Respectfully submitted by Lawrence E. Rafferty (rafflaw)-Guest Blogger
In the weeks since the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, the call for more action in controlling military style guns and large capacity magazines has increased, but as of yet, nothing concrete has been done on the national level. In fact, the NRA was recently quoted as suggesting that nothing will be done, once the country gets over the “Connecticut Effect”! “The National Rifle Association will wait until the “Connecticut effect” has subsided to resume its push to weaken the nation’s gun laws, according to a top NRA lobbyist speaking at the NRA’s Wisconsin State Convention this weekend.” Think Progress
I did not realize that anyone ever could “get over” the shameful massacre of 20 small children along with 6 staff members of the school they attended. Is this kind of statement from the NRA just hubris or is it indicative of a disgusting level of ambivalence to the violence wrought upon citizens when semi-automatic guns and large capacity magazines are allowed and allowed in the wrong hands? I know we have discussed the gun control issue many times here, but when I read statements like the one quoted above from a Wisconsin NRA official, my head explodes.
The Think Progress article linked above also discussed further statements made by Wisconsin Lobbyist, Bob Welch, that indicate that he has little or no concern over the violence of that sad day in Newtown, but rather is sad that there has been a delay in the progress of the NRA’s agenda since the Newtown shootings. “Welch went on to bemoan the fact that the public’s focus on Newtown was preventing the NRA from pushing such bills through the legislature, but his remarks soon turned to braggadocio about the NRA’s legislative influence. He relayed an anecdote about how, following the Connecticut shooting, a pro-gun Democrat in the legislature had mentioned his desire to close the gun show loophole. “And I said [to him], ‘no, we’re not going to do that,” Welch boasted. “And so far, nothing’s happened on that.”
WELCH: We have a strong agenda coming up for next year, but of course a lot of that’s going to be delayed as the “Connecticut effect” has to go through the process. […] What’s even more telling is the people who don’t like guns pretty much realize that they can’t do a thing unless they talk to us. After Connecticut I had one of the leading Democrats in the legislature—he was with us most of the time, not all the time—he came to me and said, “Bob, I got all these people in my caucus that really want to ban guns and do all this bad stuff, we gotta give them something. How about we close this gun show loophole? Wouldn’t that be good?” And I said, “no, we’re not going to do that.” And so far, nothing’s happened on that.”
Think Progress
I was glad to read that the NRA’s massive amounts of money donated to politicians may not have as large an impact on the election process that they claim. “The answer is no, because once again, though the NRA may spend a good deal of money in total, it spreads that money to multiple races across the country. In the last four elections, the median NRA House independent expenditure has spent less than $10,000, and the median Senate IE only around $30,000 – numbers too small to have a real impact.
All right, but is the organization spending token amounts on a large group of friendly candidates, but putting its real weight behind a few high-profile races and producing results? Yet again, the answer is no. In the last four elections, the NRA spent over $100,000 on an IE in 22 separate Senate races. The group’s favored candidate won 10 times, and lost 12 times. This mediocre won-lost record, however, tells only part of the story. Let’s take one example, the largest IE the NRA conducted over this period. In 2010, they spent $1.5 million on the 2010 Pennsylvania Senate race between Republican Pat Toomey and Democrat Joe Sestak. Toomey won by 2 points, but could the NRA claim credit? Toomey’s campaign spent just under $17 million, over twice as much as Sestak’s $7.5 million. The NRA was one of a remarkable 62 outside groups that poured a total of over $28 million into the Pennsylvania race. Put another way, in the NRA’s single largest independent expenditure over this period, the group accounted for less than 3 percent of the money spent in the race.” Think Progress Justice
Maybe the NRA is spinning its wheels because the Newtown shootings finally tipped the scales of public opinion in favor of sane and reasonable gun control measures. I, for one, would hope that is the case. In light of the vast amounts of weapons being purchased since the shootings, and the continued violence, I am not so sure. The latest totals that I have seen show that at least 1822 people have died due to gun violence since the Newtown shootings in December of 2012! Reader Supported News
Does the NRA really have a significant influence on the political process? Will the Newtown shootings force Washington to do something about the gun violence in this country? What do you think? What do you think should be done?
People who decry every gun and gun owner are as deplorable as those who want to arm every person with a bazooka in homage to the Second Amendment. Guns, like every other potentially dangerous commodity, have a use,a place, and a need for regulation. If you doubt this try throwing all regulations off of motor vehicles in deference to your constitutional right to travel. If they do that, I’d stay off the paved roads.
There ARE NO ABSOLUTE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS — either at the state of federal level. They are premised on reasonable interpretations of the social contract and protected by our respect for law, custom,and tradition.
No citizen not engaged in the military needs a 30 round combat clip and no rational person thinks he/she does. Let’s face it, the crowd demanding this “right” are either involved in selling firearms or convinced that they are under imminent attack from the government. There is nothing to be done about the first group except expose their little artificial turf organization for what it is. As for the second, if you really think you’re going to fight off the black helicopters with your store-bought AK-47, wake up now because you’re no match for a trained assault team.
Every gun should be registered. Autos have to be registered yet no one suggests that the gubbament will be rounding us up and taking our cars. Likewise, just because a semi-automatic looks imposing doesn’t mean it’s an automatic as OS correctly points out. As in most affairs of state, looks don’t count; dangerousness does.
There is a reachable common ground on this topic if we just put the extremists in “time-out” and set about the patriotic work of talking rationally about the subject.
.
Another one bites the dust! Why am I not surprised that “Blowhard Bob”
couldn’t refute or even offer an alternative to the article I cited which raises
serious doubts that Sandy Hook was anything more than a hoax?
Anyone want to try and rescue Bob? He is obviously ignorant of the subject, and only capable of insults. Help the bald brother out, if you think
you can.
Here’s the link: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/02/15/an-open-letter-to-fau-faculty-staff-and-administration-about-sandy-hook/
RWL,
Do not forget the profit motive of the Prison-Industrial Complex. If you expect the war on terror and war on drugs to end anytime soon, do not hold your breath. Especially the drugs. There is too much money to be made on incarcerating people to allow pot to be legalized.
Bob Kauten, I deal with facts, not hyperbole; e.g., “…you won’t mind if the damned murderous devices are banned, will you?
Diverting the topic to ridiculous assault rifle/assault weapon gun terminology is a tactic favored by the NRA.”
That is the demagoguery I was referring to. Did you get the memo that the damn things seldom work right and no self-respecting real criminal uses them? And they are used in so few crimes they hardly register on the stats? If we are going to spend money on a serious effort at reducing crime of all kinds, it might be a good idea to study the causes of crime, and not spend all our energy and money on the tools. Legislation that will not work to reduce crime, but makes some folks feel good for a while, until some crazy wipes out a classroom with some other kind of weapon or device. As for the NRA, I am not a member and think they have not had sane leadership since Bob Foss retired.
Rafflaw & bill mcwilliams,
I was making a point of how to end the gun violence. Bill O’Reilly had made an interesting comment on how to help curb the gun violence by stating: “Anyone who uses or obtain a gun illegally has violated a federal law, punishable with a mandatory 5-10 years in prison.” Then, I thought that this wasn’t a good idea, due to the fact that we have the death penalty for certain crimes, and so far, the death penalty hasn’t worked (as far as crime prevention purposes).
A professor, on the Morning Joe show, stated that neither party is not even attempting to slow the manufacturing of these weapons/guns: “If they truly wanted to stop the manufacturing of these weapons, then why not have a 15%-20% sales tax on all guns, big and small.”
Think about this: Remember the billion-dollar settlement with the Tobacco companies, private parties, and the states? Although the price of cigarettes have risen, new warning labels and name changes have been utilized, and creepy commercials have increased, there really hasn’t been a law preventing the sale or stopping people from purchasing cigarettes. Hence, are cigarettes the real concern or the people who purchase them? Are guns the real concern or should we being focusing on the people who purchase them?
This new law: Universal background checks is not going to stop Tyrone, Billy Bob, & Juan from doing a drive-by shooting on a 15 year old girl waiting for a bus in Chicago; it is not going to stop them from going inside an office building, and shooting their supervisor for laying them off in Florida; and it is definitely not going to stop them from going into some of our public and private schools.
Is focusing on the mental health or emotional well being of our citizens for prevention purposes the road we should travel?
Call me conspiracy theorists if you like, but I can only make this next assertion based on my previous work experience:
I used to work in Missouri’s Department of Probation and Parole, and I had to visit ‘offenders’ in jail, go to court with them, and have a warrant issued out for them for violating their terms of their parole or probation. Most (98%) of the offenders had commonalities: same employment status, someone was always posting their bail or bond; someone was paying to have a roof over their head (and I am not talking about a homeless shelter), feeding, clothing, and even providing cable for them. I came to the conclusion that if I know who is committing some of these crimes, then I know our federal government knows. However, our federal government refuses to stop these murders and child molesters from committing another crime or even thinking about committing these crimes in the first place.
Or maybe the feds (or Elites) are doing what Guy B. Adams & Danny L. Balfour (1998) stated in their book, “Unmasking Administrative Evil:”
“A surplus population is defined as groups of people who are made to appear useless or worse, who are viewed as detrimental to the well-being of everyone else; Hence, alternative attempts to solve a common problem, one of getting rid of people whom governments perceive to be without function or otherwise undesirable.”
Moreover, “the history of the 20th century has taught us that people who are rendered permanently superfluous are eventually condemned to segregated precincts of the living dead (what some people call ‘the projects’ or ‘the hood’) or exterminated outright.”
People such as Bob Kauten are part of your problem, bill.
I’m rather surprised that you’re allowed access to a computer for this long, during the day. Did the orderly lose track of you, again?
I sympathize. I imagine your hiding under the bed all day gets a little boring. It livens your pathetic existence, to make up exciting conspiracy stories, all of which require the collusion of millions of your enemies.
Really, everyone but you is conspiring against you, aren’t they? How exciting!
here you go, Bob:
anturley.org/2013/02/17/the-connecticut-effect/#comment-504153
Bob,
You obviously haven’t studied the facts and don’t even know why more and more people are coming to realize that uninformed, arrogant fools such as Bob Kauten are part of the problem.
Read this, or get someone to read it to you, then, if you think you can refute it, I’ll be glad to admit that I’m wrong. But, insults and/or links to Gov’t or MSM propaganda which merely sing the official version of the same song you sing WILL not suffice. Sorry Bob, only a substantive rebuttal of the evidence and argument adduced will be considered.
Otherwise, go back to sleep and STFU.
bill mcwilliams,
“Like most other people that know something about major events of the past 50 years – and have studied the recent Sandy Hook incident, I am about 98% convinced it was a hoax, complete with PAID professional actors.”
Thanks for your input. What a vicious, inhuman thing to say. You must be very proud.
You are therefore 98% certifiably insane.
Please stick to your previous holocaust-denial comments.
OS,
“The strong spring in a large capacity magazine is often so strong, it overwhelms the receiver. It can have the same effect as trying to force the wrong key into a lock. The precision mechanism jams. Jams in automatic weapons have been a problem since the things were invented.”
Good! Then you won’t mind if the damned murderous devices are banned, will you?
Diverting the topic to ridiculous assault rifle/assault weapon gun terminology is a tactic favored by the NRA. Nice to see you using it.
Steve Fleischer,
I realize that it’s difficult for those who have a gun power fetish to read a perspective on mass firearm carnage from an actual reasoning person, but please have patience. Rafflaw did an excellent job on this article.
This dog dont need no “auto complete”. Why does that little squib keep showing up at the bottom of the page on this DogolgueMachine?
This dog dont need a gun.
Of course we dont want our militia to be too well regulated.
steve f,
I think it’s YOU that’s struggling with following what I wrote. I didn’t say you are anti-semitic, I said that some people here who disagree with you might start calling you names like conspiracy theorists and anti-semites.
Next time, slow down and don’t be so quick on the disagreeable trigger.
Sorry for assuming you would “get” the Seinfeld reference.
BTW, I enjoyed your screed. What does that word mean to you?
Amendment II [ Annotations ]
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
It is a concise little statement. The Framers had thoughts that were well considered and grounded in experience that The People need to have the means to fight off bad governments, kings, tyrrants, Indians, pirates, and invaders. Their first consideration had to have been how to fight against one’s own government such as the Kraut King. The phrase “security of a free state” would be nicer if the Framers had underlined the word “free”.
Now the word “people” can not be parsed. It is you and me, not just people who are in a state militia. They did not limit itto sidearms. I suppose if the Gatling Gun had been invented that they might have gone wider on the range of weapons that The People can keep in their possession or “bear”. If I want to “bear” arms does that not mean the right to carry my gun on my person in public?
To fight off either King or Queen or the Koch Brothers we The People will need to be up to speed with Queeny and Cokeheads. If they have assault rifles in their army then we need them in our homes, in our man caves, in our cars. So that we can gather together as a militia and kill the tyrrants.
The one thing I would do though if I was to get a chance of revision of the Second Amendment would be to limit the right of kids, first name Adam, to have weapons. These days a kid is anyone under age 30. Ok, that was a joke.
Missouri has a recent Constitutional Amendment passed by the Initiative process which allows a person under 18 to get a concealed carry
permit from the state and a person over age 18 to carry concealed without a permit and allows stores and other facilities to opt out of allowing them inside. Had Adam gone into a school in Missouri it might have been possible for someone nearby to get a whiff of it and come in and gun him down.
I am tired of guys like Piers Morgan on CNN ranting about the number of gun murders each year in America. Go back to Birmingham. We had good reason to throw off the yoke of the English King and could not have done it with bows and arrows. Dogs ought to be able to carry.
Bill
Steve and Paul make perfect sense you dont seem to want to listen. The issue is whether gun control will reduce gun deaths and the answer is no.
Nothing you can legislate will stop criminals from committing crimes.
nick,
When politicians on both sides of any issue play on fear, it puts us all at risk. The fear card gave us the “war on drugs” and the Patriot Act. The agendas are different on the gun issue, but when fear is played against fear, the outcome is the same. The public loses in favor of band aid “feel good” solutions.
bill mcwilliams:
Had a hard time following your screed, but one question. How do you make the leap to calling us anti-Semites?
By the way, if you are going to call names, try to spell the insult correctly.
I just glanced over my previous comment and realized I did not complete my thought and what I said may not make sense to some. (Really, I do have to get to work. Billable time and all that).
The strong spring in a large capacity magazine is often so strong, it overwhelms the receiver. It can have the same effect as trying to force the wrong key into a lock. The precision mechanism jams. Jams in automatic weapons have been a problem since the things were invented. More than one pilot was shot down during WW-I because the Lewis machine gun drum jammed. At least they put a bunch of guns on WW-II fighter planes, and if one jammed, they had anywhere from three to seven more.
Large capacity magazines still jam, and soldiers are still being killed when their assault rifles jam during a firefight.
OS, There is demagoguery on both sides of this issue. The LA Times has 2 entire sections of today’s[Sunday] paper on gun violence. It covers not only guns but culture..including Hollywood and video culture. The most interesting piece to me was about a very liberal author named Dan Baum. He has had guns all his life. He carries a concealed weapon and makes a very unemotional, reasoned case for it. What makes me think of you is Baum talks about how he felt for a long time like a closeted gay being among friends who would use homophobic slurs. Baum has come out of the “gun closet” w/ all his liberal friends. OS, you have the knowledge and moral authority on this while most folks here talk out of their asses regarding guns. I just know this is a complex issue and pols on both sides are playing fear. When a pol plays the fear card they’re @ their worse.
I want to speak to the issue of large capacity magazines for a moment. The large capacity magazine has a spring at the bottom to push the rounds upward so they can be loaded into the chamber. In a big magazine it requires a very strong spring. Cartridges are heavy, thus the stronger spring. There is talk of limiting magazine capacity to ten rounds. Let’s take a look at the effect “restriction” on magazine size will have in the real world.
The little video below is Army Cpl. Travis Tomasie demonstrating changing magazines in a standard issue pistol. Anyone can do this with practice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgdq1FBYTUE
Here is Cpl. Tomasie giving a lesson on an Army firing range. He is an instructor.