Monday, February 18, 2013

GOP Congress backs immigration reform to garner votes…opposes gun control to hold on to votes


It’s all about “ME,” and by that I mean a dysfunctional Congress thinking only about what it takes to get reelected.  When it means turning on a huge new voting population like Hispanics, they are now rushing in to enlist this group in hopes of holding on to their jobs in 2014, and maybe adding a few seats in heavily Latino districts.  But when it comes to curbing gun violence through the passage of reasonable gun control legislation that will save innocent lives, the votes evaporate under the cloud of Wayne LaPierre and his National Rifle Assn. (NRA).

And it isn’t just Republicans.  There are turncoat Democrats representing conservative to moderate districts who walk the fence and vote with the right just to stay in office.  The primary example is Dems who refuse to back the President’s gun control legislation because of the gun bubbas they represent.  Much of this group is likely to be against immigration reform but if their district has a sizable Hispanic population, the typical politician will no doubt find a way to justify a vote in favor just to stay competitive.  I say throw ‘em all out.

As an example of a classic flip-flop, there was Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain who championed immigration reform prior to the 2008 election.  But in his run for President, in a time where the Tea Party still had a firm grip on the GOP, he turned against the issue to please his Arizona and national constituents.  As it turned out it worked, at least as far as turning off the Latino vote.  Obama received 67% nationally, 56% in McCain’s home state of Arizona compared to McCain’s 31% and 41% respectively.  Overall, Obama 52.9%, McCain 45.7%.

In a recent CNN/ORC International survey, 53% want the main focus of the immigration issue focused on allowing undocumented immigrants a pathway to citizenship.  This is a change from 2011 when 55% said the main focus should be on deportation.  With a wishy-washy American public, is Congress making its decisions based on the current direction taken on immigration reform?  If so, why don’t these blockheads listen to this same constituency when it says in a CBS News poll following the Sandy Hook massacre that 59% favorstricter gun control?

It’s clear why.  Because of the intimidation of LaPierre’s NRA and the fear he instills in Congress that he will get them fired if they don’t back his brand of gun control.  Once again, looking out for number one over passing common sense gun control legislation that could save thousands of lives.  And there’s a connection between the Hispanic vote and gun control. A November 2011 poll by Mayors Against Illegal Guns found that 69 percent of Latino voters support stricter laws on gun sales.  Hispanics for gun control in 2014 could be a formidable force.

After the Romney disaster with Hispanics, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said: "I think you are seeing a lot of movement from our party on these issues.  A lot of it, I tell you, was tone. You know, it wasn't necessarily the policy on immigration, it was what is coming out of your mouth."  I’m not sure just how to interpret this but it sounds suspiciously like an approach to Latinos of ‘we will tolerate you for your vote but don’t expect too much from the GOP in the way of change on immigration issues.’  That’s just my take.

John Feinblatt, chief adviser for policy and strategic planning to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, says our “antiquated immigration laws” are still meant for the black and white TV era.  Adding, even China provides generous stipends and other perks to lure the best scientists and engineers to its country.  Further, while “Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, Singapore and Chile offer visas and other incentives to attract entrepreneurs to their countries, we make it nearly impossible for most entrepreneurs to come here.”  There’s more but you get the idea.

And gun control is just one more example illustrating the mental retardation of the United States on issues clearly beneficial to Americans living a better life.  But in Congress you will jeopardize your career in politics if you cross Wayne LaPierre and his NRA.  FormerArizona Sen. Dennis DeConcini, a Democrat, championed legislation against assault weapons in 1989 after the Stockton, CA shooting of school children.  It passed in the Senate, failed in the House.  DeConcini, in Arizona, was almost recalled.  What else would you expect from this state?

The 2014 elections will be interesting from several standpoints.  A lot depends on what happens to gun control and Immigration reform legislation in the next several months.  Even more will be decided on how the GOP Congress of “NO” will work with the President on the programs he laid out in his State of the Union message.  Obama’s win was a mandate but he is still hampered by a Republican led House and a bare majority in the Senate.  And so far the conservatives have shown few signs of cooperation.  How long will the American public put up with this?

Friday, February 15, 2013

The 2nd Amendment is ripe for new interpretation…again


Alan Singer is a social studies educator at Hofstra University in Long Island, New York and the editor of Social Science Docket (a joint publication of the New York and New Jersey Councils for Social Studies).  Apparently he has done his homework on the 2nd Amendment in research for an article in the Huff Post titled, “Does the U.S. Constitution Prevent Gun Control?”  The answer to this question is a resounding “Yes” if asked of the gun nuts and their head fanatic Wayne LaPierre, CEO of the National Rifle Assn. (NRA).

Wacky Wayne says the 2nd Amendment is sacred and an absolutist part of the Constitution that cannot be touched by gun control advocates.  Having been proven wrong on this several times already, this lunatic continues to rant and rave about gun owner rights in spite of the killings by firearms happening on a daily basis.  This sick ideology of rights over life itself is beginning to turn off a newly savvy American public.  LaPierre has used fear to make his point for years in the American Congress, NRA membership and the general population. 
 
 
President Obama has proposed new gun control regulations that range from universal background checks to banning assault rifles.  New York State passed their own law placing an immediate ban on semi-automatic rifles and pistols, shotguns, and other firearms with military-style features, requiring universal background checks prior to the sale of all guns and ammunition, making it easier for officials to confiscate firearms from the mentally ill, and increases penalties for gun-related crimes.  Singer ponders whether the law will survive.

In a conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court, they ruled that in the 2008 decision on District of Columbia v. Heller that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home and within federal enclaves.  The key here is “in the home” which doesn’t rule out but definitely leaves the door open to curbing the carrying of concealed weapons.  Yes, this is a separate issue but it does illustrate a potential crack in the 2nd Amendment that proves non-absolutism. 

Wayne LaPierre has accused the President of “undermining 2nd Amendment constitutional principles.”  Alan Singer counters with just how the apparently divine Amendment—at least to the gun nuts—could be in trouble.  He cites the conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court which leans to a “textualist” interpretation of the Constitution.  Textualism is defined by Wikipedia as follows:

A formalist theory of statutory interpretation, holding that a statute's ordinary meaning should govern its interpretation, as opposed to inquiries into non-textual sources such as the intention of the legislature {or forefathers/my words} in passing the law, the problem it was intended to remedy, or substantive questions of the justice and rectitude of the law. 

Singer says, “In general I find most ‘textualist’ arguments forwarded by the Supreme Court's right-wing activists to be self-justifying contorted attempts to discover constitutional support for positions they already hold.”  An interesting observation when you consider Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, one of the most conservative, has said that stricter gun laws could be possible under the 2nd Amendment.  This probably sent head NRA gun nut, Wayne LaPierre, gyrating into outer space but aroused the passions of all gun control advocates.

And it is here where Singer analyzes the Constitution in relation to the right of the people in connection with individual rights.  He says, “An examination of the Constitution shows a very clear and precise distinction between the term ‘people’ and ‘person’ or "persons.’"  Further, that America functions as a whole, not individually by states nor individual persons.  True, individuals do elect our lawmakers both local, statewide and nationally, but these same individuals acting separately can legally be limited. 

In the view of a textualist, “the right of the ‘people’ is a general statement of principle not a specific or individual right.”  Singer draws support from the Fourth amendment in its collective right of the people to be secure in their homes, papers, effects, etc., the right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures.  However, with probable cause, identifying the place to be searched, the persons (individual), things can be searched and seized with the proper warrant.  It just proves that there is no absolutist finality in this or the 2nd Amendment.

In conclusion, singer quotes the 2nd: "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 clearly referring to the collective “people,” in other words the country has a right to defend itself, he claims.  He does add, “there is no specific prohibition on limiting the access of individual ‘persons’ to dangerous weapons.”  Even so, this interpretation of the 2nd Amendment “provides an opportunity for even the most conservative Supreme Court Justices to support significant new gun restrictions approved by elected officials in local, state, and federal governments.  We can only hope for the best.        

 

Thursday, February 14, 2013

Stopping illegal weapons trafficking could put big dent in gun violence


Gun trafficking is closely related to straw buyers.  The latter is defined as an illegal firearm purchase where the actual buyer of the gun, being unable to pass the required federal background check or desiring to not have his or her name associated with the transaction, uses a proxy buyer who can pass the required background check to purchase the firearm for him/her.  You can see a list of those prohibited to purchase a gun here.  It is illegal to sell to these people but in many cases it is even done through a small number of corrupt federal firearms dealers. 

According to the Brady Campaign, only 1 % of gun dealers account for almost 60 % of crime guns recovered by police.  But 94% of licensed dealers approached by undercover stings at gun shows in Ohio, Tennessee and Nevada sold to individuals who appeared to be criminals or straw purchasers.  34% of crime guns recovered in 1999 (last year data available, had been purchased from a new gun dealer within the last 3 years, indicating to the ATF that the guns had been trafficked.  40% of all U.S. gun sales are without background checks.

There is no federal law against buying a gun from a dealer today and selling it to someone else tomorrow.  The Federal Observer says, “Although the maximum federal penalty for participating in a straw purchase is a 10-year prison term, in practice sentencing guidelines call for only 2 to 2 1/2 years' imprisonment for someone caught providing as many as a dozen guns to a convicted felon. That's half the mandatory (5-year) minimum for possession of 5 grams of crack cocaine.”  Some gun control advocates favor limiting purchases to one handgun per month.

Continuing, “The so-called straw purchase of guns is ‘the most significant factor in gun trafficking, without any question,’ said Jack Killorin, director of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms' Atlanta field division.  As an example, in a straw purchase, the two shotguns and a rifle used in the 1999 Columbine High School carnage were bought by Dylan Klebold’s 18-year-old girlfriend.  Klebold was too young at age 17.  According to Bureau of Justice statistics, 40% of criminals obtain firearms from friends or family.

Sen. Kristen Killibrand introduces gun trafficking law:

From the Brady Campaign’s first report of Gun Industry Watch, Without A Trace, it exposes how the gun lobby, working with the Bush Administration and its allies in Congress, had protected corrupt gun dealers by systematically blocking the release of information identifying the gun dealers responsible for selling most of the crime guns recovered in America.  The Action Council’s Fact Sheet on gun victims provides more startling answers to why the government is so constrained in efforts to curb gun violence:

Until 2002, the ATF released aggregate crime gun trace reports to local police departments, researchers, policymakers and public safety advocates.  Then Congress voted to restrict police access to crime gun trace data and cut off public access altogether. These restrictions, known as the Tiahrt Amendments (named for the Kansas Congressman who sponsored the bill), have passed in every Department of Justice budget since 2003, despite the fact that prominent law enforcement associations oppose them as a serious threat to public safety.

The ATF, the sole government agency charged with enforcing federal gun laws, has operated without a permanent director since the Bush Administration, and operates with just 1,800 agents to monitor approximately 77,000 gun dealers. Given these constraints, it would take ATF 22 years to inspect all federally licensed gun dealers. Even if the ATF had the manpower to inspect most gun dealers, federal law limits the agency to a single unannounced inspection of a dealer in any 12-month period. Congress has made it increasingly difficult for the ATF to revoke licenses of crooked gun dealers.        

It is impossible for law enforcement to know the whereabouts of millions of firearms in circulation today because Federal law explicitly bars the ATF from establishing a database of retail firearms sales, and private gun sellers are not required to keep a paper trail of transactions. Prior to 2001, federal authorities maintained criminal background check records for up to six months. Under President Bush, Attorney General John Ashcroft reversed this policy and ordered the destruction of all criminal background check records within 24 hours. Even though the General Accounting Office found that destroying these records endangers public safety, the policy remains in effect.

Thirdway.org says, “In 9 of 10 gun crimes, the gun was not used by the original purchaser.  Felons and gun runners exploit the unregulated private market—the denial rate has plummeted to 1.53% despite the fact that the background check system is far better today than 15 years ago.  And 92% of background checks are completed within minutes.”  So what’s the problem?  With the combination of universal background checks and sending people like Klebold’s girlfriend to prison for 20 years could at least put a dent in gun violence.

And now to counter this gun insanity, 2 Democrats and 2 Republicans have taken the first bipartisan step toward new gun restrictions by introducing a bill in the House of Representatives to crack down on gun trafficking to criminals.  Carolyn Maloney, New York Democrat, along with Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the other Democrat, and Republicans Patrick Meehan of Pennsylvania and Scott Rigell of Virginia.  The bill would strengthen penalties on "straw purchasers," who buy guns for those who are barred by law from buying their own weapons.

Reuters quotes Cummings re. The Gun Trafficking Prevention Act of 2012, "We have a message for our colleagues in the House.  This bill simply makes sense. Law enforcement officials have asked for it. It will make a significant difference in combating gun crime. And it will not affect the rights of a single legitimate gun owner."  I can just hear the head gun nut of the National Rifle Assn. (NRA), Wayne LaPierre, right now.  He has a message for Cummings, and promptly trots out the NRA’s clichéd, stagnant and tiring stand on an out-of-date 2nd Amendment.  Pathetic.

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Arizona gun nuts or…bring on the clowns


When you live in the state of Arizona and regularly experience the insanity of a Republican state legislature led by a correspondingly moonstruck governor, it is hard to reconcile that these apparently unbalanced individuals are running your state.  I grew up in the South and went through the States’ Rights movement and actually participated in a Dixiecrat rally in 1948.  I thought these people were crazy then, and I think the states’ rights fanatics in Arizona are equally insane.  And there are many who will agree with me.


Arizona State Legislature at work
The Blog For Arizona chides Arizona’s citizenry of gun nuts in attempting to pass legislation to close the loophole in allowing law enforcement to destroy guns not wanted by their owners by saying, “They seek to make the secular sacred by force of state law. In doing so they seek to use the power of "Big Brother" government to trample the rights of individuals to do with their private property as they see fit, which these groups comically pretend to defend.”  BFA asks if Arizona is on the verge of making “idolatrous gun worship the state religion?”

I thought it already was.

“These people are truly insane,” says the BFA, quoting Tucson City Councilman Steve Kozachik as follows:

"This bill clearly illustrates that some people don't view guns like toasters. When it comes to guns, it's as though they hold some magical or sacred designation in their lives," Kozachik said. "They go around proclaiming to be for private property, but civil liberties are out the window when it comes to guns. I guess the message is, we can't do what we want with our property in this state if that property is a firearm."

Then another state legislative lunatic, Rep. Steve Smith, a Republican naturally, wants to make it illegal for any public servant to enforce "any act, law, statute, rule or regulation'' of the federal government relating to personal firearms or accessories as long as they remain inside Arizona.  The problem with this, as even confirmed by a National Rifle Assn. (NRA) board member, is that it is putting federally licensed firearms dealers smack in the middle of a fight between the loonies in Arizona and the federal government.  If passed, will probably end up in a court battle.

But it took Bloomberg to change Arizona’s designation from Valley of the Sun to “Valley of the Gun.”  Arizona leads the nation in licensees to manufacture firearms.  Add that to the loosest gun laws in the U.S. and you have a potential powder keg.  They are calling it the “Insurrectionist Ideology,” which is what the current gun culture is all about.  Bloomberg quotes one of the top gun control advocates today:

“It plays into this insurrectionist ideology that is at the core of the gun-rights movement: If the government is going to shackle me, I’ll become my own gunmaker, my own gun dealer,” said Ladd Everitt, communications director for the Washington-based Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. “There has been a really strong resurgence in this type of mentality that started when Obama was elected president.”

 Bloomberg calls this country an “American Arsenal,” and rightfully so considering the approximately 300 million firearms owned by U.S. citizens which breaks down to an average of about 2.5 guns per household.  However, since the concentration of gun ownership is confined to one-third of all households, the family arsenal is even bigger.  Additional alarming figures are 10.8 million guns were sold in 2011, and in just January of 2013, there were 2,495,440 FBI NCIS background checks, the prelude to gun ownership.

And if you remember Tea Party-backed State Sen. Ron Gould, the head Arizona gun worshipper who ran for Congress and lost, well another crackpot gun nut has taken his place in the name of Sen. Kelli Ward, who mirrors Smith’s legislation, above, in the Senate.  In many other states in this country these people would be labeled certifiable and committed.  Ward’s legislation goes so far that Blog For Arizona says she would change the 2nd Amendment as follows:

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.

Wayne LaPierre, the head gun worshipper at the NRA, would be proud of her.

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

NRA’s enemies list should make NRA the #1 enemy of the American public


Here’s an example of the mentality of some members in this group of gun nuts.  A National Rifle Assn. (NRA) member wears a shirt with the words, “If you know how many guns you own…you don’t own enough,” printed on the back.  It is the typical thinking prevalent of a minority in this organization of gun worshippers led by head fanatic, Wayne LaPierre.  It is also the kind of thinking that has dumped 300 million firearms on American streets making it the most gun-loving culture in all similar developed countries.  It’s an absurdity that is killing U.S. citizens.

Wacky Wayne LaPierre
 In its own covert way, the NRA has worked furiously over the years to poison the minds of the American people, and intimidate a cowardly Congress into thinking like wacky Wayne LaPierre wants them to.  You see, this misfit can’t hold on to his million-dollar annual salary unless he continues to sell more and more guns to increase the profits of his primary sponsors, the gun manufacturers.  If you doubt this there were 10.8 million guns sold in the U.S. in 2011, and there have already been 2.5 million FBI NICS background checks in January of 2013.

And in one of their most blatant lunacies, the NRA has come up with an “NRA Enemies List,” consisting of 500 names that gun owners are supposed to hate.  People like George Clooney, C. Everett Koop and the American Medical Assn.  Others include AARP, American Bar Assn., Children’s Defense Fund, U.S. League of Women Voters, the Episcopal and Methodist Churches, the U.S. Catholic Conference and the YMCA.  Any individual looking at this list without concluding the NRA is a gang of wackos is simply not from this planet.

John Avlon on CNN compares the list to Richard Nixon’s own list of adversaries, and laments that the NRA has, with this kind of action, sealed itself inside a bubble that completely divorces the group from American society.  It occurs to me that this is the only way Wayne LaPierre and his gang of gun bubbas can survive with all the killings of innocent lives the organization is responsible for.  Avlon deems the move, “…just the latest example of seriously bad judgment inside this once proud organization.  Judgment, of course, led by wacky Wayne.

86-year-old Singer Tony Bennett recently said, “I still haven’t gotten over Connecticut.  I’d like the assault weapons to go to war, not in our own country.  And I’d like assault weapons eliminated.  Thank you.”  Other celebrities on the NRA’s list include, Sandy Duncan, Marilu Henner, Ed Asner, Hal Linden, Bruce Springsteen, Albert Brooks, Jack Nicholson, Jerry Seinfeld and Oprah Winfrey.  Not a shabby bunch and I wonder how long it would take for a stream of public service TV spots from these folks to put the NRA on the run?

YOUNG TURKS COMPARE NRA TO SERIAL KILLERS:

Avlon quotes lyrics by U2: "Choose your enemies carefully, 'cause they will define you."  He adds, “The NRA, like too much of the conservative movement, has chosen its enemies indiscriminately and seems defined in opposition to most of modern America.”  Then explain to me how this pack of extremists not only survive but are able to dupe an American public and control a clueless Congress.  To heap more coals on the fire, LaPierre came out with the recent TV ad calling Obama an “elitist hypocrite” for using Secret Service to protect his children.

Hallmark Greeting Cards is on the NRA’s list of enemies.  Since this company is already being cited for lending their corporate support to gun control initiatives or taking a position supporting gun control, I would like to recommend that they come out with a special line of greeting cards to commemorate mass shooting incidents including Columbine, VA Tech, Tucson, the Sikh Temple, Aurora and Sandy Hook Elementary School.  The idea would be to share these memories with relatives and friends to keep gun control a public issue.

If Hallmark were willing, a small portion of the proceeds could go in the campaign to fight gun violence.  And I am aware the mass mayhem is only a small portion of the total problem of gun violence but it is the most visible in the public.  Anything to get the total point across.

Monday, February 11, 2013

Did God order the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre?


If not, at least “former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, a religious conservative, suggested that because we are keeping God out of schools, the Deity chose not to stop the slaughter of these young innocents.”  Does that mean God wanted it to happen, since He did nothing to stop it?  Does it really mean that God took it upon Himself as the deity of the Christian faith to pave the way for Adam Lanza to slaughter 20 little children ages 6 and 7?  Does it mean that there is no hope in prayer and common sense to stop this in the future? 

Fundamentally, are we to believe that there is some connection between the violence in the world and a God that takes retribution for the misgivings of the human race?

Lawrence M. Krauss is director of the Origins Project at Arizona State University, and he has a book, "A Universe from Nothing," that was published in January.  Krauss once debated Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, the self-proclaimed spiritual guide to Michael Jackson.  Boteach doesn’t believe in evolution and on television was found, “…offering admonition to those who, with very good reason, may question a God who could willingly allow the slaughter of children.”  But in fact is this a good time to question your faith and deities? Krauss asks on CNN.

He wonders why it is that everyone expects, and the media promulgates, such a narrow version on grieving for the 20 children who God, in His infinite wisdom, decided to call home in a gun slaughter by a maniac.  I ask, is this just another step in the process of evolution in a country that worships guns more than human life and is escalating in this mode of violence much faster than any other developed nation?  It does not make any sense to Krauss that an intelligent God could just “rationally” act in such a way and still be worth praying to.  I agree.

And the author addresses one of my favorite issues.  Why do we need more than common humanity to bring ourselves together, whether it is helping another in a time of need or grieving, as in Sandy Hook and all the other needless gun murders that go on daily in America?  Contrary to some religious beliefs that the ability to love and forgive cannot be expressed fully without Christian faith, Krauss says, aside from being nonsense, “We can feel real connections, whether we are parents, or neighbors of families, or simply caring men and women.    

Wikipedia defines humanity as “a set of strengths focused on ‘tending and befriending others.’ The three strengths associated with humanity are love, kindness, and social intelligence. Humanity differs from justice in that there is a level of altruism towards individuals included in humanity more so than the fairness found in justice.”  Confucius defined humanity, or jen, as a “love of people” stating “if you want to make a stand, help others make a stand.”  And in no way am I trying to oversimplify the grief of the parents of Sandy Hook and other gun murders.

But it is clearly unfair to limit the grieving process to even Christians, Jews and Muslims.  There are those who do not believe in God, and many these days who are questioning their faith when another of their children, other relatives, friends, or just the man and woman on the street are gunned down by a maniac.  Is it not reasonable to expect this kind of reaction and not make it impossible for these folks to mourn in their own way?  Just as there is no absolutist answer to the 2nd Amendment, there is also no absolutist approach to believing in a God.

Friday, February 8, 2013

Tying Hitler’s Holocaust to gun control advocated by NRA's Wayne LaPierre since 1994


On Fox News—where else?—Andrew Napolitano, a senior judicial analyst, said on Jan. 10, “If the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto had had the firepower and the ammunition that the Nazis did, some of Poland might have stayed free and more persons would have survived the Holocaust.”  Anthony Polonsky, a professor of Holocaust studies at Brandeis University, questions another comparison of the 1943 Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, in which about 750 Jews took up arms, killed about 25 Nazis and briefly slowed the deportation of Jews to concentration camps.

 
Polonsky admits in a Religious Newsarticle by Lauren Markoe that “this uprising was the largest single Jewish revolt against the Nazis. But the Nazis killed thousands of Jews in the Warsaw ghetto, and the 50,000 who survived were sent to concentration camps.”  Polonsky added, “The people who participated in it were killed.”  More comparisons by gun rights advocates over the years have used the Russian pogroms from the early 20th century and also the American slavery movement after the Civil War.

 
Others have joined the chorus of lunatics, one such was John Rocker, former major league pitcher who wrote on WorldNetDaily.com about “the undeniable fact that the Holocaust would never have taken place had the Jewish citizenry of Hitler’s Germany had the right to bear arms and defend themselves with those arms.”  Rocker was also accused of being racist, homophobic, and sexist for comments he made about New York.  And then Jonathan E. Grant railed on about pro-gun control Jews using the Holocaust once again.

Cartoon video of NRA gun nut blasted on Holocaust theory:
 
There were others like Tea Party backed Samuel Wurzelbacher, “Joe the Plumber,” who related, “In 1939 Germany established gun control; from 1939 to 1945 6 million Jews, 7 million others, unable to defend themselves, were exterminated.”  And once again, Wurzelbacher is the same one who proposed in Prescott, AZ, that we should start shooting at the border to prevent illegal immigration.  All loosely connected (LaPierre, Napolitano, Rocker and Wurzelbacher) but each an extremist in his own way, and a threat to sanity.

 
On Piers Morgan Tonight, conspiracy peddler Alex Jones ranted on about how "Hitler took the guns, Stalin took the guns, Mao took the guns, Fidel Castro took the guns, Hugo Chávez took the guns, and I'm here to tell you, 1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms.”  The “Hitler” approach dates back to “when opponents of a Chicago proposal to ban handguns invoked it in the largely Jewish suburb of Skokie by "reminding village residents that the Nazis disarmed the Jews as a preliminary to sending them to the gas chambers.”

 
A new pro-gun group called Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership in 1989 began arguing that the 1968 federal gun control bill once favored by the NRA's old guard "was lifted, almost in its entirety, from Nazi legislation."  It wasn’t.  And then in 1994 JPFO founder Aaron Zelman called on the NRA to take a shot at the alleged connection between gun control and the Holocaust.  Zelman made his case which you can read in a Mother Jones article by Gavin Aronsen.  Aronsen isn’t sure Zelman’s plea helped but comments:


“Whether or not the NRA was influenced by his advice, that same year its CEO, Wayne LaPierre, published Guns, Crime, and Freedom, in which he claimed, ‘In Germany, firearm registration helped lead to the holocaust,’ leaving citizens ‘defenseless against tyranny and the wanton slaughter of a whole segment of its population.’”  The following year, President George H.W. Bush famously resigned from the NRA after LaPierre attacked federal law enforcement officials as ‘jack-booted government thugs’ who wore ‘Nazi bucket helmets and black storm trooper uniforms.’”

Whatever conclusions one might draw from these conspiracy theories, it is clear they all originate within a sick gun culture with Wayne LaPierre and his band of gun worshippers always at the root of the problem.  Unless we get rid of wacky Wayne and his gang of gun nuts, mass shootings will continue, daily shootings will blossom even further with more and more guns on the street, and Americans will be forced to endure the tragedy of gun violence.  How many more little children ages 6 and 7 must be massacred to make this point clear?

Thursday, February 7, 2013

Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman says the NRA is insane… many of us agree


As have many other celebrities done, now Paul Krugman, from the field of economics, has pronounced his feelings about the leading U.S. gun lobby, the National Rifle Assn. (NRA).  They are an “insane organization,” he laments, in a situation where the pro-gun rights groups have suddenly been placed on the defensive.  Krugman didn’t say it but I will.  Wacky Wayne LaPierre, head of the NRA, is the craziest of them all with its President, David Keene, not far behind. 

 

Unfortunately these two gun fanatics are surrounded by a minority of the NRA membership that worships their weapons over human life.  This is no doubt what Krugman refers to when he says, “the craziness of the extreme pro-gun lobby has been revealed, and that has got to move the [gun control] debate and got to move the legislation at least to some degree.”   More alarming is the fact that he thinks the NRA “is pushing the country towards dystopia.”

 

See video where Paul Krugman calls NRA "insane:"

“What strikes me is we've actually gotten a glimpse into the mindset, though, of the pro-gun people…It's bizarre,” Krugman said, adding that the NRA believes “America cannot manage unless everybody's prepared to shoot intruders and that the idea that we have police forces that provide public safety is somehow totally impractical…”  The man is echoing the sentiments of most gun control advocates who see the NRA for what it is, a self-serving group protecting the profits of themselves and gun manufacturers.

 

Krugman is a liberal, ranked high in the field of economics and is rated as one of the most influential academic thinkers in the U.S.  That places the man way above the limited aptitude of a LaPierre or Keene, particularly their gun nut membership.  So it is no doubt that Krugman’s predictions would not impress them; that is considering they can even understand his logic.  In his book, “The Conscience of a Liberal,” Krugman proposes a “new New Deal” for America.  He takes American conservatism to task.

 

The gun rights movement and LaPierre’s combined interests of protecting his million-dollar salary and gun manufacturers’ billion-dollar profits is rooted in this brand of conservatism that, among other things, used fear to win elections.  Along the same lines, the NRA has constantly instilled fear in its membership to prime them to run out and buy more guns.  This keeps the gun companies happy and lets LaPierre maintain his lavish lifestyle.  This alone should wake up these clueless NRA members.

 

But Krugman is optimistic.  He feels the demographic trends, emphasizing race and culture and the conservative “overreach” of the Bush years, has created “a new center-left political environment and are slowly undermining the conservative movement.”  He wants to concentrate on social and medical programs, playing down national defense.  And Krugman confirms the rise of progressives in a political atmosphere where the term “liberal” was turned into a dirty word by conservatives.

 
Many will not agree, but I personally believe that the NRA, particularly Wayne LaPierre’s “absolutist” type, will soon lose its clout over Congress through those new progressives mentioned earlier going to the polls in 2014 and voting the bums out of office.  It’s hard to say if there will be a central character that breaks the backbone of the gun lobby, or if it will be the combined efforts of the staunch gun control groups.  The fact is that the momentum is on and we must take advantage of it.  Paul Krugman did his part.

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Cherokee activist Albert Bender believes that guns are the root of America’s problems


Albert Bender is a journalist and Cherokee activist taking the position that you can blame guns for most problems that face Americans today.  From slavery to Native Americans, it is a gun culture in the U.S. fostered by white Americans that has created the dilemma that we are in.  Bender, as many others are beginning to do, is bringing the crisis with gun violence closer and closer to the health care system, particularly mental health.  Mr. Bender takes aim at what he calls a “monolithic” weapons industry that is “opting for profit over humanity.” 

 

Gun control pieces missing in health care
And now public health experts are saying a gun is like a virus, a car, tobacco or alcohol.  It is a social disease that needs to be treated, and they liken it to reducing car crashes and deaths years ago with safety measures, product changes and driving laws that improved automobile safety dramatically.  When you compare this with the firearms industry, they have resisted safety changes due to cost and the NRA has prevented any research on gun deaths as well as stopped all gun control legislation in its tracks.  All accomplished through buying off Congress and spreading fear among its membership.

 

Although mass shootings don’t account for most of the gun deaths, they are the most visible in the media, and even more so when the victims are 20 little children ages 6 and 7.  Unfortunately, police reporting of these incidents often lags by more than a year, so we don’t really have the true picture.  This follows suit to the National Rifle Assn. (NRA) efforts that have prevented any reliable research on gun violence for years.  Even the automobile industry was solidly behind the research that brought down car deaths.  In comparison, the gun lobby fights gun violence research with millions of dollars.

 

Here’s another shocker on how the gun lobby has prevented firearms violence research:

 

One source reports, “The Consumer Product Safety Commission regulates over 15,000 products in all, but federal law prohibits them from controlling the safety of firearms.  In fact, there is next to no regulation of firearm manufacture, and only the gun manufacturers themselves can issue recalls.  What's more, gun makers, dealers and trade groups are immune from negligence and product liability lawsuits.” 

 

In this public health approach, “One recent study found firearm owners were more likely than those with no firearms at home to binge drink or to drink and drive, and other research has tied alcohol and gun violence. That suggests that people with driving under the influence convictions should be barred from buying a gun,” said  Dr. Garen Wintemute, an emergency medicine professor who directs the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis.  This group once again quoted the study that says 40% of guns are purchased without a background check.

 

Daniel Webster, a health policy expert and co-director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research in Baltimore says "There's sort of a contagion phenomenon" following a shooting.  I liken this to when the gun bubbas come out of the woodwork screaming 2nd Amendment rights and rushing out to buy several more guns for a household that already closely resembles a military arsenal.  It is all so ludicrous that one might wonder about the mentality level of a group of fanatics who have to repeatedly re-live the Revolutionary War to justify their worship of guns.

 

Dr. Mark Rosenberg, president and CEO of the Task Force for Global Health, an Atlanta-based nonprofit public health organization along with Jay W. Dickey Jr., a former Arkansas congressman, says, “The same evidence-based approach that is saving millions of lives from motor-vehicle crashes, as well as from smoking, cancer and HIV/AIDS, can help reduce the toll of deaths and injuries from gun violence.”  Dickey was once the point-person in Congress for the NRA.  Rosenberg at the time was director of the CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, which had conducted firearms research.

 
The CDC has all the data necessary to analyze gun violence and draw several conclusions on how it could be prevented.  But, “The CDC doesn’t analyze gun violence because it can’t use federal money to advocate or promote gun control.”  And that comes to your regular mass shootings and every day gun murders compliments of Wayne LaPierre and his National Rifle Assn. (NRA).  There is no excuse for this negligence but it will continue as long as the American public refuses to react and allow the NRA-controlled Republicans and Democrats to stay in Congress.  Amen!

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

New surveys confirm Americans want more gun control…even NRA members


The studies keep pouring in on gun control vs. gun rights and they keep saying the same thing.  The American public wants more gun regulations, and this includes members of the National Rifle Assn. (NRA).  The time has come for the gun rights fanatics like Wayne LaPierre, head of the NRA, to prove these studies bogus or admit defeat and get on with saving people’s lives with reasonable gun control laws.  LaPierre’s “absolutist” hogwash on gun owners’ rights under the 2nd Amendment is long overdue for an overhaul, and wacky Wayne knows it; except he’s trying to save his cushy million dollar job.

In the most recent poll by Johns Hopkins University, “89 percent of all respondents, and 75 percent of those identified as NRA members, support universal background checks for gun sales.”  Now this would include private sales at gun shows where 40% of U.S. gun sales come from.  Since there were 10,800,000guns sold in 2011 in the U.S., that means that 4,320,000 of those firearms went on the street knowing absolutely nothing about the individual buying them.  He or she just walked in, made the purchase, and walked out the door with a means to kill someone.  That is scary as hell.
 
 
There’s more.  Close to “70 percent of respondents supported bans on military-style semiautomatic weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines,” and “80 percent  backed measures restricting those who could buy guns, such as people with histories of domestic violence or serious juvenile crimes.”  The sampling also checked to find out if there were any differences between gun owners and non-gun owners.  There weren’t, which shows a consistency throughout the U.S. that more gun regulations are needed.

The above becomes even more significant when you consider the fact that a large majority of NRA members are included.  This majority also would prohibit, “people with recent alcohol or drug charges to purchase guns, and 70 percent supported a mandatory minimum of 2 years in prison for selling guns to persons who are not legally allowed to have one.”  The survey also found that Americans want more spending on mental health in relation to gun violence.    

But that’s not all.  A new Gallup poll found that two-thirds of the American public support heavy new restrictions on gun purchases, supporting all nine of President Obama’s key proposals.  They were:
 
  • 91% for criminal background checks
  • 82% want increased government spending on mental health programs
  • 79% are for increased government spending for law enforcement and school officials for armed attacks
  • 75% think criminal penalties should be increased for those buying guns for someone who hasn't passed background check
  • 70% want the feds  to spend $4 billion to help keep 15,000 police officers on the street
  • 69% would like the government to spend $30 million to help schools develop emergency response plans
  • 67% want to ban the possession of armor-piercing bullets by anyone other than the military or law enforcement
  • 60% would strengthen the ban on assault weapons that expired in 2004
  • 54% want to limit the sale of ammunition magazines to 10 rounds or less
 
In some additional findings the respondents opted for school security over new gun laws and “Seventy-five per cent favor increasing criminal penalties for so-called 'straw purchasers', people who buy guns for others restricted from having weapons of their own.”  You might recall that it was these straw buyers in Arizona, where gun control almost doesn’t exist, that purchased firearms that ended up in the hands of the Mexican drug cartels.  Arizona not only is still passing laws to relax gun control even more, but now the state’s legislature is presenting a bill that would allow Arizona to ignore new federal gun laws.

Finally let me leave you with the fact that there have been 1,280 gun deaths since the Sandy Hook Elementary School carnage, as reported by the Huff Post. 

Monday, February 4, 2013

Newtown bereaved father just doesn’t get it


No one can feel the grief that MarkMattioli feels, except the other nineteen families whose children ages 6 and 7 were slaughtered by Adam Lanza in the Newtown Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting last December.  But the father is way off base when he said, “there are more than enough gun laws on the books.”  Although the proposed legislation by President Obama for universal background checks, including private sales at gun shows, wouldn’t have helped in this instance, it will certainly help identify responsible gun owners in the future.

 

True, Mattioli’s plea for improving the mental health system could have prevented Lanza from having access to the weapons he used; although since they belonged to his mother, that is debatable unless we extend the mental health requirements to forbidding any firearms in a home where there is a known mental health problem.  Wouldn’t that just drive wacky Wayne LaPierre, head of the National Rifle Assn. (NRA), right up the wall?  But when you think about it, there is really no other way to keep someone who is mentally incompetent away from guns.

 

Adam Lanza was diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome and according to the National Institute of NeurologicalDisorders and Stroke, “Some individuals with ASD are severely disabled and require very substantial support for basic activities of daily living.  Asperger syndrome is considered by many to be the mildest form of ASD and is synonymous with the most highly functioning individuals with ASD.”  And most experts agree that Asperger’s syndrome doesn’t cause violence.  Since autism, which is what AS is a part of, is not considered a mental illness, is Sandy Hook even a mental health issue?

 

Yes, that's wacky Wayne LaPierre behind the sign
 
Contrary to Mattioli’s  position, a large group of Newtown residents voiced their opinions to Connecticut lawmakers to take state action that would prevent another tragedy like the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary.  But other residents were concerned about their 2nd Amendment rights at about the same time Wayne LaPierre was frothing at the mouth again over the NRA’s “absolutist” rights, which was in response to President Obama reminding the gun fanatics you cannot “mistake absolutism for principle.”  Apparently they just don’t get it either.

 

One Newtown mother said, “there's a national misperception that Newtown residents want to repeal the Second Amendment. Rather, Newtown residents want to protect people's rights while also protecting children and their safety.”  It is this belief by the gun nuts that gun control advocates want to take their guns away that has been instilled in them by LaPierre for years.  Fear works when you are trying to initiate action, like raising more money for the NRA.  I liken it to the selling of cancer insurance by junk mail years ago.  Scare the hell out of them to induce buying the insurance.

 

And then there was this classic statement by Bill Sherlach, whose wife, Mary, the school psychologist, was killed in the carnage:

 

He said he respects the 2nd Amendment “but it was written in a long-ago era where armaments were different.  I have no idea how long it took to reload and refire a musket," he said. "I do know that the number of shots fired in the Sandy Hook Elementary School in those few short minutes is almost incomprehensible, even in today's modern age." 

 

David Wheeler’s 6-year-old son was killed in the massacre and cited the mental health angle again:

 

"That a person with these problems could live in a home where he had access to among the most powerful firearms available to non-military personnel is unacceptable," he said. "It doesn't matter to whom these weapons were registered. It doesn't matter if they were purchased legally. What matters is that it was far too easy for another mentally unbalanced, suicidal person who had violent obsessions to have easy access to unreasonably powerful weapons."

 

If the Newtown incident is ruled to be mentally incompetent connected, it will certainly be a clear sign that it is necessary to evaluate every home in which firearms are housed.  And that would significantly apply to those having assault-type weapons since this seems to be the weapon of choice for the mass gun murderers.  Once again this raises the need for a national database of firearms owned and with the improvement of identifying the mentally challenged, there could be an instant cross-reference that would identify any potential problem households.

 
To some gun owners and wacky Wayne LaPierre, that is blasphemy toward their sacred toys.  To me it is just common sense.

Friday, February 1, 2013

Immigration reform will happen this time


 
President Obama says “Now’s the time” and he is talking about making immigration reform a reality for the U.S. in a way that will benefit both the 11-plus million who are undocumented and our country as well.  Keep in mind, this legislation does not apply just to Hispanics but also to Asians, Europeans, etc.  Those of us who came here like Obama said for a better life, which includes everyone but Native Americans.  It is easy to forget the heritage of our ancestors who came to the U.S. through Ellis or Angel Islands to work and contribute in the new country.
 
It is true of course; they were legal, at least most of them.  And the 11-plus million undocumenteds are illegal.  But according to a CNN/ORC International poll conducted this month, 53% of Americans favor allowing this group to become legal residents opposed to 43% who don’t.  And what if we followed the latter’s advice and deported the illegals?  Restaurants and the hospitality industry would be without help; there would be no gardeners to take care of your yards; no one to clean your house; and agricultural fields would have no one to work them and the crops would rot.  Do we want that?
 
FACT CHECK reports that “Economists say immigration, legal or illegal, doesn’t hurt American workers.”  But a new House Caucus, Reclaim American Jobs consisting of 41 members says otherwise.  The economists counter there is little to support their claim that these undocumenteds take American jobs.  At least those in which Americans are willing to work.  With this obstacle out of the way you would think that most states would understand the need for this group of workers.  But a clueless Arizona Governor is still fighting to prevent illegals from getting driver licenses, even under Obama’s deferred action plan.
 
The President has a plan that is a broadly sweeping outline of what needs to be accomplished in immigration reform.  He advocates focusing on enforcement while strengthening border security then insuring that businesses don’t knowingly hire illegal workers.  Obama is convinced we must deal with the 11+ million illegal immigrants, but at the same time feels this group must have hope for citizenship.  And he would update and upgrade the current immigration system to the point that it is more user-friendly in accommodating legals to get their families into the U.S.
 
The Gang of Eight Senators
 
But CNN chief political analystGloria Borger said, “…she believes Obama is playing good cop-bad cop, with his own left-leaning proposals being the bad cop and his Senate colleagues being the good cop. He's essentially saying, if you don’t deal with them, you’re going to deal with me.”  So enter the on-and-off Senator from Arizona, John McCain.  He was for immigration reform when he wasn’t running for office but changed his position radically to conform to the demands of the AZ Tea Party when a presidential candidate.  Now he’s back on the side of immigrants again.  The classic flip-flop.
 
Time’s Swampland exclaims that John McCain has been a determined opponent of Barack Obama since the scathing loss to the President in 2008.  The Gang of Eight Senators includes 4 Democrats, Bob Menendez, NJ, Dick Durbin, IL, Charles Schumer, NY, and Michael Bennet, CO.  Republicans are McCain, AZ, Marco Rubio, FL, Lindsey Graham, SC and Jeff Flake, AZ.  Swampland says this bunch has a blueprint introduced the day before Obama’s but very much a parallel to what he proposed, as follows:
 
“It would create a ‘tough but fair’ path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants while beefing up border security. It would streamline the legal immigration system and create incentives to lure sought-after tech and science whizzes. It would establish a mechanism for employers to check the immigration status of potential hires. And it would try to create ways for employers — particularly in the agricultural sector — to find low-wage undocumented workers when Americans are not available.”
 
Any bill will have a hard time getting through the GOP-held House, particularly up against the Tea Party fanatics.  The House is also apparently working on a plan of its own.  Norm Ornstein, longtime political analyst and co-author of "It's Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided with the New Politics of Extremism” had reservations:
 
“Will this compromise make it through the Senate, once the details are hammered out (always more difficult than frameworks) and with a lot more than 60 votes? Next, will House Republicans, who have very different impulses and constituencies, be supportive? Finally, if not, will (House Speaker John) Boehner bring an immigration bill to the floor that will get many more Democratic votes than Republican?"
 
If I were a Republican in Congress (God forbid) and I looked at the dynamics of the Hispanic demographic that is exploding throughout the country, I would figure some way to get on the bandwagon.  With the total Congress hovering around a 10% approval level, and Republicans who have repeatedly been identified as obstructionists, putting them at even a lower level, my gut tells me that immigration reform will happen this time.
 
 

Donald Trump Says He Will Be Indicted On Tuesday

  THAT'S TODAY... Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has brought the case to this point, now looking at a possible indictment. Trum...