The New Psychology of Time

This was an interview of Stanford Professor Philip Zimbardoon on NPR’s “Think”, which is broadcast in the Dallas area. (The podcast is available at http://www.kera.org/audio/think.php.)

This professor seems to be studying an interesting and important aspect of the human mind, which is the capability for long-range planning and thinking. He seems to take the position that this is a skill that must be developed rather than an automatic function, which I agree with. He noted his work with inner-city youths to teach them how to think long-range, which illustrates that it is a skill that must be learned. Another interesting statement by this professor was when he noted that school students need to be taught how to engage in long-range planning, and that this skill is one of the things that distinguishes (most) adults from children –as well as what distinguishes (most) modern men from primitive man. I also agree with this. He said something to the effect of: schools should teach children how to meditate on taking long-range action, which I took to mean: visualize a goal, then think about what they need to do to achieve that goal, and (presumably) take action to achieve that goal. If only Texas schools spent time teaching children this skill, instead of wasting time on that meaningless minute I’ve spoken of before.

Texas “Open Carry” Petition

Anybody who has ever spent much time immersed in the gun culture will quickly discover that there are certain debate topics that come up again and again. One of these is the “open carry versus concealed carry” debate. (Do a Google search for online forums if you are interested in learning the pros and cons of “open carry”.) Since “open carry” isn’t generally a legal option in Texas, I don’t have an opinion one way or the other on it. But, that may change if the creators of this online petition have anything to say about it. I intend to sign it for the simple reason that it increases liberty -which I am always in favor of. Also, here is the Dallas Morning News article where I learned about this.

Going Postal: No Gun Required

Two stories in the news interest me today. First, a man here in the US went on an, er, “beating-spree”, bludgeoning at least eight people to death in Illinois. (Chicago Illinois is well-known for its strict gun control laws.) Meanwhile, in Israel, a man went on an, er, “bulldozing spree”, and killed 3 people with a bulldozer before someone in civilian clothing jumped aboard and shot him in the head. A lot of Israelis exercise their right to keep and bear arms, so it would be no surprise if a civilian had a gun with him. This is why restrictions on gun ownership are a waste of time, and can actually cause more damage when people decide to “go Postal”.

Texas Pledge Briefs

My client David Croft has posted some of the briefs in the Texas Pledge case, which is a challenge to the insertion of the language “under god” into the Texas State Pledge on the grounds that it violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Public school children are required, absent a note from their parents, to recite the Texas State Pledge prior to beginning school. (Yes, Texas has its own pledge of allegiance.)

I wanted to mention this because I am, quite frankly, more proud of my work on the Texas Pledge and Texas Moment of Silence cases than of anything I have ever done. I may never get to see laissez faire capitalism, which I think will require broad societal support in order to elect the right politicians to the legislature, but I will always try to do what I can, as one person, to ensure that America doesn’t become more socialist, or, possibly worse, backslide into medieval theocracy.

Pigeons Terminated

There is a fundamental fact of reality that distinguishes how one should deal with other human beings versus how one should deal with other entities. This distinction is the human capacity for thought. A human being can be persuaded, and this should be how one should initially try to deal with other human beings. Unlike a human being, a force of nature, such as a hurricane or a meteorite cannot be reasoned with. The only way to deal with non-human entities is with force. This includes the lower animals which do not possess the capacity of reason. Although it is possible that someday we will encounter a non-human with the capacity of reason, or, perhaps, even have sufficient evidence to suggest that some currently-known non-human organism possesses such a capacity (that’s doubtful), human beings are the only currently known rational being. This fact means that an animal consciousness is more like a hurricane or other non-volitional entity, and must be dealt with by means of force. Just as a non-rational body of water can be diverted or dammed if it is inconvenient for human beings, so too can an animal be destroyed if it is inconvenient for human beings. It is with this in mind that I read with some amusement about the fretting of “animal rights” activists over the destruction of some pigeons at a tennis tournament in Great Britain. To me, this is like fretting over the damming of a river or, if we possessed the technology, the destruction of a hurricane headed towards one of our major cities.

A Good Example of Why You Never Consent To A Police Search

I have a blanket policy when it comes to the police: I don’t consent to any search. If stopped by a cop, I don’t say anything, other than “Am I free to go?”, if not, I ask for my lawyer and stop talking. It doesn’t matter how innocent I think I am. How do I know for certain that somebody hasn’t planted or accidentally dropped contraband in my car or house? How do I know that the cop won’t try to plant contraband? Yes, it does happen -remember the fake drugs scandal in Dallas? Anybody who thinks cops are more ethical or moral than the general population is a fool.

This article presents another facet of why you shouldn’t voluntarily cooperate with law enforcement. In this case, a man was fired from his job and faced prosecution for possession of child pornography, all because his laptop had a virus on it that caused it to download child pornography off the Internet. If you consent to a search of your computer, you may end up in prison and branded as a sexual predator for life, when you are, in fact, 100% innocent.

Link to Amicus Brief in Moment of Silence Case

The following is a link to an amicus brief in the Texas Moment of Silence Appeal: http://www.au.org/site/DocServer/Texas_Moment_of_Silence_Brief.pdf?docID=2701. I’ll probably add Americans United for Separation of Church and State to my list of single-issue organizations that I donate money to (along with Gun Owners of America and the National Taxpayer’s Union). I prefer single-issue groups because I know that all of the money is going exclusively to a cause that I agree with.

Tolling Mockingbird Lane

Ideally, city services that do not involve police protection or the courts would be completely privatized. Under such a system, tolling city roads would make perfect sense, especially since the technology now exists to do this without toll booths. That is why I like the idea of tolling Mockingbird Lane in Dallas, but I suspect that so long as the road is ultimately owned by the State of Texas, this idea to toll Mockingbird Lane for nonresidents of the city may not be Constitutional due to something known as the “dormant commerce clause”, and/or the “privileges and immunities clause”. This Wikipedia article says that there is a “market participant” exception to the dormant commerce clause, but I don’t know if the courts would say that it applies in this situation. There would still be an issue of the right to travel, which is recognized by Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution. The only way to avoid all of this would be to toll everyone who uses Mockingbird Lane, regardless of residency.

Does A Culture Have Rights?

A previously unknown tribe of aboriginal people has been spotted by plane in South America. The photos in the article about this discovery show people wearing loin cloths and shooting bows and arrows at the overflying plane that is photographing them. The article quotes Jose Carlos Meirelles, a member of some, presumably, multiculturalist group, who suggests that unless “something” is done these primitive cultures will soon be extinct. He obviously doesn’t mean that these primitive people are going to be murdered, since that is illegal, even in Brazil. In fact, he doesn’t mean that these people are going to have their rights to life, liberty, or property violated, since they presumably have equal rights under Brazilian law, just like any other individual. (If they do not have equal and full individual rights under Brazilian law, or whatever nation they are in, then I do not dispute that they should have such equal rights.) Just because these primitive people should have equal, individual rights under the law does not mean that they have a “right to a primitive way of life”, when that would violate the individual rights of others. For instance, these primitive people do not have a “right” to murder or enslave people who happen onto their “territory” just because it is part of their “culture” and “way of life”.

This applies to primitive people living here in the United States as well, such as the group in West Texas known as the “Fundamentalist Church of Latter-Day Saints”. The issues in this case are not entirely clear to me, and I am not certain that the State handled this situation entirely properly. Obviously, consenting adults should be free to marry whomever they want, in whatever numbers, but I am uncertain what the age of consent should be, and when or if it should be disregarded by a court in particular circumstances. I am also uncertain what the minimum age to marry should be, and whether it should matter if the girl’s parents consent to the marriage. But, I think that sex with a 12 year old girl, which is alleged to have occurred in this case, is probably always rape, regardless of any alleged consent by her or her parents. Just like the primitive people living in the jungles of Brazil, the mere fact that these people may make the multiculturalist argument that this is their “way of life” does not give them the right to violate individual rights, and it is fairly clear to me that such violations did occur.

Cultures don’t have rights. Individuals have rights, and people from a culture that institutionalizes the violation of individual rights have no right to put those ideas into practice.