Archive for 2022

BOOK RELEASE DAY!: Today is the official release day for my book, Classified: The Untold Story of Racial Classification in America.

To celebrate, if you buy the book today and email me the receipt (dbernste at gmu dot edu) and your address, I will send you a signed copy of one of my previous books, either Rehabilitating Lochner or You Can’t Say That! I have many more copies of the latter than the former, so if you want a copy of the Lochner book, act fast. (Please note that I have a busy travel schedule coming up, so you may not receive your book until mid-August.)

And just so those of you who preordered the book don’t feel left out, if you preordered send me your receipt, your address, and which book you want, and I will send you a signed copy.

WE CAN HOPE:

A NEW GROUP AT U. CHICAGO LAW SCHOOL: The Hayekians.

IN DEFENSE OF THE LSAT:  Those who oppose the LSAT argue it is not an objective measure of aptitude.  But the truth is the opposite.  They oppose the LSAT because they don’t like objective measures.  They prefer to be able to manipulate admissions criteria according to their political preferences.

#JOURNALISM: AP: “Rare in US for an active shooter to be stopped by bystander.”

To begin with, definitions are important. Self defense events happen every day in America, whether at home or out and about. I write on firearms and 2A rights, so I bypass chances to pen something else on self defense events literally every day to focus more on the mechanical and materials engineering of firearms, ammunition performance, method of carry, training, and the things that interest me. The author has subdivided his topic as best as he can in order to make his most convincing case. He has neglected literally thousands of cases of interest.

But even then, is he correct? Maybe not. . . . The researchers list more than sixty times permit holders have stopped likely mass shootings in public. I judge a few of them to be not applicable for various reasons, but that doesn’t negate the force of the copious data.

The author at AP did a lousy job of research, but then, that has become the standard for the legacy media.

They’re not journalists, they’re narrative police.

THE GREAT WHITE HOPE: Joel Kotkin: Gavin Newsom won’t save the Democrats.

Burdened with a decomposing President and a clearly overmatched Vice President, the Democrats are on the hunt for a saviour. For many in the party, Gavin Newsom, the 54-year-old perfectly coiffed Governor of California, seems like the perfect solution. No doubt, given his recent trolling of Florida’s Republican frontrunner Ron DeSantis, he feels the same.

But Newsom’s ascendency faces some severe challenges. First, to get nominated, he must not only depose Biden, but also see off Vice President Kamala Harris. And she has three things Newsom lacks: she’s a woman, she’s black, and she has Asian Indian ancestry. Newsom, on the other hand, is white, was born into a well-connected San Francisco family, and is married to a film-maker and scion of a very wealthy Bay Area family.

Perhaps more importantly, things have not been particularly good for the minority Californians he was voted in to look after. In the Golden State, African-Americans and Hispanics do far worse economically than their counterparts elsewhere in the country. Black residents, on a cost-of-living basis, make about as much as they do in Mississippi, and far less than in states such as Texas, Florida, or Arizona.

Class may prove an even more glaring weakness. Newsom sees his state as a model, claiming California is “the envy of the world” and the great bastion of social justice. “Unlike the Washington plutocracy,” he boasts, “California isn’t satisfied serving a powerful few on one side of the velvet rope.” Yet he is the favourite son of what The Los Angeles Times described as “a coterie of San Francisco’s wealthiest families”, including the founders of the Gap clothing chain, the Pritzker’s and the Getty Family, who essentially adopted him, financed his business ventures, allegedly paid for his first lavish wedding, and helped launch his political career.

Meanwhile, Newsom’s green and progressive pronouncements contrasted starkly with his passion for the good life. He has long lived in luxury, first in his native Marin, and now in Sacramento. This caused Newsom some embarrassment during the height of Covid when he was caught partying in ways that violated his own pandemic orders at the ultra-expensive, ultra-chic French Laundry in Napa and more recently on a lavish family vacation.

When it comes to actual policymaking, Newsom is not much better. . . . He is, in effect, an embodiment of the increasing feudal nature of modern California, which stands among the least egalitarian states in the nation and suffers the overall highest poverty rate in the country, according to the US Census Bureau.

The Democrats don’t have any good politicians because they don’t have any good ideas.

NITA GHEI: How False Narratives About Opioids Are Hurting Patients: Illegal street drugs cause the vast majority of opioid-related deaths, but the government and law enforcement agencies incorrectly focus on medically necessary prescriptions.

The conflation of all opioids has resulted in an unwarranted focus on prescription opioids and medical use as the root cause of the “problem” of accidental drug overdoses, even though overdose deaths from prescription opioids are a small and decreasing fraction of the total. The result is policies that fail to address the problem they were intended to solve—illicit drug use and accidental drug overdoses. Further, these policies have harmed medically fragile patients with chronic, high-impact, intractable pain who need prescription opioid medication to maintain quality of life and basic function levels.

Why did a narrative that is at odds with science become dominant, despite the harm it causes to people with substance use disorder and to medically fragile patients? The answer lies in the complex incentives that face policymakers, law enforcement and families of overdose victims, particularly as illicit drugs have edged into upper-income suburbs. The result of the “opioid crisis” narrative has been disastrous for the most vulnerable and powerless: Americans struggling with complex medical conditions and constant pain.

The dominant narrative runs something like this: Doctors overprescribed opioids from the late 1990s through approximately 2012, resulting in addiction to prescription painkillers. When prescriptions ran out, these patients turned to street drugs. This overprescribing was responsible for an increase in substance use disorder rates and overdose fatalities. The appropriate policy response was, therefore, to tighten restrictions on opioid prescribing. Very plausible, very straightforward—and almost entirely contradicted by the facts.

Much of our country is run by heavyhanded incompetent morons, but that goes double for food and drug regulation.