Keeping Focus On More Than One Issue

We can't forget about guns

Although we’re all gearing up for the first January 6 Committee session Thursday evening, tonight I want to direct your attention back to gun violence. One of the biggest challenges we face is figuring out how to keep all the balls up in the air: climate, democracy, guns, abortion, civil rights, and everything else. I hope you’ll share your thoughts about how we do this, and I’ll write about mine. The ultimate answer often involves making smart choices at the ballot box and getting more people to vote. That means we have to stay informed.

This morning, there was gut wrenching testimony — I’m sure many of you saw at least some of it on television — from parents and survivors of gun violence. No one who heard the testimony could have come away without the sense that our legislators must act to get a handle on this out-of-control epidemic. And in fact, Americans overwhelmingly favor new measures. In recent polling, 70% of Americans thought enacting new restrictions was more important than protecting the rights of gun owners. That’s a real mandate in a country where we often split in the neighborhood of 50-50 on key issues.

If you missed the House Oversight Committee hearing and want to read about what some of the witnesses said, try this New York Times article. But please watch as much of the hearing as you can. I thought I was doing okay until I suddenly found myself crying. There is no substitute for hearing the words of community, families, and survivors firsthand.

The House passed a bill today that:

·      raises the age limit for purchasing a semi-automatic rifle to 21, and

·      prohibits the sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds. Keep in mind that 20 and 30 round magazines are the standard for most assault rifles. So Republican opposition to this very sensible measure is almost assured.

The legislation passed on a mostly party-line vote of 223-204 in the House. For the record, Democratic Reps. Jared Golden of Maine and Kurt Schrader of Oregon voted against the bill. Five Republicans voted with Democrats: Chris Jacobs of New York, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Fred Upton of Michigan, Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois.

Senate Republicans, who are all that stands in the way of making these reasonable restrictions the law don’t seem interested. This despite the claim of John Cornyn, R-Tx, who was tasked by Mitch McConnell with leading those negotiations on the Republican side, that they are serious.

But you need to know about Cornyn’s June 1 response on Twitter to a talk show host who seemed upset at the prospect that the Senator might support new gun control measures to gauge what to believe. Here’s the original tweet from @joetalkshow.

I have no idea who @joetalkshow is, but Senator Cornyn felt a response was necessary. He assured Joe, “not gonna happen.” The shooting had only taken place on May 24.

Cornyn may put red flag laws and mental health on the table, but there’s no reason yet to believe Lucy isn’t going to strip the football away yet again as Charlie Brown goes in for the kick.

I don’t know about you, but I’m tired of watching the toll of people who are dead because weapons of war are freely available, because just about anyone can purchase a high capacity magazine that lets then shoot 30 rounds or more in a minute and makes it hard for law enforcement to disrupt them. We’ve heard the arguments: other countries have similar crime and mental health issues, but they don’t have mass shootings because they don’t give civilians easy access to weapons of war.

Enough talk, time for action. And this is an issue where we can act. It’s time to have a zero-tolerance for candidates who accept NRA support or take extreme positions on Second Amendment rights, without balancing community safety needs. Sometimes we choose the lesser of a pack of evils when we vote. We might not like a candidate’s stance on everything, but we like how they view other issues or we trust their basic integrity. Voters have the opportunity to send a message this year, in all elections up and down ballot, that they will not vote for candidates who refuse to take reasonable measure to protect the communities that elected them to serve.

In Heller, the Supreme Court case surprised many people by holding that the Second Amendment guaranteed the right to possess a firearm in your home for self-defense. But the Court still held out the prospect that restrictions were permissible. Justice Scalia suggested in the majority’s opinion that measures to restrict who could have a gun or where they could it, as well as the types of weapons that were permissible could remain in place.

If you agree, you might want to talk with your friends and family about declining to vote for any candidate who doesn’t support universal background checks and restrictions on people under 21 buying or possessing assault weapons. We’ve been told this is a partisan issue, but my unscientific sample of conversations in grocery stores and BBQ restaurants during the past weeks suggests you might be surprised by the folks who don’t want the 18-year-old their kids go to school with to be able to buy an AR-15. So don’t be afraid to have these conversations. Talk with people about the myth that a good guy with a gun can take out a bad guy with a gun, especially when the bad guy has an AR-15 that can do incredible damage and unload an entire high-capacity magazine in a minute. Everyone cares about being safe and protecting their families from violence. That won’t happen until we have a Senate that will pass the measures the House has passed before more people die in places like Buffalo and Uvalde.

We’re in this together,

Joyce