(~= = = = = = = = = = = = = = L

e=======tt========e========r

Cops Against Gun Control Harry Browne's apparent belief that most police officers favor gun control ("Unequal protection for the Law," March) is probably the result of the press's proclivity to report surveys of chiefs of police - many of whom are political hack appointees - rather than rank-and-file officers. In a 1993 poll of 10,614 police officers, the Atlanta Journal reported that 90 percent of respondents believe that citizens have the right to defend themselves with guns, and that 96 percent believe that gun ownership should not be against the law. Yes, we've all seen rows and rows of uniformed police officers standing on the steps of some capital building in support of anti-gun legislation. But the press fails to report that these officers are often required to attend these media affairs regardless of their own views. Gerald T. Lang Newman, Ga. Hidden Agenda J. Philippe Rushton's article ("The New Enemies of Evolutionary Science," March) was fascinating, reminiscent of Galileo's problems with the Church. It is tempting to argue that Widespread vehemence against an idea is itself evidence for the validity of the idea, else it would not be necessary to suppress it. Certainly the would-be censors must themselves suspect that the idea is true, for otherwise they would Simply marshal the evidence against it. Another interesting question is why so many white people are outraged by the suggestion that they may have a slightly higher average intelligence than blacks. Strange, isn't it, that the insult is their suggested average superiority to blacks, not their suggested average inferiority to orientals? One can see that, if they prize values such as equality and racial harmony, they may find this evidence disturbing, but the disproportion-

ate amount of outrage suggests that there is something else about this evidence that is disturbing to the left. I suspect that it is because the evidence exonerates capitalism. After all, if, under capitalism, whites go to the top even though blacks are their equals, then capitalism condones racism, and is therefore evil. On the other hand, if whites rise due to superior inborn ability, capitalism can't be faulted for this. Richard Fuerle Grand Island, N.Y.

==============~J

Freedom Is for Everyone Freedom of expression should belong to everyone, even those whose views are offensive, wrong, or - in the case of J. Philippe Rushton - both. I'm pleased that he has fended off those who would restrict his academic freedom, and I certainly understand that in printing his account of his troubles, Liberty is not endorsing his odd views. I look forward to future discussions of this theme - perhaps an article by fringe Afrocentrist Leonard Jeffries, who many conservatives think should be dismissed from his academic post for the "crime" of espousing ideas as offensive as, and even more absurd than, Rushton's. Unfortunately, Rushton's commitment to free speech doesn't seem to extend very far. By his own account, he used the threat of a libel suit to silence his critics at the Toronto Star. Evidently, it's all right for Rushton to compare his foes to the Inquisition, but not for his foes to compare him to the Nazis. I suppose it's just a matter of whose hyperbole is being gored. Later, Rushton became unhappy when, in order to get to class, he had "to run a gauntlet of demonstrators shouting protests and threats." So, he continues, he had the university "warn the demonstrators that further action would lead to suspension and legal action." I'm dependent here on Rushton's descrip-

tion of events, but that sure sounds like more than an injunction against disrupting class. It's a shame that Rushton's experience fighting censorship didn't instill in him a respect for the free speech of others. Jesse Walker Washington, D.C. Rushton responds: Good grief! Since when does free speech include the right to make threats of physical violence, but not the right to threaten a libel suit? Is there no difference at all between the threat to free speech posed by criminal prosecution and that posed by libel laws? I'll grant that my views are offensive and odd, to some people, anyway, though what's offensive and odd to me is that conducting research on race differences in exactly the same fashion as my previous work in social psychology has resulted in my becoming a pariah, my life threatened, my property destroyed, criminal charges leveled against me, and my livelihood threatened. But I will not grant my views are wrong. If Walker had offered so much as a scintilla of a hint as to why he thinks they're wrong, I'd be happy to respond. But it is difficult to respond to pure denunciation. As to whether he will find an article in some future Liberty by Leonard Jeffries, I cannot speak for Liberty'S editors, but I suspect that if Jeffries's peerreviewed scientific research led to criminal charges, threats of violence, etc, Liberty would be hospitable to his views.

Government Works, Sometimes Harry Browne flatly states "there is nothing government does well" e'Bennettudes," March). If doing well means doing better than the competition (which is a more rational measure than some arbitrary standard), I can offer two areas of government excellence. First, government can field an army like no other association of people can.
We invite readers to comment on articles that have appeared in the pages of Libert)'. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity. All letters are assumed to be intended for publication unless otherwise stated. Succinct, typewritten letters are preferred. Please include your phone number so that we can verify your identity. Send letters to: Liberty, P.O. Box 1181, Port Townsend, WA 98368. Or email us(rwb@olympus.net) from our pages on the World Wide Web, at http://www.LibertySoft.comlliberty/