This is the strongest push yet by the president for some sane gun laws. I don't believe anyone can watch this without believing that President Obama is using every weapon in his arsenal to push Congress and the country toward something resembling meaningful reforms.

One of the better moments was when the crowd spontaneously began chanting "We want a vote!" TPM:

“Some folks back in Washington are already floating the idea that they might use political stunts to prevent votes on any of these reforms,” Obama told the crowd, which included families of victims of the Sandy Hook shooting. “Think about that. They’re not just saying they’ll vote ‘no’ on ideas that almost all Americans support. They’re saying they won’t allow any votes on these provisions. They’re saying your opinion doesn’t matter. And that’s not right.”

The crowd broke into chants of, “We want a vote!”

At one point in his speech he calls for everyone to "stand up, stand up" and push their legislators to actually get this done.

Continue reading »

Rachel Maddow broke the news on her show last night. (Happy belated birthday, too, Rachel!) Connecticut legislators have agreed on a framework for a comprehensive gun safety package. In this interview with Connecticut Senator Williams, he reveals that the agreement is bipartisan, even though Democrats had the votes to pass legislation without Republicans.

Not mentioned anywhere? The National Rifle Association. They were irrelevant in this process. Got that, Congress? Irrelevant.

Via NBC News:

The bill includes a ban on large-capacity ammunition magazines like those Adam Lanza used to fire 154 shots in four 4 minutes Dec. 14 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, a new registry for existing high-capacity magazines and background checks for private gun sales, NBC Connecticut reported.

While the measure would ban the sale of ammunition magazines able to handle more than 10 bullets, Gov. Dannell Malloy and parents of the Sandy Hook victims objected to a "grandfather clause" that will allow current owners of such magazines to keep them.

[...]

In what was being described as a first in the U.S., gun owners would have to register current magazines accommodating more than 10 rounds with the state by January, The New Haven Register reported.

The measure would also require universal background checks for all firearm sales — many states don't require them for private sales, such as those between family members or collectors — and would add 34 more weapons to the state's list of banned semi-automatic assault-style weapons.

The Register reported that the bill would also strengthen penalties for gun trafficking and would expand the Board of Firearms Permit Examiners to include a mental health professional and a retired judge.

It certainly doesn't appear that the NRA intimidated Connecticut lawmakers on either side of the aisle, nor should it intimidate Congress members. Are they paying attention?

There's more than a whiff of racism in this SRWT, and it peddles one of the right's favorite myths: that guns prevent lots of crime. But there's little evidence for that claim.

But the snarky tone is more than a little creepy. To Boortz, apparently, the massacre of 20 children in less than 5 minutes is fodder for sarcasm.

In a speech today about proposed gun safety laws, the president went off script long enough to answer Wayne LaPierre's cynical speculation that given some time, Americans would forget about Newtown and settle back in to a comfortable level of apathy about guns and gun control.

From the transcript:

I read an article in the news just the other day wondering is Washington -- has Washington missed its opportunity, because as time goes on after Newtown, somehow people start moving on and forgetting. Let me tell you, the people here, they don't forget. Grace's dad is not forgetting. Hadiya's mom hasn't forgotten. The notion that two months or three months after something as horrific as what happened in Newtown happens and we've moved on to other things, that's not who we are. That's not who we are.

And I want to make sure every American is listening today. Less than 100 days ago that happened, and the entire country was shocked. And the entire country pledged we would do something about it and that this time would be different. Shame on us if we've forgotten. I haven't forgotten those kids. Shame on us if we've forgotten.

If there's one thing I’ve said consistently since I first ran for this office: Nothing is more powerful than millions of voices calling for change. And that’s why it’s so important that all these moms and dads are here today. But that's also why it’s important that we've got grassroots groups out there that got started and are out there mobilizing and organizing and keeping up the fight. That's what it’s going to take to make this country safer. It’s going to take moms and dads, and hunters and sportsmen, and clergy and local officials like the mayors who are here today standing up and saying, this time really is different -- that we’re not just going to sit back and wait until the next Newtown or the next Blacksburg or the next innocent, beautiful child who is gunned down in a playground in Chicago or Philadelphia or Los Angeles before we summon the will to act.

Right now, members of Congress are back home in their districts, and many of them are holding events where they can hear from their constituents. So I want everybody who is listening to make yourself heard right now.

President Obama went on to call for everyone to reach out to their Representatives and Senators with a passion reminiscent of his campaign for re-election. If this is the bully pulpit people were hoping for, he is using it, as is Vice President Biden.

So do it. Call your representatives and your Senators, tell them that the NRA does not own them, that the NRA has no power over them, but we, the people will judge them on whether they stand up and do what's right or cower before the likes of a wingnut like Wayne LaPierre. As the president said in his remarks today, "We need everybody to remember how we felt 100 days ago and make sure that what we said at that time wasn't just a bunch of platitudes -- that we meant it. "

I'm glad he's not letting this die. It's been frustrating to watch the NRA pretend they have the upper hand on this. It's time for all of us to shove them back under the rock where they belong.

Joe Biden just wrapped up one of his best on-fire speeches in Connecticut, not far from Newtown. He declared the days of NRA supremacy over, saying that "inaction on gun control is unacceptable." Then he aimed his verbal fire at the NRA, via TPM:

The “standing assumption” today is that “this is kind of the third rail of politics,” Biden said. “That if you take this on, somehow, there will be a severe political price to pay for doing it. Because that’s what’s happened in the past.”

The old rules no longer apply after the schoolhouse massacre in Newtown, Conn., Biden said, calling inaction on gun control “unacceptable.”

“What I say to my colleagues … I say to you, if you’re concerned about your political survival, you should be concerned about the survival of our children,” he said. “And guess what? I believe the price to be paid politically will be to those who refuse to act, who refuse to step forward. Because America has changed on this issue.”

Also, the Washington Post:

Biden, his voice getting louder and louder, delivered a point-by-point rebuttal of the National Rifle Association and other gun rights activists’ arguments against stricter gun restrictions. Biden argued that people do not need AR-15s and other so-called assault rifles for self-protection.

“They say well, it’s about our culture,” Biden said. “The facts are our culture’s not killing 25 people a day. It’s weapons and high-capacity magazines. It’s criminals who get guns without going through a background check.”

Biden accused some questioners on his online chats of planting questions designed to place roadblocks to his gun-control agenda.

“They say, all you’re going to do, Biden, you and the president, you’re going to deny law abiding citizens their rights under the Second Amendment,” Biden said. “Not true.

Let the pearl-clutching begin! Tomorrow is a Day of Action on gun control, sponsored by Organizing for America. It's time for the majority to tell the NRA to sit down and let sane people work on reasonable gun laws, beginning with universal background checks.

No other debate causes me to cringe as deeply as the one over gun control, because there is no other debate in this country that is as deeply irrational as this one. Gun manufacturers in the name of the NRA have completely co-opted the discussion and turned it into one so emotionally laden, it's impossible to have a rational discussion.

Rational people know that military-style assault weapons aren't used for hunting anything but humans. In this country, it used to be accepted wisdom that we don't hunt our fellow humans. Now, not so much.

As lawmakers were taking testimony at the Connecticut capitol yesterday, the gun manufacturers were ready to fight for their right to continue the mayhem, even if it meant heckling the father of a victim of the Sandy Hook massacre:

"The Second Amendment!" was shouted a couple of times by as many as a dozen gun enthusiasts in the meeting room as Neil Heslin, holding a photo of his slain 6-year-old son, Jesse Lewis, asked why Bushmaster assault-style weapons are allowed to be sold in the state.

"There are a lot of things that should be changed to prevent what happened," said Heslin, who said he grew up using guns and was undisturbed by the interruption of his testimony.

"That wasn't just a killing, it was a massacre," said Heslin, who recalled dropping off his son at Sandy Hook Elementary school shortly before Lanza opened fire. "I just hope some good can come out of this."

There is no low too low for these wingnuts, and no position too irrational. I really think they'd push for personal ownership of tanks and RPGs if they could, under the guise of the right to bear arms.

Screw them. I've had it with their supposition that they own all the emotion and "right thought" on this argument. As an adolescent, my family was ripped apart by two bullets from a gun. It wasn't an AR-15, and it wouldn't fall under the gun ban today, but my family member is just as dead and for no good reason other than being available for a whacko to execute.

Until these "gun enthusiasts" have had the singular pleasure of cleaning dried, congealed blood and brains out of the trunk of a car, or until they've gone and gathered the bodies of someone's loved ones from a public crime scene where some idiot exercising his "rights" decided to exercise them on the heads of the innocent, they can shut up about their emotion-laden fantasies of revolution and sit the hell down.

I did those things. I cleaned that car with my dad after his father was executed and the police gave it back, post evidence collection. I waited those three days with my grandmother until the horrid news came that yes, they had found his car with a body in the trunk. I went back twenty years later and tried to understand why these things had happened, only to discover that the evidence had been destroyed and the police didn't really care that much why a 70-year old railroad worker had been executed at the hands of someone who got a gun by wrestling it away from a security guard.

Screw them for belittling that father's grief and loss so they can hold onto their precious guns. Nothing proposed today would change the outcome of my own experience. Nothing. No one will lose their damned handguns and rifles. But at the very least, I should be able to think about my kids going out to a movie theater or shopping in the mall without worrying that they're going to find themselves on the business end of an AR-15 in the hands of a murderer.

Is that too damn much to ask?

Quick quiz. On January 2011, just two days after Jared Loughner killed six people and wounded 14 -- including US Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords -- with a Glock semiautomatic, Putz took to the pages of the Wall Street Journal to:

a) argue for bans on semiautomatic guns
b) propose measures that would prevent mentally ill individuals from acquiring firearms
c) call for greater security for members of Congress
d) complain that Democrats were saying mean things about Sarah Palin and the GOP

If you guessed "D" -- you're right!

Well, he's at it again -- this time in USA TODAY. And in the wake of this shooting spree -- a massacre which took the lives of 20 children -- Putz is mostly outraged that "liberals" are saying mean things about the NRA.

Is Hate A Liberal Value? A 20-year-old lunatic stole some guns and killed people. Who's to blame? According to a lot of our supposedly rational and tolerant opinion leaders, it's . . . the NRA, a civil-rights organization whose only crime was to oppose laws banning guns. (Ironically, it wasn't even successful in Connecticut, which has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation.)...Calling people murderers and wishing them to be shot sits oddly with claims to be against violence. The NRA -- like the ACLU, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers or Planned Parenthood -- exists to advocate policies its members want. It's free speech. The group-hate directed at the NRA is ugly and says ugly things about those consumed by it.

What's funnier here? Calling the NRA a "civil-rights organization" or comparing it to Planned Parenthood? I mean, one of those groups makes millions lobbying and shilling for gun companies and the other is a non-profit that provides affordable health services for women. See? Same thing!

Also hilarious: Putz writes that "Things Aren't Really That Bad" while simultaneously arguing that we need armed guards in every elementary school in the United States.

Frankly, I'm a little surprised it took wingers quite so long to dust off the "shooter's probably a leftist trying to make gun owners look bad" take. Yet another sign that they're just off their games since losing to the black guy again.

Then again, Bob "Confederate Yankee" Owens (who also writes for a gun porn site called Shooting Illustrated) has never been the sharpest tool in the shed.

And notice: one of the RTs below is by Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds, who is -- in the wake of the black guy winning again and the Newtown shooting -- growing more and more unhinged by the second.

DOWNLOADS: (203)

PLAYS: (1396)

Embed

The NRA lunatics seem to have settled on their counterpoint theme to the outcry for some kind of gun control. In their twisted little minds, we should simply arm the teachers, and make sure everyone has access to a gun.

Yep, that's the answer. MORE guns. Guns for everybody! Too many guns to count, just arm them all and let's see who's the last one standing.

It's unspeakably stupid, and it's the last thing our schools need right now. Will we also require teachers to wear bulletproof vests while they're teaching their classes in case there's a shootout between the teacher in the classroom next door and some insane crazed lunatic with a weapon that should never have been invented, much less used by a civilian?

Last summer, I spent time in Detroit at the American Federation of Teachers convention. As I walked around the convention center I picked up snippets of conversations here and there. More than once, teachers expressed concern that they could not keep the children safe if their class sizes were too big. You may recall that Mitt Romney, Michelle Rhee, and other "reformers" are all fans of large public school classes, provided the teacher is "competent."

I wonder how they would measure those teachers' competence in the area of shielding 40 kids from a crazed gunman with a couple of assault rifles? Let's assume those teachers took some district-mandated gun safety course and carried a gun with them in the classroom -- an odious thought. Salon's Alex Sietz-Wald spent some time looking at the question of whether carrying guns is an effective defense when the bad guy has the element of surprise. His conclusions will not surprise you. The answer is an emphatic "NO."

The truth is that it’s extremely difficult for anyone, let alone a lightly trained and inexperienced civilian, to effectively respond to a shooter. The entire episode can take a matter of seconds and your body is fighting against you: Under extreme stress, reaction time slows, heart rate increases and fine motor skills deteriorate. Police train to build muscle memory that can overcome this reaction, but the training wears off after only a few months if not kept up.

In 2009, ABC’s “20/20″ demonstrated the problem with a clever experiment. They recruited a dozen or so students, gave them gun training that was more comprehensive than what most states require for concealed carry permits, and then entrusted them with a gun and told them they would have to fend off a shooter later that day. Separating them, they placed each one in a real classroom with other “students” (actually study compatriots). When a gunman burst in and started shooting, each student tried to respond by drawing his or her gun. Every single student failed, including several who had had years of practice shooting guns, and they all got shot (fortunately, it was just paintball bullets in real handguns).

The truth, as difficult as it is to accept, is that it’s often impossible to stop a shooter no matter how many guns are present. John Hinckley Jr. managed to nearly kill Ronald Reagan and permanently disable James Brady despite the fact that they were surrounded by dozens of heavily armed men with the best training imaginable. The only way to stop the incident would have been to prevent the offender from getting guns in the first place.

The entire article is the one long read you should indulge in today. Seitz-Wald does a terrific job of debunking the myths about defensive shooting in an already-chaotic scene, and cites cases where highly trained police have reacted with a tragic result of shooting innocent bystanders instead of the perpetrator.

Arming teachers isn't the answer. Scapegoating teachers isn't the answer. Supporting teachers, making sure they have adequate security, an evacuation plan, enough teachers' aides and a manageable class size is about the best anyone can do. For all of the stories of tragedy told over the past few days, there are also stories of heroism, of teachers shoving the kids into bathrooms and closets, keeping them safe and shielding them with their bodies.

This is what teachers do. It's what they're trained to do. It's why they're teachers. Arming them is not the answer. Supporting them is.

So, according to CNN's Erick Erickson, the problem isn't that a mentally-ill person had easy access to a .223 caliber semi-automatic assault rifle with high capacity magazines. It's that too many people in this country are having unapproved sexytime. This is exactly, by the way, what Mitt Romney stupidly argued during the campaign.

Republicans and the NRA are going to pull out all the stops on this one. We can't let them win this time.