Archives for category: Gun Control

For those who may have missed it, the New York Times is running an editorial on its front page this morning. It is the first time the paper has done so since 1920. The editorial’s subject is of overwhelming importance in today’s America: the need for rational gun control. Here is the editorial in its entirety.

End the Gun Epidemic in America

​It is a moral outrage and national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency.

By THE EDITORIAL BOARD

All decent people feel sorrow and righteous fury about the latest slaughter of innocents, in California. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies are searching for motivations, including the vital question of how the murderers might have been connected to international terrorism. That is right and proper.

But motives do not matter to the dead in California, nor did they in Colorado, Oregon, South Carolina, Virginia, Connecticut and far too many other places. The attention and anger of Americans should also be directed at the elected leaders whose job is to keep us safe but who place a higher premium on the money and political power of an industry dedicated to profiting from the unfettered spread of ever more powerful firearms.

It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency. These are weapons of war, barely modified and deliberately marketed as tools of macho vigilantism and even insurrection. America’s elected leaders offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killing, as they did on Thursday. They distract us with arguments about the word terrorism. Let’s be clear: These spree killings are all, in their own ways, acts of terrorism.

Opponents of gun control are saying, as they do after every killing, that no law can unfailingly forestall a specific criminal. That is true. They are talking, many with sincerity, about the constitutional challenges to effective gun regulation. Those challenges exist. They point out that determined killers obtained weapons illegally in places like France, England and Norway that have strict gun laws. Yes, they did.

But at least those countries are trying. The United States is not. Worse, politicians abet would-be killers by creating gun markets for them, and voters allow those politicians to keep their jobs. It is past time to stop talking about halting the spread of firearms, and instead to reduce their number drastically — eliminating some large categories of weapons and ammunition.

It is not necessary to debate the peculiar wording of the Second Amendment. No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.

Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.

What better time than during a presidential election to show, at long last, that our nation has retained its sense of decency?

This post is for the gun-loving, Second Amendment-cheering, Red State/redneck half of the American public (and the majority of Greene and Columbia County residents who proudly vote Tea Party Republican).

There’s been another mass shooting, this time at a community college in Oregon. Ten dead, no big deal. Watch the liberals come out and wring their scrawny hands and cry and whine for gun control. Predictable, right?

Why don’t those leftists get it? Why can’t they see all this complaining about all the guns out there only masks the real solution to this problem? Which is, of course, that we need more guns and no restrictions on them. If even one of those community college students out in Oregon had been armed, chances are this latest incident wouldn’t even have happened? Right? Right?

Oregon community college mass shooting
Captions by New York Times, aerial photos by Google Earth.

All right, fucktards, enough of your point of view. Picture this: you’re having breakfast with your buds at your favorite spot in Hudson or Catskill or Tannersville or Windham. In walks a pissed-off progressive with an AR-15. “Here’s a tea party for you,” he says and opens fire. You die with a mouthful of bacon and eggs.

Assuming your imagination stretches that far, how would you address a situation such as the above? Would you:

A) Start taking your AR-15 every place you go, including breakfast?
B) Lobby for a change in gun registration laws to prevent any Democrat from owning a firearm?
C) Loudly proclaim that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun?

You’re probably thinking that my hypothetical scenario is ridiculous, because no liberal would have the balls to bring a rifle into a gathering of country Republicans at breakfast. The truth is that most progressives don’t even own a gun, and that is by choice.

But you’re crazy if you think the current state of affairs will last forever. As more and more Americans die by gun violence, and more and more family members and friends are devastated by their deaths, things will start to change.

One way or another, eventually the number of guns in “private” hands will shrink dramatically.

By ballot or bullet, as you like to say.

In the midst of America’s gun carnage, a new Democratic candidate came forward this week to announce his intention to run in our 19th Congressional District next year. His name: John Patrick Kehoe, the chief of Yellowcake Music. There may be a slight problem, though: Kehoe’s own press release says he lives in Rochester, some three hours away.


John Patrick Kehoe, of Rochester or Woodstock.

If there’s one thing we don’t need, it’s another young would-be Congressperson from outside our district. Especially when the semi-likable Chris Gibson will be removed from the equation in 2016.

Not to worry, though: the Democracy.com site says Kehoe actually lives in Woodstock, and in fact Yellowcake Music’s Facebook page says the organization has offices in Rochester and Woodstock. If Kehoe actually can demonstrate residency in Ulster County then it’s all good.

Still, it would be nice to have someone who’s definitively, 100% local step up to fight off the pro-gun, anti-progress likes of John Faso or Pete Lopez next year.

Guns and racism, twin exemplars of the hatreds that are devouring America from the inside. Held high on their odious perches by today’s around-the-bend Republican Party, which will do or say anything to retain power. If you think the political gridlock in Washington and the seething venom many white voters employ against their black president have no consequences on the street, South Carolina is here to remind you, for the umpteenth time, that they do.

Racism and guns. They align geographically and politically, and the twisted little turd who killed nine churchgoers in Charleston is just an offshoot of a deep-seated malignancy in the body politic. Geographically, Google has recently demonstrated that the Deep South and much of the rural Northeast (including rural NY) are the most racist sections of the country. Not coincidentally, these regions are also teeming with pro-gun fanatics. And they are ruled, almost without exception, by Republicans.

The Confederate flag in South Carolina
Flying high in South Carolina. Photo: Sean Rayford/Getty Images.

For all of South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley’s crocodile tears, the Confederate flag still flies over her statehouse.

What does all this have to do with the isolated citizens of little Greene County, New York, you might ask? Plenty. The Civil War is celebrated every summer in Windham. Excuse me, I meant to say “commemorated.” You see “Repeal the S.A.F.E. Act” signs everywhere on the Mountaintop. What you do not see are many black faces.

Republicans, largely of the dumb-ass variety, rule. Greene County is, in its own small way, aligned with places like South Carolina and Texas in its desire to resist change and progress. And you could in fact argue that the county has been more successful than most in resisting progress.

The little fuck who killed nine people in a church committed a political act and even seemed dimly aware of doing so, saying he wanted “to start a civil war.” Every cop who kills a black person and walks away free also makes a political statement. And if you have semiautomatic weapons in your house, or multiple guns of any kind, you too are making a political statement.

Our last civil war never really ended. Racism won’t go away, and apparently neither will our craven policy of allowing uncontrolled gun ownership.

I personally would like to see every Republican and Red State yahoo take their guns and move to Texas, and then have Texas go off on its own somewhere far away. But it’s far more likely I’ll be the one to move, to somewhere bluer. Not everyone has the resources to do that, though. For many people who are just trying to live their lives, things don’t look so good. For citizens of color, things look far worse.

America’s current political system is not just divided, it’s broken.

Since not much else seems to work, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence has decided to try a new approach: humor.

There is a website, CrimAdvisor, which purports to show criminals where their best options are (and the facts are all too real). And there is the video below:

Those of you with your hearts in the right place will laugh, and hope this campaign has some sort of impact. The rest of you here in upstate New York may laugh at the notion that this state is one of the "unfriendliest" for would-be gun purchasers. There’s certainly no lack of buying opportunities here in Greene County.

The New York Times reports today that gun advocates are pushing to legalize firearms on college campuses. There is a group called Students for Concealed Carry (seriously) that is among those urging the legalization of guns on campuses in Florida, Nevada, Indiana, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Wyoming.

Their primary argument: guns will help prevent rape. (Again, seriously.)

Penis Gun
Penis gun sculpture, on flickr.com.

The only problem with that theory is, what if the guy draws first?

I woke up this morning to read this:

"Police in Idaho say a two-year-old boy shot and killed his 29-year-old mother in a Walmart store after finding the weapon in her purse."

Then I read it again, just to make sure I was awake. I checked the Times, which told me the details were "shatteringly ordinary"—"a 2-year-old toddler, sitting in a shopping cart in a Walmart, his mother’s purse unattended and within reach as she shopped."


Photo: Kathy Plonka/AP.

This was in Hayden, Idaho. A sheriff’s spokesman there said "it appears to be a pretty tragic accident."

Yeah. Pretty tragic.

I almost decided to ignore this election. Yes, the country is in dire straits and the stakes are indeed high. But it’s likely this election will have almost zero impact on any of our nation’s most important problems. For the first time in my life I’m tempted to skip voting altogether.

Vote Blue—Power to the People
Vote Blue 2014 POWER TO THE PEOPLE logo by Jeff Dombrowski.

And yet … there are differences. So you can argue citizens have a duty to choose, so as to minimize destructive outcomes. Chris Gibson is widely viewed as a nice guy, but that is no reason to vote for him, as this editorial makes clear. As for the rest of tomorrow’s choices, progresssive voters would do well to vote the Working Families Party line, with the exception of the choices for Governor and Lieutenant Governor. There, the vote should go for Green Party candidates Howie Hawkins and Brian Jones.

Here’s hoping I’m wrong, and tomorrow’s election will somehow make a difference.

 

You’ve heard about the nine-year-old girl who accidentally killed her “shooting instructor” with an Uzi. The incident encapsulates so much of what is wrong with America today that no comment is really necessary. Except, perhaps, to suggest that those who cling to their Red State values consider starting their own country somewhere else.

The mass shooting near UC Santa Barbara last Friday evening was but the latest in an seemingly endless stream of mediagenic gun tragedies. (Most gun-related deaths, murders and suicides alike, go unnoticed.) Once again we had a disturbed young perpetrator attacking his own frustrations by taking the lives of others, and then his own. Once again, we had candlelight vigils and pious expressions of sympathy. Once again, pundits attributed the latest slaughter to inadequate mental health procedures … to the culture at large, particularly misogyny … and to lax gun “controls,” even in a state with more “controls” than most.

But this time, we also had something different: we had a father of one of the victims putting the blame for this latest outrage where it belongs, with “craven, irresponsible politicians and the N.R.A.” Richard Martinez, whose son Christopher was among Friday’s victims, spoke with courage and spoke the truth. Watch him here.

Richard Martinez Calls Out Craven Politicians and the N.R.A.
Richard Martinez Calls Out Craven Politicians and the N.R.A. Photo: You Tube.

Martinez calls on everyone to tell their elected officials “Not One More”. It’s a heartfelt and media-savvy slogan, but of course without legislative and/or judicial action it will go nowhere. The United States is so in thrall to the gun lobby that it can’t even produce minimal, common sense gun “controls,” such as universal background checks. And even if we could, it wouldn’t be enough. As gun fanatics love to point out, there are already some 300 million guns in private hands out there.

The heart of the matter lies with the Second Amendment, and the Second Amendment, as presently interpeted, lies. For more than 200 years, federal courts interpreted the Second Amendment quite narrowly—the phrase “well regulated Militia” limited the scope of the amendment, it was felt. It was not a freestanding right to own guns, as interpreted today.

The National Rifle Association, more than any other group, helped to change this historical interpretation—Mr. Martinez is right on target there. In response to their efforts to change the Second Amendment’s historical meaning, former Chief Justice Warren Burger (a conservative appointed by President Nixon) said this represented “one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word ‘fraud’, on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.”*

Nevertheless, the N.R.A. succeeded. In 2008, in District of Columbia v. Heller, a majority of the Supreme Court accepted the view that Burger regarded as fraudulent.

Now another former member of the Supreme Court, Justice John Paul Stevens, has issued a call to reverse this flagrant misjudgment and its tragic consequences. In his book Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution (Little, Brown, 177 pp.), Stevens proposes the Second Amendment be modified to specify that it applies only to those who keep and bear arms “when serving in the Militia”.

Now that would be gun control. And that is what it would take to end or, at a minimum, strikingly reduce the number of mass shootings America contends with today. New Yorker writer Adam Gopnik points out that similarly tough restrictions have proved effective in Australia, Canada, Great Britain and other countries. And he too salutes the honesty and courage of Richard Martinez.

Do I believe the Second Amendment is likely to be modified anytime soon? No, I do not—not when assholes like those belonging to the “Brunswick Sportsmans Club” hold events like this one a scant four days after the killings in California. BTW, our own Congressman Chris Gibson of the 19th District is listed as a keynote speaker. Talk about craven, irresponsible politicians. Gibson deserves to be voted out of office in November for this alone.

No matter how high the odds against change, if the truth remains unspoken then the situation is truly hopeless. Richard Martinez’s courage counts for a lot. Those of us who acknowledge he speaks the truth must join him in speaking out. It’s the only way we can begin to counter the N.R.A. and its distortion of the Second Amendment.

* See The New York Review, June 5, 2014, page 8.

This blog normally publishes comments. However, today’s post is likely to bring out the usual frothing N.R.A. apologists and trolls—those comments will not be published or acknowledged. Genuinely thoughtful responses will be posted, however.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 65 other followers