• Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

Gabby Giffords on Senate Filibustering Background Checks on Guns

klunderbunker

Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
From today's New York Times.

SENATORS say they fear the N.R.A. and the gun lobby. But I think that fear must be nothing compared to the fear the first graders in Sandy Hook Elementary School felt as their lives ended in a hail of bullets. The fear that those children who survived the massacre must feel every time they remember their teachers stacking them into closets and bathrooms, whispering that they loved them, so that love would be the last thing the students heard if the gunman found them.

On Wednesday, a minority of senators gave into fear and blocked common-sense legislation that would have made it harder for criminals and people with dangerous mental illnesses to get hold of deadly firearms — a bill that could prevent future tragedies like those in Newtown, Conn., Aurora, Colo., Blacksburg, Va., and too many communities to count.

Some of the senators who voted against the background-check amendments have met with grieving parents whose children were murdered at Sandy Hook, in Newtown. Some of the senators who voted no have also looked into my eyes as I talked about my experience being shot in the head at point-blank range in suburban Tucson two years ago, and expressed sympathy for the 18 other people shot besides me, 6 of whom died. These senators have heard from their constituents — who polls show overwhelmingly favored expanding background checks. And still these senators decided to do nothing. Shame on them.

I watch TV and read the papers like everyone else. We know what we’re going to hear: vague platitudes like “tough vote” and “complicated issue.” I was elected six times to represent southern Arizona, in the State Legislature and then in Congress. I know what a complicated issue is; I know what it feels like to take a tough vote. This was neither. These senators made their decision based on political fear and on cold calculations about the money of special interests like the National Rifle Association, which in the last election cycle spent around $25 million on contributions, lobbying and outside spending.

Speaking is physically difficult for me. But my feelings are clear: I’m furious. I will not rest until we have righted the wrong these senators have done, and until we have changed our laws so we can look parents in the face and say: We are trying to keep your children safe. We cannot allow the status quo — desperately protected by the gun lobby so that they can make more money by spreading fear and misinformation — to go on.

I am asking every reasonable American to help me tell the truth about the cowardice these senators demonstrated. I am asking for mothers to stop these lawmakers at the grocery store and tell them: You’ve lost my vote. I am asking activists to unsubscribe from these senators’ e-mail lists and to stop giving them money. I’m asking citizens to go to their offices and say: You’ve disappointed me, and there will be consequences.

People have told me that I’m courageous, but I have seen greater courage. Gabe Zimmerman, my friend and staff member in whose honor we dedicated a room in the United States Capitol this week, saw me shot in the head and saw the shooter turn his gunfire on others. Gabe ran toward me as I lay bleeding. Toward gunfire. And then the gunman shot him, and then Gabe died. His body lay on the pavement in front of the Safeway for hours.

I have thought a lot about why Gabe ran toward me when he could have run away. Service was part of his life, but it was also his job. The senators who voted against background checks for online and gun-show sales, and those who voted against checks to screen out would-be gun buyers with mental illness, failed to do their job.

They looked at these most benign and practical of solutions, offered by moderates from each party, and then they looked over their shoulder at the powerful, shadowy gun lobby — and brought shame on themselves and our government itself by choosing to do nothing.

They will try to hide their decision behind grand talk, behind willfully false accounts of what the bill might have done — trust me, I know how politicians talk when they want to distract you — but their decision was based on a misplaced sense of self-interest. I say misplaced, because to preserve their dignity and their legacy, they should have heeded the voices of their constituents. They should have honored the legacy of the thousands of victims of gun violence and their families, who have begged for action, not because it would bring their loved ones back, but so that others might be spared their agony.

This defeat is only the latest chapter of what I’ve always known would be a long, hard haul. Our democracy’s history is littered with names we neither remember nor celebrate — people who stood in the way of progress while protecting the powerful. On Wednesday, a number of senators voted to join that list.

Mark my words: if we cannot make our communities safer with the Congress we have now, we will use every means available to make sure we have a different Congress, one that puts communities’ interests ahead of the gun lobby’s. To do nothing while others are in danger is not the American way.

.....DANG.
 
Here's the thing though. If any of you think this will prevent bad people from getting guns, it won't. It might make it harder yes but look at Texas. Almost everyone there has a gun and yet statistics show that state has having one of the lowest gun crime rates in the country. Explain that one.
 
Here's the thing though. If any of you think this will prevent bad people from getting guns, it won't. It might make it harder yes but look at Texas. Almost everyone there has a gun and yet statistics show that state has having one of the lowest gun crime rates in the country. Explain that one.

So we shouldn't have any laws against anything because people are going to commit crimes anyway? That's in essence what you're saying: these new laws won't stop everyone, so there's no point in doing anything. You know, because the system we have now works SO well.
 
So we shouldn't have any laws against anything because people are going to commit crimes anyway? That's in essence what you're saying: these new laws won't stop everyone, so there's no point in doing anything. You know, because the system we have now works SO well.


I'm saying there's better ways than having a universal registry of who owns a gun. People are still going to buy them regardless. The only surefire way is to ban all guns but that's never gonna happen.
 
I'm saying there's better ways than having a universal registry of who owns a gun. People are still going to buy them regardless. The only surefire way is to ban all guns but that's never gonna happen.

Stroking your cock is not the same thing as getting laid but since that is never going to happen I don't see the point of you constantly stroking your cock.

:shrug:
 
What drives me crazy about the pro-gun people is that they think the only two options are to do nothing or to ban all guns. There are plenty of other ways to go about the problem besides all or nothing.
 
Here's the thing though. If any of you think this will prevent bad people from getting guns, it won't.
Yes, it would make a difference. It would eliminate the gun show loophole, which doesn't require a background check to purchase a firearm.
I'm saying there's better ways than having a universal registry of who owns a gun.
This legislation PROHIBITED a gun registry.

Do you know what you're talking about?
 
Which should have a background check with it.

Natural Selection: "FREEDOM!"

Yep, like the freedom I should have from worrying about some nutjob buying a gun at a show and blowing my brains out with it.

Well, lets regulate everything that makes YOU feel unsafe regardless of everyone else. I oppose this concept that you feeling safe is greater then the individual freedoms and liberties granted by our Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, and Constitution. Appeasing people like you who are merely afraid of guns, because they look scary, is not something I support.

guncont.jpg
 
Well, lets regulate everything that makes YOU feel unsafe regardless of everyone else. I oppose this concept that you feeling safe is greater then the individual freedoms and liberties granted by our Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, and Constitution. Appeasing people like you who are merely afraid of guns, because they look scary, is not something I support.

guncont.jpg

1. It took two posts for him to hit Hitler. That might be a new record.

2. I remember hearing about Life being one of the things guaranteed in the Declaration of Independence. That would be the things taken away by the unregulated weapons used in Connecticut. But hey, at least the mass murderer didn't have his rights infringed. We can ignore the rights of those he killed.

3. This gets back to the same problem I have with people who are obsessed with freedom: they're all for protecting rights, as long as they're their own rights. When someone else wants their rights protected, those people are against freedom.
 
1. It took two posts for him to hit Hitler. That might be a new record.

2. I remember hearing about Life being one of the things guaranteed in the Declaration of Independence. That would be the things taken away by the unregulated weapons used in Connecticut. But hey, at least the mass murderer didn't have his rights infringed. We can ignore the rights of those he killed.

3. This gets back to the same problem I have with people who are obsessed with freedom: they're all for protecting rights, as long as they're their own rights. When someone else wants their rights protected, those people are against freedom.

Connecticut has some of the toughest gun laws in the nation and that didn't prevent a damn thing. The Brady bill was in place for Columbine, that didn't stop anything. There were thousands of law enforcement and military personnel at the marathon and that didn't stop anything. All you want is to give up liberty for perceived safety and you deserve neither.
 
Connecticut has some of the toughest gun laws in the nation and that didn't prevent a damn thing. The Brady bill was in place for Columbine, that didn't stop anything. There were thousands of law enforcement and military personnel at the marathon and that didn't stop anything. All you want is to give up liberty for perceived safety and you deserve neither.

So again, my rights mean less because I disagree with you, despite me having the same freedoms and rights as you. Now on to stuff that actually makes you look stupid:

The gun laws in place didn't work. Therefore, they need to be increased to provide for the common defense, which was listed before any of your other precious freedoms were guaranteed.

What also was listed before anything written in American law is the Social Contract, which is something I'd recommend you look up, as apparently you have no concept of it and how much sense it makes.
 
It's not a loop hole, it's a private transfer.
It's a loophole in the background check system.
Well, lets regulate everything that makes YOU feel unsafe regardless of everyone else. I oppose this concept that you feeling safe is greater then the individual freedoms and liberties granted by our Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, and Constitution.
You do realize those freedoms and liberties were to keep us safe, right? Thanks for bastardizing what they stand for.
Ahh yes, rhetoric which is provably false.

Hitler deregulated gun sales in Germany.
Gun supporters are not interested in the truth.
Connecticut has some of the toughest gun laws in the nation and that didn't prevent a damn thing.
A state law has no relation to a national one.
The Brady bill was in place for Columbine, that didn't stop anything.
You do realize that their guns were bought at a gun show, correct?

There were thousands of law enforcement and military personnel at the marathon and that didn't stop anything.
I'm sorry, were the people killed by someone shooting a gun? If not, your comment makes no sense.

All you want is to give up liberty for perceived safety and you deserve neither.
Thanks Ben Franklin, of course you do realize that quote was in regards to the government obtaining more power, correct?
 
Yes, it would make a difference. It would eliminate the gun show loophole, which doesn't require a background check to purchase a firearm.
This legislation PROHIBITED a gun registry.

The thing that so many people who are against this legislation fail to understand is that their "personal freedom" ends when it puts your life or mine in danger. And allowing people with significant mental health issues or violent backgrounds to purchase guns unchecked very much so does that, but God forbid we put a stop to it.

After all, we're jeopardizing their "personal freedom" :rolleyes:
 
For what it's worth, I really like the line in Natural Selection's sig just on rhetoric alone. I mean, the idea behind it is fucking stupid, but it's very catchy and I could imagine it being a rallying cry of sorts for right-wing nutjobs.
 
The thing that so many people who are against this legislation fail to understand is that their "personal freedom" ends when it puts your life or mine in danger. And allowing people with significant mental health issues or violent backgrounds to purchase guns unchecked very much so does that, but God forbid we put a stop to it.

After all, we're jeopardizing their "personal freedom" :rolleyes:

Oh, don't worry, most of the pro gun crowd has no problem depriving the mentally ill of their rights.

The general argument is "Don't infringe upon the 2nd Amendment...unless it's someone we don't like and can blame stuff on, then it's okay."
 
It's 2013, not 1776. The 2nd Amendment is wildly antiquated. The fact that this debate rages on shows how backwards a good portion of your country is. A shame the people making a killing (wink wink) selling Bushmasters to hillbillies have so much influence over public discourse on the issue. Background checks ought not be a contentious issue for anyone with a lick of sense. It ought to be considered the barest of bare fucking minimums.

I miss anything?
 
Someone explain to a non-American why a background check is so horrible?

Don't you do background checks for loans too?
 
Someone explain to a non-American why a background check is so horrible?
Because if you allow the government to require a background check, who knows what's next?


Don't ask me to explain it any further than that, I don't understand the argument either.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,826
Messages
3,300,735
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top