July 2012 Shooting Report: 121 dead, 387 wounded, in 508 shootings

July was another banner month for shootings with 508 compared to June’s 361, a 40.7% increase.  Those wounded also skyrocketed with 387 in July versus 233 in June, again a whopping increase of 66%.  The only bright spot was that gun deaths dropped by 7; July was 121, June 128.  And this, although a total of 12 were killed by James Holmes in the Aurora, Colorado massacre.  If the latter, along with this monthly report doesn’t encourage more gun control, what will?

There were 105 shooting incidents in July, the same as June.  Chicago leads the way with a total of 22 incidents, Arizona next with 10.  Other hot spots included Baltimore, Detroit, New Orleans, New York and St. Louis.  It is notable that there was only one shooting incident in Los Angeles, the second largest city in the U.S.  Phoenix, Arizona is the sixth largest city and it had 7 incidents.  If Congress and the American public can’t see a problem here, we are in terrible trouble.

Following is the July report but first, a reminder that these figures are based on news coverage of shootings across the country and do not reflect the grand totals which are more fully reported by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) which you can see here.  The Nasty Jack Monthly Shooting Report is meant to show the wide array of shootings nationwide that occur on almost a daily basis.

July Nasty Jack Monthly Shooting Report:

DATE	CITY/STATE	DEAD	WOUNDED	SHOOTINGS
7/1/2012	Chicago, IL	1	5	6
7/1/2012	Bremerton, WA	2	0	2
7/1/2012	Phoenix, AZ	1	0	1
7/1/2012	Spartanburg County, SC	0	2	2
7/1/2012	Greeley, CO	1	0	1
7/2/2012	Spartanburg, SC	0	1	1
7/2/2012	Cleveland, OH	1	1	2
7/2/2012	Greeley, CO	0	1	1
7/2/2012	Chicago, IL	1	3	4
7/2/2012	Atlanta, GA	2	0	2
7/2/2012	Chicago, IL	4	2	6
7/3/2012	Chicago, IL	0	15	15
7/3/2012	Indianapolis, IN	1	2	3
7/4/2012	Chattanooga, TN	0	3	3
7/4/2012	Portland, OR	0	2	2
7/4/2012	Two Grey Hills, NM	1	1	2
7/4/2012	Chicago, IL	5	22	27
7/4/2012	Washington, DC	1	5	6
7/4/2012	Philadelphia, PA	0	2	2
7/4/2012	Boston, MA	0	3	3
7/4/2012	New York, NY	1	16	17
7/4/2012	Portland, OR	0	2	2
7/5/2012	Carlisle, PA	0	1	1
7/5/2012	McAllen, TX	0	1	1
7/5/2012	Tucson, AZ	0	1	1
7/5/2012	Chicago, IL	4	19	23
7/5/2012	Tucson, AZ	1	0	1
7/5/2012	Chicago, IL	3	7	10
7/5/2012	Las Vegas, NV	0	3	3
7/5/2012	St. Louis, MO	0	1	1
7/5-7/6/2012	Chicago, IL	3	7	10
7/6/2012	Pendleton, OH	0	3	3
7/6/2012	Oakland, CA	2	0	2
7/6/2012	Chicago, IL	0	11	11
7/6/2012	McKeesport, PA	1	1	2
7/6/2012	Newton Falls, OH	5	0	5
7/6/2012	Baltimore, MD	0	2	2
7/6/2012	Durham, NC	0	2	2
7/6/2012	Augusta, GA	0	6	6
7/7/2012	Chicago, IL	0	7	7
7/7/2012	Jersey City, NJ	0	2	2
7/7/2012	St. Louis, MO	1	7	8
7/7/2012	Los Angeles, CA	1	1	2
7/7/2012	Detroit, MI	1	3	4
7/7/2012	Queens, NY	3	0	3
7/8/2012	Patterson, NJ	0	2	2
7/8/2012	Dover, DE	3	2	5
7/8/2012	New York, NY	0	2	2
7/8/2012	Rochester, NY	0	2	2
7/9/2012	Wilkinsburg, PA	1	1	2
7/9/2012	Chicago, IL	0	8	8
7/9/2012	Phoenix, AZ	1	0	1
7/9/2012	Omaha, NE	3	0	3
7/9/2012	Laveen, AZ	1	0	1
7/9/2012	Oxnard, CA	1	1	2
7/9/2012	St. Louis, MO	0	3	3
7/9/2012	Baltimore, MD	0	1	1
7/9-7/10/2012	Chicago, IL	1	10	11
7/10/2012	Chicago, IL	0	2	2
7/10/2012	New Orleans, LA	3	1	4
7/10/2012	Chicago, IL	0	1	1
7/11/2012	Chicago, IL	0	8	8
7/12/2012	Baltimore, MD	0	1	1
7/13/2012	St. Louis, MO	0	1	1
7/13/2012	Falls Church, VA	2	0	2
7/13/2012	Pitt County, NC	2	0	2
7/13/2012	Lenawee County, MI	2	1	3
7/13-7/14/2012	Chicago, IL	0	9	9
7/14/2012	Memphis, TN	2	2	4
7/14/2012	Tulsa, OK	2	0	2
7/14/2012	Ellicott City, MD	0	2	2
7/14/2012	Tampa, FL	1	1	2
7/14-7/15/2012	Chicago, IL	4	16	20
7/15/2012	Martinsville, IN	1	0	1
7/15/2012	Newark, NJ	2	0	2
7/15/2012	Detroit, MI	2	2	4
7/15/2012	Manatee County, FL	0	3	3
7/15/2012	New Orleans, LA	2	0	2
7/17/2012	Tuscaloosa, AL	0	17	17
7/17/2012	Peoria, AZ	0	1	1
7/17/2012	Phoenix, AZ	0	1	1
7/17/2012	Pensacola, FL	0	1	1
7/17/2012	Milwaukee, WI	1	3	4
7/17/2012	Flint, MI	2	1	3
7/17/2012	Phoenix, AZ	1	0	1
7/18/2012	Chicago, IL	0	6	6
7/19/2012	Chicago, IL	2	4	6
7/20/2012	Aurora, CO	12	58	70
7/20/2012	Phoenix, AZ	1	0	1
7/21/2012	Phoenix, AZ	1	1	2
7/21/2012	Chicago, IL	0	6	6
7/22/2012	New York, NY	1	0	1
7/23/2012	Chicago, IL	0	6	6
7/23/2012	Little Rock, AR	1	0	1
7/23/2012	Haverhill. MA	2	2	4
7/24/2012	Phoenix, AZ	0	3	3
7/27/2012	Lawrence, IN	0	1	1
7/27/2012	Pendleton, IN	2	2	4
7/27/2012	Las Vegas, NV	1	1	2
7/27/2012	New Orleans, LA	4	0	4
7/28-7/29/2012	Chicago, IL	0	12	12
7/29/2012	Miami, FL	0	3	3
7/29/2012	Columbus, OH	2	2	4
7/30/2012	Oxford, MS	2	1	3
7/30/2012	Quincy, PA	3	0	3
		121	387	508

Prior reports: March, April, May, June.

Hispanic demographics and voting aspirations remain strong for November

President Obama is winning the Latino vote by 70 percent to 22 percent for Mitt Romney going into the final months of the 2012 election.  When you break this down, Spanish dominant Hispanics come in 76 percent to 15 percent, foreign born 72 percent to 19 percent, Spanish dominant 76 percent to 15 percent and 66 percent to 28 percent of those English dominant.  In other words, if you are Latino and for Mitt Romney, you are simply out of the loop.

To begin with, I cannot understand how any Hispanic could think the Republicans have anything to offer them.  Look at the record.  The GOP is against anything Latino and has been for years with absolutely no evidence of changing.  And this is due to a constituency that borders on racism as confirmed by the Tea Party faction, emphasized by the emails of ousted state Senator Russell Pearce of Arizona.  He is also the author of the state’s anti-immigration bill, SB-1070.

In a study done at Arizona State University, the long contemplated impact of the Hispanic vote is expected to be felt this Nov. in the state, and there is reason to believe this could evolve nationwide.  Arizona is important for several reasons.  One, it will be necessary to convince even some legal Latinos that they are not in danger of being arrested when registering to vote, convincing others nationwide.  Two, the numbers are awesome, possibly changing Arizona from red to blue.

President Obama talks about Mitt Romney and Hispanics:

In an earlier post, I reported that Arizona’s Hispanic voting-age population has jumped from 455,000 nine years ago to 845,000 today, 19 percent of the state’s population eligible to vote. Taking Arizona in 2012 is not really that far-fetched considering Obama won 45 percent of the state running against McCain in 2008, coupled with the increased strategy of Latino activists to get out the vote. 

Democrats are hoping to register approximately 300,000 new Hispanics to vote prior to November 2012.

The Latino Decisions Poll says considering, “…voters with a validated vote history in 2008 Obama leads Romney 72% to 20%, and Latinos who reside in one of 13 critical battleground states (AZ, CO, FL, IA, IN, MI, MO, NC, NV, OH, PA, VA, WI) lean very heavily towards Obama, 71% to 21% for Romney.  The question is no longer just whether the general voters of swing states will come out for Obama, but also how many Hispanics those states can register.

As an example, the four swing states with the highest percent of Latino population are Arizona, 29.6 percent, Colorado, 20.7 percent, Florida 22.5 percent and Nevada 26.5 percent.  When you add up the five and ten percent states across the country, you begin to realize the potential of the Hispanic vote.  16.3 percent of the nation’s population is Latino and growing daily.  It is beyond me how the GOP can argue with these demographics.

I have a friend here in Arizona that I talked with just a week ago who is Hispanic and I asked her if she was going to vote.  Unfortunately she hasn’t achieved citizenship yet which means she can’t.  She indicated her husband would definitely vote and her daughters are out knocking on doors to help bring out the vote.  My friend is also actively advocating for Latinos to vote as well as her husband when he has the time.  My point here is…it is beginning to happen.

Is gun control impossible based on the number of weapons on the street?

Florida will soon pass the one-million-mark in gun worshippers carrying concealed weapons.  They are the first state in the country to reach that firepower.  If Florida’s population wasn’t three times that of Arizona, I’d bet the latter would have been first.  But then, Florida is where the NRA’s own graying granny Marion Hammer hails from, a little old lady we can thank for the Stand Your Ground law plus others like it designed to kill off the American population.



Guns on the street

Gun sales in Florida have likewise soared 96 percent from 2002 through 2011.  But comparable sales remained only stable after the Aurora, Colorado movie massacre.  Considering gun nuts never think they have enough guns, go figure.  In Colorado they jumped 43 percent.  There is a graphic showing mass shootings since 1999 that is significant since in many of these incidents, either assault weapons or high capacity magazines were used.  Readily available.

There are at least 270 million guns out there in the U.S., 2.84 per 100,000 population.  Firearms account for 67.52 percent of all murders nationwide but Illinois, even back in 2010 (the latest figures) it was 80.35 percent.  It has only gotten worse with the recent gang wars that have caused hundreds of deaths in Chicago.  Loose guns everywhere, compliments of the national Rifle Assn. (NRA). 

It is hard for other developed countries to understand why the U.S. has so many murders due to guns.  We have almost 13,000 a year, 8,775 of them caused by firearms.  As an example, Great Britain has around 600 murders a year which makes this fact startling even considering the smaller population.  The difference in the proliferation of guns in the two countries is equally amazing; GB has only 3.4 million firearms out in the population.

Another gun proliferator is the Tea Party, known for demonstrations in Washington, D.C., blatantly with guns in the hands of members as a show of arrogant force.  If TPers hadn’t lost most of their effectiveness in recent months, you could almost rank them up there with the NRA in their fanaticism.  They are the cheerleaders for virtually unrestricted gun rights using ringed targets of President Obama to prove their point.  Double-digit IQs at best.

What is frightening is the fact that some are touting the fact that gun control is not to be considered, at least in the near future, even after Virginia Tech, Tucson and Aurora, Colorado.  Jonathan Mann writing on CNN wants to know, “What is it about Americans and guns?”  An obvious reference to worship by gun nuts of their weapons, plainly over valuing human life, which is so often taken by firearms.  He quotes the same numbers I use above but continues in analysis.

He says, “The laws are being driven by politics, and the politics are being driven by groups such as the National Rifle Assn.  The Washington Post estimates that the NRA succeeded in helping elect four out of every five candidates it endorsed in the most recent congressional election.”  He quotes NRA head, wacky Wayne LaPierre saying, "When they tell you that a government ban on certain firearms will somehow make you safer, don't you believe it, not for a second, because it's a lie just like the lies they've told you before."

Mayors Against Illegal Guns
Where the guns are

Mann also quotes New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg when he commented on both Obama’s and Romney’s reactions to the Aurora shooting, “You know, soothing words are nice, but maybe it's time that the two people who want to be president of the United States stand up and tell us what they are going to do about it, because this is obviously a problem across the country."  As a matter of fact, soft rhetoric is all we have been hearing on gun control for years.

The problem of this post persists, ‘Is gun control impossible based on the number of weapons on the street?’  With over 270 million guns out there in the hands of who knows who, you’d never gather up even a small portion of them because the NRA has made sure the government doesn’t know where they are.  And maybe that is where we start.  Demand the registration of all firearms so we can at least know who the good guys are, making it easier to locate illegal guns.

So maybe it is a doable situation, huh?  Oh no, I forgot about wacky Wayne LaPierre.  Maybe Obama can deal with him in his second term.

Did Mitt Romney change the way corporations are run?

If you are running for president, especially as a Republican, you get to change the laws, or at least the interpretation of them, to fit your particular situation.  Like running for president.  And you can even make this retroactive to whenever you want.  John Adams said years ago, “facts are stubborn things” and he should know as our second president, a founding father, and a leader of American independence from Great Britain.



ummmm...What did I do?

 But as stubborn as some facts are, Mitt Romney insists that he didn’t run Bain Capital after 1999, although he was still president, CEO and its only shareholder.  The AP reports, however, that Romney stayed in “regular contact” and was personally involved with the signing or approval of legal documents well into 2001.  He claimed to have left Bain in 1999.  He also argues that he didn’t even visit Bain during the period in question.

Following 1999 Bain was investing in companies that shipped jobs overseas; actually, pioneering the practice.  Putting Americans out of work is not something that goes over well with middle class Americans, but fits perfectly in with Romney’s philosophy of putting corporations ahead of the general public.  Obviously the campaign reacted fiercely to defend the candidate.

But in mid-July the Boston Globe said Romney had signed official documents claiming to be president and CEO of Bain Capital as late as 2002, in the middle of the period it was developing firms that were outsourcing jobs.  This was sworn to on Securities and Exchange Commission filings.  Not only did Romney deny everything again, he demanded a retraction from the Boston Globe which he didn’t get.

Good video on Romney flip-flops:

Donna Brazile, a contributor to CNN and a Democratic strategist says, despite what the candidate’s campaign claims, this whole issue is about getting to the bottom of their complete diversion of the facts.  To support all the accusations of burying facts and potential lies, there is the tax returns issue.  The general policy of most presidential candidates is to release 12 years of tax returns…unless you have something to hide. 

Mitt Romney’s father, George Romney, did just that in his run for president in 1968.  The elder’s effective tax rate at the time was 37 percent.  The son’s similar tax rate was under 15 percent in 2010, the only year he has released.  He promises 2011 when completed.  John McCain released only 2 years of tax returns when he ran against Barack Obama in 2008 and look what happened to him.

Brazile sums it up eloquently: “If Romney won't stand by his record at Bain, just like he won't stand by his record as governor of Massachusetts, how exactly is the American public supposed to evaluate the candidate?”  Romney did a flip-flop on both his health care plan and gun control laws as governor.  The answer to Brazile: if you mix Bain Capital with no additional tax returns, plus reversals in policies on major issues, the real question is can we trust Romney?