Tag Archives: NRA

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, 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

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

POTUS speaks to two of three critical issues

Donald J. Trump went on the air this morning to offer the stricken nation his deep condolences over the latest school massacre that killed 17 people in Parkland, Fla.

The president offered on behalf of the nation his love and support for the victims and their families. Their grief is borne by the entire nation, he said. “We are one American family,” said the president.

He spoke also correctly about the need to address mental health issues. The gunman who opened fire at the high school had been expelled from the school for disciplinary reasons. He reportedly had exhibited some warning signs that went unheeded by those who know him.

Indeed, we do need to heed these signs. We mustn’t let them go.

Trump also spoke to the compelling need to boost school safety. That, too, is important. As the president noted, parents must not worry about the safety of their children “when they kiss them goodbye” each morning.

School safety. Mental health. Those are valid and important issues.

The president, though, left one critical issue unaddressed this morning. He didn’t mention gun violence. He didn’t speak at all to the need to find ways to keep guns out of the hands of those who exhibit the warning signs that the alleged gunman reportedly did.

Trump vowed to take on the “difficult issue of mental health.” Fine. What about gun violence, Mr. President? When in the name of political sanity are our elected leaders going to take on that “difficult issue”?

I continue to believe there are ways to toughen requirements for legal firearms purchases without impeding Second Amendment guarantees that citizens have the right to “keep and bear arms.”

That, too, needs a nation’s attention. If only the president had started that discussion today.

national news

We may never solve this national crisis

One of my oldest and dearest friends has just posted a message on social media that I want to share in this blog.

Tim was my best man in 1971 and has forged a successful career in law. I admire him more than I’ve ever told him, until now.

Here is what he wrote:

In everything I do in my personal life, my professional life, my Rotary life, I am a “glass half-full” guy. I am an optimist. I believe that things can and, with determination, WILL get better. I believe in the inherent good in people in all walks of life. All of this is true in every area of my life but one: To those who plead, through eyes filled with horror and tears, that gun violence must stop, I say: It will never happen. This country, with orders of magnitude more guns and gun deaths than any other country in the world, is too far gone. The gun lobby is too strong. The pathetic “2nd Amendment” excuse is too widely embedded. Our legislators are too deep in the pockets of those who profit from death. Over and over and over again I hear “We must take action to stop this!” and that is the news for a week, maybe two, and then we are right back in the murderous gunsights, losing more people to gun violence each year than in the worst year of traffic deaths. And the hand-wringing and tears is as far as this will ever get. I am so ashamed of what went wrong in our country, and utterly without hope that it will ever, ever, ever get better.

The massacre today in Parkland, Fla. has scarred us all. Americans all across the land condemn gun violence. They call for something to be done legislatively to end it. Nothing happens.

I fear that my dear friend has encapsulated what many of us have feared all along. There is nothing we can do now to prevent this kind of slaughter from recurring … again and again.

It is to our everlasting shame.

national news

Another day, another horrific tragedy

Oh, my! It has happened. Again!

What does one say about this latest spasm of senseless gun violence.

A 19-year-old man opened fire in Parkland, Fla., and killed 19 people in a local high school. Our hearts are broken. Once again!

The man was a former student at the high school. He was expelled for disciplinary cause.

As has been the practice of this blog, I won’t mention the shooter’s name. I don’t intend to give this maniac any more exposure other than to chronicle the incident for which he has been charged by Broward County officials.

I cannot yet fathom how this kind of violent explosion is allowed to continue in this country. The debate over gun control is going to commence in due course, if it hasn’t already.

Fox News’s Shepard Smith today read the list of the shootings since the tragedy that erupted at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo. “Since Columbine in 1999, there have been 25 fatal, active school shooting incidents at elementary and high schools in America,” Smith said.

Twenty-five! Since 1999!

For the time being — and as the country continues to digest and process this tale of horror — I am left only to mourn and to pray for the souls of the victims.

Sickening.

local news, political news

Seliger re-focuses his re-election strategy

If you want to witness how the fight for the heart and soul of the Republican Party is taking shape, those of us in West Texas need look no further than right here at home.

State Sen. Kel Seliger is in the midst of what could become a hard-fought GOP primary battle against two men who are trying to outflank the Amarillo lawmaker — on the right.

Seliger is having none of it.

This Facebook image tells me how Sen. Seliger is showing off his own brand of conservatism to voters who might have their doubts about him. I also have noticed a significant change in the tone of his TV ads of late.

There’s an ad showing Seliger talking about his desire to see local control have preference over the running of public education. Then he piles into a pickup and drives away; but then you notice a National Rifle Association sticker on this rear window as he puts the pedal to the metal.

Seliger’s two GOP foes — former Midland Mayor Mike Canon and Amarillo restaurant owner Victor Leal — are getting backed by ultraconservative political action groups. Seliger isn’t relying on that kind of political activism, although Amarillo Matters — a local PAC — has signed on with its own endorsement and efforts to push Seliger across the primary election finish line well ahead of his challengers.

Let me be clear: I want Seliger to return to the Texas Senate, where he has served with clear-headed distinction since 2004.

Seliger’s endorsement from the NRA doesn’t exactly thrill me. I am no fan of the NRA and its hard-core resistance to any kind of legislation that seeks to end the scourge of gun violence. That group’s backing of Seliger, though, doesn’t dissuade me from backing his re-election bid.

What I find fascinating about Seliger is his knowledge of all the issues relating to the sprawling District 31, which runs from the very top of the Panhandle to the Permian Basin, which is about 400 miles — or about a seven-hour drive just one way. As I’ve noted, Seliger — a Borger native — is just as fluent in Permian Basin-speak as he is in Panhandle-speak.

His immediate political goal is to win the GOP primary in March outright. He doesn’t want to end up in a runoff. So, to avoid that possibility Seliger is highlighting his brand of conservative values. It’s not a holier-than-thou brand. Instead it is a level-headed realization of the constituency he represents.

If he is looking for any political advice on how to avoid a runoff, perhaps he should seek it from Potter County Judge Nancy Tanner, who in 2014 managed to win her primary race outright, with four other candidates on the ballot; and to think that Tanner pulled off that feat in her first political campaign.

Let it be said, too, that Sen. Seliger is no novice.

national news

Does gun control doom 2nd Amendment? Um, no!

I believe we can start debating gun legislation now in the wake of the Sutherland Springs, Texas massacre. Correct?

It has commenced and there now appears to be some indication of public support for stricter gun laws.

A Gallup Poll reveals that 51 percent of Americans now favor increased regulation on guns purchases. Wow, man! Imagine that. Most Americans, according to Gallup, think the nation needs to legislate some remedy to keep guns out of the hands of madmen, such as the guy who opened fire at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs.

Most want gun control

I am acutely aware that this is a complicated problem that requires a finely nuanced legislative solution. I am a supporter of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; I also own firearms. I need no lecture on how the Second Amendment has been interpreted by the courts.

The Sutherland Springs tragedy also brings to mind a monumental failure by the U.S. Air Force to report the gunman’s criminal history to the FBI, which could have prevented him from getting the weapon he used to slaughter those people in the church sanctuary.

The complications, of course, become evident when bad actors acquire guns from family members, or friends, or some fly-by-night gun seller looking to make a few bucks. I do not know how you prevent those crackpots from obtaining guns.

Is there a legislative solution that remains faithful to the Second Amendment? I believe one can be found. Somewhere. By someone. Somehow.

If the Gallup Poll is accurate — and I tend to believe it is — then our elected representatives have been given a chance to do what they’ve been unwilling to do in the wake of other horrific tragedies.

Of course, it would be a no-brainer were it not for the existence of that political powerhouse called the National Rifle Association.

national news

‘Bump stock’ becomes new gun focus

Maybe it’s just me but I rather doubt many Americans had ever heard of “bump stock” before this past weekend when a madman opened fire on a crowd of 22,000 spectators attending a country music festival in Las Vegas, Nev.

A bump stock, we have learned, is a device that turns a semi-automatic weapon into a machine gun.

The shooter in Las Vegas had attached a bump stock to a semi-auto rifle and created an automatic weapon, a killing machine that took the lives of 58 people and injured more than 500 others.

Now the debate has been joined. And guess what: There seems to be some actual momentum building that could make bump stocks illegal. Congressional Republicans, who usually are allied with the National Rifle Association in opposing any effort to regulate guns in any fashion, now are calling for an examination of this device.

More good news? Sure. The NRA is softening its opposition, agreeing that Congress should debate the legality of bump stocks.

Hell has frozen over!

As The Hill reports:Ā ā€œThe NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations,ā€ NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre and executive director of theĀ NRAĀ Institute for Legislative Action Chris Cox said in a joint statement.

Who would have thought such a thing could come from the NRA?

Might there be a gun law breakthrough?

I believe it’s a baby step toward taking some needed legislative steps regarding gun violence. I hope eventually that Congress will be able to be more comprehensive in its approach to curbing this kind of massacre. It likely will need some push from powerful public interests — such as the NRA.

If it’s against the law to own a machine gun, then how is it that bump stocks remain legal?