Those Damn Guns Again
- Thread starter thoughtone
- Start date
source: Daily Kos
Not a peep in the debate about that other terrorist attack on U.S. soil
Not Muslim
I suppose we should have guessed, but so far there's not been a peep from either CNN or the other candidates about the other terrorist attack on American soil in the last few weeks, the murder of bystanders at a Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood clinic.
ISIS terrorism? Muslims and Syrians and terrorists crossing the border? Those we'll talk about. But we've had more time devoted to the hoax threat against Los Angeles area schools than the actual attack that took place in Colorado just weeks ago.
Go figure.
Not a peep in the debate about that other terrorist attack on U.S. soil
Not Muslim
I suppose we should have guessed, but so far there's not been a peep from either CNN or the other candidates about the other terrorist attack on American soil in the last few weeks, the murder of bystanders at a Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood clinic.
ISIS terrorism? Muslims and Syrians and terrorists crossing the border? Those we'll talk about. But we've had more time devoted to the hoax threat against Los Angeles area schools than the actual attack that took place in Colorado just weeks ago.
Go figure.
A Racial Divide Among Evangelicals on Gun Control
May 10, 2016 | 407 videos
Video by Independent Lens
The documentary The Armor of Light follows the journey of the Evangelical minister Rob Schenck as he attempts to preach to a reluctant audience on the issue of gun violence in America. “You can’t ignore the racial dimensions to this whole subject. It’s the giant elephant in the room that must be addressed,” he says in this short clip from the film. The reality is that different conversations exist within white and black families regarding guns and gun safety, and young black men are at an elevated risk of being shot. One of Schenck’s main allies in this fight to unify Christian believers has been Lucy McBath, the mother of Jordan Davis,an unarmed teenager who was killed in Florida and whose story cast a spotlight on the state’s Stand Your Ground laws. “Instead of looking to God righteously as the protector, we have replaced God with our guns,” McBath tells Schenck. “God did not give you the right to shoot to kill because you think that you're threatened.”
The full film will air on PBS on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, as a part of ARMED IN AMERICA, a special two-night television event exploring America’s rising gun violence. For more information about the film, visit the Independent Lens website. The Armor of Light will also be streaming online until June 9, 2016.
Author: Nadine Ajaka
.
May 10, 2016 | 407 videos
Video by Independent Lens
The documentary The Armor of Light follows the journey of the Evangelical minister Rob Schenck as he attempts to preach to a reluctant audience on the issue of gun violence in America. “You can’t ignore the racial dimensions to this whole subject. It’s the giant elephant in the room that must be addressed,” he says in this short clip from the film. The reality is that different conversations exist within white and black families regarding guns and gun safety, and young black men are at an elevated risk of being shot. One of Schenck’s main allies in this fight to unify Christian believers has been Lucy McBath, the mother of Jordan Davis,an unarmed teenager who was killed in Florida and whose story cast a spotlight on the state’s Stand Your Ground laws. “Instead of looking to God righteously as the protector, we have replaced God with our guns,” McBath tells Schenck. “God did not give you the right to shoot to kill because you think that you're threatened.”
The full film will air on PBS on Tuesday, May 10, 2016, as a part of ARMED IN AMERICA, a special two-night television event exploring America’s rising gun violence. For more information about the film, visit the Independent Lens website. The Armor of Light will also be streaming online until June 9, 2016.
Author: Nadine Ajaka
.
Data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control show that
on an average day, 91 Americans are killed with guns.
To calculate this, Everytown relies on a five-year-average of data from the Centers for Disease Control, whose National Vital Statistics System1 contains the most comprehensive national data, currently available through 2014.
View CDC data on people killed by guns each year
Homicide - Suicide - Unintentional - Legal Intervention -Undetermined Intent - Total
2010 11,078 - 19,392 - 606 - 344 - 252 - 31,672
2011 11,068- 19,990 - 591 - 454 - 248 - 32,351
2012 11,622 - 20,666 - 548 - 471 - 256 - 33,563
2013 11,208 - 21,175 - 505 - 467 - 281 - 33,636
2014 10,945 - 21,334 - 586 - 464 - 270 - 33,599
Annual Average 11,184 - 20,511 - 567 - 440 - 261 - 32,964
Daily Average 31 56 2 1 1 91
There are nearly 12,000 gun murders a year in the U.S. – and despite falling crime rates, that number has barely changed since the late 1990s.
Between 1998 and 2014, gun homicides have not varied more than 11% in either direction from an annual average of 11,619.2
View annual gun murders in the US 1981 - 2014
Twice as many Americans are injured with guns as killed with them.
The number of Americans injured with firearms dwarfs the number who are killed, although data to measure non-fatal shootings are less reliable. The CDC’s National Electronic Injury Surveillance System estimates the number of annual non-fatal firearm injuries based on reports from a sample of hospital emergency departments: over the last five years, there were more than 200 non-fatal firearm injuries each day.3
View full data set on non-fatal firearm injuries
Year Non-Fatal
Firearm Injuries
2009 66,769
2010 73,505
2011 73,883
2012 81,396
2013 84,258
Annual Average 75,962
Daily Average 208
Nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of firearm deaths in the U.S. are suicides.
Of the 33,599 firearm deaths in the US in 2013 (the most recent year of data available), 21,344 (or 64 percent) were suicides. To calculate this total, Everytown relies on CDC data regarding fatal injury by intent.4
View more information about gun suicides in the US
Seven children and teens (age 19 or under) are killed with guns in the U.S. on an average day.
Rates of firearm injury death increase rapidly after age 13. And unintentional shootings of children and teens are underreported in the CDC data, possibly because of the difficulty of characterizing a child’s intent after he or she has killed himself or a playmate with a firearm. In research released in 2013, Everytown documented 100 unintentional gun deaths of children 14 and under, 61 percent more than reflected by CDC data.5 Everytown also tracks unintentional shootings involving children, which are reported in the press every 34 hours, on average.6
View full data-set on children and teens killed with guns
Population Total
Firearm
Deaths Firearm
Homicides
2010 83,267,556 - 2,711 1,773
2011 82,814,893 2,703 1,651
2012 82,482,488 2,694 1,664
2013 82,248,087 2,465 1,410
2014 82,135,602 2,549 1,455
Total 413,043,293 13,122 7,953
Annual
Average 82,608,659 2,624 1,591
Daily
Average N/A 7 4
In an average month, 51 women are shot to death by intimate partners in the U.S.
And more than half of all women killed by intimate partners in the U.S. are killed with guns.7
View full data set on gun homicides of women by a current or former intimate partner
Year FBI Supplementary
Homicide Reports Florida Department of
Law Enforcement Total
2009 595 -61 -656
2010 613 -48 -661
2011 553 -61 -614
2012 529 -58 -587
2013 519 -41 -560
Total 2,809 - 269 - 3,078
Annual Average 561.8 - 53.8 - 615.6
Monthly Average 46.8 - 4.5 - 51
America’s gun murder rate is more than 25 times the average of other developed countries.
An analysis of gun homicide rates in developed countries— those considered “high-income” by the World Bank that are members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and have populations larger than 1 million — found that the United States accounted for 46 percent of the population but 82 percent of the gun deaths.8
View more on how the US gun homicide rate compares with that of other developed countries
The background check system is a central component of America's efforts to keep guns from criminals: since its inception, it has blocked 2.4 million gun sales to prohibited people.
According to a study by the Department of Justice, from the inception of the background check system in 1994 through the end of 2012, federal, state, and local agencies conducted more than 147 million firearm applications and denied 2.43 million gun sales to prohibited people. Assuming a similar rate over the period 2013-15, to date the background check system has likely blocked nearly 3 million firearm sales to prohibited people.9
Black men are 10 times more likely than white men to be murdered with guns.
Black Americans make up 14 percent of the U.S. population but suffer more than half of all gun homicides.10
View more on gun murders and race in America
When a gun is present in a situation of domestic violence, it increases the risk the woman will be murdered fivefold.
A case-control study of 11 cities found that in a domestic violence situation, the perpetrator’s access to a gun increased the odds of femicide by more than five times (adjust OR=5.44, 95% CI = 2.89, 10.22).11
Note on Data Sources
Both the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the FBI collect data on firearm homicides — the former from medical examiners and the latter from local law enforcement. Each data set has distinct advantages and flaws. The CDC’s National Vital Statistics System records a higher percentage of all firearm deaths but fails to capture details about their circumstances, including the relationship of the perpetrator to the victim. This makes it unsuitable for measuring gun violence between people of certain relationships.
In contrast, the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) include details on the perpetrator and murder weapon but are more likely to be missing records because the FBI relies on police departments to voluntarily submit their homicide data on an annual basis. Despite these gaps, SHR data are utilized widely in the criminology community. The SHR do not include data from the state of Florida. Everytown obtained data for that state directly from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Women killed by former dating partners (as opposed to current dating partners) are not categorized in the Florida data and are not included.12
Notes
SOURCE: https://everytownresearch.org/gun-violence-by-the-numbers/#
.
on an average day, 91 Americans are killed with guns.
To calculate this, Everytown relies on a five-year-average of data from the Centers for Disease Control, whose National Vital Statistics System1 contains the most comprehensive national data, currently available through 2014.
View CDC data on people killed by guns each year
Homicide - Suicide - Unintentional - Legal Intervention -Undetermined Intent - Total
2010 11,078 - 19,392 - 606 - 344 - 252 - 31,672
2011 11,068- 19,990 - 591 - 454 - 248 - 32,351
2012 11,622 - 20,666 - 548 - 471 - 256 - 33,563
2013 11,208 - 21,175 - 505 - 467 - 281 - 33,636
2014 10,945 - 21,334 - 586 - 464 - 270 - 33,599
Annual Average 11,184 - 20,511 - 567 - 440 - 261 - 32,964
Daily Average 31 56 2 1 1 91
There are nearly 12,000 gun murders a year in the U.S. – and despite falling crime rates, that number has barely changed since the late 1990s.
Between 1998 and 2014, gun homicides have not varied more than 11% in either direction from an annual average of 11,619.2
View annual gun murders in the US 1981 - 2014
Twice as many Americans are injured with guns as killed with them.
The number of Americans injured with firearms dwarfs the number who are killed, although data to measure non-fatal shootings are less reliable. The CDC’s National Electronic Injury Surveillance System estimates the number of annual non-fatal firearm injuries based on reports from a sample of hospital emergency departments: over the last five years, there were more than 200 non-fatal firearm injuries each day.3
View full data set on non-fatal firearm injuries
Year Non-Fatal
Firearm Injuries
2009 66,769
2010 73,505
2011 73,883
2012 81,396
2013 84,258
Annual Average 75,962
Daily Average 208
Nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of firearm deaths in the U.S. are suicides.
Of the 33,599 firearm deaths in the US in 2013 (the most recent year of data available), 21,344 (or 64 percent) were suicides. To calculate this total, Everytown relies on CDC data regarding fatal injury by intent.4
View more information about gun suicides in the US
Seven children and teens (age 19 or under) are killed with guns in the U.S. on an average day.
Rates of firearm injury death increase rapidly after age 13. And unintentional shootings of children and teens are underreported in the CDC data, possibly because of the difficulty of characterizing a child’s intent after he or she has killed himself or a playmate with a firearm. In research released in 2013, Everytown documented 100 unintentional gun deaths of children 14 and under, 61 percent more than reflected by CDC data.5 Everytown also tracks unintentional shootings involving children, which are reported in the press every 34 hours, on average.6
View full data-set on children and teens killed with guns
Population Total
Firearm
Deaths Firearm
Homicides
2010 83,267,556 - 2,711 1,773
2011 82,814,893 2,703 1,651
2012 82,482,488 2,694 1,664
2013 82,248,087 2,465 1,410
2014 82,135,602 2,549 1,455
Total 413,043,293 13,122 7,953
Annual
Average 82,608,659 2,624 1,591
Daily
Average N/A 7 4
In an average month, 51 women are shot to death by intimate partners in the U.S.
And more than half of all women killed by intimate partners in the U.S. are killed with guns.7
View full data set on gun homicides of women by a current or former intimate partner
Year FBI Supplementary
Homicide Reports Florida Department of
Law Enforcement Total
2009 595 -61 -656
2010 613 -48 -661
2011 553 -61 -614
2012 529 -58 -587
2013 519 -41 -560
Total 2,809 - 269 - 3,078
Annual Average 561.8 - 53.8 - 615.6
Monthly Average 46.8 - 4.5 - 51
America’s gun murder rate is more than 25 times the average of other developed countries.
An analysis of gun homicide rates in developed countries— those considered “high-income” by the World Bank that are members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and have populations larger than 1 million — found that the United States accounted for 46 percent of the population but 82 percent of the gun deaths.8
View more on how the US gun homicide rate compares with that of other developed countries
The background check system is a central component of America's efforts to keep guns from criminals: since its inception, it has blocked 2.4 million gun sales to prohibited people.
According to a study by the Department of Justice, from the inception of the background check system in 1994 through the end of 2012, federal, state, and local agencies conducted more than 147 million firearm applications and denied 2.43 million gun sales to prohibited people. Assuming a similar rate over the period 2013-15, to date the background check system has likely blocked nearly 3 million firearm sales to prohibited people.9
Black men are 10 times more likely than white men to be murdered with guns.
Black Americans make up 14 percent of the U.S. population but suffer more than half of all gun homicides.10
View more on gun murders and race in America
When a gun is present in a situation of domestic violence, it increases the risk the woman will be murdered fivefold.
A case-control study of 11 cities found that in a domestic violence situation, the perpetrator’s access to a gun increased the odds of femicide by more than five times (adjust OR=5.44, 95% CI = 2.89, 10.22).11
Note on Data Sources
Both the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the FBI collect data on firearm homicides — the former from medical examiners and the latter from local law enforcement. Each data set has distinct advantages and flaws. The CDC’s National Vital Statistics System records a higher percentage of all firearm deaths but fails to capture details about their circumstances, including the relationship of the perpetrator to the victim. This makes it unsuitable for measuring gun violence between people of certain relationships.
In contrast, the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) include details on the perpetrator and murder weapon but are more likely to be missing records because the FBI relies on police departments to voluntarily submit their homicide data on an annual basis. Despite these gaps, SHR data are utilized widely in the criminology community. The SHR do not include data from the state of Florida. Everytown obtained data for that state directly from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Women killed by former dating partners (as opposed to current dating partners) are not categorized in the Florida data and are not included.12
Notes
- "Fatal Injury Reports," Injury Prevention & Control: Data & Statistics (WISQARS), accessed December 21 2015, excluding legal intervention, http://1.usa.gov/1plXBux
- Fatal Injury Reports," Injury Prevention & Control: Data & Statistics (WISQARS), accessed December 21, 2015, http://1.usa.gov/1plXBux
- "Non-Fatal Injury Reports," Injury Prevention & Control: Data & Statistics (WISQARS), accessed June 29, 2015 http://1.usa.gov/1qo12RL.
- Fatal Injury Reports," Injury Prevention & Control: Data & Statistics (WISQARS), accessed December 21, 2015, http://1.usa.gov/1plXBux
- Everytown for Gun Safety, Innocents Lost: A Year of Unintentional Child Deaths, June 2014, available at http://every.tw/1iFElcV
- See Everytown for Gun Safety, Not An Accident – Index, http://every.tw/1GMK8np, and School Shootings since Newtown, http://every.tw/1eh50vh.
- Federal Bureau of Investigation, Supplementary Homicide Reports, 2009-13, available at http://bit.ly/1yVxm4K. Over the last five years of available data, 55% of women killed by intimate partners were killed with guns.
- Erin Grinshteyn and David Hemenway, "Violent Death Rates: The US Compared with Other High-income OECD Countries, 2010," American Journal of Medicine, 2015. The World Bank defines a high-income country as one with a gross national income per capita greater than $12,736. Additionally, the study excluded Iceland and Luxembourg from the broader OECD for having very small populations, and also excluded Greece and Switzerland for not using detailed ICD-10 codes.
- US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2012 - Statistical Tables, by Jennifer C. Karberg, Ronal J. Frandsen, and Joseph M. Durso (December 2014), http://1.usa.gov/1TgPRgB.
- "Leading Causes of Injury Death," Injury Prevention & Control: Data & Statistics (WISQARS), accessed January 25, 2015, http://1.usa.gov/1S8hAO4.
- Jacqueline C. Campbell, Daniel Webster, and Jane Koziol-McLain, "Risk Factors for Femicide in Abusive Relationships: Results from a Multisite Case Control Study," American Journal of Public Health 93, no. 7 (June 2003): http://1.usa.gov/1osjCet.
- See James Alan Fox, “Missing Data Problems in the SHR: Imputing Offender and Relationship Characteristics,” Homicide Studies 8, no. 214 (2004); and Catherine Barber and David Hemenway, “Underestimates of Unintentional Firearm Fatalities: Comparing Supplementary Homicide Report Data with the National Vital Statistics System,” Injury Prevention 8 (2002).
SOURCE: https://everytownresearch.org/gun-violence-by-the-numbers/#
.
The history of the AR-15, the weapon that had a
hand in the United States’ worst mass shooting
hand in the United States’ worst mass shooting
A Rock River Arms AR-15 rifle with a 30-round P-Mag inserted. (Photo illustration by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
The type of rifle used to kill 49 people and injure 53 at an Orlando nightclub Sunday — in the worst mass shooting in U.S. history — is as American as baseball cards and apple pie.
Manufactured by dozens of companies nationwide, the ubiquitous synthetic and aluminum rifle, known as the AR-15, is a civilian variant of the military’s M-16 series of rifles and carbines. It’s favored because of its relative light weight and anchor points for numerous modifications, and serves as a type of lethal erector set for millions of Americans.
The AR-15 is synonymous with the shootings in San Bernardino, Calif.; Aurora, Colo.; and Newtown, Conn. Its design and likeness appear in video games, movies, television shows and toy stores. Military variants of the weapon have been shipped overseas en masse, arming U.S. allies, and sometimes enemies, on battlefields the world over. For terrorist groups such as the Islamic State and al-Qaeda, the possession of the black rifle in their fighters’ hands and propaganda videos indicates position, seniority and a sort of material mastery over their accidental American suppliers.
Using a .223 cartridge (meaning the bullet diameter is about .223 inches), the AR-15 has a projectile velocity, depending on the type of ammunition, that can be upward of 3,200 feet per second and is accurate up to about 500 yards. Known to the masses as an “AR-15 assault rifle” and frequently misnamed as a “machine gun,” the AR-15 is sold mostly as a semiautomatic weapon only, meaning one pull of the trigger equates to one bullet leaving the barrel. An assault rifle, by definition, means that the weapon is fully automatic.
Fully automatic AR-15s are available in the United States, but they require extensive paperwork from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and are much more expensive than their single-fire counterparts. That being said, certain modifications to the weapon’s trigger assembly can enable some semiautomatic AR-15s for fully automatic fire. These devices, known as “auto sears,” without proper authorization from the ATF, are illegal. It is unclear whether Omar Mateen, the man identified as the shooter at the Orlando nightclub, had a full auto variant AR-15. Even a semiautomatic AR-15 can fire a large number of rounds in a very short amount of time, about as fast as a shooter can aim and pull the trigger.
Typically, an AR-15 is loaded with a 30-round magazine. Although some states regulate the size and availability of magazines — for instance, California allows only 10-round magazines that cannot be removed from the rifle — Florida does not. The magazines are easy to carry, and in the hands of a trained shooter, easy to manipulate and reload. Larger magazines that can carry 75 to 100 rounds are commercially available, but they are unwieldy and sometimes prone to jamming. It is unclear what exactly Mateen was carrying.
The AR-15’s combination of portability, relatively light weight (about 8 to 9 pounds loaded) and customization options make it attractive for both close- and medium- to long-range engagements and the preferred weapon used to kill the enemies of the United States. The military variants are customized and used by every branch of the military for myriad missions, including clearing oil rigs and patrolling the large expanses of Afghanistan.
Although the AR-15 has been standard issue for American service members for decades, the weapon’s ascension to a nationwide staple is a bit of a mystery. Conceived by a company started in a Hollywood garage and solicited by an unlikely trio made up of an aeronautical engineer, an arms salesman and a Marine, the AR-15, (AR standing for ArmaLite Rifle) was born in the late 1950s and came of age during the Vietnam War as an answer to Mikhail Kalashnikov’s AK-47.
Chronicled extensively in New York Times reporter C.J. Chivers’s book “The GUN,” the AR-15, and eventually the M-16, was introduced as a replacement for the U.S. military’s M-14, a long large-caliber rifle based on an older World War II design. A small number of AR-15s were first bought by the Air Force in 1962 after a bit of salesmanship by Colt Firearms executives (Colt bought ArmaLite in 1959), that involved a pair of exploding watermelons and a general who disliked the M-14. With the Air Force’s initial purchase, the AR-15 entered the U.S. military’s arms procurement pipeline.
After a series of tests and eventual adoption by other branches of the U.S. military, the AR-15, now the M-16, entered the jungles and rice paddies of Vietnam as a malfunction-prone mess. The weapon, after failing in combat time and time again, eventually prompted a 1967 congressional inquiry and a Marine Corps investigation after a Marine officer criticized the weapon in a widely read letter published in The Washington Post, Chivers said.
The M-16 and its civilian counterpart bear only an external resemblance to its Vietnam-era ancestors and are considered mostly reliable, if properly maintained, by today’s standards.
As the U.S. military’s standard-issue rifle evolved, so did the country’s relationship with it. Following the expiration of President Bill Clinton’s 1994 federal assault weapons ban in 2004, the weapon entered its heyday with the American public. Currently, the weapon’s price oscillates between about $800 and $1,800, given the manufacturer brand. Although commonly sold in standard matte black, some rifles are available in pink for those who are intimidated by its militaristic appearance.
SOURCE: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...t-had-a-hand-in-americas-worst-mass-shooting/
.
source: National Geographic
That Time Mob Violence Inspired Gun Control in America
It might sound like politicians are repeating themselves when they argue for or against tighter gun control. But this conversation began almost a century ago.
The tommy gun and the AR-15 are different in many ways, but they've inspired very similar debates about the role of guns and government in Americans' lives.
By Gabe Bullard
PUBLISHED June 14, 2016
Consider the situation: Gun crimes are on the rise, and the guns that criminals use are military-style weapons, capable of firing rounds with unprecedented speed and ferocity. Cities—where more people live than ever before—are becoming unsafe. The United States leads other industrialized countries in gun-related deaths. And scores of citizens, including the liberal president, are calling for action.
But this isn’t 2016. It’s 1934—a year in which the United States faced unprecedented challenges from a new kind of gun and a new kind of criminal, and the country responded with new laws.
The weapon in question was the tommy gun. Named for its inventor, John T. Thompson, the tommy gun is the kind of short machine gun you see in old-timey mob movies, usually with a cylindrical drum of bullets hanging from the barrel. And the tommy gun really was the weapon of choice for mobsters and bandits, who were a major part of the American consciousness during Prohibition and the Depression.
“By the late 1920s, through popular culture, through news reports, through movies, you have this rising crime rate where criminals are using weapons like the tommy gun, like the sawed-off shotgun,” says Robert Spitzer, a professor of political science at SUNY Cortland and the author of several books on the history of gun control.
“A cry arose in the country to regulate these weapons,” he says.
And that cry sounds a lot like the arguments we hear today.
“Why should desperadoes, brazen outlaws of the period, be permitted to purchase these weapons of destruction?” wrote the editors of the Waco News-Tribune in 1933 after the Texas—yes, Texas—statehouse passed a ban on fully automatic weapons.
When New York state banned submachine guns, the Ironwood Daily Globe in Ironwood, Michigan, called it a “a very excellent law” and went on to say, “It is hard to think of any good reason why every other state in the union should not copy it at once.”
That was also in 1933, the same year that New York’s previous governor, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, became president of the United States. Roosevelt favored a registration law for machine guns. And he also favored a new approach to how the federal government interacted in Americans’ everyday lives.
When crimes involving tommy guns began making headlines, many lawmakers wanted to restrict the machine gun's use to soldiers and law enforcement.
Along with New Deal legislation that gave the federal government a larger role in economic development, Roosevelt—and J. Edgar Hoover’s fairly new Federal Bureau of Investigation—championed an expansion of Washington’s law enforcement powers. These expansions targeted crimes that were very much in the public consciousness. After Charles Lindbergh's baby was kidnapped, kidnapping was made a federal crime. In the days of John Dillinger and Bonnie and Clyde, robbing any federally insured bank became also became a federal crime. And with tommy gun-toting gangsters on movie screens and in real-life back alleys, the White House’s focus turned to machine guns and short or sawed-off shotguns.
The National Firearms Act of 1934 required registration and a tax of $200 (almost $3,600 in today’s dollars) on all so-called gangster weapons, a category that included the tommy gun and sawed-off shotguns. While gangsters might’ve been able to pay the fine, they weren’t keen to be registered, which meant getting fingerprinted and photographed. This created a new legal loophole for the Feds to bust mobsters on whom pinning charges would’ve been otherwise difficult; simply having an unregistered gun was enough to prompt an arrest.
This doesn’t mean the 1930s were a time when any gun control laws could pass. “There was profound opposition,” says UCLA law professor Adam Winkler, author of Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. The National Rifle Association (NRA) was instrumental in removing provisions from the 1934 law that would’ve required the licensing of handguns. And while the Second Amendment wasn’t often evoked in the debate over the law, Attorney General Homer Cummings was up front about the fact that, in an effort to stay in line with the Constitution and prevailing thoughts on the federal role in policing the public, the legislation only taxed and regulated guns and did not ban them.
Despite the opposition, the legislation passed.
“It was very effective,” Spitzer says of the National Firearms Act. “When people shrug their shoulders and say gun laws don’t work, all you have to do is point to the 1934 law.”
State laws went even further in this time. Spitzer has chronicled how many states banned gangster weapons outright. And a handful of states even banned semiautomatic firearms, which, unlike the tommy gun, require a shooter to pull the trigger for every round fired. The military-style rifle used in many modern mass shootings, the AR-15, is a semiautomatic gun.
The mainstream debate about gun control occasionally came to the fore over the following decades, but Spitzer and Winkler say it wasn’t until the late 1970s that it took on the energy we still see today. That’s when the NRA became more politically powerful. State laws were loosened or repealed. Gun technology advanced and American politics shifted. In 1939, the Supreme Court had upheld the National Firearms Act. In 2008, the court struck down Washington, D.C.’s gun regulations.
But for both sides of the gun control debate, Winkler says there are lessons from the '30s that apply today.
“One lesson is that even from the earliest days, broad gun proposals were fought by gun advocates and successfully defeated,” Winkler says. Second, as calls for increased gun regulation continue, he says the past shows us that “the types of gun laws that do pass are the ones that target criminals and people who are untrustworthy with firearms.”
That Time Mob Violence Inspired Gun Control in America
It might sound like politicians are repeating themselves when they argue for or against tighter gun control. But this conversation began almost a century ago.
The tommy gun and the AR-15 are different in many ways, but they've inspired very similar debates about the role of guns and government in Americans' lives.
By Gabe Bullard
PUBLISHED June 14, 2016
Consider the situation: Gun crimes are on the rise, and the guns that criminals use are military-style weapons, capable of firing rounds with unprecedented speed and ferocity. Cities—where more people live than ever before—are becoming unsafe. The United States leads other industrialized countries in gun-related deaths. And scores of citizens, including the liberal president, are calling for action.
But this isn’t 2016. It’s 1934—a year in which the United States faced unprecedented challenges from a new kind of gun and a new kind of criminal, and the country responded with new laws.
The weapon in question was the tommy gun. Named for its inventor, John T. Thompson, the tommy gun is the kind of short machine gun you see in old-timey mob movies, usually with a cylindrical drum of bullets hanging from the barrel. And the tommy gun really was the weapon of choice for mobsters and bandits, who were a major part of the American consciousness during Prohibition and the Depression.
“By the late 1920s, through popular culture, through news reports, through movies, you have this rising crime rate where criminals are using weapons like the tommy gun, like the sawed-off shotgun,” says Robert Spitzer, a professor of political science at SUNY Cortland and the author of several books on the history of gun control.
“A cry arose in the country to regulate these weapons,” he says.
And that cry sounds a lot like the arguments we hear today.
“Why should desperadoes, brazen outlaws of the period, be permitted to purchase these weapons of destruction?” wrote the editors of the Waco News-Tribune in 1933 after the Texas—yes, Texas—statehouse passed a ban on fully automatic weapons.
When New York state banned submachine guns, the Ironwood Daily Globe in Ironwood, Michigan, called it a “a very excellent law” and went on to say, “It is hard to think of any good reason why every other state in the union should not copy it at once.”
That was also in 1933, the same year that New York’s previous governor, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, became president of the United States. Roosevelt favored a registration law for machine guns. And he also favored a new approach to how the federal government interacted in Americans’ everyday lives.
When crimes involving tommy guns began making headlines, many lawmakers wanted to restrict the machine gun's use to soldiers and law enforcement.
Along with New Deal legislation that gave the federal government a larger role in economic development, Roosevelt—and J. Edgar Hoover’s fairly new Federal Bureau of Investigation—championed an expansion of Washington’s law enforcement powers. These expansions targeted crimes that were very much in the public consciousness. After Charles Lindbergh's baby was kidnapped, kidnapping was made a federal crime. In the days of John Dillinger and Bonnie and Clyde, robbing any federally insured bank became also became a federal crime. And with tommy gun-toting gangsters on movie screens and in real-life back alleys, the White House’s focus turned to machine guns and short or sawed-off shotguns.
The National Firearms Act of 1934 required registration and a tax of $200 (almost $3,600 in today’s dollars) on all so-called gangster weapons, a category that included the tommy gun and sawed-off shotguns. While gangsters might’ve been able to pay the fine, they weren’t keen to be registered, which meant getting fingerprinted and photographed. This created a new legal loophole for the Feds to bust mobsters on whom pinning charges would’ve been otherwise difficult; simply having an unregistered gun was enough to prompt an arrest.
This doesn’t mean the 1930s were a time when any gun control laws could pass. “There was profound opposition,” says UCLA law professor Adam Winkler, author of Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. The National Rifle Association (NRA) was instrumental in removing provisions from the 1934 law that would’ve required the licensing of handguns. And while the Second Amendment wasn’t often evoked in the debate over the law, Attorney General Homer Cummings was up front about the fact that, in an effort to stay in line with the Constitution and prevailing thoughts on the federal role in policing the public, the legislation only taxed and regulated guns and did not ban them.
Despite the opposition, the legislation passed.
“It was very effective,” Spitzer says of the National Firearms Act. “When people shrug their shoulders and say gun laws don’t work, all you have to do is point to the 1934 law.”
State laws went even further in this time. Spitzer has chronicled how many states banned gangster weapons outright. And a handful of states even banned semiautomatic firearms, which, unlike the tommy gun, require a shooter to pull the trigger for every round fired. The military-style rifle used in many modern mass shootings, the AR-15, is a semiautomatic gun.
The mainstream debate about gun control occasionally came to the fore over the following decades, but Spitzer and Winkler say it wasn’t until the late 1970s that it took on the energy we still see today. That’s when the NRA became more politically powerful. State laws were loosened or repealed. Gun technology advanced and American politics shifted. In 1939, the Supreme Court had upheld the National Firearms Act. In 2008, the court struck down Washington, D.C.’s gun regulations.
But for both sides of the gun control debate, Winkler says there are lessons from the '30s that apply today.
“One lesson is that even from the earliest days, broad gun proposals were fought by gun advocates and successfully defeated,” Winkler says. Second, as calls for increased gun regulation continue, he says the past shows us that “the types of gun laws that do pass are the ones that target criminals and people who are untrustworthy with firearms.”
History repeats itself; and
Those who do not learn history, are doomed to repeat it.
It seems Americans are famous for this.
Demanding Action On Gun Control, House Democrats Stage Sit-In
Democratic members of Congress, including Rep. Elizabeth Esty, D-Conn.(seated left), Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga. (center) as
- they participate in a sit-down protest seeking a vote on gun control measures on Wednesday.
Updated 1:35 a.m. ET: House votes to adjourn, will reconvene at approximately 2:30 a.m.
When the House reconvenes, Republicans will attempt a procedural vote on the Zika funding measure. If successful, they will move to a vote on the bill itself and then adjourn for the July 4 holiday break.
Updated 10:40 p.m. ET: Speaker moves to regain control of House
After recessing the House for most of the day and leaving Democratic members to protest for gun-control votes, Speaker Paul Ryan gaveled the House back into session at 10 p.m.
NPR's Susan Davis reports he disregarded the Democrats' shouts of "no bill, no break" and "shame," to take votes on matters unrelated to guns. Then the House recessed again, and Democrats resumed their protest.
"Lawmakers are grouped in the well of the chamber, in front of the speaker's dais and in chairs in the front row," NPR's Sue Davis reports. "Some members are literally sitting on the floor of the House."
When the House was gaveled back into session a little after noon, Rep. Ted Poe, a Republican from Texas who was speaker pro tempore at the time, was shouted down by members.
"No bill, no break," they chanted. The House is scheduled to break on Sunday, and Democrats are demanding a vote on two bills before they go: one that bars anyone on the no-fly list from buying a firearm and another that broadens background checks for firearm purchases.
A prayer was said and members recited the Pledge of Allegiance, but once it became clear that regular business would not take place, Poe called for another recess.
AshLee Strong, a spokeswoman for House Speaker Paul Ryan, said the House "cannot operate without members following the rules of the institution, so the House has recessed subject to the call of the chair."
Rep. John Lewis, a Democrat from Georgia, announced the sit-in earlier this morning.
"We have lost hundreds and thousands of innocent people to gun violence — tiny little children, babies, students and teachers, mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, daughters and sons, friends and neighbors — and what has this body done?" Lewis said, flanked by fellow Democrats. "Mr. Speaker, nothing. Not one thing."
Lewis and 18 of his colleagues also sent a letter to Speaker Ryan urging him to keep the House in session and schedule a vote.
"There is no doubt that our path to solutions will be arduous," the letter reads. "But we have to agree that inaction can no longer be a choice that this Congress makes."
Lewis' colleagues in the Senate held the floor for nearly 15 hours last week demanding much the same thing. Senate Democrats eventually succeeded in getting a vote, but all four gun control measures failed.
There is no official live video of the demonstration on the floor because the cameras in the House are turned off once the chamber goes into recess.
However, some representatives, including Rep. Scott Peters, of California, and Rep. Beto O'Rourke, from Texas, have been streaming the speeches from the floor. Saying they don't control the cameras in the House chamber, C-Span has been airing video from Facebook and Periscope.
NPR's Sue Davis says that filming on the floor is a violation of House rules, "but it's sort of un-enforceable unless the speaker directs the sergeant-at-arms to clear the floor."
Sue adds that the galleries, which were at one point closed, are now open to the public and dozens of people, including tourists and staff, are watching the sit-in.
NPR's Ailsa Chang reports that Democrats voted to suspend the rules, but it's unclear if that vote matters considering that the House is not in session.
The Congressional Radio and Television Galleries, representing the broadcasters who cover Congress, said that it "appealed to the Speaker's Office to open up camera access of the sit-in demonstration" — but the "request was not granted."
You can read the statement here: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...n-on-gun-control-house-democrats-stage-sit-in
.
Republicans mull going home to thwart
Democratic gun control sit-in on House floor
Washington Post -- Democrats took over the House floor on Wednesday in an attempt to force votes on gun-control proposals, holding their sit-in well into Thursday morning more 12 hours after it began.
Many House Democrats said they plan to stay in the chamber all night — even if Republicans decide to shut off the lights and the air conditioning — to call for congressional action following the recent mass shooting in Orlando.
“I don’t know how many of us or all of us are going to stay,” said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.). “But my plan is I have a blankey.”
[How Democrats pulled off their dramatic House floor sit-in]
Democrats are demanding votes on measures that would prevent suspected terrorists from buying firearms and expand background checks for firearm purchases.
Early Thursday morning, Republican leaders were preparing to pull the plug on House business for the week and adjourn until after the Fourth of July recess. Republicans are “seriously considering” holding a series of votes Thursday morning on a Zika funding package negotiated by House and Senate Republicans and a separate measure to adjourn until July 5, according to several GOP aides. That plan could force an end to the sit-in.
“Democrats can continue to talk, but the reality is that they have no end-game strategy…and no stunts on the floor will change that,” said AshLee Strong, press secretary for House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).
Around 1 a.m., Republicans began the process of setting up the vote on the Zika funding, which if adopted would then clear the way for the GOP leaders to send members home until July 5.
[Why House Republicans aren’t giving in to Democrats demands for gun votes]
Democratic members caught wind of the plan and blasted Republicans on the floor.
“They will leave town in the middle of the night in a cowardly fashion,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said on the floor.
Democrats have little recourse to stop Republicans from voting to adjourn the House, but argued the move would send a message to voters.
“What are the consequences?,” Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.), the former Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee head, said on MSNBC. “They’re going to have to go home to their districts, whether its tomorrow or next week, and explain to their constituents why they weren’t courageous enough to even bring a bill to a vote.”
The protest started early in the day when a group of House Democrats chanting “no bill, no vote” shouted down Republican leaders’ efforts to gavel the House into session around 11:30 a.m., and then prevented the GOP from conducting regular business for most of the day.
Around 10 p.m., House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) banged the gavel and called the House back into session for a vote to override President Obama’s veto of a measure that would scale back new regulations for financial advisers. Democrats voted to sustain the veto while continuing to chant and protest.
Republicans immediately called the House into recess after the vote was completed and Democrats returned to their sit-in.
The vote was an attempt by Republican leaders to show the House could do its business despite the Democrats’ protest. But it was held as Democrats sang “We Shall Overcome,” switching the words of the second verse to “we shall pass a bill.” Following the vote, Democrats made clear they would continue their protest.
“We can win and we will win,” they chanted at one point.
Tensions began to rise late in the evening with Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Tex.) yelling at Democrats that they should talk about “radical Islam,” a reference to Orlando gunman Omar Mateen’s pledge of solidarity with the Islamic State, while Democrats shouted back that Republicans should hold a vote on gun-control proposals.
At one point Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) stepped in between Gohmert and the Democrats saying later he was afraid it would turn into a physical fight.
Outside the Capitol, a group of protesters gathered, and Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), one of the leaders of the sit-in, spoke to the gathering of about 150 around 10:45 on the Capitol lawn.
“By standing here tonight, by standing with us, you’re bearing witness to the truth; you must never ever give up or give in or give out,” he said. “We got to stop the violence and do something about the proliferation of guns.”
Earlier in the day, President Obama praised Lewis for his role in pushing for the gun votes.
Democrats gathered in the well of the chamber throughout the day, with members coming in and out to lend their support, calling on Republicans to take action. The group grew to about 100 members at times and Democratic members of the Senate joined in the protest as well, including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
Pelosi pledged earlier in the day that Democrats would stay on the floor until they get a vote.
“We’ll be here as long as it takes, every day,” she said during a news conference on the steps of the Capitol. “This is the moment of truth.”
In an appearance on CNN early in the evening, Ryan showed little inclination to meet Democrats’ demands, criticizing them for staging “a publicity stunt” and for calling for votes on “a bill that already died” in the Senate this week.
“People have a guaranteed right to Second Amendment rights,” Ryan said. “We’re not going to take away a person’s constitutionally guaranteed rights without due process.”
Republicans held a party meeting at 6 p.m. to figure out a way forward.
They settled on holding a vote on the investor adviser legislation to highlight how the Democrats’ sit-in wouldn’t prevent the House from doing its scheduled business.
“We are going to conduct the will of the people and conduct ourselves as an adult Congress that is actually going to uphold I think the norms, the customs, the rules of the House,” said Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.). “If the minority chooses not to do that, that’s their choice, but we are going to conduct our business, starting tonight.”
Republicans also decided to hold the vote on legislation that would provide funding to combat the Zika virus. GOP leaders hope a vote on an important public health issue will further show they won’t be deterred by the sit-in from taking care of legislative business, this time on a major public health issue. Democrats oppose the Republican-crafted Zika spending bill because it includes cuts to other programs, including the Affordable Care Act.
[Bipartisan talks on Zika virus break down ahead of July 4 recess]
During the sit-in, the cameras normally used for C-SPAN broadcasts, which are controlled by the House, were turned off, and so were the microphones, leading some members to jokingly argue about who should take the next turn to speak, based on who had the loudest voice. While it’s against House rules to take photos or video on the floor, C-SPAN carried live footage of the sit-in via the live-streams from members’ smartphones.
The House cameras were turned on when the House voted at 10 p.m. but were turned off shortly after the votes concluded. Democrats then returned to broadcasting the sit-in via their smartphones.
Throughout the day, one by one, Democrats marched to a podium in the well of the House to decry the GOP’s refusal to bring gun-control measures to the floor. They taped rainbow-colored signs that said “disarm hate” to all of the speaking podiums.
Apart from the intensity of the speeches, the House floor had the atmosphere of an open-mic night, as about a dozen Democrats sat in the well, several dozen more occupied the seats around them and others trickled in and out.
House Democrats frequently congratulated themselves on staging a protest that was largely unprecedented at the Capitol.
The idea for the sit-in began with 15 Democratic members who gathered in Lewis’ office Tuesday night, according to Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.). Initially, they had intended to keep it a secret from leaders.
But the plan leaked out during the House Democrats’ meeting Wednesday morning, and Pelosi found out that Lewis was formally inviting people to join the protest. Pelosi then endorsed the initiative, Yarmuth said, but there were no rules or strategy beyond that.
“We wanted to keep it a little organic,” Yarmuth said. Grinning, he added: “It’s cool.”
Lewis and other members likened Wednesday’s protest on the floor to a civil rights movement.
[Everything lawmakers said (and didn’t say) after the Orlando mass shooting]
Pelosi said members were especially committed to holding the floor because after a series of mass shootings marked by prejudice — the recent attack on a gay nightclub in Orlando and the shooting last year at a predominantly African American church in Charleston, S.C. — and homeland security concerns, members had reached a breaking point.
House Democrats are trying to stay “in sync” with the Senate in making their demands, Pelosi explained. That’s why the only two measures they are specifically demanding votes on would prevent suspected terrorists on the government’s watch lists from purchasing firearms and expand background checks. The Senate considered proposals on these two issues earlier this week.
“The others, we can’t say 85 to 90 percent of the public support,” Pelosi explained, adding that the chances of passing an assault-weapons ban in this Congress are “hopeless,” despite the many House Democrats who also called for that on the floor Wednesday.
“But the other two shouldn’t be, because they are bipartisan,” Pelosi said.
On Monday night, the Senate voted down two Democratic-backed versions of the bills House Democrats are clamoring for, as well as two Republican alternatives. Senators have since moved on to a potential compromise that Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) drafted with a group of bipartisan senators, that would prevent people on the FBI’s no-fly and terrorist watch lists from purchasing a firearm. They have been promised a vote on the measure, and are trying to build enough bipartisan support to clear a 60-vote threshold.
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) argued that the sit-in could help build support for the Collins compromise.
“I think it puts more of a spotlight on both House Republicans to schedule something and Senate Republicans to do something,” said Heinrich, one of the key negotiators on Collins’ compromise who also visited the House floor during the sit-in Wednesday. “And I think it also puts pressure on Democrats to embrace something, in a year where this could have just been a political cudgel, to do something and support something, even if that may not be everything they want.”
The American Civil Liberties Union came out strongly against the Collins amendment in a letter to senators Wednesday. The group said it relies on “the error-prone and unfair watchlist system,” “fails to provide basic due process safeguards,” and “effectively creates a new watchlist that is broader than any current list” — a reference to the provision that would alert the FBI if anyone who was on the no-fly or “selectee” lists in the past five years purchases a gun.
The gathering of House Democrats on the floor turned somber at times. At one point, Assistant Democratic Leader James Clyburn (S.C.) offered a prayer. At another, members broke into singing the spiritual “We Shall Not Be Moved,” a song associated with the civil rights movement.
Midday, about 20 of the members involved in the sit-in left the floor to join Pelosi’s news conference. Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) spoke about his son, who was fatally shot in 1999. “It’s time to end this chorus of primal screams” from mothers finding out their children have been killed by guns, he said.
SOURCE: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...loor-to-force-gun-control-votes/?tid=pm_pop_b
Democratic gun control sit-in on House floor
Washington Post -- Democrats took over the House floor on Wednesday in an attempt to force votes on gun-control proposals, holding their sit-in well into Thursday morning more 12 hours after it began.
Many House Democrats said they plan to stay in the chamber all night — even if Republicans decide to shut off the lights and the air conditioning — to call for congressional action following the recent mass shooting in Orlando.
“I don’t know how many of us or all of us are going to stay,” said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.). “But my plan is I have a blankey.”
[How Democrats pulled off their dramatic House floor sit-in]
Democrats are demanding votes on measures that would prevent suspected terrorists from buying firearms and expand background checks for firearm purchases.
Early Thursday morning, Republican leaders were preparing to pull the plug on House business for the week and adjourn until after the Fourth of July recess. Republicans are “seriously considering” holding a series of votes Thursday morning on a Zika funding package negotiated by House and Senate Republicans and a separate measure to adjourn until July 5, according to several GOP aides. That plan could force an end to the sit-in.
“Democrats can continue to talk, but the reality is that they have no end-game strategy…and no stunts on the floor will change that,” said AshLee Strong, press secretary for House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).
Around 1 a.m., Republicans began the process of setting up the vote on the Zika funding, which if adopted would then clear the way for the GOP leaders to send members home until July 5.
[Why House Republicans aren’t giving in to Democrats demands for gun votes]
Democratic members caught wind of the plan and blasted Republicans on the floor.
“They will leave town in the middle of the night in a cowardly fashion,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said on the floor.
Democrats have little recourse to stop Republicans from voting to adjourn the House, but argued the move would send a message to voters.
“What are the consequences?,” Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.), the former Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee head, said on MSNBC. “They’re going to have to go home to their districts, whether its tomorrow or next week, and explain to their constituents why they weren’t courageous enough to even bring a bill to a vote.”
The protest started early in the day when a group of House Democrats chanting “no bill, no vote” shouted down Republican leaders’ efforts to gavel the House into session around 11:30 a.m., and then prevented the GOP from conducting regular business for most of the day.
Around 10 p.m., House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) banged the gavel and called the House back into session for a vote to override President Obama’s veto of a measure that would scale back new regulations for financial advisers. Democrats voted to sustain the veto while continuing to chant and protest.
Republicans immediately called the House into recess after the vote was completed and Democrats returned to their sit-in.
The vote was an attempt by Republican leaders to show the House could do its business despite the Democrats’ protest. But it was held as Democrats sang “We Shall Overcome,” switching the words of the second verse to “we shall pass a bill.” Following the vote, Democrats made clear they would continue their protest.
“We can win and we will win,” they chanted at one point.
Tensions began to rise late in the evening with Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Tex.) yelling at Democrats that they should talk about “radical Islam,” a reference to Orlando gunman Omar Mateen’s pledge of solidarity with the Islamic State, while Democrats shouted back that Republicans should hold a vote on gun-control proposals.
At one point Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) stepped in between Gohmert and the Democrats saying later he was afraid it would turn into a physical fight.
Outside the Capitol, a group of protesters gathered, and Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), one of the leaders of the sit-in, spoke to the gathering of about 150 around 10:45 on the Capitol lawn.
“By standing here tonight, by standing with us, you’re bearing witness to the truth; you must never ever give up or give in or give out,” he said. “We got to stop the violence and do something about the proliferation of guns.”
Earlier in the day, President Obama praised Lewis for his role in pushing for the gun votes.
Democrats gathered in the well of the chamber throughout the day, with members coming in and out to lend their support, calling on Republicans to take action. The group grew to about 100 members at times and Democratic members of the Senate joined in the protest as well, including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
Pelosi pledged earlier in the day that Democrats would stay on the floor until they get a vote.
“We’ll be here as long as it takes, every day,” she said during a news conference on the steps of the Capitol. “This is the moment of truth.”
In an appearance on CNN early in the evening, Ryan showed little inclination to meet Democrats’ demands, criticizing them for staging “a publicity stunt” and for calling for votes on “a bill that already died” in the Senate this week.
“People have a guaranteed right to Second Amendment rights,” Ryan said. “We’re not going to take away a person’s constitutionally guaranteed rights without due process.”
Republicans held a party meeting at 6 p.m. to figure out a way forward.
They settled on holding a vote on the investor adviser legislation to highlight how the Democrats’ sit-in wouldn’t prevent the House from doing its scheduled business.
“We are going to conduct the will of the people and conduct ourselves as an adult Congress that is actually going to uphold I think the norms, the customs, the rules of the House,” said Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.). “If the minority chooses not to do that, that’s their choice, but we are going to conduct our business, starting tonight.”
Republicans also decided to hold the vote on legislation that would provide funding to combat the Zika virus. GOP leaders hope a vote on an important public health issue will further show they won’t be deterred by the sit-in from taking care of legislative business, this time on a major public health issue. Democrats oppose the Republican-crafted Zika spending bill because it includes cuts to other programs, including the Affordable Care Act.
[Bipartisan talks on Zika virus break down ahead of July 4 recess]
During the sit-in, the cameras normally used for C-SPAN broadcasts, which are controlled by the House, were turned off, and so were the microphones, leading some members to jokingly argue about who should take the next turn to speak, based on who had the loudest voice. While it’s against House rules to take photos or video on the floor, C-SPAN carried live footage of the sit-in via the live-streams from members’ smartphones.
The House cameras were turned on when the House voted at 10 p.m. but were turned off shortly after the votes concluded. Democrats then returned to broadcasting the sit-in via their smartphones.
Throughout the day, one by one, Democrats marched to a podium in the well of the House to decry the GOP’s refusal to bring gun-control measures to the floor. They taped rainbow-colored signs that said “disarm hate” to all of the speaking podiums.
Apart from the intensity of the speeches, the House floor had the atmosphere of an open-mic night, as about a dozen Democrats sat in the well, several dozen more occupied the seats around them and others trickled in and out.
House Democrats frequently congratulated themselves on staging a protest that was largely unprecedented at the Capitol.
The idea for the sit-in began with 15 Democratic members who gathered in Lewis’ office Tuesday night, according to Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.). Initially, they had intended to keep it a secret from leaders.
But the plan leaked out during the House Democrats’ meeting Wednesday morning, and Pelosi found out that Lewis was formally inviting people to join the protest. Pelosi then endorsed the initiative, Yarmuth said, but there were no rules or strategy beyond that.
“We wanted to keep it a little organic,” Yarmuth said. Grinning, he added: “It’s cool.”
Lewis and other members likened Wednesday’s protest on the floor to a civil rights movement.
“Thank you for getting in trouble! Good trouble,” John Lewis told his colleagues
Wednesday night, applauding them for their efforts to “protest what is right.”
“Sometimes by sitting down, by sitting in, you’re standing up,” he said.
Wednesday night, applauding them for their efforts to “protest what is right.”
“Sometimes by sitting down, by sitting in, you’re standing up,” he said.
[Everything lawmakers said (and didn’t say) after the Orlando mass shooting]
Pelosi said members were especially committed to holding the floor because after a series of mass shootings marked by prejudice — the recent attack on a gay nightclub in Orlando and the shooting last year at a predominantly African American church in Charleston, S.C. — and homeland security concerns, members had reached a breaking point.
House Democrats are trying to stay “in sync” with the Senate in making their demands, Pelosi explained. That’s why the only two measures they are specifically demanding votes on would prevent suspected terrorists on the government’s watch lists from purchasing firearms and expand background checks. The Senate considered proposals on these two issues earlier this week.
“The others, we can’t say 85 to 90 percent of the public support,” Pelosi explained, adding that the chances of passing an assault-weapons ban in this Congress are “hopeless,” despite the many House Democrats who also called for that on the floor Wednesday.
“But the other two shouldn’t be, because they are bipartisan,” Pelosi said.
On Monday night, the Senate voted down two Democratic-backed versions of the bills House Democrats are clamoring for, as well as two Republican alternatives. Senators have since moved on to a potential compromise that Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) drafted with a group of bipartisan senators, that would prevent people on the FBI’s no-fly and terrorist watch lists from purchasing a firearm. They have been promised a vote on the measure, and are trying to build enough bipartisan support to clear a 60-vote threshold.
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) argued that the sit-in could help build support for the Collins compromise.
“I think it puts more of a spotlight on both House Republicans to schedule something and Senate Republicans to do something,” said Heinrich, one of the key negotiators on Collins’ compromise who also visited the House floor during the sit-in Wednesday. “And I think it also puts pressure on Democrats to embrace something, in a year where this could have just been a political cudgel, to do something and support something, even if that may not be everything they want.”
The American Civil Liberties Union came out strongly against the Collins amendment in a letter to senators Wednesday. The group said it relies on “the error-prone and unfair watchlist system,” “fails to provide basic due process safeguards,” and “effectively creates a new watchlist that is broader than any current list” — a reference to the provision that would alert the FBI if anyone who was on the no-fly or “selectee” lists in the past five years purchases a gun.
The gathering of House Democrats on the floor turned somber at times. At one point, Assistant Democratic Leader James Clyburn (S.C.) offered a prayer. At another, members broke into singing the spiritual “We Shall Not Be Moved,” a song associated with the civil rights movement.
Midday, about 20 of the members involved in the sit-in left the floor to join Pelosi’s news conference. Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) spoke about his son, who was fatally shot in 1999. “It’s time to end this chorus of primal screams” from mothers finding out their children have been killed by guns, he said.
SOURCE: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...loor-to-force-gun-control-votes/?tid=pm_pop_b
Fox News and OAN News, cable news channels that lean right had no hint of the Congressional sit down on their broadcasts last night and this morning.
If it has an "R" next to it, the Republibots will vote for it!
If it has an "R" next to it, the Republibots will vote for it!
Now it’s the liberals who are arming up
McClatchy DC
By Teresa Welsh
twelsh@mcclatchy.com
December 23, 2016
When it looked all but certain that Hillary Clinton was going to win the presidency, nervous gun rights advocates reported stockpiling guns and ammunition they feared would no longer be available if the Democrat won the White House.
The threat of Clinton presidency, along with several recent mass shootings, had led to 18 straight months of records in the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check system for people seeking a permit to buy a firearm. Many were concerned the government would enact regulations restricting their access to guns.
But since Republican Donald Trump, who was endorsed by the National Rifle Association and supports gun rights, won the White House in November, gun shops anticipated sales would taper off. Shares in major gun companies fell, anticipating a slowdown.
Yet that doesn’t seem to be the case: On Black Friday this year, NICB processed a record 185,713 background checks — the most ever on a single day in the 20 years the system has existed.
And some of those gun buyers are what the industry calls “non-traditional.” Namely, minorities, gay people and self-described liberals.
“In the more conservative gun world, there is definitely a feeling that liberals hate guns,” Liberal Gun Club spokesperson Lara Smith told the BBC. She said there as been a spike in inquiries to her organization after Trump’s election and that paid membership has increased 10 percent. People have expressed concern that an increase in hate crimes since Trump’s election could escalate into something more violent, Smith said, and they want to be prepared.
“Yes, there are liberals who dislike guns, but the vast majority of them have never been around guns and don’t know much about them other than what they are told,” Smith wrote on her organization’s website.
Smith said she has been working with other non-traditional gun groups like Black Guns Matter and Pink Pistols. Pink Pistols promotes “legal, safe, and responsible use of firearms for self-defense of the sexual-minority community.” The group, which has 45 chapters nationwide, calls itself a shooting group that “honors diversity” and “teaches queers to shoot.” Although it has worked in conjunction with the NRA, the Pink Pistols considers itself non-partisan.
Gun shop owner Michael Cargill told NBC News gun classes at his Austin, Texas store are selling out. He’s noticed an increase in LGBTQ, African-American, Hispanic and Muslim customers. Store owners told NBC they’ve seen up to four times as many minority customers than is typical.
The National African American Gun Association, which has 14,000 members, has seen an increase in interest following the election.
“Most folks are pretty nervous about what kind of America we’re going to see over the next 5-10 years,” the organization’s founder Philip Smith told NBC. “I tell everyone don’t panic, use your head. If you see something not normal, get out. You’re probably right. And if you’re not able to get out, you’re prepared to do what you need to do.”
Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article122697849.html#storylink=cpy
.
'Stray' bullet hits Texas legislator in
the head at New Year's celebration
January 1, 2017
(CNN)A Texas lawmaker is lucky to be alive after an apparently stray bullet hit his head during a New Year's celebration early Sunday, authorities said.
State Rep. Armando "Mando" Martinez, D-Weslaco, said his wife had just given him a kiss shortly after ringing in the new year with family and friends, and the next thing he knew, "it felt like a sledgehammer hit me over the head."
A bullet fragment had just punctured the top of the south Texas legislator's head.
Martinez said he had just stepped outside a home in a rural neighborhood north of Weslaco when he was hit.
Martinez, 40, was transferred to the neurosurgical unit at Valley Baptist Medical Center in Harlingen, where surgeons removed the bullet fragment. The fragment had penetrated his skull and lodged itself into the dura mater, the top layer of the brain, doctors told Martinez.
The fragment appears to be from a .223 caliber round, said Martinez, who spoke to CNN by phone on Sunday while recovering at the hospital.
"Had it gone any further, I don't think we would be having this conversation," Martinez said.
Hidalgo County Sheriff Eddie Guerra said Martinez's survival was nothing short of a miracle.
The sheriff's office is investigating the shooting, and investigators "have reason to believe that (Martinez) was hit by a stray bullet," county sheriff's office spokesman JP Rodriguez said.
"There is no evidence to indicate he was targeted," Rodriguez said.
"It was a miracle last night. I was given another chance at life and I'm grateful for it," Martinez said.
Martinez was elected to a seventh term in November and scheduled to take the oath of office January 10.
SOURCE: http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/02/us/texas-representative-bullet-hits-head/index.html
Link to Video: http://www.krgv.com/story/34163141/...rt=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=13001174
.
the head at New Year's celebration
January 1, 2017
(CNN)A Texas lawmaker is lucky to be alive after an apparently stray bullet hit his head during a New Year's celebration early Sunday, authorities said.
State Rep. Armando "Mando" Martinez, D-Weslaco, said his wife had just given him a kiss shortly after ringing in the new year with family and friends, and the next thing he knew, "it felt like a sledgehammer hit me over the head."
A bullet fragment had just punctured the top of the south Texas legislator's head.
Martinez said he had just stepped outside a home in a rural neighborhood north of Weslaco when he was hit.
Martinez, 40, was transferred to the neurosurgical unit at Valley Baptist Medical Center in Harlingen, where surgeons removed the bullet fragment. The fragment had penetrated his skull and lodged itself into the dura mater, the top layer of the brain, doctors told Martinez.
The fragment appears to be from a .223 caliber round, said Martinez, who spoke to CNN by phone on Sunday while recovering at the hospital.
"Had it gone any further, I don't think we would be having this conversation," Martinez said.
Hidalgo County Sheriff Eddie Guerra said Martinez's survival was nothing short of a miracle.
The sheriff's office is investigating the shooting, and investigators "have reason to believe that (Martinez) was hit by a stray bullet," county sheriff's office spokesman JP Rodriguez said.
"There is no evidence to indicate he was targeted," Rodriguez said.
"It was a miracle last night. I was given another chance at life and I'm grateful for it," Martinez said.
Martinez was elected to a seventh term in November and scheduled to take the oath of office January 10.
SOURCE: http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/02/us/texas-representative-bullet-hits-head/index.html
Link to Video: http://www.krgv.com/story/34163141/...rt=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=13001174
.
"It's high time to allow Chicagoans to carry a weapon to protect themselves against the millions of illegally-obtained firearms that the bad guys are packing."
Today on "Cashin' In," Eric Bolling insisted that big changes are needed to fix the dysfunctional and violent problems facing Chicago. http://bit.ly/2jnCjnl
Today on "Cashin' In," Eric Bolling insisted that big changes are needed to fix the dysfunctional and violent problems facing Chicago. http://bit.ly/2jnCjnl
Despite a mother’s plea,
her mentally ill daughter was sold a firearm.
Here’s why she sued
In Wellington, Mo.
She called the police. Then ATF. After that, the FBI.
Janet Delana was desperate to stop her mentally ill adult daughter from buying another handgun.
Finally, Delana called the gun shop a few miles from her home, the one that had sold her daughter a black Hi-Point pistol a month earlier when her last disability check had arrived.
The next check was coming.
Delana pleaded.
Her daughter had been in and out of mental hospitals, she told the store manager, and was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. She had tried to kill herself. Her father had taken away the other gun, but Delana worried that her daughter would go back.
“I’m begging you,” Delana said through tears. “I’m begging you as a mother, if she comes in, please don’t sell her a gun.”
Colby Sue Weathers was mentally ill, but she had never been identified as a threat to herself or others by a judge or ordered to an extended mental hospital stay — which meant she could pass the background check for her gun.
At the Odessa Gun & Pawn shop, Weathers approached a manager: “Something like what I bought last time.”
She seemed nervous, the manager, Derrick Dady, would recall to police.
The Hi-Point pistol and one box of ammunition cost Weathers $257.85 at the store, on the main drag of the small town of Odessa, about 40 miles east of Kansas City.
Weathers headed back to the house that the 38-year-old shared with her parents, stopping along the way for a pack of unfiltered cigarettes at a gas station. A firefighter who was an old acquaintance saw her acting skittishly and muttering.
An hour after leaving the gun store, Weathers was back home where her father sat at a computer with his back to her.
She shot.
Weathers planned to kill herself next but told a 911 operator: “I can’t shoot myself. I was going to after I did it, but I couldn’t bring myself to it.”
Delana lost Tex, her husband of nearly 40 years, and her daughter, who was charged with murder. And beneath her anguish, Delana seethed.
The store had made about $60 profit on the sale, court records would show.
“After everything I did, they still sold her a gun,” Delana said recently. “The more I thought about it, the madder I got. I wanted someone to pay.”
Delana sued the Odessa Gun & Pawn shop for negligence in the June 2012 sale and won a decision at the Missouri Supreme Court that said that nothing in federal law barred Delana’s type of lawsuit. Under state law, the court ruled that dealers can be held liable if they should have known a buyer was dangerous. Last fall, with a trial set to start in January in the wrongful-death case, the gun shop settled with Delana, saying it had followed the law and done nothing wrong.
“I can’t just go by what a phone call says,” Dady said in a deposition. “If the person that comes in . . . passes the background check, I can sell them a gun.”
The gun shop agreed to pay Delana $2.2 million.
Gun-control advocates say the state court’s decision combined with Delana’s settlement are significant victories for those who want to reduce gun violence by changing the financial equation for the firearms industry.
The Missouri case, brought with the help of lawyers from the D.C.-based Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, provides a legal road map for similar lawsuits around the country, according to the Brady Center, which said there are at least 10 other civil cases pending, including in Florida, Pennsylvania, Indiana and Texas.
Jonathan E. Lowy, Brady’s legal director who argued Delana’s case, said it sends a “powerful message to the gun industry nationwide, and to the companies that insure them, that if you supply a dangerous person with a gun, you will pay the price.”
Gun rights supporters counter that a 2005 national law that shields gunmakers, distributors and sellers from lawsuits never provided blanket immunity and already has exceptions to cover knowingly illegal sales.
Lawrence G. Keane, general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, said the lawsuits brought by the Brady Center and others are an effort to impose gun control through litigation instead of legislation. There is “nothing remarkable” about the Missouri settlement, Keane said. “What’s remarkable is that the law is functioning just as Congress intended.”
SOURCE: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/local/2017/03/06/despite-a-mothers-plea-her-mentally-ill-daughter-was-sold-a-gun-with-tragic-results/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_missourigun-215pm:homepage/story&utm_term=.459f411cf889
.
her mentally ill daughter was sold a firearm.
Here’s why she sued
In Wellington, Mo.
She called the police. Then ATF. After that, the FBI.
Janet Delana was desperate to stop her mentally ill adult daughter from buying another handgun.
Finally, Delana called the gun shop a few miles from her home, the one that had sold her daughter a black Hi-Point pistol a month earlier when her last disability check had arrived.
The next check was coming.
Delana pleaded.
Her daughter had been in and out of mental hospitals, she told the store manager, and was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. She had tried to kill herself. Her father had taken away the other gun, but Delana worried that her daughter would go back.
“I’m begging you,” Delana said through tears. “I’m begging you as a mother, if she comes in, please don’t sell her a gun.”
Colby Sue Weathers was mentally ill, but she had never been identified as a threat to herself or others by a judge or ordered to an extended mental hospital stay — which meant she could pass the background check for her gun.
At the Odessa Gun & Pawn shop, Weathers approached a manager: “Something like what I bought last time.”
She seemed nervous, the manager, Derrick Dady, would recall to police.
The Hi-Point pistol and one box of ammunition cost Weathers $257.85 at the store, on the main drag of the small town of Odessa, about 40 miles east of Kansas City.
Weathers headed back to the house that the 38-year-old shared with her parents, stopping along the way for a pack of unfiltered cigarettes at a gas station. A firefighter who was an old acquaintance saw her acting skittishly and muttering.
An hour after leaving the gun store, Weathers was back home where her father sat at a computer with his back to her.
She shot.
Weathers planned to kill herself next but told a 911 operator: “I can’t shoot myself. I was going to after I did it, but I couldn’t bring myself to it.”
Delana lost Tex, her husband of nearly 40 years, and her daughter, who was charged with murder. And beneath her anguish, Delana seethed.
The store had made about $60 profit on the sale, court records would show.
“After everything I did, they still sold her a gun,” Delana said recently. “The more I thought about it, the madder I got. I wanted someone to pay.”
Delana sued the Odessa Gun & Pawn shop for negligence in the June 2012 sale and won a decision at the Missouri Supreme Court that said that nothing in federal law barred Delana’s type of lawsuit. Under state law, the court ruled that dealers can be held liable if they should have known a buyer was dangerous. Last fall, with a trial set to start in January in the wrongful-death case, the gun shop settled with Delana, saying it had followed the law and done nothing wrong.
“I can’t just go by what a phone call says,” Dady said in a deposition. “If the person that comes in . . . passes the background check, I can sell them a gun.”
The gun shop agreed to pay Delana $2.2 million.
Gun-control advocates say the state court’s decision combined with Delana’s settlement are significant victories for those who want to reduce gun violence by changing the financial equation for the firearms industry.
The Missouri case, brought with the help of lawyers from the D.C.-based Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, provides a legal road map for similar lawsuits around the country, according to the Brady Center, which said there are at least 10 other civil cases pending, including in Florida, Pennsylvania, Indiana and Texas.
Jonathan E. Lowy, Brady’s legal director who argued Delana’s case, said it sends a “powerful message to the gun industry nationwide, and to the companies that insure them, that if you supply a dangerous person with a gun, you will pay the price.”
Gun rights supporters counter that a 2005 national law that shields gunmakers, distributors and sellers from lawsuits never provided blanket immunity and already has exceptions to cover knowingly illegal sales.
Lawrence G. Keane, general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, said the lawsuits brought by the Brady Center and others are an effort to impose gun control through litigation instead of legislation. There is “nothing remarkable” about the Missouri settlement, Keane said. “What’s remarkable is that the law is functioning just as Congress intended.”
SOURCE: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/local/2017/03/06/despite-a-mothers-plea-her-mentally-ill-daughter-was-sold-a-gun-with-tragic-results/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_missourigun-215pm:homepage/story&utm_term=.459f411cf889
.
Las Vegas Strip reopens after gunman surrender, fatal shooting
LAS VEGAS, Nevada -- A man riding on a double decker bus on the Las Vegas Strip pulled a gun
and started shooting, killing one person and wounding another before barricading himself inside
in a standoff that lasted hours before he finally surrendered.
http://abc7ny.com/news/las-vegas-strip-reopens-after-gunman-surrender-fatal-shooting/1818496/
.
LAS VEGAS, Nevada -- A man riding on a double decker bus on the Las Vegas Strip pulled a gun
and started shooting, killing one person and wounding another before barricading himself inside
in a standoff that lasted hours before he finally surrendered.
http://abc7ny.com/news/las-vegas-strip-reopens-after-gunman-surrender-fatal-shooting/1818496/
.
Cincinnati nightclub shooting: One killed, 15 injured
CNN)They came for a night of music and dancing. They left by fleeing past wounded clubgoers lying
on a bloody floor. Shortly after 1 a.m. Sunday at the packed Cameo Night Club in Cincinnati, the hip-
hop DJ called for security over and over, one man recalled later. Four off-duty police officers were
outside in the parking lot.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/26/us/ohio-nightclub-shooting/
.
CNN)They came for a night of music and dancing. They left by fleeing past wounded clubgoers lying
on a bloody floor. Shortly after 1 a.m. Sunday at the packed Cameo Night Club in Cincinnati, the hip-
hop DJ called for security over and over, one man recalled later. Four off-duty police officers were
outside in the parking lot.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/26/us/ohio-nightclub-shooting/
.
Poll: 67 percent of gun owners say NRA 'overtaken by lobbyists'
In a poll provided to POLITICO by Americans for Responsible Solutions, the PAC created by former Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who survived a shooting at a constituent event in 2011, and her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly:
“As a lifelong gun owner, I’ll be the first to say gun owners want our leaders to do more to save lives and make our communities safer,” Kelly said in a statement that accompanied the poll’s release. “Whether you are a Republican gun owner, a Democrat gun owner, or an NRA member — we can all agree that when guns end up in the wrong hands the results are devastating. It’s unacceptable that every day 91 Americans are killed by a gun. We’ve got to do better.”
SOURCE: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/25/poll-gun-owners-nra-237564
.
In a poll provided to POLITICO by Americans for Responsible Solutions, the PAC created by former Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who survived a shooting at a constituent event in 2011, and her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly:
- <50% - less than 50 percent of gun owners polled believe the NRA represents their interests.
- 67% - - Sixty-seven percent of gun owners polled said they either strongly or somewhat agree that the NRA has shifted from an organization dedicated to gun safety to one “overtaken by lobbyists and the interests of gun manufacturers and lost its original purpose and mission.”
- 60% of poll of respondents said they are members of the NRA.
- 74 % of poll respondents said they are not members of the NRA.
- 50% said they voted in November for Trump, who was endorsed early in his candidacy by the NRA.
- 43% said they voted for Democrat Hillary Clinton.
“As a lifelong gun owner, I’ll be the first to say gun owners want our leaders to do more to save lives and make our communities safer,” Kelly said in a statement that accompanied the poll’s release. “Whether you are a Republican gun owner, a Democrat gun owner, or an NRA member — we can all agree that when guns end up in the wrong hands the results are devastating. It’s unacceptable that every day 91 Americans are killed by a gun. We’ve got to do better.”
SOURCE: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/25/poll-gun-owners-nra-237564
.
How to Win
The Kind of Democrat Who Can
Win in the South—or Anywhere
It’s how I won in Columbus, Georgia.
People want progress.
They just want it to be implemented in a pragmatic way.
Teresa Tomlinson
Mayor, Columbus, Georgia
06.11.17 12:00 AM ET
In Columbus, Georgia, we believe in good government, and we have a long history of it. At the local level, we do not care for the partisan hooey - a technical term – that may impede the delivery of that good government.
Columbus is a city of 200,000 people, ninety-miles southwest of Atlanta. Columbus is a highly diverse, minority-majority community, and home to the international headquarters of Aflac and TSYS. It also is home to one of the world’s largest military training bases, the Ft. Benning Maneuver Center of Excellence.
As a longtime Democrat, I’ve had the privilege of being elected twice to the non-partisan position of Mayor of Columbus. There, I learned something useful to our current national dialogue: people embrace progressive ideals, they simply want them pragmatically implemented.
Sure, this pragmatism is more work because the elected leaders cannot rely on either the partisan appeal or moral objective of the proposed policy, but must provide a transparent assessment of how the policy and its process impacts all citizens. The resulting information touches everyone and presents an opportunity for broader consensus.
It turns out that citizens like progress. They are excited by the future, and they embrace leaders who can take them there. Citizens want a government that works and to which they feel connected. Basically, citizens want pragmatic progressive leadership.
All of this made me think: In this Trumpian alternate universe we are enduring, are we ready to re-commit to the better governing policies of the Democrats, if pragmatically applied?
As voters in the 6th Congressional District of Georgia begin voting in the June 20 Jon Ossoff/Karen Handel run-off, politicos and uber-engaged voters around the country are wondering if this election will signal a new dawn in our long partisan darkness. It could be that a new pragmatic leadership style is emerging: one that is easier on the eyes and ears of independents, suburban moderates, blue-collar workers, and millennials.
The Pragmatic Progressive is a strong Democrat in economic
and social/civic policy, but understands these policies benefit
many beyond their base and are not afraid to go into the lion’s
den, if need be, to let them know so.
A Pragmatic Progressive – and Ossoff sure seems like one - can explain to you why Democratic policies are not special-interest politics but are sound economic strategies for citizens at every economic level. A Pragmatic Progressive believes government is meant to be a partnership with you, your business, and your community. It is government’s role to create a framework within which a citizen can prosper.
A Pragmatic Progressive believes -- that there is no special or privileged group that is entitled to better or more advantageous government than another. Every citizen is entitled to government respect and access. Every person is an economic and community asset. A Pragmatic Progressive believes the worker is as important and as valuable as the investor, and our governmental policies should reflect that.
A Pragmatic Progressive knows -- that our common prosperity lies in the strength of the middle class. Expanding the middle class through economic principles of fair (not favored) taxation stimulates the economy, increases investment, creates growth and opportunity, lowers unemployment and improves workforce quality. The expenditure of government funds should not be justified as an entitlement, but rather as an investment that can be defended with an articulable return.
Such a progressive accepts science, technology and fact. She understands that global markets and policies are essential to innovation and the free market at home. He wants the United States to be an economic leader in the world and appreciates that global political and economic stability is in our best interest. That stability requires that the United States be a major, but measured, participant in world affairs, on both national security and economic matters. A Pragmatic Progressive knows that immigration is essential to our economic growth.
The red/blue dichotomy has become an oversimplified, lazy way to talk about what we actually believe, and that is one of the reasons we are having such difficulty in American political discourse today. A Pragmatic Progressive does not reject reasoned, well-targeted Republican policies out of hand. Yet, a Pragmatic Progressive recognizes that many policies urged by conservatives are not conservative policies at all, but rather are highly invasive government-expanding ideas based on using government as a weapon of individual power, such as the so-called Religious Freedom Bills.
A Pragmatic Progressive does not believe in the conservative adage, coined by William F. Buckley, that we should “stand athwart history and yell stop.” The human condition is to move forward, to embrace progress and to shape our future, not hide from it or deny it or fight it. We cannot simultaneously hate our government and love the United States of America that it comprises. We cannot simultaneously hate our government and proclaim to love the men and women who give their lives for it. A Pragmatic Progressive cannot be a member of a party that believes our government – the United States of America - is so potentially “tyrannical” that citizens must preemptively stockpile weapons against it.
Government is important.
Our government is us.
Our form of government is the greatest civic experiment of mankind, and to this point it has been a successful experiment. We need policies that reflect that and leaders who understand it. We need more Pragmatic Progressive Democrats.
Jon Ossoff’s unlikely success thus far has signaled that the dawn is coming. The only question is: Will it arrive on June 20?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/the-kind-of-democrat-who-can-win-in-the-southor-anywhere
.
The Kind of Democrat Who Can
Win in the South—or Anywhere
It’s how I won in Columbus, Georgia.
People want progress.
They just want it to be implemented in a pragmatic way.
Teresa Tomlinson
Mayor, Columbus, Georgia
06.11.17 12:00 AM ET
In Columbus, Georgia, we believe in good government, and we have a long history of it. At the local level, we do not care for the partisan hooey - a technical term – that may impede the delivery of that good government.
Columbus is a city of 200,000 people, ninety-miles southwest of Atlanta. Columbus is a highly diverse, minority-majority community, and home to the international headquarters of Aflac and TSYS. It also is home to one of the world’s largest military training bases, the Ft. Benning Maneuver Center of Excellence.
As a longtime Democrat, I’ve had the privilege of being elected twice to the non-partisan position of Mayor of Columbus. There, I learned something useful to our current national dialogue: people embrace progressive ideals, they simply want them pragmatically implemented.
Sure, this pragmatism is more work because the elected leaders cannot rely on either the partisan appeal or moral objective of the proposed policy, but must provide a transparent assessment of how the policy and its process impacts all citizens. The resulting information touches everyone and presents an opportunity for broader consensus.
It turns out that citizens like progress. They are excited by the future, and they embrace leaders who can take them there. Citizens want a government that works and to which they feel connected. Basically, citizens want pragmatic progressive leadership.
All of this made me think: In this Trumpian alternate universe we are enduring, are we ready to re-commit to the better governing policies of the Democrats, if pragmatically applied?
As voters in the 6th Congressional District of Georgia begin voting in the June 20 Jon Ossoff/Karen Handel run-off, politicos and uber-engaged voters around the country are wondering if this election will signal a new dawn in our long partisan darkness. It could be that a new pragmatic leadership style is emerging: one that is easier on the eyes and ears of independents, suburban moderates, blue-collar workers, and millennials.
The Pragmatic Progressive is a strong Democrat in economic
and social/civic policy, but understands these policies benefit
many beyond their base and are not afraid to go into the lion’s
den, if need be, to let them know so.
A Pragmatic Progressive – and Ossoff sure seems like one - can explain to you why Democratic policies are not special-interest politics but are sound economic strategies for citizens at every economic level. A Pragmatic Progressive believes government is meant to be a partnership with you, your business, and your community. It is government’s role to create a framework within which a citizen can prosper.
A Pragmatic Progressive believes -- that there is no special or privileged group that is entitled to better or more advantageous government than another. Every citizen is entitled to government respect and access. Every person is an economic and community asset. A Pragmatic Progressive believes the worker is as important and as valuable as the investor, and our governmental policies should reflect that.
A Pragmatic Progressive knows -- that our common prosperity lies in the strength of the middle class. Expanding the middle class through economic principles of fair (not favored) taxation stimulates the economy, increases investment, creates growth and opportunity, lowers unemployment and improves workforce quality. The expenditure of government funds should not be justified as an entitlement, but rather as an investment that can be defended with an articulable return.
Such a progressive accepts science, technology and fact. She understands that global markets and policies are essential to innovation and the free market at home. He wants the United States to be an economic leader in the world and appreciates that global political and economic stability is in our best interest. That stability requires that the United States be a major, but measured, participant in world affairs, on both national security and economic matters. A Pragmatic Progressive knows that immigration is essential to our economic growth.
The red/blue dichotomy has become an oversimplified, lazy way to talk about what we actually believe, and that is one of the reasons we are having such difficulty in American political discourse today. A Pragmatic Progressive does not reject reasoned, well-targeted Republican policies out of hand. Yet, a Pragmatic Progressive recognizes that many policies urged by conservatives are not conservative policies at all, but rather are highly invasive government-expanding ideas based on using government as a weapon of individual power, such as the so-called Religious Freedom Bills.
A Pragmatic Progressive does not believe in the conservative adage, coined by William F. Buckley, that we should “stand athwart history and yell stop.” The human condition is to move forward, to embrace progress and to shape our future, not hide from it or deny it or fight it. We cannot simultaneously hate our government and love the United States of America that it comprises. We cannot simultaneously hate our government and proclaim to love the men and women who give their lives for it. A Pragmatic Progressive cannot be a member of a party that believes our government – the United States of America - is so potentially “tyrannical” that citizens must preemptively stockpile weapons against it.
Government is important.
Our government is us.
Our form of government is the greatest civic experiment of mankind, and to this point it has been a successful experiment. We need policies that reflect that and leaders who understand it. We need more Pragmatic Progressive Democrats.
Jon Ossoff’s unlikely success thus far has signaled that the dawn is coming. The only question is: Will it arrive on June 20?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/the-kind-of-democrat-who-can-win-in-the-southor-anywhere
.
50+ killed in Las Vegas Strip massacre;
About 400 Injured; Suspect had 10 rifles, police say
By Susannah Cullinane,
Holly Yan and Euan McKirdy, CNN
Mon October 2, 2017
(CNN) Thousands of country music fans became sitting ducks in the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history when a gunman fired hundreds of bullets into the Las Vegas Strip crowd.
More than50 people were killed Sunday night during an outdoor performance by country singer Jason Aldean, police said.
About 400 others were rushed to hospitals after the mass shooting and ensuing stampede, police said.
The gunman, 64-year-old Stephen Paddock, unleashed a hailstorm of bullets from the 32nd floor of the nearby Mandalay Bay hotel, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Sheriff Joseph Lombardo said.
Inside his room, they found a cache of weapons, including 10 rifles, the sheriff said.
"We believe the individual killed himself prior to our entry," Lombardo said.
Police said they believe Paddock acted alone. "Right now, we believe it's a sole actor, a lone-wolf-type actor," the sheriff said.
But why the massacre happened remains a mystery.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/02/us/las-vegas-shooter/index.html
.
Don't look Muslim or gang related to me.
On average, there is more than one mass shooting for each day in America
Christopher Ingraham/Washington Post
High-profile shootings don’t appear to lead to more support for gun control
Although mass shootings are often viewed as some of the worst acts of gun violence, they seem to have little effect on public opinion about gun rights, based on surveys from the Pew Research Center. That helps explain why Americans’ support for the right to own guns appears to be rising over the past 20 years even as more of these mass shootings make it to the news.
17) But specific gun control policies are fairly popular
Although Americans say they want to protect the right to bear arms, they’re very much supportive of many gun policy proposals — including some fairly contentious ideas, such as more background checks on private and gun show sales and banning semi-automatic and assault-style weapons, according to Pew Research Center surveys.
This type of contradiction isn’t exclusive to gun policy issues. For example, although most Americans in the past said they don’t like Obamacare, most of them also said they like the specific policies in the health-care law. Americans just don’t like some policy ideas until you get specific.
For people who believe the empirical evidence that more guns mean more violence, this contradiction is the source of a lot of frustration. Americans by and large support policies that reduce access to guns. But once these policies are proposed, they’re broadly spun by politicians and pundits into attempts to “take away your guns.” So nothing gets done, and preventable deaths keep occurring.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts
Christopher Ingraham/Washington Post
High-profile shootings don’t appear to lead to more support for gun control
Although mass shootings are often viewed as some of the worst acts of gun violence, they seem to have little effect on public opinion about gun rights, based on surveys from the Pew Research Center. That helps explain why Americans’ support for the right to own guns appears to be rising over the past 20 years even as more of these mass shootings make it to the news.
17) But specific gun control policies are fairly popular
Although Americans say they want to protect the right to bear arms, they’re very much supportive of many gun policy proposals — including some fairly contentious ideas, such as more background checks on private and gun show sales and banning semi-automatic and assault-style weapons, according to Pew Research Center surveys.
This type of contradiction isn’t exclusive to gun policy issues. For example, although most Americans in the past said they don’t like Obamacare, most of them also said they like the specific policies in the health-care law. Americans just don’t like some policy ideas until you get specific.
For people who believe the empirical evidence that more guns mean more violence, this contradiction is the source of a lot of frustration. Americans by and large support policies that reduce access to guns. But once these policies are proposed, they’re broadly spun by politicians and pundits into attempts to “take away your guns.” So nothing gets done, and preventable deaths keep occurring.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts
The Las Vegas attack is the deadliest mass shooting in US history
By Doug Criss
Mon October 2, 2017
(CNN)When a gunman opened fire on a crowd gathered for a music festival on the Las Vegas Strip last night, he killed at least 50 people -- making the Sunday night incident the deadliest mass shooting in the United States.
Here is a list of the 10 deadliest single-day mass shootings in US history from 1949 to the present. If the shooter was killed or committed suicide during the incident that death is not included in the total.
By Doug Criss
Mon October 2, 2017
(CNN)When a gunman opened fire on a crowd gathered for a music festival on the Las Vegas Strip last night, he killed at least 50 people -- making the Sunday night incident the deadliest mass shooting in the United States.
Here is a list of the 10 deadliest single-day mass shootings in US history from 1949 to the present. If the shooter was killed or committed suicide during the incident that death is not included in the total.
The Harvest Music Festival
At least 50 killed
October 1, 2017 - A gunman, identified as 64-year-old Stephen Paddock, fired from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino, on a crowd of 30,000 gathered on the Las Vegas Strip for the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival. At least 50 people were killed and more than 200 injured. Officers killed the gunman.
Pulse night club
49 killed
June 12, 2016 - Omar Saddiqui Mateen, 29, opens fire inside Pulse, a gay nightclub, in Orlando. At least 49 people are killed and more than 50 are injured. Police shoot and kill Mateen during an operation to free hostages officials say he was holding at the club.
Virginia Tech
32 killed
April 16, 2007 - A gunman, 23-year-old student Seung-Hui Cho, goes on a shooting spree killing 32 people in two locations and wounding an undetermined number of others on the campus of Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia. The shooter then commits suicide.
Sandy Hook
27 killed
December 14, 2012 - Adam Lanza, 20, guns down 20 children, ages 6 and 7, and six adults, school staff and faculty at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. -- before turning the gun on himself. Investigating police later find Nancy Lanza, Adam's mother, dead from a gunshot wound.
Luby's Cafeteria
23 killed
October 16, 1991 - In Killeen, Texas, 35-year-old George Hennard crashes his pickup truck through the wall of a Luby's Cafeteria. After exiting the truck, Hennard shoots and kills 23 people. He then commits suicide.
McDonald's in San Ysidro
21 killed
July 18, 1984 - In San Ysidro, California, 41-year-old James Huberty, armed with a long-barreled Uzi, a pump-action shotgun and a handgun, shoots and kills 21 adults and children at a local McDonald's. A police sharpshooter kills Huberty one hour after the rampage begins.
University of Texas
18 killed
August 1, 1966 - In Austin, Texas, Charles Joseph Whitman, a former US Marine, kills 16 and wounds at least 30 while shooting from a University of Texas tower. Police officers Ramiro Martinez and Houston McCoy shoot and kill Whitman in the tower. Whitman had also killed his mother and wife earlier in the day.
San Bernardino
14 killed
December 2, 2015 - Married couple Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik open fire on an employee gathering taking place at Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, killing 14 people.
Edmond, Oklahoma
14 killed
August 20, 1986 - In Edmond, Oklahoma, part-time mail carrier Patrick Henry Sherrill, armed with three handguns, kills 14 postal workers in 10 minutes and then takes his own life with a bullet to the head.
Fort Hood
13 killed
November 5, 2009 - Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan kills 13 people and injures 32 at Fort Hood, Texas, during a shooting rampage. He is convicted and sentenced to death.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/02/us/las-vegas-attack-deadliest-us-mass-shooting-trnd/index.html
.
At least 50 killed
October 1, 2017 - A gunman, identified as 64-year-old Stephen Paddock, fired from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino, on a crowd of 30,000 gathered on the Las Vegas Strip for the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival. At least 50 people were killed and more than 200 injured. Officers killed the gunman.
Pulse night club
49 killed
June 12, 2016 - Omar Saddiqui Mateen, 29, opens fire inside Pulse, a gay nightclub, in Orlando. At least 49 people are killed and more than 50 are injured. Police shoot and kill Mateen during an operation to free hostages officials say he was holding at the club.
Virginia Tech
32 killed
April 16, 2007 - A gunman, 23-year-old student Seung-Hui Cho, goes on a shooting spree killing 32 people in two locations and wounding an undetermined number of others on the campus of Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia. The shooter then commits suicide.
Sandy Hook
27 killed
December 14, 2012 - Adam Lanza, 20, guns down 20 children, ages 6 and 7, and six adults, school staff and faculty at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. -- before turning the gun on himself. Investigating police later find Nancy Lanza, Adam's mother, dead from a gunshot wound.
Luby's Cafeteria
23 killed
October 16, 1991 - In Killeen, Texas, 35-year-old George Hennard crashes his pickup truck through the wall of a Luby's Cafeteria. After exiting the truck, Hennard shoots and kills 23 people. He then commits suicide.
McDonald's in San Ysidro
21 killed
July 18, 1984 - In San Ysidro, California, 41-year-old James Huberty, armed with a long-barreled Uzi, a pump-action shotgun and a handgun, shoots and kills 21 adults and children at a local McDonald's. A police sharpshooter kills Huberty one hour after the rampage begins.
University of Texas
18 killed
August 1, 1966 - In Austin, Texas, Charles Joseph Whitman, a former US Marine, kills 16 and wounds at least 30 while shooting from a University of Texas tower. Police officers Ramiro Martinez and Houston McCoy shoot and kill Whitman in the tower. Whitman had also killed his mother and wife earlier in the day.
San Bernardino
14 killed
December 2, 2015 - Married couple Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik open fire on an employee gathering taking place at Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, killing 14 people.
Edmond, Oklahoma
14 killed
August 20, 1986 - In Edmond, Oklahoma, part-time mail carrier Patrick Henry Sherrill, armed with three handguns, kills 14 postal workers in 10 minutes and then takes his own life with a bullet to the head.
Fort Hood
13 killed
November 5, 2009 - Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan kills 13 people and injures 32 at Fort Hood, Texas, during a shooting rampage. He is convicted and sentenced to death.
There were several other incidents in which 13 people were killed:
April 3, 2009 - In Binghamton, New York, Jiverly Wong kills 13 people and injures four during a shooting at an immigrant community center. He then kills himself.
April 20, 1999 - Columbine High School - Littleton, Colorado. Eighteen-year-old Eric Harris and 17-year-old Dylan Klebold kill 12 fellow students and one teacher before committing suicide in the school library.
February 18, 1983 - Three men enter the Wah Mee gambling and social club in Seattle, rob the 14 occupants and then shoot each in the head, killing 13. Two of the men, Kwan Fai Mak and Benjamin Ng, are convicted of murder in August 1983. Both are serving life in prison. The third, Wai-Chiu "Tony" Ng, after years on the run in Canada, is eventually convicted of first-degree robbery and second-degree assault. He is deported to Hong Kong in 2014.
September 25, 1982 - In Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, 40-year-old George Banks, a prison guard, kills 13 people including five of his own children. In September 2011, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court overturns his death sentence stating that Banks is mentally incompetent.
September 5, 1949 - In Camden, New Jersey, 28-year-old Howard Unruh, a veteran of World War II, shoots and kills 13 people as he walks down Camden's 32nd Street. His weapon of choice is a German-crafted Luger pistol. He is found insane and is committed to a state mental institution. He dies at the age of 88.
April 3, 2009 - In Binghamton, New York, Jiverly Wong kills 13 people and injures four during a shooting at an immigrant community center. He then kills himself.
April 20, 1999 - Columbine High School - Littleton, Colorado. Eighteen-year-old Eric Harris and 17-year-old Dylan Klebold kill 12 fellow students and one teacher before committing suicide in the school library.
February 18, 1983 - Three men enter the Wah Mee gambling and social club in Seattle, rob the 14 occupants and then shoot each in the head, killing 13. Two of the men, Kwan Fai Mak and Benjamin Ng, are convicted of murder in August 1983. Both are serving life in prison. The third, Wai-Chiu "Tony" Ng, after years on the run in Canada, is eventually convicted of first-degree robbery and second-degree assault. He is deported to Hong Kong in 2014.
September 25, 1982 - In Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, 40-year-old George Banks, a prison guard, kills 13 people including five of his own children. In September 2011, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court overturns his death sentence stating that Banks is mentally incompetent.
September 5, 1949 - In Camden, New Jersey, 28-year-old Howard Unruh, a veteran of World War II, shoots and kills 13 people as he walks down Camden's 32nd Street. His weapon of choice is a German-crafted Luger pistol. He is found insane and is committed to a state mental institution. He dies at the age of 88.
.
True to form . . .
Las Vegas shooting: White House hits Clinton, Dems for rush to gun control
White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders on Monday chided congressional Democrats -- and Hillary Clinton -- for sounding the call for gun control within hours of the Las Vegas massacre.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...its-clinton-dems-for-rush-to-gun-control.html
.
Don't look Muslim or gang related to me.
And neither does this guy, shot twice trying to save others . . .
© Photo by Heather Long -- Jonathan Smith was shot at least twice while trying to run back and save
others in the crowd at the Route 91 Harvest festival in Las Vegas.
LAS VEGAS — Jonathan Smith is likely to spend the rest of his life with a bullet lodged in the left side of his neck, a never-ending reminder of America’s deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.
Smith, a 30-year-old copy machine repairman, was shot Sunday night while trying to help save people after a gunman opened fire on the crowd at the Route 91 Harvest Country Music Festival in Las Vegas. He knows he’s one of the lucky ones to be able to walk out of the hospital, even with his severe injuries.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/break...o-viral/ar-AAsQ3To?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp
.
source: The Hill
Bill O'Reilly: Las Vegas shooting 'the price of freedom'
Former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly called the mass shooting at a Las Vegas music festival “the price of freedom” in a blog post on his website Monday.
“Public safety demands logical gun laws but the issue is so polarizing and emotional that little will be accomplished as there is no common ground,” O’Reilly wrote in the [URL='https://www.billoreilly.com/b/Mass-Murder-in-Las-Vegas/851098107399788721.html']post. “The NRA and its supporters want easy access to weapons, while the left wants them banned.”
“This is the price of freedom," he continued. "Violent nuts are allowed to roam free until they do damage, no matter how threatening they are."
O’Reilly said his experiences covering gun-related crimes showed him that “government restrictions will not stop psychopaths from harming people” because “they will find a way.”
“The Second Amendment is clear that Americans have a right to arm themselves for protection,” O’Reilly wrote. “Even the loons."
At least 59 people were killed and more than 520 others injured in the Las Vegas shooting, making it the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.
Democrats ramped up their calls for stricter gun control laws in the wake of the shooting, with Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) calling on Congress to “get off its ass and do something” following the shooting.
But the White House said Monday that now is not the time to debate over gun laws.
“There’s a time and place for a political debate, but now is the time to unite as a country,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters during a press briefing.
Sanders also said “it would premature of us to discuss policy” without knowing all the facts of the shooting.
[/URL]
Bill O'Reilly: Las Vegas shooting 'the price of freedom'
Former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly called the mass shooting at a Las Vegas music festival “the price of freedom” in a blog post on his website Monday.
“Public safety demands logical gun laws but the issue is so polarizing and emotional that little will be accomplished as there is no common ground,” O’Reilly wrote in the [URL='https://www.billoreilly.com/b/Mass-Murder-in-Las-Vegas/851098107399788721.html']post. “The NRA and its supporters want easy access to weapons, while the left wants them banned.”
“This is the price of freedom," he continued. "Violent nuts are allowed to roam free until they do damage, no matter how threatening they are."
O’Reilly said his experiences covering gun-related crimes showed him that “government restrictions will not stop psychopaths from harming people” because “they will find a way.”
“The Second Amendment is clear that Americans have a right to arm themselves for protection,” O’Reilly wrote. “Even the loons."
At least 59 people were killed and more than 520 others injured in the Las Vegas shooting, making it the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.
Democrats ramped up their calls for stricter gun control laws in the wake of the shooting, with Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) calling on Congress to “get off its ass and do something” following the shooting.
But the White House said Monday that now is not the time to debate over gun laws.
“There’s a time and place for a political debate, but now is the time to unite as a country,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters during a press briefing.
Sanders also said “it would premature of us to discuss policy” without knowing all the facts of the shooting.
[/URL]
NRA spokesperson dismisses Las Vegas massacre by claiming ‘feet’ are just as deadly as guns
NRA spokesperson and radio host Dana Loesch thinks that if guns are banned then fists and feet are probably next because people can punch and kick to harm others.
The American College of Physicians sent out a press release saying that gun violence is a public health issue and called for a ban of automatic and semiautomatic weapons. Loesch retweeted the release with the comment, “Right after we ban pools, cars, cigarettes, alcohol, hands feet and fists. Lives lost due to these constitute an epidemic.”
NRA spokesperson dismisses Las Vegas massacre by claiming ‘feet’ are just as deadly as guns.
NRA spokesperson and radio host Dana Loesch thinks that if guns are banned then fists and feet are probably next because people can punch and kick to harm others.
The American College of Physicians sent out a press release saying that gun violence is a public health issue and called for a ban of automatic and semiautomatic weapons. Loesch retweeted the release with the comment, “Right after we ban pools, cars, cigarettes, alcohol, hands feet and fists. Lives lost due to these constitute an epidemic.”
When The Hill reported on the press release from the physicians, Loesch retweeted the story and again claimed, “If it’s a “health issue,” cars, then hand, feet, and fists will be banned first (also pools).”
The NRA frequently argues that banning semiautomatic weapons is a slippery slope to banning other things responsible for death like cars, knives or, in Loesch’s case, body parts.
NRA spokesperson and radio host Dana Loesch thinks that if guns are banned then fists and feet are probably next because people can punch and kick to harm others.
The American College of Physicians sent out a press release saying that gun violence is a public health issue and called for a ban of automatic and semiautomatic weapons. Loesch retweeted the release with the comment, “Right after we ban pools, cars, cigarettes, alcohol, hands feet and fists. Lives lost due to these constitute an epidemic.”
NRA spokesperson dismisses Las Vegas massacre by claiming ‘feet’ are just as deadly as guns.
NRA spokesperson and radio host Dana Loesch thinks that if guns are banned then fists and feet are probably next because people can punch and kick to harm others.
The American College of Physicians sent out a press release saying that gun violence is a public health issue and called for a ban of automatic and semiautomatic weapons. Loesch retweeted the release with the comment, “Right after we ban pools, cars, cigarettes, alcohol, hands feet and fists. Lives lost due to these constitute an epidemic.”
When The Hill reported on the press release from the physicians, Loesch retweeted the story and again claimed, “If it’s a “health issue,” cars, then hand, feet, and fists will be banned first (also pools).”
The NRA frequently argues that banning semiautomatic weapons is a slippery slope to banning other things responsible for death like cars, knives or, in Loesch’s case, body parts.