Democrats sing We Shall Overcome while Republicans sing We Shall Overcomb.
Sorry. Couldn’t resist.
1 Like
Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) said that he believed he could potentially come around to the Collins’ bill if he could ensure that people who were wrongly on the no-fly list had an easier time getting their gun.
Right, an easier time getting a gun, not, you know, getting off the watch list they are wrongly on, because… priorities… or something…
1 Like
I don’t think this is the case. I don’t know if what’s currently being proposed will have much of an effect, honestly. And there very well may be simple “feel good” measures as you state. But the larger problem here and one that Congressional Democrats are attempting to address is that we can’t even discuss these things on a meaningful (legislative/governmental) level. The NRA and the GOP won’t allow it. A standardized set of federal regulations sounds good, right? The NRA won’t allow it. If research showed that X might actually reduce the rate of mass shootings while still preserving 2nd Amendment rights, could we enact X? Nope, the NRA won’t allow it. Could we even put adequate funding into research on what might reduce the rate of mass shootings? Nope, the NRA doesn’t allow it. Our legislative branch has been bought and is thoroughly controlled by an outside lobbying group, even in matters where public support is overwhelming for specific measures. That’s the problem.
5 Likes
I believe you’re exactly right. Having a nominee who is unabashedly pro-gun reform makes it much easier for Democrats to stand tall and lean into an issue that is otherwise thought to be fraught with peril. Seeing her win so handily, and largely on this particular issue since she and Sanders had so little disagreement on actually policy goals, undoubtedly gave other Democrats to courage to fight too. While the massacre of 49 innocent people at Pulse no doubt was the catalyst, Clinton’s leadership is giving them the will to take this fight to the NRA and into the election year.
3 Likes
True, and I’ll add that individualized state gun laws are utterly meaningless. It doesn’t make a damn bit of difference if Chicago bans certain guns when you can take a quick drive to IN and buy those same guns.
1 Like
Unlike the FBI, I have not been in contact with any mass murderer.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the Sup Ct itself rejected the challenge to the ban on assault wpns in NY and CT.
Yesterday, I quoted Scalia’s clear qualification of Heller: it affirms the broad right to own a gun. That’s all.
He wrote Heller as a narrow ruling. The wording of his decision leaves the door wide open for reasonable gun control as this rejection shows.
Scalia in his Heller majority opinion:
“ Like most rights, the right secured by the 2nd Amendment is not unlimited. … through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose …. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the 2nd Amendment…”
“… nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”
.It’s rare to hear any mention of this paragraph, but there it sits. And the Sup Ct has just given states and cities the signal to go ahead with laws similar to those in CT & NY.
2 Likes
You brought up knife deaths in a discussion about mass shootings. You realize that high powered, high rate of fire weapons designed specifically for war are not the same thing as knives, right? I’m not sure what you’re getting at here.
2 Likes
Let’s review how we got here. Democrats don’t bother showing up for off year elections
or voting down ballot. Thus, the tyranny of the Republican majority.
2 Likes
Of course it was a publicity stunt, but it was a brilliant publicity stunt. It might be the beginning of the end of the Republican hold on the house. At the very least the majority is going to have to figure out a way to give the minority a voice of some sort.
1 Like
You realize, too, that automatic weapons are illegal; but that does not stop criminals from obtaining them or the DOJ from selling them (Fast & Furious anyone?) All the weapons used in the commission of these crimes were semi-automatic weapons that are no different from semi-automatic weapons used in hunting.
What I was trying to do was connect the dots that 5 times more deaths are attributed to knives than rifles.
Thank Allah the terrorists have the GOP fighting for their gun rights!
4 Likes
It’s just difficult for me to understand why anyone would vote for someone not willing to reduce gun violence.
2 Likes
Yeah, the debate isn’t about the 2nd Amendment any longer.
It’s about insanity and the GOP’s claims that mass shooters should always have the latest state-of- the-art, military grade weapons when they decide to mow down as many people as they can as fast as they can. Conservatives are actually worried about the gun rights of terrorists and the mentally ill over public safety.
It’s just plain insane. The GOP House caucus doesn’t allow ANY weapons in Congress. Who do they think they are fooling?
Ask Palin. She’s the expert and point person on this Republican stance for blood running in the streets everywhere in America.
Feh, I don’t look to her for a rational discussion.