Goldwater Institute shows its libertarian side

by David Safier
G.I. usually doesn't come down on the same side of issues as I do. But as a faithfully skeptical reader of its daily emails, I keep abreast of its ideas and its doings, and I find we come down on the same side of two recent issues, one for different reasons, one for similar reasons.

Today, G.I.'s Nick Dranias stated why he thinks the guns-in-parking lots law is a bad idea. It's not because he's against guns in parking lots, but because he's against limiting private property rights.

Arizona House Bill 2474 would protect the right to carry, transport and store weapons on private property–effectively trumping the owner's property rights. Advocates of limited government should avoid creating a conflict between property rights and gun rights. Bills like this lead down a slippery slope. Forcing private property owners to abide behavior that we like provides the basis to force them to abide behavior we abhor.

Too bad G.I. can't appeal to the libertarian strain in enough R legislators to have them vote against the bill. NRA approval trumps just about everything else.

Our second agreement is G.I.'s belief that a tattoo studio should be allowed to open in a Tempe strip mall. The city council voted to revoke the parlor's permit because they thought it would lead to "neighborhood deterioration." A judge ruled in favor of the owners of the tattoo parlor,  Tom and Elizabeth Preston, and against Tempe.

"This ruling is a victory for the rule of law," declared [Clint] Bolick [of the Goldwater Institute]. "If the City can lawfully treat the Prestons this way, then every small business owner in Arizona is at risk of arbitrary government action."

This time we agree on allowing the Prestons to open their business, for the same reason.

Strange bedfellows and all that.

0 responses to “Goldwater Institute shows its libertarian side

  1. They are also doing good work looking at MCSO.

  2. I support the property owners on this issue. Every day I go to work though doors plastered with “no guns” and “no knives” stickers.

    The odd thing is that I don’t imagine government police would feel obliged to obey this prohibition.

    I’m pretty certain that criminals wouldn’t feel obliged either.