Guns Now Required On Texas State University Campuses

The Texas House, by a vote of 98-to-47 on Sunday, passed Senate Bill 11, legislation requiring the state’s public universities to allow handguns in dorms, classrooms and campus buildings.  SB 11 is now on its way to desk of Gov. Greg Abbott, who has said he will sign the bill.

The state Senate approved the bill Saturday by a 20-11 vote, with all of the chamber’s Democrats opposing it.

Under the version of the bill passed by both legislative chambers, universities would be able to carve out gun-free zones in locations of their choice — establishing their own rules on where handguns are carried and how they’re stored in dormitory buildings, based on public safety concerns.

The bill’s sponsor, Senator Brian Birdwell (R-Granbury) said the limited the last minute gun-free zones amendment was designed to allow guns to be prohibited in places of heightened security, such as biohazard labs. Common spaces, such as dormitories or libraries can not be designated gun-free zones.

Only concealed handgun license holders would be allowed to carry their firearms on state university campus. Private universities are allowed to opt out of the requirement, all together.

Texas now becomes the ninth U.S. state to allow concealed weapons on college campuses. Ten states have rejected campus carry bills this year, while four more -- Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma and South Carolina -- are still considering them. Twenty states ban concealed weapons from campuses, while 23 allow individual schools to make their own policies, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

University presidents and students warned lawmakers that the policy could lead to accidental shootings, student suicides and violence at alcohol-laced parties, while creating an air of intimidation in classrooms during heated debates.

Texas Hand Gun Open Carry Law

Update (May 31, 2015): On Friday, Texas lawmakers approved legislation that allows citizens who have a concealed handgun license to openly carry handguns in plain view in belt or shoulder holsters. The is on its way to Gov. Greg Abbott, who promised to sign it.

In a concession to law enforcement groups, lawmakers removed a provision that would have prohibited police from stopping someone to check for a gun license simply because that person was carrying a handgun openly.

The Texas House of Representatives approved the legislation 102-43, with just five Democrats joining the Republican majority. The bill passed the state Senate with 20 Republican votes in favor and 11 Democratic votes against it.

Why Baltimore Blew Up

Amid anger and protests in Baltimore following the unexplained death of 25-year-old African American Freddie Gray from a spinal injury sustained in a police paddy-wagon after being arrested, Baltimore exploded in protests.  But the American media did not use the that opportunity to talk about the poverty-ridden neighborhood in which Gray grew up.

The media didn't use the opportunity to have a conversation about the economic disadvantages that Gray, his peers, and so many young African American adults, are disadvantaged by the current socio-economic conditions found in minority neighborhoods throughout Baltimore and in other U.S. metro areas from the very beginning of their lives.

Neither did the American media use the opportunity to talk about the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of illegal searches and arrests across decades of discriminatory policing policies, the debate revolved around whether or not the teenagers who set fire to two West Baltimore CVS stores after Gray's death were "thugs," or merely wrongheaded criminals.

From Eric Garner to Michael Brown to Akai Gurley to Tamir Rice to Walter Scott and now Freddie Gray, there have now been so many police killings of African-American men and boys in the past calendar year or so that it's been easy for both the media and the political mainstream to sell us on the idea that the killings are the whole story.

Public Education, Poverty, and Standardized Testing

Thirteen billion dollars and 45 days per year. Those are the two numbers I want you to remember at the end of this post.

Thirteen billion dollars and 45 days per year.

But first, I would like to brag a bit about our public schools. Do you have a child or grandchild in public school? Are you a teacher, or do you have a friend or family member who teaches? Do you pay taxes?

Great! Listen up. You should enjoy this: 

Every few years, students in over 60 countries participate in the Programme for International Student Assessment, also known as the PISA. This study, which began in 2000, compares the performance of students across various nations in the fields of math, science, and reading. When the results from this study are broken into quartiles by poverty, the United States routinely scores first in every subject.

That's right, number one! That's pretty darned good, don't you think? Let's give a round of applause for our hard-working educators. They do an amazing job with the resources they are given, and they deserve a great deal of respect and admiration for their service.

Why do I say they do a great job with the resources they have?

In 2011, the Texas Legislature cut $5.4 billion from the public education budget, and it did quite a number on our schools. Class sizes skyrocketed in every district, support staff was reduced, and many great programs were eliminated. Teachers found themselves paying more in insurance premium hikes than what they received from the highly publicized pay raises (even here in Plano), and larger class sizes mean significantly more homework to grade. Then there are, of course, the resources of the students.

POVERTY

Studies have proven that poverty accounts for a huge portion of any standardized test results. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, which runs the PISA, determined that poverty explains at least 46% of the scores on their tests. Results from the SAT and ACT exams have shown a high correlation between scores and family income.

Closer to home, the STAAR test, administered yearly to Texas students, has also demonstrated the effects of poverty on education. In 2013, only "69 percent of economically disadvantaged students passed all subjects in all grades compared to the state average of 77 percent. Results in individual grades and subjects were the same: The economically disadvantaged student subgroup had a lower passing rate than the state average on every test."

White on White vs Black on Black Murder Rates

When White on White crime occurs, it’s seldom talked about the way Black on Black occurs, especially on the Fox News channel. In fact, White on White crime and murder is seldom talked, period.

But according to the FBI data, there are more White on White murders committed every year than Black on Black murders, with 84 percent of the white murders committed by whites.

Even so, most White people don’t kill anyone. Yet media pundits, like Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly, regularly talk about “Black on Black violence,” despite the fact that most Black people don’t kill anyone, and commit few murders than White people.

			Race of Offender
Race of Victim	Total	White	Black or African American	Other	Unknown
White	3,005	2,509	409	49	38
Black or African American	2,491	189	2,245	20	37
Other race2	159	32	27	96	4
Unknown race	68	25	17	3	23
FBI Homicide Data for 2013

These statistics have not led to a media outcry about the problem of White on White crime or the unique pathology of the White community. Nor has the White community stood up to demand change in their community like the Black community does when trying to tackle instances of Black on Black crime.

Time magazine’s Joe Klein wrote an entire column last August in the aftermath of the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Mo., that focus on the rate of violence and murder in the Black community - calling it a “social disaster.” But there was no mention that more whites are killed by other whites, which was typical of media outlets.

The term ‘black-on-black’ crime is a destructive, 'racialized' colloquialism that perpetuates an idea that blacks are somehow more prone to violence. This is untrue and fully verifiable by FBI, DOJ and census data. Yet the fallacy is so fixed that Black People are prone to violence that even African Americans have come to believe it.

Influential columnists like George Will never examine crime committed by whites, do not use the racialized phrase “white-on-white” crime and give the impression African American citizens ore more dangerous than White citizens and the lives of White citizens are more at risk from of African Americans. It this perception of the dangerous Black man that had at least some bearing on Darren Wilson, white Ferguson, Mo police officer shooting 18-year-old African American Michael Brown Jr., and George Zimmerman fatally shooting 17-year-old African American Trayvon Martin in Florida, Timothy Loehmann, a Cleveland, Ohio, police officer fatally shooting 12-year-old African American Tamir Rice who was holding a toy gun, and so many other fatal shootings.

It this perception of the dangerous Black man that for generations has prompted parents of black boys across the United States to have rehearsed, dreaded and postponed “The Conversation.” But when their boys become teenagers, parents must tell their sons the risk of what it means to be a black man in America. To keep him safe, they may have to tell the child they love that he risks being targeted by the police, simply because of the color of his skin. How should parents impart this information, while maintaining their child’s pride and sense of self? How does one teach a child to face dangerous racism and ask him to emerge unscathed?

Considering Bureau of Justice Statistics, homicidal rates from 1980 to 2008, they show that compared to Blacks, Whites were more likely to kill children, the elderly, family members, and their significant others. Whites commit more sex-related crimes, gang related crimes, and are more likely to kill at their places of employment.

Read more at The Root: It’s Time to Stop Blaming Black-on-Black Crime - The rhetoric around crime is factually wrong and allows some to ignore and pass the blame for systemic misdeeds.

More: A guide to debunking black on black crime and all of its rhetorical cousins

Climate Change Poses A National Security Danger

President Barack Obama delivered the keynote address at the United States Coast Guard Academy commencement last week in New London, Connecticut. In his commencement speech, Obama warned graduates climate change is one of the largest threats they will have to face as they defend the United States and our nation's interests abroad.

For the first time since record keeping began, carbon dioxide levels set a new record high water mark in surpassing 400 parts per million (ppm) at 40 monitoring sites around the globe, according to newly published data for March 2015.

CO₂ emissions, the main green house gas driver of global warming and have risen more than 120 ppm since pre-industrial times, warming the planet 1.6°F over that period. Since record-keeping began in 1880, average global temperatures have risen 1.4^o Fahrenheit.

The last time concentrations of Earth's main greenhouse gas level was at 400 PPM, during the Pliocene era, from 5.3 to 2.6 million years ago, the planet was about 3.6^o to 5.4^o Fahrenheit warmer. The Arctic was 14°F warmer allowing horses and camels to graze in lush savannas that grew at those ancient high latitudes. Mid-Pliocine sea levels were about 82 feet higher than today — levels that today would inundate major cities around the world — because Arctic and West Antarctic ice sheets did not exist to hold that from the ocean!

2014 was the 38th consecutive year with temperatures above the average for the entire 20th century. Fourteen of the past 15 years rank among the 15 warmest of the past 136 years – since record-keeping began. Moreover, nine out of the 10 warmest years on record have occurred since 2000, with 2014 being Earth’s warmest year on record.

A recent survey of peer reviewed articles on climate change showed that only 2 out of 10855 articles believe that humans aren't causing global warming. A mere two articles rejected anthropogenic global warming. For the next 25 to 30 years, climate scientists say we're in for a 1.8^o F warmer climate, there's no way out. That amount of change is inevitable, set by today’s atmospheric conditions.

If we make substantial effort starting now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, global temperature increase can be kept to 2^o C or 3.6^o F in the second half of this century. But if nothing is done to greenhouse gas emissions, the world will face 4^o C, or 7.2^o F, increase. (see: A Climate Changed Earth)

A Climate Changed Earth

For the first time since record keeping began, carbon dioxide (CO₂) levels, the main green house gas driver of global warming, set a new record high water mark, surpassing 400 parts per million (ppm) at 40 monitoring sites around the globe, according to newly published data for March 2015.

Latest analysis shows that warming feedback mechanisms, which hasten the effects and pace of global warming, are already speeding the melt of glaciers worldwide and the polar ice caps.

An atmospheric carbon level of 450 ppm has generally been associated with an average global temperature rise of 2^o C or 3.6^o F. If the U.S. and nations of the earth do nothing to curtail CO₂ emissions, that carbon level will be hit within about 20 years.

But under the expected “business as usual” scenario — nations continue to burn fossil fuels as they do now, doing little to curtail fossil fuel use — scientists expect CO₂ levels to reach 560 ppm by about 2060. That level of atmospheric CO₂ has generally been associated with an average global temperature rise of between 2^o C and 4.5^o C  (3.6^o-8.1^oF) higher than pre-industrial times, with a best estimate of about 3^o C (5.4^o F) in temperature rise.

With ice masses worldwide already showing significant melting at 400 ppm, an ice free earth is already probable — it's only a matter of time, unless worldwide CO₂ emission levels are reduced. CO₂ levels of 450 ppm or 560 ppm will only accelerate the ice melt.

Atmospheric CO₂ levels have risen more than 120 ppm since pre-industrial times, warming the planet 1.6°F over that period. Since record-keeping began in 1880, average global temperatures have risen 1.4^oF.

An increase of 10 parts per million might have needed 1,000 years or more to come to pass during ancient climate change events. Now the planet is poised to reach the 1,000 ppm level in only 100 years, if CO₂ emissions trajectories remain at their present level.

The Guardian newspaper reports on a Royal Dutch Shell "New Lens Scenarios" internal planning document defining a business strategy for a potentially catastrophic global temperature rise of 4^o C.

No Need To Sacrifice Liberty For Security

New Jersey Governor and likely 2016 Presidential candidate Chris Christie (R-NJ) said on Monday, he would increased spending to expand the government's “intelligence capabilities” to spy on American citizens. Christie’s comments are in response to the ongoing debate occurring in the Congress, as provisions of the USA Patriot Act, which was passed in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, are set to expire at the end of this month.

In a common refrain with most Republican lawmakers, Christie harkened back to that September 2001 attack, stating that, “Everyone will remember 9/11, but have forgotten what 9/11 felt like.” He also stated that “We acted differently, we conducted our lives differently. We were reticent. We were scared to do things as a people. That’s a stealing of our liberty too.”

Christie went on to critique the arguments of opponents of the domestic spying programs saying, “The founders made sure that the first obligation of the American government was to protect the lives of the American people.” Christie concluded his argument by employing a one-liner, explaining that “You can’t enjoy your civil liberties if you’re in a coffin.”

If Governor Christie and the Republican Party as a whole wish to understand the one of the most sacred tenets upon which the United States is founded, he needs only look to two of the most commonly repeated quotes by Patrick Henry and Benjamin Franklin.

In a 1775 speech to the Virginia Convention, Henry stated his most famous quote during a debate concerning whether to send Virginian troops for the Revolutionary War. His exclamation to “Give me liberty, or give me death!” was also featured on the Culpepper Minutemen Flag of 1775, in addition to the iconic “Don’t Tread on Me.”

The quote by Franklin that, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety,” was first written for the Pennsylvania Assembly in November 1755 in its Reply to the Governor. Franklin used derivations of the quote throughout his life, including a variant in his famous Poor Richard’s Almanack in 1738.

As Henry's and Franklin's statements make clear, defense should not ever trump our essential liberties, not the least of which are those explained in the Fourth Amendment. If we are to forfeit liberty in the face of fear, that liberty is nearly worthless. When the colonists chose to fight a revolutionary war against the British Crown, they clearly chose liberty over security.

But the attacks of September 11, 2001, did not happen for lack of having a Patriot Act that authorized the government to capture and record every phone call made and received by every American, and record the websites visited and emails sent and received by every American. The attacks of September 11, 2001, happened for lack of leadership in President G.W. Bush's White House.

As chronicled by former acting CIA director Mike Morell in his new book, The Great War Of Our Time: The CIA’s Fight Against Terrorism, and former counter terrorism chief Richard Clarke in his book, Against All Enemies, several government security agency experts repeatedly warned President Bush and Bush Administration officials of a pending attack by Al-Qaeda -- from the weeks before Bush took the oath of office until the morning of Sept. 11, 2001. More here...

Bush and Cheney Falsely Presented Iraq WMD Intelligence

Presidential hopeful Jeb Bush's Iraq war fumble freshly lays bare the truth that President George W. Bush intentionally misrepresented the intelligence related to Iraq's supposed WMD program and Saddam's alleged links to Al Qaeda to talk the nation into a war of his choice.

Appearing on MSNBC's Hardball on Tuesday night, former acting CIA director Mike Morell, author of a new book, The Great War Of Our Time: The CIA’s Fight Against Terrorism, made clear the Bush-Cheney administration publicly misrepresented the intelligence related to Iraq's supposed WMD program and Saddam's alleged links to Al Qaeda.

Host Chris Matthews asked Morell about a statement Cheney made in 2003: "We know he [Saddam Hussein] has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons. And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." Here's the conversation that followed:

GOP Can't Be Trusted To Keep America Secure

Jeb Bush and other Republican presidential contenders have a new and bogus spin on how the Iraq War began. They say Jeb's brother, Pres. G.W. Bush was misled into war by faulty intelligence. That's Not What Happened!

But here's the truth Jeb and the Republicans are evading: George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, & Co. were not misled by lousy intelligence; they intentionally cherry-picked lousy intelligence to mislead the public into war.

Throughout the run-up to the war, Bush, Cheney, and their lieutenants repeatedly stated assertions about Iraq to justify war that were not supported by the professional the intelligence analysts.

An article published at New York Magazine and another published at Mother Jones are excellent refreshers on the history of the Bush administration trumping up reasons for America to invade Iraq, even though U.S. intelligence agency professionals could not find any factually convincing evidence Saddam Hussein had any connection to the Sept. 11, 2001 al Qa‘ida attack.

But that was not the first instance of a disastrous outcome from Bush administration officials dismissing intelligence agency reports. According to The Great War Of Our Time: The CIA’s Fight Against Terrorism, a new book by former acting CIA director Mike Morell, Vice President Dick Cheney thought al Qaeda was bluffing on its plan plan to fly commercial aircraft into high value buildings: