Comments on: Tyler Cowen’s Militarism Matrix

By: derek

derek — Fri, 11 Dec 2015 19:43:23 +0000

I believe I have a very credible enforcement strategy for moderate gun control, which is to say that guns must be stored securely so that they are not used inappropriately by children (ie toddlers on playdates) or high risk groups (mental health factors, terrorism suspicion if that’s the way the government goes). If a gun is not stored appropriately (the specifications of this are an easily surmountable technical detail that we should simply recognize and move on) and then kills someone accidentally or on purpose, the owner is subject to criminal and civil liability.

Civil liability already exists, but it is rarely used. We should make winning these cases easier by introducing clear guidelines and legal mandates for gun storage, and we should encourage victims and their survivors to file suit. Criminal liability would work similarly. The incentives for proper gun storage do not seem to be nearly enough.

I would also give the boilerplate that background checks need to be a lot stricter and that internet/gun show loopholes need to be closed.

By: Andrew'

Andrew' — Fri, 11 Dec 2015 11:57:10 +0000

Btw, aside from granting it for the sake of argument. What is the link between gun ownership and foreign policy? For example, this “martial South” was on the non- interventionist side of the civil war. Put simply, walk softly with big sticks. I don’t see it as inconsistent at all. I see it as a lot of otherwise brilliant people not understanding it. Is it that I have to accept that “culture” is that eople will never get it?

By: Andrew'

Andrew' — Fri, 11 Dec 2015 03:45:05 +0000

This is the first thing I read that helps me understand what Tyler Cowen is getting at (though I still don’t buy it).

By: Jeff R.

Jeff R. — Fri, 11 Dec 2015 00:19:32 +0000

“Americans were an especially gun-owning nation well before the US became an empire e.g.”

Keep in mind, from it’s earliest days up through the end of the 19th century, the US was expanding westward and subjugating hostile Indian tribes, so you could argue it was behaving like an empire from go. Consider, also, the War of 1812, fought to attempt acquire land in Canada and the Caribbean.

By: Andrew'

Andrew' — Thu, 10 Dec 2015 21:19:59 +0000

Liberals and conservatives aren’t crazy about giving up the civil liberties they like in trade for security, just the ones the other side likes. Thus tenuous correlations to actually benefiting security is not that big of a problem to them.

By: Andrew'

Andrew' — Thu, 10 Dec 2015 21:16:26 +0000

To try to synthesize Arnold and TC (can we just start calling them Magnum and TC?) I will assume they mean that the stance libertarians in the Reason quadrant would have to take is alliance with the rhetoric and politics of people like Trump resulting in belligerent foreign policy.

The problem I have with this is that I think the public is dumb (for reasons) and that a little gun control will be met with attacks that it didn’t stop and calls for even more gun control AND belligerent foreign policy.

By: Andrew'

Andrew' — Thu, 10 Dec 2015 21:01:50 +0000

Tyler Cowen is very meta. I suspect he means that you can feel that way, but if all libertarians feel that way, they aren’t going to contribute to getting a result they want.

By: Andrew'

Andrew' — Thu, 10 Dec 2015 20:59:57 +0000

Yes, but you aren’t choosing your matrix buddy, just your matrix.

By: Oliver Sherouse

Oliver Sherouse — Thu, 10 Dec 2015 20:25:27 +0000

Have what? False dichotomies?

By: Dain

Dain — Thu, 10 Dec 2015 19:07:45 +0000

The comments on that TC post are full of contradictory evidence. Interesting theory, but doesn’t seem to hold up well. Americans were an especially gun-owning nation well before the US became an empire e.g.