possessing guns while inside the target and being trained in their use shortened the shooting incident and yielded far fewer casualties and far less lethality.

Those lessons are universal.  They apply in schools, in supermarkets and other public gathering places, and around in the home.

There is a role for gun control.  Training in the use of guns is critical.  Practice so the defender can fire accurately is critical.  That’s critical gun control.

Public Records

The Seattle Times has the shameful story.

…a brazen attempt by [Washington State] lawmakers to exempt themselves from the state’s Public Records Act. These elected officials are evading the ruling of a judge and contradicting Attorney General Bob Ferguson, both of whom said legislators are subject to the law.

And

[SB 6617] tries to permanently ban access to lawmakers’ past emails, text messages and calendars, as well as past disciplinary proceedings and complaints about lawmakers’ conduct.

What are these guys trying to cover up?

With dizzying speed and no public debate, state lawmakers passed the bill sealing off thousands of records that could inform voters how well their elected leaders are representing them. The entire process took about 48 hours….

It must be something, or a lot of somethings.

The Times editors called on the State’s Progressive-Democrat Governor to veto the bill.  It’s not often I agree with these editors, but on this score, they’re absolutely right.  Jay Inslee agreed: he vetoed the bill Thursday.

Hmm….

Arms Keeping and Bearing “Reform”

The House passed a bill last December that greatly expands background checks and that mandates concealed-carry reciprocity among the several States.

The Senate should take up that bill without further delay and pass it as well.  With the much broader background checks, there’s no longer any rational argument for opposing concealed-carry reciprocity.

It’s a pipedream, though; there aren’t enough Progressive-Democrat Senators willing to vote for cloture.  The lack of progress is too important to them as a campaign issue.