ENOUGH: innocent lives must be saved!

In light of the recent SIT-IN in Congress, the upcoming Party conventions and a major presidential election, it is fitting to review the topic of gun violence control from another perspective: that of current law on the issue, as well as examples of registration and licensing that might be utilized to curb gun violence.  The following summary combines materials from several sources, as indicated, and is meant to lay groundwork for upcoming Part 2, which details gun violence control proposals based on varied registration and certification procedures. My main purpose today is to present this consolidated information as background and foundation toward perhaps gaining a slightly revised perspective on this extremely important issue.

(There have been postings on the “gun issue” on this Blog numerous times in the past, including: 12/15/2012, 12/22/2012, 12/30/2012, 01/01/2013, 02/10/2013, 05/13/2013, 06/19/2013, 12/07/2015). 

Major Federal Laws:

National Firearms Act (1934) (from: FindLaw.com)

·         The original Act imposed a tax on the making and transfer of firearms defined by the Act, as well as a special (occupational) tax on persons and entities engaged in the business of importing, manufacturing, and dealing in NFA firearms.

·         Required the registration of all NFA firearms with the Secretary of the Treasury. Firearms subject to the 1934 Act included shotguns and rifles plus certain firearms described as “any other weapons,” such as machine guns, short-barreled rifles, heavy weapons, explosive ordnance, silencers, and disguised or improvised firearms). 

·         Its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms. The $200 tax has not changed since 1934.

·         Imposed a duty on persons transferring NFA firearms, as well as mere possessors of unregistered firearms, to register them with the Secretary of the Treasury. 

·         The Supreme Court in 1968 held in the Haynes case that the registration requirement imposed on the possessor of an unregistered firearm violated the possessor’s privilege from self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The Haynes decision also made the 1934 Act virtually unenforceable.

Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968: Prohibited interstate trade in handguns, increased the minimum age to 21 for buying handguns.

Title II of the Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968 amended the NFA to cure the constitutional flaw pointed out in Haynes. Focused primarily on regulating interstate commerce in firearms by generally prohibiting interstate firearms transfers except among licensed manufacturers, dealers and importers.

·         First, the requirement for possessors of unregistered firearms to register was removed.  There is no mechanism for a possessor to register an unregistered NFA firearm already possessed by the person.  In 1971, the Supreme Court reexamined the NFA in the Freed case and found that the 1968 amendments cured the constitutional defect in the original NFA. 

·         Second, a provision was added to the law prohibiting the use of any information from an NFA application or registration as evidence against the person in a criminal proceeding.  

·         Title II also amended the NFA definitions of “firearm” by adding “destructive devices” and expanding the definition of “machinegun.”

Firearm Owners’ Protection Act 1986

·         amended the NFA definition of “silencer” by adding combinations of parts for silencers and any part intended for use in the assembly or fabrication of a silencer.

·         also amended the GCA to prohibit the transfer or possession of machineguns. Exceptions were made for transfers of machineguns to, or possession of machineguns by, government agencies, and those lawfully possessed before the effective date of the prohibition, May 19, 1986.

·         Revised and partially repealed the Gun Control Act of 1968. Prohibited the sale to civilians of automatic firearms manufactured after the date of the law's passage. Required ATF approval of transfers of automatic firearms.

Undetectable Firearms Act (1988): Effectively criminalizes, with a few exceptions, the manufacture, importation, sale, shipment, delivery, possession, transfer, or receipt of firearms with less than 3.7 oz. of metal content.

Gun-Free School Zones Act (1990): Prohibits unauthorized individuals from knowingly possessing a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.

Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act 1994.  In 1993, Congress amended the 1968 Gun Control Act by enacting the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act that required the Attorney General to establish an electronic or phone-based background check to prevent firearms sales to persons already prohibited from owning firearms. This check, entitled the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) went into effect as required on November 30, 1998.  (More than 100 million Brady-mandated background checks have been conducted since its passage in 1994).

Under certain interim provisions in the Bill, a firearms dealer who proposed to transfer a handgun must receive from the transferee a statement (the Brady Form), containing the name, address and date of the proposed transferee along with a sworn statement that the transferee was not among any of the classes of prohibited purchasers who cannot have a gun for personal or business use if they:

1. Were convicted of a crime punishable by being in prison for more than one year;
2. Are a fugitive from justice;
3. Are addicted to, or illegally use, any controlled substance;
4. Have been ruled mentally defective by a court, or are committed to a mental institution;
5. Are an illegal alien living in the United States unlawfully;
6. Received a dishonorable discharge from the U.S. Armed Forces;
7. Renounced your U.S. citizenship, if you are a U.S. citizen;
8. Are subject to a court restraining order that involves your 'intimate partner,' your partner's child, or children; or
9. Were convicted of domestic violence in any court of a misdemeanor.

Federal Assault Weapons Ban (1994–2004): Banned semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. The law expired in 2004.

Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act 2005: Prevent firearms manufacturers and licensed dealers from being held liable for negligence when crimes have been committed with their products.

NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (NIAA):  Section 105 the NIAA provides for restoration of firearm ownership rights in mental health cases. Under NIAA it is up to each U.S. state to come up with its own application process; thus the procedure to regain one's rights vary from state-to-state

Second Amendment Supreme Court Decisions (from Wikipedia)

An individual right to own a gun for personal use was affirmed in the landmark District of Columbia v. Heller decision in 2008, which overturned a handgun ban in the Federal District of Columbia.  In the Heller decision, the court's majority opinion said that the Second Amendment protects "the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home."

However, in the Court's majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote something quite remarkable:

“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited (emphasis mine). It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not 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.”

The four dissenting justices said that the majority had broken established precedent on the Second Amendment, and took the position that the Amendment refers to an individual right, but in the context of militia service.

In the McDonald v. City of Chicago decision in 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that, because of the incorporation of the Bill of Rights, the guarantee of an individual right to bear arms applies to state and local gun control laws and not just federal laws.

The Supreme Court has not ruled on whether or not the Second Amendment protects the right to carry guns in public for self-defense.  However,  Federal appeals courts have issued conflicting rulings on this point.

o   United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled in 2012 that it does, saying, "The Supreme Court has decided that the amendment confers a right to bear arms for self-defense, which is as important outside the home as inside."   

o   Tenth Circuit Court ruled in 2013 that it does not, saying, "In light of our nation's extensive practice of restricting citizen's freedom to carry firearms in a concealed manner, we hold that this activity does not fall within the scope of the Second Amendment's protections.”

o   More recently, the Ninth Circuit Court ruled in its 2016 decision Peruta v. San Diego County that the Second Amendment does not guarantee the right of gun owners to carry concealed weapons in public

State laws (including Washington, D.C. and the U.S. territories)

Are independent of existing federal firearms laws, although they are sometimes broader or more limited in scope than the federal laws.  Thus, State level laws vary significantly in their form, content, and level of restriction.

·         Forty-four states have a provision in their state constitutions similar to the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects the right to keep and bear arms. The exceptions are California, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, and New York. In New York, however, the statutory civil rights laws contain a provision virtually identical to the Second Amendment.

·         Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court held in McDonald v. Chicago that the protections of the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms for self-defense in one's home apply against state governments and their political subdivisions.

·         Firearm owners are subject to the firearm laws of the state they are in, and not exclusively their state of residence. Reciprocity between states exists in certain situations, such as with regard to concealed carry permits. These are recognized on a state-by-state basis.

·        In many cases, state firearms laws can be considerably less restrictive than federal firearms laws. This does not confer any de jure immunity against prosecution for violations of the federal laws. However, state and local police departments are not legally obligated to enforce federal gun law as per the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Printz v. United States. 

·         States also have laws that either allow or prohibit you from openly carrying a gun in public. These are called "open carry" laws. Generally, states fall into one of four categories:

 

o     Permissive Open Carry States - Allow you to carry a gun without a permit or license.

o    Licensed Open Carry States - Allow gun owners to carry firearms openly only after they are issued a permit or license.

o   Anomalous Open Carry States - Carrying a gun openly may be generally lawful under state law, but local governments may pass their own gun laws that are more restrictive than the state's laws.

o   Non-Permissive Open Carry States - Carrying a gun openly is against state law, or is legal only in limited circumstances (e.g., while hunting) or when legally used for self-defense 

·         A minority of U.S. states have created assault weapon bans that are similar to the expired federal assault weapons ban

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday June 20, 2016, left in place gun control laws in New York and Connecticut that ban assault weapons (and large capacity magazines) like the one used in the massacre at an Orlando nightclub, rejecting a challenge brought by gun rights advocates.    (Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Will Dunham for MSN.com)

 

Recent Congressional Action:

(© The Associated Press FILE June 16, 2016)

WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Senate blocked rival election-year plans to curb guns Monday, 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.  No background checks are currently required for anyone buying guns privately online or at gun shows.

In largely party-line votes, senators rejected one proposal from each side to keep extremists from acquiring guns and a second shoring up the government's system of required background checks for many firearms purchases.  Monday's votes were 53-47 for Grassley's plan, 44-56 for Murphy's, 53-47 for Cornyn's and 47-53 for Feinstein's — all short of the 60 needed.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine was trying to fashion a bipartisan bill preventing people on the government's no-fly list from getting guns. That list currently contains around 1 million people — including fewer than 5,000 Americans or legal permanent residents, according to the latest government figures. The narrower no-fly list has just 81,000 names.  (Associated Press writers Matthew Daly and Richard Lardner contributed to this report)

What preliminary thoughts and conclusions might we draw from this brief review of legislation and SCOTUS rulings?  I offer the following:

1.       Federal laws in several states are not being strongly enforced because of the Printz decision.  State and local police departments cannot be required to enforce federal gun law.  This leaves open the possibility that states can prevent enforcement of federal laws simply by ignoring them. 

 

2.       The right of “concealed carry” is not settled law, although some states have opted to pass legislation that allows concealed carry in most major venues, and conflicting views have been expressed in lower courts

 

3.       It appears there is an opening for restoring the ban on assault weapons but not with current radical right-wing congressional incumbents

 

4.       Opinion Polls show that there are common sense steps toward greater gun violence control that are favored by at least 2/3rds of the American public, but their desires are ignored in favor of the desires of the NRA.  Apparently, there is some disconnect with what people express in opinion polls, and how they end-up voting at the election polls.  Nonetheless, there needs to be a discussion among responsible gun owners of an alternative organization.

5.       The conservative cabal on the SCOTUS have interpreted law and the Founder’s intent of law with a myopic view of history and of actual wording.  SCOTUS has thus helped to create an atmosphere of gun violence.

6.       In this writer’s opinion, Congress has not only helped create that atmosphere, they have actually been complicit in the ability of terrorists and mass murders to obtain guns, to use automatic weapons, and to discharge many rounds in one pull of the trigger.  By their actions and in-actions the mouthpieces of the NRA have truly been complicit in these acts.  Complicity is defined as the “state of being an accomplice; a partner in wrongdoing.”

7.       Justice Scalia has left a lasting legacy in his own words that might come back to haunt the NRA: “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited (emphasis mine). It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

8.       In the Heller decision, the court's majority opinion said that the Second Amendment protects "the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home." Question is:  what is their definition of a “law-abiding, responsible citizen”? Could it include the proper registration of all gun ownership and certification of their “responsible law-abiding citizenship”?

 

9.       The Supreme Court in 1968 held in the Haynes case that the registration requirement imposed on the possessor of an unregistered firearm violated the possessor’s privilege from self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  Does this imply that the registration and licensing of all guns could be forbidden in spite of the fact that we require registration and licensing of “responsible citizens” in many areas: for driving a car, hunting and fishing, selling or actually displaying of fireworks, even the licensing of “drug stores” and “medical marijuana” growers and vendors. Do unregistered vendors such as these also have a fifth amendment right from self-incrimination if they operate without a license?  Of course not.  What, then, gives unregistered firearm possessors this special privilege?  In my opinion, if all gun owners are required to register their guns and have them licensed there is no discrimination, and no fifth amendment right is abrogated, but I am not the Supreme Court…

10.   Under Heller, states have begun to make laws that challenge federal law.  One example, “open carry laws” including unrestricted carry which has not been addressed by the SCOTUS.  This trend toward states having the right to make federal laws null and void by reaching beyond them is essentially the result of a Supreme Court controlled by a majority of states’ rights advocates.  It is regrettable and dangerous that because such rulings go un-challenged, the furtherance of gun violence control measures in federal legislation is stymied and eventually sidelined.  Nonetheless, Progressives must push ahead and offer solutions to the pervasive problem of gun violence in our society.

Next time, in Part 2 of this series, we shall look at other areas where licensing and registration already exist and where provisions for such may be instructive for moving closer to sensible and responsible gun ownership and gun-seller responsibility that protects an entire society, not just gun owners.

 

 

A Reading of Our 'PULSE'

[NOTE:  Orlando is not something about which one has a great desire to write, but then again, it is difficult to avoid.  This is a profoundly sad and tragic moment, and my sympathy, thoughts and prayers are directed toward surviving families of victims of this inhuman act.  I cannot hope to fathom the depth of despair and anger that they are feeling at this moment.  So, my hope is that the vivid and heartfelt responses of thousands throughout this country and the world will be of some comfort to them in their sorrow]

What happened yesterday, June 12, 2016, in a nightclub in Orlando Florida is the largest single shooting massacre ever in the history of the USA.  That fact alone has engendered  reactions that are ever-growing, ever-expanding, ever-fearful as more facts come to light. Here are just a few brief reactions I want to mention from what I observed:

• the reaction of an off-duty policeman who exchanged fire with the shooter and also got some people to safety
• the brave and professional handling of the situation by local, state and federal first-responders who thereby saved hundreds of lives
• of course, the immediate reaction of medical staff of the trauma center to the necessity of treating a large number of wounded people
• the outpouring of empathy and sympathy throughout this country and the world
• the examples of heroic and healing actions taken by certain patrons in the midst of chaos and in what followed
• the despair of those parents and others who were looking for their loved ones
• the reactions of politicians and office-holders, particularly the chief of Orlando Police, and the Mayor. 
• the President responded to this tragedy in a somber and frustrated manner, appearing worn down by this senseless violence; this was reported as the fifteenth time in his Presidency that he had the burden of addressing the nation about such shootings
• the differing tones taken by the presumptive candidates for President; Trump, as usual, felt it necessary to denigrate both the President and Hillary Clinton

That last reaction brings me to a point of needing to say some things that must be said.  But first, let me bring to you a timeline of  similar incidents of mass shootings that we have experienced in the USA since Columbine. The descriptions are as brief as possible, and contain little detail. (To qualify as "mass shootings" the federal guideline is that at  least three people  must have been killed -- Please see  http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map?page=2 for a fairly definitive listing; others like 'A Timeline Of Mass Shootings In The US Since Columbine' by Aviva Shen, Dec 14, 2012  have also been used here to bring this summary to the present date in 2016).

June 12, 2016.  Orlando, FL. 50 killed, 53 Injured Orlando LGBT Nightclub Massacre largest shooting massacre to occur in USA.  Omar Mateen, was the shooter, perhaps a sympathetic ISIS follower 

February 25, 2016. Hesston, KS. 3 dead, 14 wounded
Cedric L. Ford, shooter

February 20, 2016.  Kalamazoo, MI. 6 dead 2 injured

Jason B. Dalton, shooter

Dec. 2, 2015.   San Bernardino, CA.  14 dead, 21 wounded                   

Rizwan Farook and Pakistan national Tashfeen Malik who pledged allegiance to Islamic State..

 Nov. 27, 2015.  3 dead; 9 injured | Colorado Springs, Colo.                    

Robert Lewis Dear entered a Planned Parenthood clinic and started firing 

October 31, 2015.  Colorado Springs, CO. 3 dead

Noah Harpman, 33, shot people at a Planned Parenthood Center 

Oct. 1, 2015. 9 dead, 9 injured: Roseburg, Ore.

Christopher Sean Harper-Mercer, 26, shot fellow students and a teacher Community College

 July 16, 2015. 5 dead, 3 wounded: Chattanooga, Tenn.

Mohammod Youssuf Abdulazeez, 24, opened fire on two military centers 

 June 17, 2015.  9 dead: Charleston, S.C.

Dylann Storm Roof killed people at historic Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church

 May 23, 2014. 6 dead, 7 wounded: Isla Vista, Calif.

Elliot Rodger, 22, meticulously planned his deadly attack on the Isla Vista community

April 2, 2014. 3 killed; 16 injured: Ft. Hood, Texas

Army Specialist Ivan Lopez, 34, killed  and wounded others before shooting himself

 Sept. 16, 2013. 12 killed, 3 injured: Washington, D.C.

Aaron Alexis, a Navy contractor, shot people at the sprawling Washington Navy Yard.
June 7, 2013   5 killed: Santa Monica

John Zawahri, unemployed 23-year-old, killed at his father’s home ending at Santa Monica College
April 21, 2013.  Federal Way, WA 4 killed
Dennis Clark III, 27, shot and killed his girlfriend, then shot witnesses
March 13, 2013.  Herkimer County, NY. 8 killed 
Kurt Myers, 64, shot people in neighboring towns,.
December 14, 2012. Newtown, CT 28 killed 2 injured
Adam Lanza, 20, shot his mother dead, drove to Sandy Hook Elementary and killed children
 December 11, 2012. Clackamas Town Center, OR. 3 killed

22-year-old Jacob Tyler Roberts killed others and himself with a stolen rifle 

September 27, 2012. Minneapolis, MN. 5 killed 3 injured

36-year-old Andrew Engeldinger at Accent Signage Systems went on a rampage after losing his job

August 5, 2012. Oak Creek, WI. 7 killed 4 wounded

40-year-old US Army veteran Wade Michael Page opened fire in a Sikh temple in Oak Creek.

July 20, 2012. Aurora, CO. 12 killed. 58 wounded

 24-year-old James Holmes opened fire in a crowded theater

May 29, 2012. Seattle, WA. 6 killed 1 wounded

Ian Stawicki opened fire on Cafe Racer Espresso in Seattle, WA,

April 6, 2012. Tulsa, OK.  3 killed

Jake England, 19, and Alvin Watts, 32, shot black men in shooting spree in Tulsa.

April 2, 2012. Oakland, CA 7 killed 3 wounded

43-year-old One L. Goh killed people at Oikos University, a Korean Christian college 

February 27, 2012. Chardon, OH 3 killed 3 wounded

Fellow students killed by Thomas “TJ” Lane in a rampage at Chardon High School

February 22, 2012.  Norcross, GA.  5 killed

Jeong Soo Paek, 59, shot up a Korean spa from which he'd been kicked out after an altercation 

October 14, 2011. Seal Beach, CA 8 killed 1 wounded

Shooting at Salon Meritage hair salon in Seal Beach, CA. involved 41-year-old Scott Evans Dekraai 

September 6, 2011. Carson City, NV 5 killed 7 wounded

Eduardo Sencion, 32, was the shooter at an IHOP restaurant in Carson City, 

January 8, 2011. Tucson, AZ.  6 killed. 13 injured

Former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ) was shot in the head when 22-year-old Jared Loughner opened fire on an event she was holding at a Safeway market in Tucson, AZ.

August 3, 2010. Manchester, CT.  9 killed. 2 injured

Omar S. Thornton, 34, gunned down Hartford Beer Distributor in Manchester; caught stealing beer

November 29, 2009.  Parkland, WA. 9 killed 2 wounded

Maurice Clemmons, 37, on bail for child-rape charges, shot four police officers in a coffee shop.

November 5, 2009. Fort Hood, TX 13 killed  29 wounded

Forty-three people were shot by Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan at the Fort Hood army base

April 3, 2009. Binghamton, NY  13 killed  4 wounded

Jiverly Wong, 41, opened fire at an immigration center in Binghamton, New York

March 29, 2009. Carthage, NC.  8 killed  3 wounded

At the Pinelake Health and Rehab nursing home. 45-year-old Robert Stewart shot his estranged wife

June 25, 2008.  Henderson, KY.  6 killed  1 injured

Wesley Neal Higdon, 25, shot up Atlantis Plastics factory after argument with supervisor.

February 14, 2008. DeKalb, IL  6 killed 21 wounded

Steven Kazmierczak, 27, opened fire in a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University

February 7, 2008. Kirkwood MO  6 killed  2 injured

Charles Lee Thornton, opened fire during a public meeting after being denied construction contracts. 

December 5, 2007. Omaha NE  9 killed  4 wounded

A 19-year-old Robert Hawkins, used stolen rifle to kill others and himself at the Westroads Mall. 

October 7, 2007.  Crandon, WI.  6 killed  1 injured

Off-duty sheriff's deputy Tyler Peterson, 20, opened fire inside apartment after argument at party 

April 16, 2007. Blacksburg VA  33 killed  23 wounded

Virginia Tech  the site of the deadliest school shooting in US history; shooter Seung-Hui Choi, 

February 12, 2007. Salt Lake City UT  5 killed 4 injured

In Salt Lake City’s Trolley Square Mall, people were shot by 18-year-old gunman Sulejman Talović

October 2, 2006. Lancaster PA  6 killed  6 injured

Charles Carl Roberts, 32, shot 10 young girls in a one-room Amish schoolhouse in Bart Township,  

March 25, 2006. Seattle WA  7 killed  2 injured

28-year-old Kyle Aaron Huff in a shooting spree through Capitol Hill in Seattle, WA

January 30, 2006.  Goleta, CA  8 killed 

Former postal worker Jennifer Sanmarco, 44, shot a neighbor and employees at mail processing plant

March 21, 2005. Red Lake MN  12 killed 5 injured

Teenager Jeffrey Weise killed his grandfather and students  Red Lake Senior High School.

March 12, 2005. Brookfield WI  10 killed  4 wounded

Members at Church meeting gunned down by 44-year-old Terry Michael Ratzmann.  

December 8, 2004.  Columbus, OH.  5 killed  7 wounded

Nathan Gale, 25, shot former Pantera guitarist Dimebag Darrell & others at a Damageplan show

July 8, 2003. Meridian MS  8 killed  7 wounded

Doug Williams, Lockheed Martin employee, shot up plant in Meridian in racially-motivated rampage

February 5, 2001.  Melrose Park, IL. 5 killed 4 injured

 Fired employee William D. Baker, 66, opened fire at his former Navistar workplace

December 26, 2000. Wakefield MA  7 killed

Edgewater Technology employee Michael “Mucko” McDermott shot and killed coworkers 

December 30, 1999.   Tampa Fla  5 killed  3 injured

Hotel employee Silvio Leyva, 36, gunned down coworkers at the Radisson Bay Harbor Inn 

November 2, 1999.  Honolulu, HA  7 killed
 Byran Koji Uyesugi, 40, a Xerox service technician, opened fire inside a building with 9mm Glock

September 15, 1999. Fort Worth TX  8 killed  7 injured

Larry Gene Ashbrook opened fire on a Christian rock concert and teen rally

July 29, 1999. Atlanta GA 13 killed  13 injured 

Mark Orrin Barton, 44, murdered wife & two children; then shot up two Atlanta day trading firms 

 April 20, 1999. Littleton CO  15 killed  24 wounded

In the deadliest high school shooting in US history, teenagers Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold shot up Columbine High School in Littleton, CO. They killed themselves after the massacre

 

I realize only too well that this list is long and arduous to run through, but it is necessary for bringing us to some conclusions and opinions that perhaps deserve your consideration. Besides, the very existence of that long list is indicative of the depth of our problem with violence; particularly with gun violence.  The Mother Jones website has done some analysis of such shootings, and its report is of distinct value.  Their recent analysis includes attacks dating from January 2013 in which three or more victims died. Excerpts from their original analysis, which covers cases with four or more victims killed from 1982-2012, appear below. The cases they  have documented since then reaffirm their major findings, which include:

• Since 1982, there have been at least 80 public mass shootings across the country, with the killings unfolding in 33 states from Massachusetts to Hawaii. Forty-three of these mass shootings have occurred since 2006. Seven of them took place in 2012 alone, including Sandy Hook.
• A recent analysis of this database by researchers at Harvard University, corroborated by a recent FBI study, determined that mass shootings have been on the rise.
• Of the 143 guns possessed by the killers, more than three quarters were obtained legally. The arsenal included dozens of assault weapons and semi-automatic handguns with high-capacity magazines
• More than half of the cases involved school or workplace shootings (12 and 20, respectively); the other 30 cases took place in locations including shopping malls, restaurants, and religious and government buildings.
• Forty-four of the killers were white males. Only one was a woman. (See Goleta, Calif., in 2006.) The average age of the killers was 35, though the youngest among them was a mere 11 years old. (See Jonesboro, Ark., in 1998.)
• A majority were mentally troubled—and many displayed signs of mental health problems before setting out to kill.
• Mass shootings represent only a sliver of America's overall gun violence

To begin to get a grasp on the economic toll, Mother Jones turned to Ted Miller at the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, an independent nonprofit that studies public health, education, and safety issues. Miller's approach looks at two categories of costs. The first is direct: Every time a bullet hits somebody, expenses can include emergency services, police investigations, and long-term medical and mental-health care, as well as court and prison costs. About 87 percent of these costs fall on taxpayers. The second category consists of indirect costs: Factors here include lost income, losses to employers, and impact on quality of life, which Miller bases on amounts that juries award for pain and suffering to victims of wrongful injury and death.

 

In collaboration with Miller, Mother Jones crunched data from 2012 and found that the annual cost of gun violence in America exceeds $229 billion.

• Direct costs account for $8.6 billion—including long-term prison costs for people who commit assault and homicide using guns, which at $5.2 billion a year is the largest direct expense. Even before accounting for the more intangible costs of the violence, in other words, the average cost to taxpayers for a single gun homicide in America is nearly $400,000. And we pay for 32 of them every single day.
• Indirect costs amount to at least $221 billion, about $169 billion of which comes from what researchers consider to be the impact on victims' quality of life. Victims' lost wages, which account for $49 billion annually, are the other major factor.

Let me now add to this analysis, my own observations, opinions and thoughts as to other considerations we ought to bear in mind as we contemplate and debate what is happening in our nation.

1. The shooters vary in many ways, including age, motive, mental state, and ties to groups.
2. On the one hand, we are not being besieged by thousands of ISIS terrorists.  Therefore,  allowing an abject fear to be our primary motivator in our politics and in everyday life in America is not a healthy nor helpful approach
3. On the other hand, there are enough lone-wolf ISIS sympathizers to require law enforcement, intelligence agencies and individual citizens to be wary of their activities, monitor their movements  and to be vigilant in reporting circumstances that are suspicious
4. Politicians who use mass shootings as fodder for demeaning other candidates, blaming the President, or furthering their own agenda are not worthy of anyone's vote.
5. On the other hand, inaction on gun violence and mental health treatment and funding in regard to these multiple and tragic incidents is inexcusable.  Legislatures at all levels are responsible for law-making to solve or resolve problems in society.   Ignoring or obstructing such problem-solving is not acceptable. 
6. Ordinary citizens are responsible for communicating their concerns to their legislative representatives and protest is a right and responsibility placed upon us by our foundational documents.  Citizens have a constitutional right to a "redress of grievances" and to ultimately make their voices heard by VOTING. 
7. Perhaps most apropos is the fact that legislators are responsible for providing resources to combat problems, meet needs, attend to emergencies, defend our nation, to resolve persistent problems and to provide for the General Welfare.  If Congress fails to provide adequate funding for FBI agents, Intelligence officers, and federal Department of Justice personnel, and local and state legislatures fail to fund adequate numbers of  first responders, how can we expect to address violence and terrorism in any meaningful way?  We have been kept in Limbo too long.
8.  There is a pervasive atmosphere, passive acceptance and active encouragement of violence in our culture.  The very fact that this many mass shootings have occurred since Columbine in 1999 is evidence enough that our culture has been corrupted by approving violence as an acceptable human behavior. What are some of the signs of this cultural strain; I can mention a few: 

• Evidence is accumulating in schools and other institutions and organizations that bullying, taunting, demeaning of others is too often considered acceptable. 
• The Republican candidate for President encourages and demonstrates his own affinity for violence as an acceptable and imperative method of governance and power-seeking.  
• A penchant for War and a movement that organizes hate groups and racist purity groups is  increasing. 
• Attacks on groups and individuals of different religions, different ethnicities, different cultures, different characteristics from a white supremacist standard promotes division and enmity. 
• We see and ignore the destruction of Planned Parenthood centers, attacks on doctors, and sometimes violent harassment of patients. 
• We too often condone the use of military force as a primary means of controlling and reacting to other nations. 
• We glorify guns and allow the NRA to dictate that second amendments rights are more important to defend than the lives of innocent victims of gun violence. Meanwhile the NRA spends outrageous sums to influence the promulgation of legislation, regulations, and policy, and to influence the outcome of elections in their favor. 
• We condone rape on campuses made so real by a judge in California who exempted a rapist from jail time as though  the rapist was the victim not the perpetrator of a violent act against a young woman. 
• We revel in the violence of certain sports.
•  The media and the arts are not exempt from their contributions to a culture of violence.  Movies of a certain genre are particularly to blame for promoting violence not only as entertainment, but as heroic.
• And this list of overt violence leaves untold the stories of the covert violence of injustice, massive incarceration, segregation, lack of jobs, lack of services for certain populations.  Underlying  many of our institutions is the violence of racism and discrimination.  

 We are in imminent danger of becoming the most violence-ridden country on the face of the earth simply because we do not recognize that violence and hate are destructive of individuals but also of a society.  We have failed to live up to the ideal that if one person is violated or denigrated or treated unjustly, we are all affected. We have failed to deem all forms of violence as unacceptable behavior and we have failed to act to prevent the violence that we encounter, these mass shootings of innocent people on an on-going and unchallenged basis serving as a prime example.
The Tony award TV show on Sunday evening, June 12th, tried to set a different tone and they are to be commended for that.  The talented host of the Tony show commented that "Hate will not Win."  Unfortunately, it sometimes does win because good people fail to speak out, leaders fail to lead and ordinary citizens fail to protest or to get involved in a persistent and unrelenting manner. 

[Looking for more definitive solutions, try these websites for Ways to Stop Gun Violence:
http://preventioninstitute.org/focus-areas/preventing-violence-and-reducing-injury/preventing-violence-advocacy.html

https://action.groundswell-mvmt.org/petitions/take-action-5-ways-to-stop-gun-violence-in-america

https://action.groundswell-mvmt.org/petitions/take-action-5-ways-to-stop-gun-violence-in-america

http://www.yesmagazine.org/people-power/4-ways-to-stop-gun-violence

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/03/oregon-shooting-aftermath-eight-ways-to-stop-gun-massacres-in-the-us]

VOTING for CHAOS?

“We’re going to make America great again,” according to Donald Trump.
First, we’ll build a wall to keep Mexicans out.  You know those wetback illegals who come across our borders and commit rapes and other crimes – they’re causing a crime wave.  We’re going to keep them out, and Trump will also get the Mexican government to pay for the wall.  We’ll protect jobs and our citizens, and America will be great again!

Second, we’re going to deport all 11,000,000 illegal aliens who are already here.  No, it doesn’t matter that some families will be split up or that many of the children in those families were born here.  They aren’t citizens of the U.S. and they don’t belong here.  We’ll kick them all out and America will be great again!

Third, we’ll put people in the Executive Branch who know what they are doing because the people who are there now don’t have a clue, says Trump.  Trump claims to know how to run a business, so he will be able to make this government work for you by hiring the best people he can find.  So he starts by choosing Chris Christie to stand behind him at every possible moment and Sarah Palin as worthy of an Executive position in his administration.  Look for some more failed governors to make the list, and remember the Donald’s words: “You won’t believe how great it will be” - - government will work like it should, and America will be great again.

Fourth, we’re going to put law-breakers - like young mothers who have abortions – in private for-profit jails because we aren’t going to allow law-breaking to go unpunished, and we are going to run the prisons like businesses so they can profit from increased incarceration of people of color 

And here are several additional important things we are going to do to make America great again:

·         Encourage people to fight back against those holding different ideas, especially the “liberal press,” women, minorities, government welfare abusers, gays, and ‘foreigners.’

·         Treat protestors like vermin and forcibly reject them; they’re nothing but free-loading hippies anyway – why don’t they just get a job!

·         Bomb enclaves of terrorists and not worry about damage and death to innocents; kill them all with atom bombs

·         Encourage the rich and their businesses to pay as little in taxes as they can arrange under current laws; use the tax system to pay as little in taxes as possible.  Be the first presidential candidate not to share tax documents.

·         Oppose the establishment in every way possible – forget about the fact that they have some experience in legislating and politicking that might be useful – government is rotten and wants to take everything we have especially our guns and our money

·         Attack groups – like Muslims, women, illegal-status immigrants and individuals when necessary-- when those attacks help your cause with other groups, without any regrets

·         Cut the taxes of the rich but oppose the raising of the minimum wage for workers

·         Never reveal anything concrete to be done; act only when it looks good for you

·         Obliterate with words and deeds every SoB that crosses Trump or doesn’t agree with him, or the Donald simply doesn’t like

It’s time to rip this phony, self-aggrandizing businessman apart.  He epitomizes the medicine man of days gone by who offered remedies that cured nothing because they never contained healing substances in the first place.  Donald Trump is a liar and a faker, and a menace to America, not the one who can or will make America great! 

Someone whom I respect a great deal, Senator Elizabeth Warren, had a few choice things to say about the BIG-MOUTH EMPTY-MINDED TRUMP in a recent speech at the annual gala for the liberal nonprofit Center for Popular Democracy, as reported by Mother Jones:

“"Let's face it: Donald Trump cares about exactly one thing—Donald Trump," said the senator from Massachusetts, according to her prepared remarks. "It's time for some accountability because these statements disqualify Donald Trump from ever becoming president. The free ride is over."   



During her first tweetstorm after he secured the nomination, she said he had "built his campaign on racism, sexism, and xenophobia." During her speech Tuesday (5/24), she began by reflecting on the human toll from the foreclosure crisis and then tied it to an NBC report this week that quoted Trump, shortly before the housing market crash, saying he was "excited" for the bubble to burst since he'd make money off the misfortune it caused. "Donald Trump was drooling over the idea of a housing meltdown," Warren said, "because it meant he could buy up a bunch more property on the cheap."

She also zeroed in on a topic that has been a growing cause of frustration for Democrats (as well as for some Republicans): Trump's refusal to release his tax returns, as major presidential candidates have long done. "Maybe he's just a lousy businessman who doesn't want you to find out that he's worth a lot less money than he claims," Warren speculated. Echoing a video from her 2012 Senate campaign, Warren emphasized that "Donald Trump didn't get rich on his own." He inherited a fortune from his father, she said, and "his businesses rely on the roads and bridges the rest of us paid for. His businesses rely on workers the rest of us paid to educate and on police forces and firefighters who protect all of us and the rest of us pay to support."

Warren quoted a recent statement from Trump attacking the 2010 Dodd-Frank law, passed by Democrats to try to rein in Wall Street, for imposing too many restrictions on bankers. Trump pledged to roll back the law should he win the White House. "Donald Trump is worried about helping poor little Wall Street?" Warren said. "Let me find the world's smallest violin to play a sad, sad song. Can Donald Trump even name three things that Dodd-Frank does? Seriously, someone ask him."

The common belief is that people with a business background are apt to be effective managers in governments.  However, it is my contention that business men or women are actually at a disadvantage in government.  They are used to operating a business by Executive order, expecting underlings to carry out their every wish.  If managers or workers don’t perform their duties as ordered, they can be fired.  In business, that usually works without a problem (given the facts of lower union membership and loss of collective bargaining rights in some states).  In a government - especially federal government – firing anybody is not an easy process.  

More important, perhaps, is the tendency of departments, offices, commissions, agencies of all kinds to have their own loyalties, their own rules, their own norms and standards, and their own milieu.  Often there is a perceived need to ‘protect’ or ‘enhance’ their unit, which leads to resistance and delay in implementing orders from POTUS.  It is the nature of the beast and is not necessarily confined to public agencies.  A business background (rather than experience with politics) can often be a disadvantage in such a situation that is loaded with political and other-than-business-like operational issues, like having to represent others fairly.

Of course, there is that labor union thing that the Donald does not take to with great enjoyment.  He doesn’t like bargaining with underlings.  Unfortunately for the Donald (and other big businessmen who have worked in the White House or in the federal bureaucracy) powerful unions exist, in addition to Civil Service rules and laws which also lay down a good number of job protections for all to obey.  One large union is the National Federation of Federal Employees considered "a key player in backing collective bargaining and appeal rights of [federal] employees." As of 2007, NFFE represented about 100,000 federal workers (Wikipedia). But other unions exist on the federal level meaning that different unions represent workers in different departments.  The American Federation of Government, the International Association of Machinists,  the National Treasury Employees Union  and the National Association of Government Employees (a division of the Service Employees International Union) also represent federal employees.

Trump’s modus operandi are related to his particular business background.  In some circles it would be described as a ‘cutthroat’ approach, where allies are used and enemies are abused and often obliterated.  In real estate and development, it is important to operate in such a manner – to rise to the top of the heap – because the one who grabs power gets the deals, controls circumstances and produces profit.  The latter operating principles are not necessarily the most helpful in the implementation of non-profit programs, policies and guidelines.  Nor are they helpful in terms of relationships to other countries and peoples – often described as ‘diplomacy’ which for a developer, is useful only so long as the person being ‘wooed’ is not aware of the sham and is not resistant to ‘charm.’  Otherwise, they are written off as undesirables and are abandoned by the wayside.

Trump’s background in the real estate business, and his political campaign so far, provide us with clues as to what it will be like to have him in the Oval Office.  Moreover, the experience of him so far provides clues as to what he will be doing (or NOT doing) for YOU, the voter-citizen.

 Trump says that CHAOS will happen under a Clinton administration, but that is a stretch when Clinton has political savvy, legislative experience, diplomacy and executive functioning in her background while Trump has only the dictatorial model of business administration in his.  Where will that chaos show itself under Trump?

1)      Conflict with either a majority or larger plurality of Democrats in the Senate.  Trump will alienate and abuse this group if they don’t act as he directs.  If any moderate non-Trump-supporter Republicans remain in the Senate, they may give him some trouble as well.  If the Speaker of the House remains a non-supporter of Trump, expect some delay on most Trump proposals in that House.

RESULTS for YOU: continued deadlock and delay in any major legislation that affects your life, among these items: minimum wage, public transportation, infrastructure, public education, healthcare coverage including Medicare & Medicaid.  

All of this is going to catch up with your daily life, and you will have losses and increased costs that you did not expect, mostly resulting from inattention to your needs.  However, there will be some actions and changes that become law, and thus make it into your supposedly isolated life. 

One example:  Trump wants all states to be able to pass gun carry laws that apply to all public places.  How safe will your children be in school once the Donald signs legislation for a countrywide carry bill?  Whether teachers carry or children carry or both, your children will be in danger of being shot in their classrooms and school environs. 

Example #2:  watch out for Trump trying to please Evangelicals by signing legislation that allows religious objections to health care provisions – birth control specifically – you won’t be covered in many cases.  Or, if you are a member of the LGBT community, watch out for new laws that allow discrimination against you by using religious exemptions. That particular ploy could become rather routine, so watch out for religion becoming a pawn in the attempt to curb certain actions that are now legal (like abortion) but won’t last for longer than 50 days in a new Trump administration.

Example 3: Do you like the stability of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid?  Well forget it.  No matter what you have heard, none of these systems is in serious funding trouble now, but the chaotic approach of Republicans will reduce each of them to a state of total vulnerability by means of SS personal accounts, Medicare vouchers and contraction of benefits when Medicaid is administered by states that can’t afford current administrative support levels.  Add to that the repeal of Obamacare and you are in the worst bind ever in terms of healthcare coverage.  You won’t be able to afford anything but the very basic coverage replete with co-pays, limits to overall coverage, no coverage for your young adult children, and lots of minimums and maximums that will have you in limbo financially before you know it. 

2)      A vote for Trump for President means even more Chaos in our lives.  How about war?  Don’t care much for it? But those in the appropriate age group will for certain end up in the Middle East or Asia and Africa fighting people that Donald Trump decides need a lesson in American greatness and might.  Given what he has said already about Muslims, eliminating radical Islamist groups, threatening to use atomic weapons, and standing up to China and Iran and Syria and the Caliphate, we will be at war within a year of Trump assuming control. Many will not only be asked to volunteer to risk their young lives, but I believe a draft will be restored to show that America means business because it is so great.  Then recall that war spreads its chaos at home as well as overseas.  Prices rise, shortages occur, families lose members, over-spending becomes a necessity and as a nation we become more vulnerable to the hate and disgust of other nations.  Given the belligerent attitude of Donald Trump, the chaos of War is inevitable.

3)      Another inevitable proposition: Donald Trump, if elected President, will savor the moment(s) he gets to nominate a Supreme Court Justice! He has already indicated that he will be looking for someone opposed to abortion, in favor of protecting our borders, and pro-business.  Need we say more?  His first appointment will restore the conservative majority on the Court and from that base will emanate the chaos of decision after decision that will undo civil rights, long-term voter and consumer protections, equal justice for rich and poor alike, and the separation between church and state.  Trump’s first appointment would come right after his inauguration (assuming that President Obama’s nomination is never considered), and then we would experience a series of decisions unseen in the history of the Court.

4)      Let us be sure to mention the chaos that will be created when this man of the Big Deal makes decisions based first on what he considers convenient, next on what is provocative, and finally on what is powerful.  In other words, Trump changes his mind on policy, principles and actions based on what is right for his image and status at the moment.  He can change from pro-life back again to pro-choice, back again to pro-life; or from punishing mothers who have abortions to punishing only doctors who perform them, back to punishing mothers again.  And, just to remind you one more time -- one more chaotic action based on a false premise of religious freedom: Abortion will be made illegal, and many people will suffer because of that, not just doctors.

5)      But finally, let us not forget the CHAOS that inevitably results from the misuse of power by those who hold government offices, especially the Presidency.  Recall, if you will, the enormous chaos caused by Nixon’s use of staff, his Attorney General, White House lawyers, his Watergate “plumbers,” surveillance by government agents, and the accusations of use of the FBI to embarrass and perhaps charge enemies with crimes.  Nixon misused the powers of his office to protect himself and to damage his enemies.  This is what we shall face if a pathological liar, a narcissist, a man who prefers to obliterate and destroy enemies, and a media-hater who favors muzzling of the press when they seek accountability from him.  If Trump gets elected this year, look out for the all-encompassing CHAOS just waiting to devour us.  

Again, the Donald can say one thing one day and something else the next day, and still think he’s being consistent and not chaotic.  Creating chaos by changing one’s policies from day-to-day simply to always be able to conclude a deal, is not how you run a government.  Certain steady principles are needed in the public sector simply because people’s lives are affected, and so is governmental functioning; no one can depend upon or determine how they stand when CHAOS reigns. 

Chaos is not an effective strategy or operational paradigm.  Chaos costs money, chaos affects lives adversely and chaos takes stability and tears it to shreds.

WE MUST SPREAD the WORD:  DO NOT VOTE FOR TRUMP!   Why vote to fill your life with the chaos of a right-wing government built on the all-too-prevalent dictatorial management style of corporate America?  It will not be to our benefit or honor, as a just and generous People who constitute and revere this freedom-loving Nation, to have it ravaged by the likes of one man placed in an office for which he is eminently unqualified. 

Remind everyone you know that "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts (men like Trump) absolutely" (with apologies to Lord Acton).