Tag Archives: gun violence

national news

Remember when Obama was going to disarm us?

All this hubbub over gun control, gun violence and whether Donald Trump would inject the power of the presidency into this debate sparked a memory.

It involves former President Barack H. Obama. You see, Obama faced crises similar to what we’re facing now. Shooters opened fire in public schools, in movie theaters and shopping malls. The president would speak to the nation about the need to curb gun violence.

After the Sandy Hook school massacre in Newtown, Conn., that killed 20 children and six educators, Obama was moved to tears. He spoke of the innocent children who died along the teacher heroes who fought to spare them from the carnage. He demanded legislation that would curb gun violence.

Then the gun lobby kicked into high gear. It asserted that the president intended to disarm Americans. Obama didn’t respect the Second Amendment, they said.

Despite all the rhetoric we heard from Obama and those of his allies, the Second Amendment remains untouched from the day it was written by the Founding Fathers.

Then just today we hear that the president of the United States, Donald Trump, wants the Justice Department to propose regulations banning bump stocks, the devices used to turn semi-automatic weapons into machine guns. A bump stock isn’t the issue with regard to the Parkland, Fla., school massacre, but it does speak to the issue of gun regulation.

I am waiting now for the gun lobby to rise up against Donald Trump. Will the gun lobby, led by the National Rifle Association, accuse the president of seeking to disarm the “law-abiding” public that cherishes firearm ownership?

I doubt we’ll hear it this time. I mean, this president says he favors gun ownership and he favors the Second Amendment.

However, I also believe President Obama sought to assure Americans he also supported the Second Amendment. Yes, I know he said something about following the Australia model, which called for confiscation of firearms after a massacre there in 1996.

The result, though, is that nothing happened. We are as armed today as we ever have been.

I’ll continue to assert that there are ways to tighten regulations without subverting the Second Amendment. I have no solutions. I do have hope — although it is diminishing rapidly — that we can find one.

national news

Bump stocks on the way out … it’s a start

Now we’re getting somewhere.

Donald Trump today announced plans to get rid of bump stocks, devices used on semi-automatic weapons to turn them into fully automatic weapons.

To that I can say only: good show, Mr. President!

Bump stocks came to the fore after the Las Vegas massacre that killed 59 people attending a country music festival. The shooter killed himself after he had turned his rifle into a machine gun that he unloaded on festival attendees.

The latest tragedy involves high school students who were mowed down in Parkland, Fla. According to The Hill: “We can do more to protect our children. We must do more to protect our children,” Trump said during the announcement at the White House.

Yes, we can — and we must protect our children.

Trump has been a bit slow to call attention to ways we can seek solutions to this crisis. The president has directed the Justice Department to propose regulations that would eliminate bump stocks.

Oh, how I hope that members of Congress are now frightened by threats delivered by gun lobbyists who see bump-stock elimination would somehow run counter to the Second Amendment’s guarantee of firearm ownership.

Who in the world needs a device that turns semi-auto weapons into killing machines? I have the answer: killers.

The founders never envisioned this perversion of the amendment that they wrote into the U.S. Constitution.

media news, national news

Yet another tragedy falls victim to politics

Donald Trump’s incessant use of Twitter could enable him to use the social medium to comfort and console families suffering from unspeakable grief.

Yes, the president did offer his “thoughts and prayers” to families and other loved ones in the wake of the Parkland, Fla., school massacre on Valentine’s Day.

Then he followed up with a tweet over the weekend that reveals, in my mind, the kind of person Trump really is.

He blamed the FBI for failing to respond to tips about the alleged shooter because the agency was “too busy” investigating the Trump presidential campaign’s alleged collusion with Russian hackers who meddled in our 2016 presidential election.

There you have it. When the president is handed an opportunity to criticize law enforcement, by golly he jumps all over it — even when the criticism is juxtaposed with a nation’s grief over another spasm of gun violence.

The president has drawn criticism from politicians of both parties over this response. Will it sink in? Will he heed what members of his own party are saying? Hah! Hardly.

Does this man have any sense of decency? Any sense of shame? Any sense of compassion or empathy? I concluded long ago the answer is an unequivocal “no!”

Sickening.

national news

OK, Sen. Cornyn, let’s start by talking about guns

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn wants to “talk about gun policy.”

The Texas Republican has accepted a challenge by a California Democrat with whom he serves in the Senate, Dianne Feinstein, to start some discussion about what to do to prevent future slaughters such as the one that occurred on Valentine’s Day in Parkland, Fla.

Now, is this the start of a move toward legislating a solution to gun violence? I am not yet holding my breath.

Seventeen people died in the carnage. High school students who survived the slaughter have risen up to issue direct threats to politicians who block efforts to legislate a remedy.

As the Texas Tribune has reported: At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, brought the issue to the fore.

“Let’s take some action,” she said. “We cannot see this continue on.”

She then mentioned two areas where compromise might be reached. The first was a “Fix NICS” bill Cornyn sponsored last fall that would hold government agencies accountable for uploading relevant information to the federal background check system.

The second was related to bump stocks, which are legal firearm enhancements that allow shooters to operate firearms as if they were automatic weapons. Several Texans said last fall that they would consider banning bump stocks after the devices were found on the guns of the man who shot dozens on the Las Vegas strip. No law has since passed.

“Nobody likes these devices. You can’t have automatic weapons on the streets,” Feinstein said. “It’s easy to fix. Why don’t we do it?”

Cornyn hasn’t been much of a friend to those who oppose the gun lobby. However, there might be the tiniest of cracks beginning to appear in the armor that has surrounded politicians who resist any effort to legislate some remedies to the type of carnage that erupted once again.

It would be a near miracle if Sen. Cornyn would help widen that crack and start to deliver some sensible legislation that doesn’t destroy the Constitution’s Second Amendment.

But, you know … stranger occurrences and alliances have taken shape atop Capitol Hill.

national news, political news

Is this massacre spawning a political movement?

Are my ears deceiving me or am I hearing the rumblings of an extraordinary political movement born of yet another national tragedy?

A gunman opened fire this past week in Parkland, Fla., killing 17 people. It was yet another in a lengthy — and likely growing — list of public school massacres.

In previous such tragedies — such as Columbine and Sandy Hook, to cite just two — politicians called for action to curb gun violence. Then, to the never-ending shame of those in power, nothing got done. The gun lobby — led by the National Rifle Association — bullied Congress, threatening to beat politicians at the next election if they tinkered with any notion of legislating possible remedies to the epidemic of gun violence.

This time, in the wake of the Parkland massacre, we’re hearing something quite different. High school students, some of whom already are of voting age, are speaking with remarkable eloquence about their belief in the need for legislative remedies.

They speak of their own tragic loss, the deaths of their dearest friends, of the “heroes” who died while trying to save the lives of others. They are warning politicians — Democrats and Republicans — that if they don’t act now, that these young people will take political matters in their own hands.

They are speaking about their electoral power, how they, too, can threaten politicians who don’t stand up to the gun lobby. The picture attached to this post is of high schooler Emma Gonzalez, who called out Donald Trump on the issue of gun control.

It’s still quite early in the aftermath of this latest monstrous act. Still, I cannot get past the gnawing in my gut that we might be witnessing the birth of a political movement conceived by the next — and perhaps greatest — generation of Americans.

national news

Repeal the Second Amendment? Hey, let’s talk

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.

— Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

I’ve got some idle time and I am wondering about a congressional proposal that would move Mother Earth, about an idea that would trigger a political earthquake like we’ve never seen in this country.

Have you wondered — as I have — whether anyone in Congress has the nerve to propose repealing the Second Amendment?

Mass shootings in schools, churches, movie theaters, at music festivals or shopping malls so far has failed to move anyone to propose such a thing on Capitol Hill. Seventeen more people died this week in Parkland, Fla., when a lunatic opened fire with an AR-15 assault rifle that he had purchased legally.

I’ve heard a bit of chatter from young Americans that maybe they would be the generation to get our politicians to do something truly dramatic to curb gun violence.

Repealing the Second Amendment would be, um, a seriously dramatic notion.

We all know this reality: It won’t happen. The Second Amendment is one of our Bill of Rights. It isn’t going to be repealed. Sure, we’ve repealed amendments before. The 18th Amendment calling for Prohibition was pulled back years later when it became clear that it wasn’t prohibiting Americans from swilling alcoholic beverages; Congress enacted the 21st Amendment repealing the 18th. So, the precedent for repealing a constitutional amendment has been set.

Do I believe we should repeal the Second Amendment? Full repeal isn’t possible, as near as I can tell. I do believe that there must be a legislative solution that allows Congress to enact laws that control the purchase and ownership of firearms without violating the principle behind the Second Amendment.

I don’t want the government to storm into my house and force me to surrender the two weapons I own: an heirloom 30.06 rifle and a .22-caliber single-shot rifle my father gave me when I was 11 years of age.

You see, I am not a nut job. I don’t have pent-up anger. I will never do harm with either of these weapons. That’s just me. I cannot speak for the actual nut jobs out there who possess far deadlier weapons and do intend to inflict maximum horror and misery.

It is long past time our elected representatives do something constructive about the individuals who purchase assault rifles and then unleash them against children or other innocent victims.

So, why not kick the discussion squarely in the a** by suggesting out loud that it’s time to repeal the Second Amendment?

Surely there must be a member of Congress — among the 535 individuals serving there — who has the stones to do such a thing.

national news

When is it the ‘right time,’ Mr. Speaker?

U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan is showing his gutlessness yet again.

He said it is “too early” to discuss gun violence in the wake of the latest gun-related tragedy.

A gunman killed 17 people in Parkland, Fla. on Valentine’s Day. Seventeen lives were snuffed out by a lunatic with an AR-15 assault rifle. He bought the gun legally, according to authorities. OK. Let’s start there.

How does someone who exhibited some warning signs of violence purchase an assault weapon legally? Are there any legislative remedies available to prohibit someone from buying a rifle that is designed to inflict maximum casualties in a minimum amount of time?

The speaker says it’s too early to talk about that. What utter crap!

It’s not too early. It’s never too early. Our nation is grieving yet again after a massacre at a public school. I am sickened in the extreme at this news. What’s more, I also am sickened at the lack of our will among our political leadership to take this matter on in a forthright manner.

The president spoke to us this week about love and caring for the victims. He said the students who witnessed the carnage are not alone and “never will be.” I appreciate Donald Trump’s statements about the need to protect our students and to tackle the ravages of mental illness. He’s right.

However, the president hasn’t yet broached the subject of gun violence. He hasn’t offered any ideas on how we might legislate some solution, or begin to craft a path toward some remedy that doesn’t violate the constitutional guarantee of gun ownership.

Let’s talk about this, shall we? It’s not too early. If not now, then when is the right time?

national news

Where is that solution to this violence?

I hate repeating myself. It frustrates me terribly when I find myself saying the same things over and over … much as I did to my sons when they were growing up.

Not to mention how frustrated they must have been. You know?

Thus, I am aghast at having to say once again: How in the world do Congress and the president find a solution to curb gun violence that doesn’t weaken one of our cherished constitutional amendments. I am referring to the Second Amendment, the one that guarantees gun ownership in this country.

The debate is being joined once again in the wake — once again! — of horrific tragedy. Seventeen people died Wednesday in a horrifying massacre at a Parkland, Fla., high school. A former student is in custody.

He entered the school with an AR-15 assault rifle, a weapon he purchased legally.

I am not smart enough to come up with a legislative solution to this problem. I merely sit out here in Flyover Country, writing a blog and offering commentary on this and/or that issue of the day.

The issue of this day happens to deal with guns and the violence that comes from those who possess weapons with the sole aim of killing as many beings as humanely possible.

A shooter walked into the high school and killed a lot of people quickly. Does the Second Amendment guarantee a lunatic the right to purchase a weapon that the authors of that amendment never envisioned in the late 18th century?

Gun-rights groups say, “Yes, it does!” They add, “Not only that, don’t even think about watering it down.” Then they bully our elected representatives into supporting their view. Members of Congress back off. They flinch. They quiver. They don’t act.

They’re smart enough to know how to craft legislation that perhaps can make it just a bit tougher to purchase an assault weapon.

Yes, I know what you might ask: Would any law have prevented the slaughter in Parkland? My answer? I have no earthly idea.

I do believe that we cannot let our lack of assurance about the effectiveness of these laws prevent our elected lawmakers from seeking solutions.

Moreover, I also believe that the Second Amendment is written broadly enough to allow for some controls on the weapons we allow and on those who can purchase them. I know we have restrictions already on who can purchase these weapons. I also know those restrictions aren’t limiting the tragedy that keeps recurring.

Can’t we do better? I believe we can.

I also believe we must.

national news

‘Active shooter drills’? Really?

There once was an almost-quaint era in our schools.

Students conducted fire drills. Those of us who grew up during the Cold War went through drills where we would be instructed to duck under our desks in case the Soviet Union decided to launch nuclear missiles at us.

Today we are in a different time. Now our students are conducting “active shooter drills” in schools. Educators are instructing our children about what they do when someone unloads a firearm.

Welcome to 21st-century America? Good ever-lovin’ grief, man!

Today’s students are facing dangers I never recall giving an instant of thought back when I was a kid. Parkland, Fla., has joined a lengthening list of American communities that have been scarred by gun violence tragedy. Seventeen people died; more were injured. A former student is arrested and charged with premeditated murder and is being held without bail in jail.

I suppose you can say that our school systems mark the most graphic changes in our culture. We’re hearing now in the wake of the Parkland massacre about these active shooter drills. Oh, my!

Consider, too, how public school students are able now to attend their schools after giving birth to children. Schools have day care centers on campus for the babies who belong to students.

I remember quite vividly how it used to be. It was around 1966 at the high school I attended. A girl revealed she was pregnant; she was unmarried. Almost immediately, this girl disappeared from the face of the planet, moving somewhere far, far away … never to be seen or heard from again by her friends at the school we all attended.

It’s not that way these days. See what I mean?

So it is with active shooter drills in our schools.

They’re keeping track these days of on-campus shooting incidents throughout the United States. Here we are, a month and a half into 2018 and we’re on track to set some sort of unofficial record for these kinds of events. Some of them have produced no casualties. Others have been tragic, such as what occurred in Parkland, Fla.

The very idea that we have to teach our children about how to deal with active shooters sickens me to my core.

national news

Gov. Scott has it right: no guns for mental cases

Florida Gov. Rick Scott has it right.

“Everything’s on the table,” the Republican governor said on CNN in the wake of the latest horrifying school shooting. This one, in Parkland, Fla., left 17 people dead and nearly as many injured.

A 19-year-old former student at the high school is in custody and has been charged with 17 counts of “premeditated murder.”

So, what does the governor mean by “everything”? I’ll take a leap here and presume he means, um, everything. That means potentially tighter regulations, stricter laws regulating the purchase of guns.

Gov. Scott went today where the president of the United States declined to go in discussing gun violence and beginning a discussion about a legislative solution to curbing it.

He said at an impromptu press event immediately after the shooting that people with mental disorders had no business purchasing and owning a firearm, let alone an AR-15 assault rifle like the one used by the gunman in Parkland.

As CNN.com reported: “Everything’s on the table. I’m going to look at every way that we can make sure our kids are safe,” Scott told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Thursday when asked if he was ready to commit to working on tightening gun restrictions in the state.

Well done, governor. I hope someone in the right places will heed your message.