Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., left, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., listen as Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, center, speaks during a media availability, on Capitol Hill, Monday, June 20, 2016 in Washington. A divided Senate blocked rival election-year plans to curb guns, eight days after the horror of Orlando’s mass shooting intensified pressure on lawmakers to act but knotted them in gridlock anyway – even over restricting firearms for terrorists. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
This week, four gun safety measures failed at the senate. This isn’t surprising, as congress is predominately pro-gun Republican.
The nightmare that is the mass shooting epidemic our country has lived through these past few years has put everybody on a national script. Cries for gun reform echo through the Internet and in protests in the streets, while millions revert to the same phrase:
“My thoughts and prayers go out to the victims. May this senseless violence cease.”
It’s terrifying, really, how powerless one feels in the wake of such earth-shattering events, especially considering 49 people were shot and killed within minutes by one gunman. Keeping in mind, Pulse in Orlando was just one of 43 shootings that Sunday.
Again, four separate gun safety laws were proposed — one even the National Rifle Association supported (gasp!) — and fulfilling the cycle of a mass shooting aftermath, all four were denied.
But what infuriates me more is how obvious special interest groups buy politicians. I’m looking at you, National Rifle Association. I’m also looking at you, Senator John Boozman (R-AR). In 2014, he received $4,700, and in 2016, gun rights groups contributed nearly $1 million to the Senate, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Somehow, Tom Cotton received $0 in 2014, which honestly surprised the hell out of me.
I’m a big fan of HBO’s “Last Week Tonight” with John Oliver. This past Sunday, he did an excellent breakdown on the NRA’s influence on members of Congress, and how they lobbied to block research by the Center for Disease Control on gun violence. A part of the show brought a few laws to my attention that hinder the whole gun lawmaking process, which I’d like to share with you all.
What do pro-gun congressmen and women seemingly always respond with when facing gun safety legislation?
“There’s no evidence these gun laws will prevent shootings.”
Ah, but here’s the deal. In 1996, the NRA successfully lobbied Congress to impose a restriction on gun violence research, calling for none of the funds to be used to promote or advocate gun-control via the Dickey Amendment. Jay Dickey, the congressman namesake for the bill now even opposes his own amendment some 20 years later. All attempts to repeal the amendment have, to no surprise, failed.
The thing is, the law isn’t even gun control. It’s just barring research by the CDC to study if, y’know, gun violence and its influence is a real thing we should be wary of.
What’s worse, there’s a disconnect between public opinion and members of congress. Eighty-five percent of Americans favor making private gun sales and sales at gun shows subject to background checks, and 79 percent support laws to prevent people with mental illnesses from purchasing guns. A majority of people, 57 percent, support a ban of assault weapons, according to poll data by Pew Research Center.
As the general public agrees, those all seem to be pretty commonsense do they not? If we’re really gonna be this whole machismo ‘Merica country that’s cracking down on the terrorists, how could something as simple as delayinggun ownership to people on the FBI’s terrorist watch list be such a bad idea? That was the bill the NRA supported Monday. Nope! Still voted down. Are we really going to let that continue? I’ll go as far as to say that ain’t American in my eyes to allow suspected terrorists to buy guns, considering the fact many of such assumptions are often in error or deeply prejudiced — which is the American way!
It’s my personal belief that AR-15’s, and assault weapons in general, shouldn’t be sold over the counter as they are today and for how little oversight there is. I believe this is common sense, for both people who want guns and those who don’t. I can understand the different needs for guns in rural communities versus inner cities, and how guns provide a sense of safety to people. I also understand guns are purely designed to be extremely efficient in killing.
I think gun owners should be treated like women who are seeking abortion (not to equate the two, mind you), and be forced to jump through several hoops and attend safety training with any purchase of any firearm before being allowed to own one. Maybe along the way, one of the administrators could identify a potential threat?
Conservatives can say what they want about the “feckless, bleeding heart” Democrats, but hell, at least they’re trying and doing something about this. At least they’re doing what they can to improve a situation versus the GOP, who refuse to give in to change while they bury their heads in the ground and blame the “broken system” they serve for our problems.
My main point here is, if we really want to do something about guns, shouldn’t we at least be allowed to make informed opinions about this?
Still, I can’t fathom how the senators responsible for voting down all four bills sleep at night when such commonsense bills are proposed, just for party solidarity. Yet, I fear they sleep just fine on their mattresses made of cash while experiencing empty, emotionless dreams.
Puppeteering The Gun Lobby
Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., left, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., listen as Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, center, speaks during a media availability, on Capitol Hill, Monday, June 20, 2016 in Washington. A divided Senate blocked rival election-year plans to curb guns, eight days after the horror of Orlando’s mass shooting intensified pressure on lawmakers to act but knotted them in gridlock anyway – even over restricting firearms for terrorists. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
This week, four gun safety measures failed at the senate. This isn’t surprising, as congress is predominately pro-gun Republican.
The nightmare that is the mass shooting epidemic our country has lived through these past few years has put everybody on a national script. Cries for gun reform echo through the Internet and in protests in the streets, while millions revert to the same phrase:
“My thoughts and prayers go out to the victims. May this senseless violence cease.”
It’s terrifying, really, how powerless one feels in the wake of such earth-shattering events, especially considering 49 people were shot and killed within minutes by one gunman. Keeping in mind, Pulse in Orlando was just one of 43 shootings that Sunday.
Again, four separate gun safety laws were proposed — one even the National Rifle Association supported (gasp!) — and fulfilling the cycle of a mass shooting aftermath, all four were denied.
But what infuriates me more is how obvious special interest groups buy politicians. I’m looking at you, National Rifle Association. I’m also looking at you, Senator John Boozman (R-AR). In 2014, he received $4,700, and in 2016, gun rights groups contributed nearly $1 million to the Senate, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Somehow, Tom Cotton received $0 in 2014, which honestly surprised the hell out of me.
I’m a big fan of HBO’s “Last Week Tonight” with John Oliver. This past Sunday, he did an excellent breakdown on the NRA’s influence on members of Congress, and how they lobbied to block research by the Center for Disease Control on gun violence. A part of the show brought a few laws to my attention that hinder the whole gun lawmaking process, which I’d like to share with you all.
What do pro-gun congressmen and women seemingly always respond with when facing gun safety legislation?
“There’s no evidence these gun laws will prevent shootings.”
Ah, but here’s the deal. In 1996, the NRA successfully lobbied Congress to impose a restriction on gun violence research, calling for none of the funds to be used to promote or advocate gun-control via the Dickey Amendment. Jay Dickey, the congressman namesake for the bill now even opposes his own amendment some 20 years later. All attempts to repeal the amendment have, to no surprise, failed.
The thing is, the law isn’t even gun control. It’s just barring research by the CDC to study if, y’know, gun violence and its influence is a real thing we should be wary of.
What’s worse, there’s a disconnect between public opinion and members of congress. Eighty-five percent of Americans favor making private gun sales and sales at gun shows subject to background checks, and 79 percent support laws to prevent people with mental illnesses from purchasing guns. A majority of people, 57 percent, support a ban of assault weapons, according to poll data by Pew Research Center.
As the general public agrees, those all seem to be pretty commonsense do they not? If we’re really gonna be this whole machismo ‘Merica country that’s cracking down on the terrorists, how could something as simple as delayinggun ownership to people on the FBI’s terrorist watch list be such a bad idea? That was the bill the NRA supported Monday. Nope! Still voted down. Are we really going to let that continue? I’ll go as far as to say that ain’t American in my eyes to allow suspected terrorists to buy guns, considering the fact many of such assumptions are often in error or deeply prejudiced — which is the American way!
It’s my personal belief that AR-15’s, and assault weapons in general, shouldn’t be sold over the counter as they are today and for how little oversight there is. I believe this is common sense, for both people who want guns and those who don’t. I can understand the different needs for guns in rural communities versus inner cities, and how guns provide a sense of safety to people. I also understand guns are purely designed to be extremely efficient in killing.
I think gun owners should be treated like women who are seeking abortion (not to equate the two, mind you), and be forced to jump through several hoops and attend safety training with any purchase of any firearm before being allowed to own one. Maybe along the way, one of the administrators could identify a potential threat?
Conservatives can say what they want about the “feckless, bleeding heart” Democrats, but hell, at least they’re trying and doing something about this. At least they’re doing what they can to improve a situation versus the GOP, who refuse to give in to change while they bury their heads in the ground and blame the “broken system” they serve for our problems.
My main point here is, if we really want to do something about guns, shouldn’t we at least be allowed to make informed opinions about this?
Still, I can’t fathom how the senators responsible for voting down all four bills sleep at night when such commonsense bills are proposed, just for party solidarity. Yet, I fear they sleep just fine on their mattresses made of cash while experiencing empty, emotionless dreams.
Thanks for reading.