Showing posts with label Politics News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics News. Show all posts

Friday, September 4, 2015

Beware of the Arch-Deceivers: GOP's Issues With Race

"Democrats are the real racists!": Inside the GOP's pathetic & insulting response to charges of bigotry
Too bad The GOP created the environment in which Donald Trump is now tearing the Republicans apart by being the least productive Congress ever only because they wanted to spite President Obama. 

So sad is it that the Republican party (GOP) is in such disarray that they cannot seem to pull themselves together. There seems to be nothing but false talking points, smokescreens, lies and distractions in the form of attacks on Hillary Clinton and President Obama. 
Why are the Republicans in their current state of political disorientation? First, they have this tendency to judge and condemn harshly certain groups like liberals, those who are pro-choice, immigrants. As well, they tend to alienate women and African-Americans. 
It is no secret that the GOP base consist mostly of uneducated bigots and racist that Republican politician pander to during elections. They call it firing up the base. They use certain phrases and terminology that generally contain racist overtones and/or are well within the realm of bigotry. "Let's take back our country" is one of their battle cries. 
To prove my point let us take a trip down memory lane. To understand where we are now we should know a little about the Republican Party (GOP) and it's history concern African-Americans/Blacks.
In 1968, Richard Nixon realized he could not become president unless he made a deeply cynical move: convincing southern racists to vote Republican.

The trouble was, they hadn't done that since the Republican Abe Lincoln freed the slaves. But Nixon calculated that the Democratic "Solid South" could now be broken open: after the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and '64, and the Voting Rights Act of '65, racists, feeling betrayed and furious, were looking for a new home.

So, in what became known as the Southern Strategy, Nixon invited racists into the GOP. Ever since, the racists have been essential to the party's "winning coalition," the collection of targeted groups that can add up to electoral victory.

Not all Republicans are racists, of course. But without racists, I don't think the GOP can win elections.

Not the kind of thing you want to talk about openly, though. So Republican politicians have become fluent in a kind of code, which they use to communicate with the ugly part of their base without offending polite society. In 1981, GOP consultant Lee Atwater offered a guide in an interview: You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" -- that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.

More recent examples: "taking back our country," voter ID, border security and birtherism.

But now, along comes a cartoon racist like Donald Trump, who ignores the code and drops the veil from the GOP's structural racism. In response, Republican politicians pronounce themselves shocked to see such blatant bigotry, naked and unashamed.

It's a tough sell. The GOP has been doing a racist strip tease for decades now, and Trump is just skipping the tease. Only a few years ago, Senator Lindsey Graham could safely flirt with anti-immigrant racism on Fox News. Now, he's forced to go on CNN and publicly disown Trump's very similar comments, calling him a "wrecking ball for the future of the Republican Party with the Hispanic community."

So embarrassing.

But it may point to a possible upside. Thanks to gauche clowns like Trump -- not to mention Cliven BundySteve King and others -- the GOP, like the Democratic Party of the 60s, might be forced to reform itself, if only to end the pain.


Because the party is finally experiencing the agony of racism in a form it can't ignore: bad PR. ~from The Huff Post article by Spencer Critchley "Trump Has Exposed GOP Racism" Posted: 07/13/2015 4:03 pm EDT Updated: 07/13/2015 4:59 pm EDT~

 To further drive my point home is another article from the The Huffington Post By Jackson Connor entitled "MSNBC's Chris Matthews Accuses GOP Of Keeping Jim Crow Alive In 21st Century"

 The thought of Chris Matthews railing against Republicans isn't anything new. But during the final segment of "Hardball" Thursday night, the MSNBC host seemed particularly riled up, accusing the GOP of ushering in a new era of Jim Crow with their treatment of the country's first black president.

Matthews said he believes Americans will see Barack Obama's time in the White House in "sharper contrast” in years to come, taking into account the antics he's had to endure from his conservative foes since taking office. According to Matthews, the GOP's primary goal has been to make sure the president "accomplishes nothing" and "gets booted from office as quickly as possible.”

The host pointed to numerous examples of Republican temper tantrums, listing Sen. Tom Cotton's (R-Ark.) recent letter to Iran, subverting Obama's ongoing nuclear negotiations, and Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) shouting “You lie,” during the president's 2009 health care speech, among the most egregious.

“They will read all this and wonder, 'What was it that made this Republican opposition so all out contemptuous of an American president?'” Matthews said. “'What made it treat him as below respect, below the dignity historically accorded his office?'”

The answer, Matthews suggested (and it's been suggested before), stems from President Obama's race.

"They will then look at a picture of this president, a picture of this man," Matthews said, "and perhaps get the idea that the age of Jim Crow managed to find a new habitat in the early 21st century Republican Party.”

H/T Mediaite

  As a reply to people calling the Republicans out for their racism they say that it is the Democrats who are the real racist. Some of the facts concerning this are laid out in the following article: "Democrats are the real racists!: Inside the GOP’s pathetic & insulting response to charges of bigotry" If you're a Republican, how exactly do you explain away Donald Trump's hideous comments about Mexicans? by HEATHER DIGBY PARTON

  If there is a more fatuous right wing trope than “Martin Luther King was a Republican” it has to be the utterly nonsensical line that Democrats are the true racists because they were the southern party during Jim Crow. Inevitably, in any discussion of race, some smart-aleck troll smugly interjects the irrelevant fact that the departed Democratic Senator Robert Byrd was a member of the KKK and some very clever boy or girl shares the astonishingly obvious fact that Republican Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves. Case closed, Democrats are the racists and the Republicans are the African Americans’ true allies.

I’m not going to go over the same tired ground that hundreds of others have covered to refute this foolishness. Even the trolls know that many millions of people who used to vote for Democrats switched parties after the various civil rights acts were passed in the ’60s under a Democratic majority. While they deny there was ever such a thing as the “Southern Strategy,” and pretend that racist appeals for votes never happened, that’s also a documented fact and they know that too.

But just because conservatives are clearly playing games, it doesn’t lessen the insult to African Americans when they make these inane claims. After all, if Democrats are the “real racists,” then 95 percent are African Americans must be very dumb indeed.

Here’s one of conservatives’ more “entertaining” strategies for proving their specious argument, from a chain email I received some time back, a painfully awkward attempt at satirizing the voice of a supposedly Democratic racist:

REWARD!

CAPTURE and RETURN  RUNAWAYS from the Democratic Party’s LIBERAL PLANTATION.

Any Person of Color claiming to be Republican, Conservative or a member of the Tea Party is suspect and should be berated, insulted, abused and returned.

BE ON THE LOOK-OUT

Runaways often speaking in an uppity manner about right the individual, personal responsibility an greatness of America and other such nonsense.

THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

THE PARTY OF JIM CROW

THE PARTY OF BULL CONNOR

in the not so distant past would lynch People of Color for voting Republican.

Then we learned it’s far better to just buy their votes using taxpayer money and for over forty years that’s what we have done!

WE OWN THEM.

*Amount of cash reward pending results of our fund-raising efforts. You didn’t expect us to use our own money, did you?

Those are words on a widely trafficked chain email, based upon real runaway slave posters. And it is disgusting, not only for the revolting imagery, but for making a mockery of the horror of slavery itself. After all, what this is is saying is that the vast majority of African Americans are “owned” by the Democratic Party, not because they’ve been bought but because they’ve been “bought-off,” and by implication have no sense of personal responsibility or belief in the “greatness of America.”

Again, this is a truly specious line of argument. They are saying that Black people vote Democratic because they’ve been “bought off” with all that generous welfare and food stamp money. The only “good” Black people, therefore, are the “runaways” who vote Republican. (Could they be any more contemptuous of the people they are supposed to be defending?) This “liberal plantation” concept, while not always as crudely expressed as in the aforementioned email, is pervasive among right wingers. And truthfully, this argument is often deployed by African American conservatives who obviously have a claim to use the imagery even though their message is insulting to the vast number of fellow African Americans who vote Democratic.

The question of why Black Americans vote for Democrats is not a mystery and it has nothing to do with being “bought (off).” As everyone surely knows, when they were allowed to do it at all, black Americans traditionally voted for the party of Abraham Lincoln for many years. This was for obvious reasons — he was the man who freed the slaves. But as this article in the Washington Post points out, African Americans started voting for Democrats long before they allegedly started chasing all that free government money:

[The] Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies pulled data from independent research, Gallup polling, exit polls, professional polling firms and their own surveys to put together a look at the partisan makeup of black voters since the administration of Franklin Roosevelt. That the data start in 1936 and not, say, with the emancipation of slaves after the Civil War — thanks largely to a Republican president — is because the ability of black Americans to vote was regularly restricted and uneven. 
  In the decade before 1948, black Americans identified as Democrats about as often as they did Republicans. In 1948, as Real Clear Politics’ Jay Cost wrote a few years ago, Democrat Harry Truman made an explicit appeal for new civil rights measures from Congress, including voter protections, a federal ban on lynching and bolstering existing civil rights laws. That year, the number of blacks identifying as Democrats increased.

The second big jump is the one that you likely thought of first: The Civil Rights Act of 1964. Its passage in July of that year was the culmination of a long political struggle that played out on Capitol Hill. When he signed the bill, President Lyndon Johnson reportedly said that Democrats would, as a result, lose the South for a generation. It’s been longer than that.[…]

It’s worth [looking at the] Democratic vote in the heart of the South, including Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi and South Carolina. The average support for the Democratic candidate each year has slipped downward, but plummeted in 1948 and 1964. In the latter year, those states backed Barry Goldwater. In the former, they largely backed the States Rights party candidate, Strom Thurmond.

Black Americans have many reason to vote Democratic. But it was two Democratic presidents proposing civil rights legislation that made them leave the Republican Party in large numbers. Likewise, it was that same movement for civil rights that made many of those white Southern Democrats switch to the GOP.

And the Republican party is still having a problem dealing with the fallout. As Brian Beutler points out in this piece at The New Republic:

[S]ince the 2012 election Republicans have been engaged in a quiet and unresolved debate amongst themselves over which of the following three strategic reforms to pursue:

1) Making genuine, substantive concessions to minority voters.

2) Making symbolic and rhetorical concessions to minority voters, without making significant changes to the GOP’s substantive agenda.

3) Making no concessions to minority voters whatsoever, while working to increase the GOP’s already impressive margins among white voters.

Two developments in the past month—the mass killing of black worshippers by a white supremacist at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, SC, and the launch of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign—have thrown into stark relief how badly option one lost out to options two and three. The ongoing Republican presidential primary has become a contest to determine which of the latter two models the party will adopt in the 2016 election.

The hesitancy of the GOP presidential candidates to step up in the wake of the Charleston massacre says everything about their “outreach” to African Americans. The popularity of Donald Trump’s crude nativism among the base likewise illuminates their difficulty in attracting Latinos in sufficient numbers to win a national election. They are stuck.

But what can they expect? When you have people constantly spewing vacuous nonsense about the Democrats being the party of racism even as you are insulting African Americans to their faces, it’s hard to make a case for minorities voting for your party. Calling immigrants a bunch of rapists and criminals and rising dramatically in the GOP primary polls isn’t exactly a friendly gesture of inclusion.

Whether they like it or not, it is a historical fact that many people who were once members of the Democratic Party switched their affiliation to the GOP when the Democrats voted for civil rights legislation and Democratic presidents signed it. This is not a debatable point. That so many Republicans choose to pretend this isn’t so is either a sign that they are arguing in bad faith or they are living in denial. Either way, it won’t solve their problem: they just have no idea what to do about all the resentful white voters they’ve been opportunistically coaxing into their coalition for the last few decades. They can try to prevent people from voting and they can pretend that “illegal immigrants” are stealing elections. But it won’t change the fundamental reality that they are on the wrong side of history and have been for a very long time.

Heather Digby Parton, also known as "Digby," is a contributing writer to Salon. She was the winner of the 2014 Hillman Prize for Opinion and Analysis Journalism.

 Bernie Sanders Rips Donald Trump While Calling Out The Bigoted Billionaire’s Racism

By: Jason Easley

Bernie Sanders Latino Roundtable Iowa
Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) ripped Donald Trump at a Latino roundtable in Iowa. Sanders stood up to the 
Republican bully by calling out Trump’s racism.


According to the Sanders campaign:


In a statement, Sanders said: “This country has experienced racism for hundreds of years. I would have hoped that by the year 2015 leading candidates for president like Mr. Trump would campaign on their ideas as to how they can address our serious problems, and not by trying to divide the country with racist and demagogic appeals. Clearly Trump is scapegoating the Hispanic community. Immigrants are not responsible,” Sanders stressed, “for the disappearing American middle class, the Wall Street collapse brought on by huge financial institutions’ greed and illegal behavior, the war in Iraq, income inequality or climate change.”
At the roundtable discussion, Sanders called Trump’s comments “mean” and “denigrating” to an entire group of people and accused him of using Latinos as “whipping boys” to distract attention from real problems confronting the country. He called it “absurd, racist and wrong” to blame immigrants for the nation’s problems.

“That is absolutely unacceptable,” the senator added during the roundtable discussion at the Muscatine County Boxing Club. “That kind of discourse should be removed from our politics.”

Sen. Sanders was correct. Donald Trump is scapegoating the Hispanic community, but Trump is merely building on the precedent that has been set by his party. The Republican Party has been trying to distract the country from their unpopular policies by playing up their imaginary immigration menace for nearly a decade.

Trump has brought the thinly veiled racial dog whistles that Republicans have been using out the open by being extremely blunt and direct about his bigotry.

Bernie Sanders has integrity and courage, which is why he directly confronted Trump and ripped him for his racist tactics. The “campaign strategy” is that Donald Trump is using should have been roundly condemned by the Republican Party. Instead of doing the decent thing, Republican presidential candidates have scrambled to follow Trump’s lead and cater to the bigots among their voters.


Since Republicans are too afraid to stand up to the bully, Bernie Sanders has risen to knock Trump down.

The GOP isn’t in trouble because of their racist base, they’re in trouble because they’re assholes


Conservatives — whose week went bad when retailers stopped selling southern treason flags before turning unbearable when the Supreme Court re-shoved affordable health care down America’s throat today  — are in a bit of a slump. After being smacked across the snout with a rolled-up copy of Modern Etiquette and told it was considered déclassé to wave a Confederate flag while killing black churchgoers, they are doing a little soul searching and discovering that their soul looks like a raisin that fell under the refrigerator over a year ago.

According to Matt Lewis at The Daily Beast, Republicans need to take a hard look at this whole dogwhistlin’, red-meat tossin’, hunkerin’ down in the dust with southern yahoos and talking about them thar obstreperous and uppity colored folk.

The injection of Southerners into the Republican coalition—a coalition they ultimately came to dominate—couldn’t help but change the image of the GOP. There were racial, cultural, political, and even religious implications. Republicans captured the South, yes, but the South also captured the GOP. There were no doubt many salutary benefits to this arrangement—most obviously, an electoral boon that lasted for decades. But it also guaranteed we would eventually see a day of reckoning.
Lewis then goes on to soft-peddle the “Southern Strategy,” writing “Whether or not you accept that this was an intentional strategy…”

It almost as if he is blissfully unaware of the late campaign wizard Lee Atwater bluntly describing it no uncertain terms as the way to the promised land.

Here is Atwater to explain it for the dim at heart:

You start out in 1954 by saying, “N*gger, n*gger, n*gger.” By 1968 you can’t say “n*gger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “N*gger, n*gger.”
I can see how someone might find that unclear when their thesis is dependent upon pretending it doesn’t exist — but let’s move on.

Lewis is concerned that, having allowed  their Confederate flag-waving crazy cousins into a Republican big tent that is whiter than a Wes Anderson movie, the Republicans can’t get their message heard over all of the yee-hawing, drunken political fistfights, and guns a’shootin’ into the air.

So here’s what the GOP has to figure it out: How do they continue to get the Bubba vote while shedding appeals to the cultural symbolism of the past? How do they sell their conservative ideas about free markets, strong national defense, and conservative family values to 21st-century Americans?
Here is the problem with that.

That is what Romney ran on in 2012 and the electorate was all, “Nah, we’ll pass” and Romney at least had the virtue of seeming like a decent –albeit out of touch — guy with sincerely held beliefs that were equally out of touch with anyone not still living in the 50’s.

This election go-around the party bus is top-heavy with smarmy assholes like Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee, and Scott Walker, insincere assholes like Rand Paul and Jeb Bush, dumb assholes like Rick Perry, and executive assholes like Donald Trump and Carly Fiorina. To his credit, Marco Rubio to this point only seems like a sweaty overachiever, but the debates may push him into belching forth something equally assholish.

The problem for the GOP is both the medium and the message.  And even if they can somehow tamp down the party’s inherent racism –which is a feature and not a bug — in an election that most likely won’t feature a person of the dusky hue, they’re still going to have to explain that giving more tax cuts to the rich, starting up a few new wars, stripping millions of people of healthcare benefits, while trashing women, minorities, seniors, the poor, unions, gays, and science is what America is yearning for.


Good luck with that, guys. See you on the other side.


The GOP isn’t in trouble because of their racist base, they’re in trouble because they’re assholes


Sunday, January 27, 2013

Gun Laws: It's Time to Emphasize Pragmatic and Achievable Gun Law Reform


Cory Booker



It's Time to Emphasize Pragmatic and Achievable Gun Law Reform!



If today is a typical day in America, 34 people -- men, women, and children -- will be killed with a gun. Countless more will be wounded. As the Mayor of Newark, New Jersey, I don't enjoy the luxury of ideological debate -- whether guns in our society are "good" or "bad," or arguing the constitutional parameters of "a well regulated Militia." My concern, when I wake up every morning and when I put my head down on my pillow at night, is that none of my residents become part of that daily 34 person national tragedy. My hope, my prayer, is that Friday's horrific shooting in Newtown might convince others to share this sense of pragmatic urgency.
Some of this fight to keep Newark's neighborhoods safe is within my control. My administration has poured unprecedented time, energy, and share of city resources into policing and crime prevention. We have engaged in focused policing, applied new management and organizational structures, are building a hybrid ceasefire model blending Chicago and Boston approaches, and employed advanced technologies such as acoustic gunshot detection. We have sought to address the many socio-economic causes of crime, from creating New Jersey's first city office of ex-offender reentry to a significant focus on Newark economic growth to create more opportunity for the underemployed in our local workforce. We have seen progress in driving down crime, including drops in shootings and gun murders since I entered office in 2006, but when it comes to guns, we can't adequately inhibit their flow into Newark, and we don't have the authority to reach the spigot. We must look outward to our state, other states, and to the federal government for any hope of serious progress.
There is no shortage of sensible reforms to pursue: We should immediately restore a modified version of the Assault Weapons Ban that expired in 2004, which included a ban on high capacity magazines. We should pursue one-handgun a month restrictions, which will allow law abiding gun owners to purchase up to a dozen handguns a year, but will significantly hamper gun traffickers due to the mechanics and economics of straw purchasing (having another buy guns on one's behalf). We must empower the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to do its job. BATFE has been without a permanent director for over six years, which is representative of Congress' obstructive treatment of the agency. There should be no more excuses. The time is now to have an honest conversation on these topics, and work tirelessly to win the necessary support to make them happen.
But allow me to set the floor. As President Obama mentioned in his powerful remarks on Monday afternoon, many reforms have significant support from the public, and even from gun owners. Fortunately, several of these widely agreed upon measures are among the highest impact reforms. The only reason these wouldn't happen is because of backroom dealing and lobby opposition, and we simply cannot allow that given what is at stake. While admittedly none of the following would have likely stopped Friday's tragedy, and we must address more closely related problems such as reforms to our broader mental health practices, any one of the below would save thousands of Americans from a similar violent end.
1.) Make background checks universal
There are fundamentally two ways to buy guns in this country: through a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL), such as a gun store, or through a private sale, which includes gun shows, many internet transactions, and private owners who wish to sell their guns. Federal law mandates that any purchase made from an FFL include a background check of the purchaser under the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). Federal law, however, does not require NICS checks for private sales, allowing for an estimated 40% of all sales nationally to circumvent any background checks.
Even with criminals disproportionately seeking out private sale opportunities to avoid background checks -- a DOJ survey concluded that 80% of inmates obtained their crime guns through private transfers -- there were still 78,211 instances of NICS identifying and denying prohibited purchasers from buying one or more guns from an FFL in 2011.
And those 78,211 instances matter. For example, one in every two women killed with a gun is killed by an intimate partner. However, in states which require private sales to be subject to background checks, this number drops by 40 percent. This is in part because many with a history of domestic violence, even a misdemeanor, are identified as prohibited purchasers in the NICS system.
The idea here is quite simple and reasonable: every individual who wants to buy a gun in this country should have to undergo a comprehensive background check to ensure that they are not a criminal, mentally ill, or a member of another prohibited purchaser category. Note that contrary to the claims of many, these checks are not cumbersome or inefficient - last year, background check calls were answered in an average of 6.9 seconds and 91 percent immediately resulted in a proceed or deny order.
A poll conducted earlier this year by a Republican pollster found that 82 percent of U.S. gun owners -- including 74% of NRA members -- agree that we should implement background checks for all sales. These gun owners don't want guns in the wrong hands for the same reasons as non-gun owners -- they are mothers, fathers, sons and daughters who care about the safety of family, friends and community -- and they know their rights are made more secure by a sensible regulatory regime.
Existing law defines, quite reasonably, who should and should not be able to buy a gun. Let's actually put ourselves in a position to enforce these basic standards by passing the Fix Gun Checks Act (H.R. 1781/S. 436), which is pending in Congress.
2.) Improve mental health and other prohibited purchaser sharing with the National Instant Criminal Background Check System
Providing for all sales to be screened for prohibited purchasers through NICS takes us a long way towards keeping guns only in the hands of the law abiding, mentally stable people who should be allowed to purchase them. The next step is ensuring that NICS has the mental health data -- documentation of whether an individual has been, for example, involuntarily committed -- it needs to make those determinations.
The Tenth Amendment restricts the federal government from compelling states to provide all necessary data, which has meant, for example, that 19 states have provided fewer than 100 records of individuals disqualified on mental health grounds since the implementation of NICS in the early 1990s. We can do a better job of inputting federal data into the system, and should start there, but the real gap exists because of several states' failure to provide their data.
The federal government has employed a carrot and stick approach to improve state participation, but the current incentives and penalties need to be strengthened. The Fix Gun Checks Act, mentioned above, will go some of the way in addressing this issue. The best solution, though, is for citizens in states that do not provide robust data to demand more of their state government (visithttp://www.demandaplan.org/FatalGaps for an interactive map that will give you a sense of how comprehensively your state is reporting mental health prohibited purchasers).
A bipartisan poll released in January of 2010 revealed that 90% of gun owners supported addressing such data gaps. NRA leadership has actually shown glimmers of support for this issue, as recently as this morning's press conference, and should make it a real priority.
3.) Tighten anti-trafficking laws
With all legal sales now running through NICS, and NICS now filled with more data, we can turn to defeating trafficking tactics. There are several options available, but here are two examples:
First, we need to pass a law that makes gun trafficking a clear, substantial, and practically enforceable federal crime. Law enforcement currently uses federal provisions that prohibit engaging in the business of selling guns without a federal license, which, as recently noted by the bipartisan coalition Mayors Against Illegal Guns, carries the same punishment as for the trafficking of chicken or livestock. The impact has been that federal prosecutors do not prosecute these cases as often as they do many other significant crimes. While polling data for this specific question is not available, 99 percent of non-NRA member gun owners and 95% of NRA members have expressed support for punishing traffickers to the maximum extent of the law.
Second, one of the most common excuses provided by straw purchasers when questioned by authorities after a crime gun trace leads to them is that their gun was lost or stolen. While retailers are required to report lost and stolen guns, individuals are not. Requiring this reporting will provide an enforcement mechanism against those suspected of assisting traffickers. A 2009 bipartisan poll found that 78 percent of NRA members and 88 percent of non-NRA gun owners supported such a measure.
These reforms, aimed squarely at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, and aligned with the interests and preferences of law abiding gun owners, should be passed immediately by Congress and, where appropriate or necessary, the states. Congress and state governments have no excuse not to act: The majority of NRA members and non-NRA member gun owners support these measures because they are sensible and in no way threaten Second Amendment rights. You wouldn't guess this from remarks made earlier today by NRA President Wayne LaPierre, whose underlying philosophy of a response to last week's shooting was "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." Most gun owners propose that we do all we can to stop "bad guys" from getting guns in the first place. The plan set forth by the NRA this morning -- a woefully inadequate and misdirected response -- simply does not venture to do that, and through that omission, fails its membership.
These reforms alone will save thousands upon thousands of Americans, and joined with other reasonable reforms, they can truly turn the tide on gun violence in this country. We owe no less to communities like mine, communities like Newtown, and to the next American community that will, within 45 minutes of you reading this, lose a citizen to gun violence.
Below is another viewpoint concerning gun control.






Mitch McConnell Gun Control Email: You're 'Literally Surrounded,' They're 'Coming For Your Guns'


Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) addressed supporters in a frantically toned email on Monday, warning them of a looming effort to snatch up their guns.
"You and I are literally surrounded. The gun-grabbers in the Senate are about to launch an all-out-assault on the Second Amendment. On your rights. On your freedom," reads the opening of the email, according to The Hill.
"[T]hey're coming for your guns," the email exhorts.
Last week, President Barack Obama unveiled a comprehensive set of initiatives meant to combat gun violence. Alongside 23 executive actions, Obama also announced his intention to press congressional lawmakers to introduce a set of measures, including a renewed assault weapons ban and restriction on large-capacity ammunition magazines.
Following Obama's announcement, McConnell said he'd take a tempered approach to judging the effort against gun violence, declaring that the “first test of any new legislation” would be “whether or not it infringes on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.”
The Kentucky Republican has apparently decided that the president's proposals would violate the Second Amendment. Over the weekend, he sent out a telephone recordingto supporters in his home state, promising to fight Obama's new campaign "tooth and nail."
"President Obama and his team are doing everything in their power to restrict your Constitutional right to keep and bear arms," McConnell said in the recording. "Their efforts to restrict your rights, invading your personal privacy and overstepping their bounds with executive orders, is just plain wrong."
Eva M. Clayton

Will Reasonable People Speak Up on Gun Safety?

Former Congresswoman and former Assistant Director General of the UN Food and Agriculture Organization
This is not the time for our leaders to have a yelling match causing fear in our citizens; nor is it the time for stalling and procrastination. It is a time for action. If we are to have action in a thoughtful way, reasonable people, must stand up.
Jim Worth

Gun Powder and Testosterone

Author, 'Final Audit'
Though W.C. Fields once joked, "They say gasoline and alcohol don't mix... actually, they do, they just don't taste good," the combination of gun powder and testosterone is no joking matter.
Joel Shatzky

Educating for Democracy: A Modest Proposal on Reducing Gun Violence

English Professor
The present debate on what to do about gun violence as a result of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre reminds me of an observation by Winston Churchill: "The American people will find a solution to every problem after they've tried everything else."
Ed Gurowitz, Ph.D.

Who Does the NRA Work For?

Writer, consultant, teacher
No one worries that the government is coming to take their cars, no one threatens revolt if cars are regulated, and no one much worries about car registration.
Shan Wells

Gun Regulation 101

Nationally syndicated political cartoonist
The vast majority of folks who own guns are responsible people who are just as horrified as any of us over these mass killings. But the saturation of our culture with what really amounts to nothing more than lethal toys has become too great a weight to bear.
Caroline Brewer

Time to Adopt Laws That Prevent Gun Violence, Like When We Adopted Laws to Prevent Racial Injustice

Director of Communications and Media, Brady Campaign/Center to Prevent Gun Violence
In the aftermath of Sandy Hook, Americans understand, as King did 50 years ago when he spoke on the National Mall, that truly we are better than this. We must affirm "the sacredness of human life" and move swiftly toward the sunlight of a safer nation.
Edward Summers

Making Campuses Safer

Chief of Staff, Union College
Every time I hear of another shooting, the thought invariably crosses my mind: Could it happen on my campus? The answer is 'Yes.' But with the ambitious steps President Obama is proposing, perhaps now we can turn the tide.
Brandon Friedman

Texas Mayors Oppose Rick Perry on Gun Control

Author, 'The War I Always Wanted'
For a state often stereotyped in the media as having a significant number of quasi-state nationalists, it turns out that the population centers of Texas are actually anchored in rational understanding of America's gun problem.
Jason Stanford

What's the Point of the Second Amendment?

Democratic consultant and writer
There's a word for those who would take up arms against our government, and it's not "patriots." If you have a gun to protect yourself against someone regulating your gun, then what you love isn't America, or freedom, but your gun.
Dawn Papandrea

The President Is Right on Target With Gun Law Legislation

Freelance Writer, blogger and editor
I believe in the Constitution as strongly as I believe in the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But that liberty includes a fundamental peace of mind that when I drop my children off at school, they will be safe from semiautomatic weapons.
Michael J. Tansey

It's the Guns, Stupid!

Psychologist, author
Although we should applaud the president's and vice president's intention to throw the kitchen sink at gun violence, there is a real danger in a lack of laser focus on sweeping bans of all assault weaponry.