David McElroy

When police in a Sacramento, Calif., suburb were searching for a violent killer Saturday, they set up roadblocks in certain areas. This picture is what innocent suburbanites faced as they drove down neighborhood streets trying to get to or from their houses.

I think it’s a perfect example of the conflicts we face between two very strongly opposing views about law enforcement and the rights of innocent people. Do you think it’s right and reasonable for this random innocent driver — who wasn’t suspected of anything — to have this weapon pointed at him at close range under this circumstance?

I don’t think it’s reasonable, but defenders of police would say that it was necessary to protect police safety. Frankly, I’m a little more worried about the safety of the vast bulk of the public — who don’t deserve to have high-powered weapons pointed at their heads when they come to roadblocks in their otherwise safe neighborhoods.

There are two prevailing narratives about police today. One is that they’re all thugs who are drunk on the power of the state and are out to violate the rights of innocent people. The other is that they’re valiant and trustworthy servants of the people who are sacrificially doing a dangerous job to keep the rest of us safe.

I think there’s some true in each extreme, although people on the two extremes generally can’t see much middle ground.

Keep Reading

Fairly regularly, there are stories that circulate about misguided restaurant patrons who refuse to tip servers for strange reasons. Not long ago, it was someone complaining that he gives God 10 percent, so why should he tip a server 18 percent.

The latest story that’s been going around for the last few days is about the customer of a Carrabba’s in Overland Park, Kan., who refused to tip the server because the server is apparently gay.

When the unidentified server went to pick up the check after the customers left, the patron had written this note on the back: “Thank you for your service, it was excellent. That being said, we cannot in good conscience tip you, for your homosexual lifestyle is an affront to God. May God have mercy on you.”

Where do we even begin in discussing what’s wrong with this?

The focus of these reports has been the anti-gay bias of the customers, but I think the real issue is far more simple. These folks are perfectly free to believe what they want. They’re perfectly free to believe that God hates the server or that God disapproves of his lifestyle. As long as they simply believe those things, that’s their business.

But this isn’t about people having a “wrong” opinion. It’s about people refusing to pay for services they’ve received.

Keep Reading

If you care about individual freedom, Russell Brand isn’t a hero. He’s just another ignorant buffoon selling a populist version of socialism.

Brand is a comedian and actor, but he’s now pontificating about politics and economics to a fawning worldwide audience. I’ve seen praise heaped upon him this week by otherwise-reasonable people. Why? Because he conducted a combative interview on a BBC news show in which he attacked the Establishment.

But what does Brand stand for?

“[I advocate] a socialist egalitarian scheme based on the massive redistribution of wealth, heavy taxation of corporations,” Brand said. “The very concept of profit should be reduced. … I say profit is a filthy word because wherever there is profit, there is also deficit.”

Does this sound like someone who knows anything about individual freedom? Does it sound like someone who knows anything about economics? Does it sound like anything other than the same old ignorance that has led much of the world to economic ruin since Karl Marx popularized this nonsense?

Keep Reading