"...a primal scream against Washington and the Senate that won’t ebb anytime soon"

[babylonsister]

Obama and Giffords shame the Senate

Posted by Jonathan Capehart on April 18, 2013 at 7:16 am



Jesse Lewis, Gabby Giffords and President Obama in the Rose Garden (Jacquelyn Martin/AP)


The failure of the Senate to pass legislation to expand background checks for gun purchasers — and a host of other measures — has unleashed a primal scream against Washington and the Senate that won’t ebb anytime soon. Regular folks took to Twitter and Facebook to vent their frustration over how 46 senators could stand in the way of of 90 percent of the country. But it pales in comparison to the blistering words from President Obama yesterday and Gabby Giffords today in a New York Times op-ed.

“Speaking is physically difficult for me. But my feelings are clear: I’m furious,” Giffords writes. “I will not rest until we have righted the wrong these senators have done, and until we have changed our laws…” The former Arizona congresswoman who was shot in the head in 2011 during a constituent meet-and-greet in Tucson writes about her visits to senators to urge them to do the right thing. And she nails them for doing nothing.

Some of the senators who voted no have also looked into my eyes as I talked about my experience being shot in the head at point-blank range in suburban Tucson two years ago, and expressed sympathy for the 18 other people shot besides me, 6 of whom died. These senators have heard from their constituents — who polls show overwhelmingly favored expanding background checks. And still these senators decided to do nothing. Shame on them.

Giffords pulled the bark of the Senate hours after standing in the Rose Garden with the president and the families of some of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. Obama was equally blunt and unsparing in his assessment of what happened. He usually is reluctant to show anger. Not yesterday.

I’ve heard folks say that having the families of victims lobby for this legislation was somehow misplaced. ”A prop,” somebody called them. “Emotional blackmail,” some outlet said. Are they serious? Do we really think that thousands of families whose lives have been shattered by gun violence don’t have a right to weigh in on this issue? Do we think their emotions, their loss is not relevant to this debate? So all in all, this was a pretty shameful day for Washington.

more...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/04/18/obama-and-giffords-shame-the-senate/

[hepkat]

1. It just doesn't matter.... that's what's frustrating

No horror is bad enough to cause these NRA puppets to do the right thing.

Nothing works.

They are a death cult that are more willing to tolerate the death of 7 year olds than a 5 minute wait.

They are sick and disturbed and need to be crushed.

[workinclasszero]

26. Yes the Republican Party is a death cult

They worship money and the dammed NRA has bought off just about the entire federal government.
Those rotten f***** bastards pissed on the graves of eight year old murder victims!

The NRA is a terrorist front for the gun industry. This is government, by the corporation and for the corporation and the public be damned!

[tblue37]

2. They CAN'T be shamed because they are shameless.

These same jerks walked right by Bob Dole in his wheelchair to vote against a bill to extend disability rights internationally. They have no shame--and no compassion.

None.

[ReRe]

17. I will never forget the day they did that to Bob Dole

after he was so ill, just checked out of the hospital. You said it right above... they have no emotions, and if they do, they're all backwards than yours and mine. They are psychopaths. Psychopaths have no consciences. Something that makes everyone else feel sad, makes them feel deliriously happy. Sadly, our government seems to be filled with them. They are like the Corporatists that keep them in office.

[City Lights]

39. You are absolutely right.

Heartless, soulless, shameless. Shells of humans with nothing inside.

[Macoy51]

3. Enforce the Laws We Have

I have yet to see a gun control law that address the criminals and not the law abiding citizen. Let’s enforce our current gun laws before we start introducing new one just to feel good. Do we really want a nation where only police and criminals have guns?


Macoy

[Laurian]

4. Bullshit.

[Kolesar]

5. Bugger off ... eom

[longship]

7. That's utter rubbish.

We've been hearing this same damnable bullshit for decades. It's the go-to response from somebody who stands against any reasonable legislation that would help stem the tide against gun violence. It's fatuous.

I am disgusted by this response.

[Macoy51]

13. Stem the Tide Against Gun Violence????

Do you thing gun violence is on the rise?

/and yes, it is a trap lol



Macoy

[zipplewrath]

19. Over what period of time?

And yes, it is also a trap.

[Macoy51]

28. O. Let's Say..last 10 Years...

After all, we must stem the rising tide of gun violence. Ten years sounds like a good tide to stem.


Macoy

[zipplewrath]

32. Local minimum

I'd have to double check, but over that time frame, you'll find us in a local minmum.

Now look over the last 30 as we have loosened gun laws in many states. Or the last 50 as technology and economics have made powerful and accurate weapons more obtainable.

[Gore1FL]

8. Specifically, what laws are not enforced?

Please name them.

[Macoy51]

11. Felons Can Not Own Guns

I know mass killing get all the press. But the fact is, the vast majority of gun killings are done by criminals who never were allowed a gun in the first place. But rather than go after the armed felons (too dangerous) they want to go after the law abiding people.

You want to see a drop in gun deaths? Random checks of released felons. (make it a condition of parole) Catch a felon with a gun, off to prison with him.



macoy

[meanit]

21. So you're saying

that the police don't go after armed felons, but instead only pick on people like you? That's rich.
Throwing felons in jail longer still does not prevent them from getting the gun in the first place and is of very little consolation for their victims.

[JaneyVee]

24. What do you think the universal background checks were addressing? CRIMINALS.

Look at this chat between undercovers & gun sellers:

?

[zipplewrath]

20. This is a tad misleading

Yes, the FEDERAL laws are often not "enforced" in the sense of taking them to federal court. But a big contributor to this condition is that these crimes are frequently handled with STATE laws in STATE courts as part of other STATE level charges.

Federal courts are vastly over loaded (and under funded and staffed, including judges) and they frequently defer to state courts for prosecution of crimes.

From the very article to which you referred:

"A Justice Department official says that many fugitive cases are handled at that moment by local authorities, who simply send police to the gun shop to pick up the violator, which is why few of those cases are referred."

[Schema Thing]

22. I don't suppose the NRA has championed a "bullet tax" or "firearm tax" to pay for said prosecutions?

That's what an honest person, yourself included, would do every time they mentioned "prosecute the current violators"..... if they really wanted it to happen.

[Macoy51]

53. You Want Special Funding To Enforce the Law?

Easy.

Sell all confiscated fire arms in open auction. Use the funding raised to pay for more police to target felons. Rinse/repeat until all illegal weapons are off the street and gun crime becomes a “Stop the presses” event instead of the current “In other news….13 shot over the week-end”

And no, the police do not get to pick through the weapons and cheery pick the best for their personal collection.

Gets guns away from criminals, raises money for increased law enforcement, get more guns in to the hands of law abiding citizens...what's not to love?

But I guess actually reducing gun crimne is not important to you.



Macoy

[demwing]

9. I'm sorry, I must have missed the "Only for Cops and Criminals" gun bill

that was proposed in the Senate.

Once more...who wrote that, and who sponsored it?

Anyone?

Bueller?

[Macoy51]

12. For the Slow Amoung US

For the slow among us…criminals do not obey laws. That is what…wait for it…makes them criminals. And every gun control bill I have seem does not apply to law enforcement…or are you saying NY police may not have more that 7 rounds in their magazine? lol

Now, as a compromise, I would be willing to have the same gun control restrictions as the police. Seems reasonable to me. Me and the police only need guns to protect us from the criminals, so I will happily comply to any restrictions the police comply with.


Macoy

[demwing]

16. For the seriouly dense among us

what gun bill bans all weapons, resulting in the old "only criminals will have guns" outcome?

As far as your silly idea ("I would be willing to have the same gun control restrictions as the police&quot goes, do you see yourself as a cop? A crime fighter? Do you wear a badge? Can you arrest people? Give them citations? Take them into custody for interrogation? ...No, I mean can you do it legally?

Why the fuck do you need to be outfitted like a cop?

[justhanginon]

27. Just a precaution

Just a precaution in case you run across someone armed with a bag of Skittles and a soda. You really can't be too careful of these dangerous criminals!

[Macoy51]

29. Welp

Well, Wilber, because I may have to DEFEND myself from the same criminals the police do. If a well trained, well armored, cop needs a tank, machine guns and explosives to defend himself against the criminals, why do you want to restrict my constitutional right to own a weapon??

/remember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.


Macoy

[demwing]

30. You assume I trust the police with those weapons.

I don't.

But I trust them more than I trust the great mass of cowboys (gun nuts) who think the way to tame the west (anything west of the Atlantic) is to shoot all the thieving varmints (scary brown people).

Your mileage may vary...

[Macoy51]

33. At Least We Agree on the Police

LOL, nope I do not trust the Police. It is sad, but I am probably more danger from the police (due to mistaken identify/address) that I am from any brown people (even the scary ones)


We agree on some thing.


Macoy

[Ikonoklast]

38. And what assurances will you give to the rest of us that one day you won't lose your temper

and shoot dead someone that cut you off in traffic?

(Done by a 'law-abiding gun owner)


Or murder an ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend?

(Also done by a 'law-abiding' gun owner)


Or kill his entire family after losing his job?

(See above)


Thise circumstances are far, far more likely to happen to you than ever having to defend yourself with a firearm than from those mythical criminals that you see around every corner.

[Macoy51]

40. Your Fear is Miss-Placed

As an owner of several weapons let me respond by saying:

I have been cut off in traffic, and never fired a shot. I will most likely be cut off in traffic again this week, if not today. And I will not shot the guy.

I have lost my job, several times, and I have some how refrained from shooting any one. Heck, once I got very publicly fired from my job by my ex-girlfriend and I STILL did not shoot any one.

I have had my heart broken by more ladies than I care to admit. Had one have an affair and walke out on me and our three children…but again, I refrained from shooting any one.

I will even go one better, I have been drunk, and very, very angry with some one…and I did not shoot him.

Bottom line, I am the Joe Average Guy next door. Fear the criminals (and the Police) not me.


Macoy

[Ikonoklast]

41. Your assurances are worth nothing.

Every 'law-abiding gun owner' could have said the very same thing you just said, right up to the moment they stopped being 'law-abiding gun owners' and fired their weapon at an innocent person.

I fear civilian idiots with firearms far more than I fear any police official, and I have had my own issues with my local PD.



Seems to me that you *do* fear the police for some reason.

Why is that?

[Macoy51]

44. 21,000 Posts

Wow, over 21,000 posts on this board and you do not see a reason a law abiding person would fear the police.

Not to thread-jack, but the police are the only gang I know who can kick your peaceful ass, have it all caught on video, and get away with it.

I will most likely die of old age, but if I do end up shot, it will be a mistake by a ‘roided out Rambo wanta-be kicking open my door and shooting me. And I will probably be laying on the ground (if not handcuffed) when he shoots me.

So no, brown people do not frighten me, cops do.


Macoy

[Ikonoklast]

47. And you still haven't answered the question.

WHY do you, personally, have cause to fear the police?

You are afraid because of something that has an infinitesimally minute statistical chance of happening to you?

Your chance of being struck by lightning is far greater.

Do you walk around with a lightning rod attached to your head?

[Macoy51]

49. Sorry, I thought I Did

The reasons I fear the police more than brown people are that:

1) I have seen, time and time again the police get away with bloody murder.

2) Police come in packs. If I ever am attacked by a brown person, it will probably be just one, if I kick his ass, that is the end of it and I can go on with my life. I kick a cop’s ass, and I quickly find my self surrounded with a swarm of police carrying weapons a infantry platoon would love to have.

3) The Police have the system on their side. If the above mentioned brown attacker kicks my ass, then I go to the hospital, recover at home for a while and get on with my life. A cop kicks my ass, my life is ruined, I get out of the hospital, go to jail, lose my house, lose my job, and am unemployable for all but low wage jobs for the rest of my life.


On a side note: Only 300 people are struck by lighting each year…..in what fantasy world do police beat up/kill less than 300 innocent people a year?

Macoy

[Tommy_Carcetti]

57. "If I ever am attacked by a brown person...."

Wha......?

[geek tragedy]

10. Adam Lanza was one of your precious law abiding gun owners.

Until he massacred 25 people.

Fucking gun nuts.

[Macoy51]

31. nope

I he stole the guns from his Mother, who would have passed any background check suggested.

Which is why the whole background check issue is just theater designed to make you feel good with out actually helping at all. I laugh every time I fill out one of the background check forms…’are you a felon? Are you in the country illegally? “ I swear, only the dumbest criminals would fill out the form truthfully. It is like taking my shoes off at the airport, doesn’t do a bloody thing but show we are tough on terror. lol


Macoy

[geek tragedy]

35. Stole? She gave him free access to them.

And, of course, the NRA and its fellow travelers want to ensure that family members can provide their violently psychotic relatives access to weapons of death.

[Macoy51]

36. He Killed Her

You do know she was the first one he killed, right? Again, how would background checks stopped him? Or do you want the background check to include family, friends, co-workers, passers by?


Macoy

[geek tragedy]

37. He killed her using the guns she have him free access to.

He didn't kill her to get access to them.

She was a certified gun nut who effectively made his crimes possible, and she did it legally.

[Macoy51]

42. Certified?

Really? Certified? I feel I am missing out on getting my self certified. Is there a test I need to take....or can I just fill out the pplication and mail it in?


And again, what background check would have prevented a law abiding person like his Mother from owning her guns?


macoy

[geek tragedy]

43. Anyone who owns an arsenal is a per se gun nut.

The bottom line is that the NAMGLA'ers think inconveniencing gun purchasers is worse than enabling the deaths of innocent human beings.

[Macoy51]

46. How Many is Too Many?

How many guns am I allowed to own with out being a gun nut? And while you are restricting my constitutional rights, how many times can I go to church with out being a religious nut? Can I vote in every election, or is there a limit? How many times can I have a jury trial without being a law nut?

Try proposing a bill that would have actually helped to prevent the shootings, and you may have a shot at it. (pun intended)

Until then, you are just proposing feel good laws becosue actually DOING some good is too hard.



Macoy

[geek tragedy]

48. You gunners won't even allow bills that will make it

inconvenient for people to buy guns for the purpose of killing other human beings.

So spare me the "prevention" talk.

[Macoy51]

50. So What is the Point?

So if prevention is not the point of your bills...then what is? Feeling good?

macoy

[geek tragedy]

51. Prevention is the point. But no single bill will prevent every atrocity.

But this bill would have prevented some.

The problem is that y'all find inconveniences to gun purchasers more objectionable than dead children.

[Arkana]

55. You jackasses won't allow new gun laws

under the cover that "CRIMINALS WILL JUST BREAK THEM!"

So by this logic, we shouldn't have laws against murder or rape because murderers and rapists will just break them! Hooray, we've solved all the problems in the fucking world.

And mandatory background checks are NOT a "feel-good" law. They're something that an overwhelming majority of the country wants--including the vast majority of gun owners and NRA members--and yet the small minority that wants to keep their howitzers and their Abrams tanks have held sway forever. That isn't fair. Why is it wrong to want mentally ill people to be restricted from owning guns?

[HangOnKids]

56. Mac got a time out for being a complete___________

fill in the blank.

[meanit]

15. All guns are presumably manufactured by law - abiding people

Then they are presumably sold to law-abiding gun shops, who then presumably sell them to law abiding citizens. Yet the criminals still get guns. How is that possible?

Manufacturers making illegal sales?

Retail gun shops making illegal sales or making sales to people that they do not know are criminals?

Haphazard personal gun sales?

Theft of improperly stored / secured guns?

Either way, keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies starts with regulating the legal gun industry, gun sellers and gun owners. The current gun laws are not working, despite the standard NRA bullshit that "current gun laws are not enforced".

[abelenkpe]

23. ^TROLL^

[lunatica]

25. Aah! Talking point # 3

verbatim

[Tommy_Carcetti]

34. Enough with the "law abiding citizen" bullshit.

A "law abiding citizen" and his legally purchased gun was the guy who came into my office building two weeks ago and shot his wife and himself. James Holmes, Sueng Hui Cho and Jared Loughner were all "law abiding citizens." A law abiding citizen allowed her guns to fall into the hands of her mentally ill son, ultimately resulting in her death and 26 others, including 20 school children.

Enough with the "law abiding citizen" bullshit. Enough. Stop acting like a damn parrot boy to whatever bullshit the gun lobby spews from its fetid mouth.

[Arkana]

54. Oh really? Background checks don't do this?

You sound like Mark Begich and his "DON'T YALL MAKE LAWS JUST CUZ YALL GOT YER DANDER UP!" excuse.

[KharmaTrain]

6. Blood Is On Their Hands...

...sadly it's not a matter of IF but WHEN the next mass murderer will go on a rampage and we'll be back to this song and dance...and unfortunately with similar results. The bottom line is not only the NRA scoring involved here but also big contributions that is the prid quo pro for most rushpublicans. The money means more than all else and as long as this is the case there will be little meaningful gun control legislation...even measures that have overwhelming public support.

This is a great example where the only time politicians really care what their constituents feel is in the days and weeks before a primary or general election...the rest of the time all they care about are those who write the checks...

[BrainDrain]

18. This is terrible.....

This loss will enhance the reputation of the NRA. Here we had a HIGHLY emotional situation that under-pinned the effort for at least a minimal step forward in controlling gun violence. The atmosphere could not have been more favorable with national polling showing overwhelming support among the populace for the measure. Yet it still failed. The NRA didn't have to convince anyone outside of a few senators who were at risk for political defeat if they voted for the bill. The field they had to cover was narrow and well within their capability to exploit.

In today’s world politics is not about knowing right from wrong or even something as simple as doing the right thing because the greater majority supports it. For most, it is about getting re-elected. And when you represent a state where a conservative majority make you vulnerable to electoral defeat, it makes a special interest group like the NRA that much more powerful. It also helps that those they target are weak of character to begin with and have no faith in themselves to be able to stand up front of their own constituents and be able to explain why it was so important to take this step and lay to rest the NRA lie that somehow this is an attempt to take their guns and freedoms away from them.

We the people suffer because far too many of those we elect lack the courage to do the right thing. They are more afraid of losing their privileges and status than they are of losing themselves.

That just makes this whole episode just that much more sad.

There comes a point where everyday, ordinary people must make a choice not to be ordinary anymore.

Let the Revolution...........begin

[Macoy51]

45. Let the Revolution...........begin

"Let the Revolution...........begin " And, pray tell, just how will this revolution work with out guns?


macoy