Laws, Ordinances & Regulations

Canadian Libertarian Leader on Mandates

Tim Moen, from up near Edmonton, has led the Canadian Libertarian party for the past 7 years.  His views regarding the unacceptability of pandemic mandates are available at timmoen.net.  He doesn’t write like the late L. Neil Smith – and the article I’ve linked to is definitely beyond Biden. 

Moen starts with details on the non-aggression principle – while he describes it as completely as Smith did, it’s a bit harder read:

Libertarians hold that the only morally legitimate use of force is in response to the initiation of force against a person or their property. So when we are determining whether the use of force is ethical (or legal in a libertarian order) we need to know whether the force was initiatory or defensive (in response to initiatory force).”

He adds

The argument being made by radical centrists (ie most politicians and establishment bureaucrats) is that all sorts of force must be used during a pandemic in the name of protecting people or decreasing pandemic spread or death. Libertarians do not judge government force (policy) based on whether it had the desired outcome, we judge it based on whether that force is moral or immoral, defensive or initiatory.”

Moen offers thoughts on essential and non-essential workers:

During the covid pandemic the government divided people into two classes; essential workers and non-essential workers. Ironically the language “essential worker” used to be used by government to force striking employees to go to work and now its being used to force people to not work. If you disobey government orders and open your “non-essential” comic book store, restaurant, or movie theatre you’d get some warnings and eventually men with guns would come and use force to shut you down. Is this force justified?

A business owner is not initiating force against anyone by opening his store and serving customers. The customers are not initiating force against anyone by patronizing that store. So any force used against these peaceful people engaged in consenting activity ought to be considered criminal. It is not defensive force because it is not responding to any initiation of force. On the other hand if a person in that store is covid positive then they are initiating force against others assuming that their exhaled air containing harmful contagious pathogens is being inhaled by those around them. Force would be justified against the force initiator but not the innocent individuals.”

It isn’t an easy read – but he does make his points and reasoning clear – which is a lot different than most of the political rhetoric we read.

Community, Laws, Ordinances & Regulations

Beyond Ghost Guns

I ran across an article called “Beyond State Control” published by   SmallArmsSurvey.org.

The report takes up 128 pages, and does a pretty good job of showing spots where gun control legislation has failed.  Page 80 shows production of submachine guns in Canada:

Canadian authorities have also seized significant numbers of craft-produced submachine guns from criminals. In December 2015, Toronto police found what was described as a ‘Tec9’ sub-machine gun in an abandoned vehicle (CityNews, 2015). The gun, actually a craft-produced copy of the Intratec TEC-9, was one of many produced at a plant in Montreal, Quebec. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police have since traced more than two dozen of these to 18 locations across Canada (Berthiaume, 2018). The sub-machine guns in question were produced at a metal-working factory and feature two CNC-machined polymer halves used to form the frame of the gun, a distinguishing feature of other TEC-9/DC-10 copies (see Image 38). The barrels were threaded to accept craft-produced suppressors, also made in the factory. Two factory directors were charged with firearms offences; they had reportedly told factory employees that they were manufacturing parts for paintball guns (Berthiaume, 2018).”

Their illicit product looked something like this:

Earlier, the authors explain why the submachine guns are so common as what they term “craft-produced small arms: “Sub-machine guns are perhaps the most widely documented craft-produced small arms in circulation (ARES, 2018; ImproGuns, n.d.). Their high rate of fire and low cost make them attractive to organized criminal groups. Often chambered for the common 9 × 19 mm cartridge, they are frequently based on Second World War or cold war designs, such as the British Sten and the US M3 ‘grease gun’. As such, they almost always operate on the simple blowback69 principle, firing from an open bolt (ARES, 2018; Jenzen-Jones, 2017a). Pulling the trigger releases not the firing pin but the entire bolt, which picks up a cartridge from the magazine, chambers it, and fires it by means of a fixed firing pin. The bolt is then ‘blown’ backward by the fired cartridge, such that the empty case is extracted and ejected, while the bolt is returned to the rear, where it is ready for the next shot. These weapons require none of the complex machining and engineering needed to create a reliably functioning locked-breech firearm, and they can be relatively safe to operate.”

The photographic quality is probably lower than the machining quality – while these examples were taken from a protestant group in Northern Ireland, I suspect the Provisional IRA has equally skilled folks in their workshops.

Another article, from the same folks in Switzerland is “Craft Production”, found here.

It begins with “Craft production of small arms refers principally to weapons and ammunition that are fabricated largely by hand in relatively small quantities. Government authorities may tightly regulate and oversee these artisans’ activities and outputs (expensive replica antique firearms legally produced in the United States are a good example). Often, however, this material is produced outside of, or under limited, state controls. These weapons are often used in crimes and against government targets.” 

The problem with legislating gun control is that some folks out in the real world are better at making guns than the folks trying to stop them.  If they’ve been making submachine guns in Quebec, I suspect the idea of shutting down ghost guns by legislation is closing the barn  door after the horse is in the garden.

Community, Demography

Beer Taxes North and South

I listened to a comment from north of the line about how cheap beer is south of the 49th parallel.  So I decided to investigate – and a lot of the difference is alcohol prices is the governmental controls.  Taxes do make a difference in what we drink – particularly when we look at alcoholic beverages. 

A 2018 report titled “Beer Taxes – A Canadian – U.S. Comparison” makes the research easy.  “Beer taxes in Canada are higher in both absolute value and when calculated as a percentage of selling price with an average government beer tax percentage of 47% (of retail price) in Canadian provinces versus an average government tax percentage of 17% in U.S. states.”  Working the math is an exercise in keeping your units straight.    In Canadian dollars, a case of beer is $2.09 taxes in Montana, and $17.32 in British Columbia.  

Montana taxes beer at 14 cents/gallon, Wyoming at just 2 cents/gallon, and Tennessee at $1.29/gallon. It’s a little harder to calculate the Federal taxes on beer:  $3.50 per barrel on the first 60,000 barrels for domestic brewers producing fewer than 2 million barrels annually; or $16 per barrel on the first 6 million barrels for all other brewers and all beer importers; and $18 per barrel rate for barrelage over 6 million. Wikipedia assures me that there are 31 gallons in a barrel of beer.  So we’re looking at 72 cents on the gallon of a big producer’s beer going for taxes in Montana, while craft beers from small brewers are a little more than a dime per gallon. 

Essentially, every time you buy a beer north of the line, you buy a beer for the government.  South of the line, every time you buy a six-pack, you buy one for the government.

Next week – taxation of hard liquor differences.