Open Carry

Proponents of open carry argue that Texas is regressive because it is only one of seven states that does not allow the citizens to openly carry weapons in public. 11 states required permits and 21 others place restriction on those that wish to carry a gun. Therefore, proponents argue that we should too because we are now viewed by others as out of date. Proponents believe that everyone has a right to protect themselves and that open carry is a deterrent to crime. Further, they suggest that an open carry society is a polite society. However, proponents do not mentioned that crime rates have been going down because of the Brady Bill, and in states that have lax gun laws, the crime rates committed with guns have gone up. For example, Florida passed an open carry law in 1987 and the crime rates with guns has significantly gone up.

I find these arguments fallacious and wanting. Since most people are doing it (no matter what it is), I must do it too or I am old fashioned or socially unacceptable if I don’t. This is logically fallacious. Frequently, bravely dissenting is the moral and most effective thing to do. Further, proponents offer no hard evidence and data about the effectiveness of this policy as a deterrent to crime or a means of self protection. Further, they do not tell us how common the practice of open carry is or whether or not the public really want to carry guns. They simply make unsubstantiated claims. Although you do not make this point, I tend to agree with you instinctively that such a policy would cause public intimidation and make it difficult for police officer to effectively carry out their duties, but again we have no hard evidence for what we believe.

The most frequent argument that the proponents of open carry or gun crazies (I have a bias), as you noted, is that they are being denied their constitutional rights under the II Amendment. During colonial times and the early republic, citizens were frequently called up for militia duty and they had to supply their own arms as you note. That is why the second amendment was written. It also did not prevent individuals from using guns for lawful purposes. Proponents of open carry habitually misread the second amendment to promote their agenda.

By the way, the Europeans aren’t doing it. They think that Americans are gun crazy.

http://cypresscorner.blogspot.com/
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

The Latino Factor

Forrest Wilder in “The Latino Factor,” an opinion piece on the editorial page of the Texas Observer, explores racial bigotry in Texas judicial elections. He explores the campaign and voter results with the technical help of a social and political science researcher, who is identified as Beatty by Wilder. Specifically, Linda Reyna Yanez not only faced lack of funding in her campaign for judicial office, voter apathy, and republican domination of the office since 1994, but racial bigotry. Her colleague, J.R. Molina, faced the same kind bigotry in his bid for office on the Texas District Court of Criminal Appeal.

Wilder contrasts what he calls the Latino Factor with the Bradley Effect. As result of the Bradley Effect, voters will say they will vote for a candidate of another race because they do not want to appear bigoted but intend to do the opposite. Voters in Texas, especially white rural voters, will vote against a candidate simply on the basis of their racial or ethnic surnames. This is what Wilder terms the Latino Factor. If your first name is Mekisha or Askish, forget it. Mekisha Murray changed her name to Jane to increase business in law firm and win political office.

Beatty found that the whiter and the more rural voters were, the more they simply voted on the basis of racial or ethnic bias and name recognition. The pictured changed in places like the Rio Grand valley and San Antonio. His study only had a .00004 probability of error. Even after controlling variables, such as race, age, homeownership, and income, his percentage result after regression analysis was an unbelievable and highly improbable 39 %.

This data and this particular election voter analysis simply support what is well known by sociologist and historians in Texas. Mexicans and Hispanics have been second class citizens and subject to bigotry and degrading treatment since white Texas immigrants began to dominate the state when they are invited to Texas by Mexico during the Westward Movement and after the Mexican American War. Although almost a majority, Mexicans are still second class citizens in Texas and are generally at the bottom of the socio-economic strata. These two political incidents also raise the question about the judicial elections and whether they are bias. Although judges insists they follow the constitution and legal precedents, can a white judiciary, or almost all white judiciary, voted in by a white electorate dispense justice equitably and without bias? Why are 2/3 of the prison population black or Hispanic? Why have so many a minorities been released on the basis of DNA evidence after decades of imprisonment?

In conclusion, Forrest Wilder and political scientist Beatty provide hard evidence of bigotry in Texas and give us much food for thought.

http://www.texasobserver.org/article.php?aid=2906