Slog
News & ArtsFriday, December 14, 2012
Crime / Death Telling People Not to "Politicize" Mass Shootings Is Politicizing Mass Shootings
Posted by Dominic Holden on Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 2:19 PM
Slog tipper Adam sends this excellent piece by Ezra Klein—on twelve facts about guns and mass shootings—but the opening point is one that can't be stressed enough:
When we first collected much of this data, it was after the Aurora, Colo. shootings, and the air was thick with calls to avoid “politicizing” the tragedy. That is code, essentially, for “don’t talk about reforming our gun control laws.”
Let’s be clear: That is a form of politicization... It’s just a form of politicization favoring those who prefer the status quo to stricter gun control laws.
Nothing is more political if you're trying to have a rational discussion of policy—based the actual merits of that policy—than blocking the debate from happening at all. It's censorship. And right now, the White House is complicit in the radical right's politicization of the shooting by saying "today is not the day" to talk about it.
Obama's silence is purely political. It's obvious that it isn't just a timing issue for "today," because he's refused to have this discussion in a meaningful way before the Aurora shooting, on the day of the Aurora shooting, or after the Aurora shooting. He's refused to do it before the Newtown shooting, and now he's refusing to do it on the day of the Newtown shooting. There's no indication that he'll have this conversation until America forces him to have it. Obama's condolences are nice and all, but we don't just deal with mass death by being sad about it. Back to Klein:
If roads were collapsing all across the United States, killing dozens of drivers, we would surely see that as a moment to talk about what we could do to keep roads from collapsing. If terrorists were detonating bombs in port after port, you can be sure Congress would be working to upgrade the nation’s security measures. If a plague was ripping through communities, public-health officials would be working feverishly to contain it.
Only with gun violence do we respond to repeated tragedies by saying that mourning is acceptable but discussing how to prevent more tragedies is not.
Restrictions on the casual ownership of souped-up murder weapons isn't a safe policy debate, plain and simple, because it's a third rail political issue. And the right has cornered the left's leadership into believing gun policy debates are third rail now and forever. That's bullshit. Gay marriage, legalizing pot, and ending plenty of foreign wars were also third rail—until people outside the Democratic tent pushed those issues inside the tent. Those issues are off the table until it is politically more dangerous to be silent than to engage. Flipping the politics allows the policy debate to happen at all. That's what needs to happen now with gun control: We need to push it inside the Beltway until this third-rail political hot potato is mandated as a normal policy debate.
And I think that's what America is doing today.
1
There is never a good time to discuss societal insanity and refusal to deal with real problems.
Butter tomorrow.
Butter yesterday.
But never butter today.
Butter tomorrow.
Butter yesterday.
But never butter today.
3
Can gun control advocates count on the pro-life movement among their voice in this fight? Since they're all anti-murder and stuff?
4
I'm a fan of Greg Sargent's approach
This response is totally appropriate and more pragmatic than we're used to being. But maybe we should be pragmatic. Just this once...so as to solve a problem.
Or as Van Jones put it: When the President screws up, you should treat him like you might treat your cousin when he screws up...Hold him...But hold him accountable.
If liberals are serious about solutions, none of this has to devolve into hostage-taking.
“As a country we have been through this too many times,” Obama added. “We’re going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics.”Emphasis mine.
Let’s believe he means it, while simultaneously insisting he prove it. Obama’s statement rose to the occasion emotionally, but the unique horror of today’s events demands that Obama and other public officials rise to the occasion politically.
This response is totally appropriate and more pragmatic than we're used to being. But maybe we should be pragmatic. Just this once...so as to solve a problem.
Or as Van Jones put it: When the President screws up, you should treat him like you might treat your cousin when he screws up...Hold him...But hold him accountable.
If liberals are serious about solutions, none of this has to devolve into hostage-taking.
5
Really well put. This is our work to do, not the President's. We put him in charge of playing the long game, and there's shit on his desk right now where if he addresses gun control today some of that other business is going to take the hit.
He may be wrong in his calculations, he certainly has been before, but it's his call to make of what's worth fighting and when and how.
We are under no such constraints. The people have a power to shake the entire legislative agenda overnight if we care to marshal it. Sure, we'll probably as usual fritter it away with online petitions (and blog comments, ahem), but that doesn't mean the fault lies in our stars rather than ourselves.
He may be wrong in his calculations, he certainly has been before, but it's his call to make of what's worth fighting and when and how.
We are under no such constraints. The people have a power to shake the entire legislative agenda overnight if we care to marshal it. Sure, we'll probably as usual fritter it away with online petitions (and blog comments, ahem), but that doesn't mean the fault lies in our stars rather than ourselves.
6
If the Federal Government passes any meaningful legislation in the next twelve months, I'll let Cascadian Bacon shoot me through the hand.
7
Remember, if that teacher and the children had bricks...
God, can't one of our regular trolls finish that for me?
God, can't one of our regular trolls finish that for me?
8
The President may not have used the words "gun control" but I don't think his call for "meaningful action...regardless of politics" constitutes silence. As gus notes above, the man has a lot on his plate--including not letting the economy be run back off the rails by those who place tax cuts for the rich above the good of the nation--that can take a major hit if he were to get up in front of the White House press corps and outline a 15 point plan for enacting effective gun control legislation.
There is also the likelihood that he chooses not to fixate on gun control right out of the gate because there's more at work here than just easy access to guns (although that is clearly a factor in incidents like this). This is a President who understands and embraces complexity and nuance, and this means that you won't always get instantaneous single-issue focused soundbites out of him.
In the meantime, the more effective path would be for gun control advocates to come together to form a single, cohesive lobbying organization to counter the NRA. If you want to effect change, organize, mobilize and make it politically dangerous to ignore you. Moaning on the internet won't cut it.
Finally, if you want to have a debate on this (or any) subject, you need to be genuinely open to debate. Shrieking "GUNS ARE EVIL" at the top of your lungs will never convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you, and writing off those who disagree with you as trigger-happy crazies will nip debate in the bud. If you're not ready and willing to listen to and try to understand other viewpoints, the discussion is never going to go anywhere.
There is also the likelihood that he chooses not to fixate on gun control right out of the gate because there's more at work here than just easy access to guns (although that is clearly a factor in incidents like this). This is a President who understands and embraces complexity and nuance, and this means that you won't always get instantaneous single-issue focused soundbites out of him.
In the meantime, the more effective path would be for gun control advocates to come together to form a single, cohesive lobbying organization to counter the NRA. If you want to effect change, organize, mobilize and make it politically dangerous to ignore you. Moaning on the internet won't cut it.
Finally, if you want to have a debate on this (or any) subject, you need to be genuinely open to debate. Shrieking "GUNS ARE EVIL" at the top of your lungs will never convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you, and writing off those who disagree with you as trigger-happy crazies will nip debate in the bud. If you're not ready and willing to listen to and try to understand other viewpoints, the discussion is never going to go anywhere.
9
He may not have used the words "gun control," but I wouldn't call Obama's call for "meaningful action...regardless of politics" silence.
I couldn't agree more with @5 more. If you want change, whining on the internet isn't going to cut it. Organize, mobilize, and make yourself a political force to be reckoned with. Gun control advocates could form their own lobbying organization to stand up to the NRA or they could even organize to join the NRA en masse and, when they've reached critical mass within the organization, vote to change its policies and mission.
And more importantly, if y'all genuinely want a debate, you'll have to be genuinely open to debate. That means being willing to listen to the viewpoints of others and working to understand where they're coming from. Shrieking "GUNS ARE EVIL" at the top of your lungs will never convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you, and treating all gun owners like trigger-happy crazies will nip debate in the bud.
I couldn't agree more with @5 more. If you want change, whining on the internet isn't going to cut it. Organize, mobilize, and make yourself a political force to be reckoned with. Gun control advocates could form their own lobbying organization to stand up to the NRA or they could even organize to join the NRA en masse and, when they've reached critical mass within the organization, vote to change its policies and mission.
And more importantly, if y'all genuinely want a debate, you'll have to be genuinely open to debate. That means being willing to listen to the viewpoints of others and working to understand where they're coming from. Shrieking "GUNS ARE EVIL" at the top of your lungs will never convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you, and treating all gun owners like trigger-happy crazies will nip debate in the bud.
11
@6
Why would I want to shoot you through the hand?
I guess I appreciate the offer or whateves but unnecessary violence isn't really my thing.
Besides wouldn't stabbing you in the hand be more appropriate?
Gun control legislation is political suicide, it cost the dems the house for the first time in 60 years after the Clinton ban of 94 and also contributed to Gore's defeat in 2000. All for a ban that had ZERO effect on crime. Alienating gun owners alienates nearly 50% of the population on both sides of the political aisle.
The political climate of gun owners is very different than 1994, back then rifles like the AR15 were oddities that few people owned, the ban actually increased their popularity. Now an most gun owners own an AR, andn if not they own an AK. The AR15 is the best selling firearm in America and for many people it is their only rifle. It will not be banned anytime soon.
Why would I want to shoot you through the hand?
I guess I appreciate the offer or whateves but unnecessary violence isn't really my thing.
Besides wouldn't stabbing you in the hand be more appropriate?
Gun control legislation is political suicide, it cost the dems the house for the first time in 60 years after the Clinton ban of 94 and also contributed to Gore's defeat in 2000. All for a ban that had ZERO effect on crime. Alienating gun owners alienates nearly 50% of the population on both sides of the political aisle.
The political climate of gun owners is very different than 1994, back then rifles like the AR15 were oddities that few people owned, the ban actually increased their popularity. Now an most gun owners own an AR, andn if not they own an AK. The AR15 is the best selling firearm in America and for many people it is their only rifle. It will not be banned anytime soon.
12
@11:
I don't think an outright ban of certain weapons is necessary, and, as your comment makes clear, it's certainly not practical.
But we CAN do a number of things RIGHT NOW, that would at least make it more difficult for crooks and crazies to get their hands on guns:
1. Close the "gun show loophole". Require that EVERY transaction wherein a gun is bought or sold, including private sales, be accompanied by a background check and waiting period. NO EXCEPTIONS.
2. Create a National Felony Offenders Database and require ALL gun sellers, including those at gun shows and private parties, have access and use it, to ensure that no one convicted of a felony gets their hand on a weapon sold through legal channels.
3. Create a National Gun Registry in order to trace ownership/possession and sales of guns, including through private channels. Anyone caught selling an unregistered firearm or selling to anyone on a "no sell" list (see 2. & 5) would be subject to stiff penalties and possible jail-time.
4. Increase the penalties for crimes committed with guns to automatic Life Sentence; again, NO EXCEPTIONS.
5. Increase funding for mental health screenings & services and create a National Mental Health Registry, so that people diagnosed with mental illnesses can be identified by gun sellers BEFORE they are able to purchase guns, and lengthen the waiting period for these individuals to two weeks, so that their mental stability can be fully established.
I don't think an outright ban of certain weapons is necessary, and, as your comment makes clear, it's certainly not practical.
But we CAN do a number of things RIGHT NOW, that would at least make it more difficult for crooks and crazies to get their hands on guns:
1. Close the "gun show loophole". Require that EVERY transaction wherein a gun is bought or sold, including private sales, be accompanied by a background check and waiting period. NO EXCEPTIONS.
2. Create a National Felony Offenders Database and require ALL gun sellers, including those at gun shows and private parties, have access and use it, to ensure that no one convicted of a felony gets their hand on a weapon sold through legal channels.
3. Create a National Gun Registry in order to trace ownership/possession and sales of guns, including through private channels. Anyone caught selling an unregistered firearm or selling to anyone on a "no sell" list (see 2. & 5) would be subject to stiff penalties and possible jail-time.
4. Increase the penalties for crimes committed with guns to automatic Life Sentence; again, NO EXCEPTIONS.
5. Increase funding for mental health screenings & services and create a National Mental Health Registry, so that people diagnosed with mental illnesses can be identified by gun sellers BEFORE they are able to purchase guns, and lengthen the waiting period for these individuals to two weeks, so that their mental stability can be fully established.
13
@12
I agree with all of the above with the exception of 3 as registration leads to confiscation, but I would begrudgingly accept #1 if it meant no further restrictions.
#2, #4, #5 need to be implemented ASAP.
No one wants to sell a gun to a Felon, many gun owners, including myself request a concealed pistol license for private sales to ensure the buyer is legally able to purchase a firearm.
I agree with all of the above with the exception of 3 as registration leads to confiscation, but I would begrudgingly accept #1 if it meant no further restrictions.
#2, #4, #5 need to be implemented ASAP.
No one wants to sell a gun to a Felon, many gun owners, including myself request a concealed pistol license for private sales to ensure the buyer is legally able to purchase a firearm.
14
Imagine a creepy band of warriors/fuckwits who pledged to perpetrate a motiveless mass shooting every two weeks in randomly chosen gatherings of people across the U.S. (big cities, small towns, malls, concerts, churches, bowling alleys, schools, block parties, beaches, pride parades, what-have-you), thereby achieving a slightly higher rate of carnage than we are currently experiencing. No one not already incarcerated could consider themselves immune.
Do you think the regularity of those events, with no way to predict locations or prevent them and the deaths of hundreds per year an empirical certainty, might lead to a change in priorities or behavior among the citizenry?
Do you think the regularity of those events, with no way to predict locations or prevent them and the deaths of hundreds per year an empirical certainty, might lead to a change in priorities or behavior among the citizenry?
15
I agree with everything in #12, except for the life sentences. I'd be reluctabnt to swing quite that big a sledgehammer. #13, the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the 2nd amendment to recognize an individual right to gun ownership, as do many state constitutions. At some point, gun owners have to give up the paranoia. Look, if things get to the point of mass gun confiscation, none of these laws would matter anyway. In the meantime, I think registration and tracing are reasonable.
To the items above, I would add a maximum size for handgun magazines, and a higher level of scrutiny for those who purchase or own large quantities of guns or ammo.
To the items above, I would add a maximum size for handgun magazines, and a higher level of scrutiny for those who purchase or own large quantities of guns or ammo.
17
@15/16
The paranoia tends to come from people screaming to take your rights away over an emotional reaction. Also contributing is the rising tide of a top heavy federal government that wants to increasingly spy on and control it's citizens. Things like the patriot act make paranoia reasonable.
Also it is already illegal to ship guns or ammo through the mail, guns can only be shipped to a Federal Firearms License holder. Ammo can be shipped via UPS which beats paying local scalpers prices when you shoot a large volume.
I also compliment you on being one of the most reasonable posters here regardless of topic.
The paranoia tends to come from people screaming to take your rights away over an emotional reaction. Also contributing is the rising tide of a top heavy federal government that wants to increasingly spy on and control it's citizens. Things like the patriot act make paranoia reasonable.
Also it is already illegal to ship guns or ammo through the mail, guns can only be shipped to a Federal Firearms License holder. Ammo can be shipped via UPS which beats paying local scalpers prices when you shoot a large volume.
I also compliment you on being one of the most reasonable posters here regardless of topic.
18
@15, a "higher level of scrutiny"? Just who's going to provide that scrutiny and what would it consist of? Calling them weekly to see if they've killed anyone lately?
Good god, you people who are afraid of pissing off gun owners make the silliest suggestions.
Good god, you people who are afraid of pissing off gun owners make the silliest suggestions.
19
#18, the ATF provides higher levels of scrutiny already for items such as shotguns with barrels under 18 inches, machine guns, etc. As for being "afraid of pissing off gun owners," I'd say that wanting to put them through ATF hoops for certain things isn't exactly "afraid of pissing off gun owners,"
#17, I'm not a gun owner so there are gaps in my knowledge, but I just did an Internet search for ammo, and it's pretty clear that it's easy to get. Whether it's through the USPS or a private courier is immaterial to me. For purposes of my last post it's all "the mail."
Come on, be real. Faxing some remote seller something the purports to be an adult driver's license, and then everything's just fine? That's just ridiculous, and we both know it. I don't want to restrict your ability to buy ammo, but I don't want to make it that easy for some 16-year-old to order it online and have it dropped off at his parents' house while one or both of them are at work.
I realize that no one can create a hermetically sealed system, but there are just too many gaps in what we have now. I fully recognize how ridiculous some of the crap is from the "anti-gun" side, but if you stand back and try to see this particular issue with more objectivity, I think any good-faith reading of your position would highlight some real weaknesses in it.
As for the Patriot Act, etc., I have very mixed feelings about what's gone on, but I return to my earlier statement that,. with the Supreme Court's clear interpretation of the second amendment and the 100 million-plus guns out there, it's time for the gun lobby to climb off the ledge. Regardless of what some idiots might argue here, I really don't think anyone's going to even try, much less succeed, in taking guns away from lawful owners.
More...
#17, I'm not a gun owner so there are gaps in my knowledge, but I just did an Internet search for ammo, and it's pretty clear that it's easy to get. Whether it's through the USPS or a private courier is immaterial to me. For purposes of my last post it's all "the mail."
Come on, be real. Faxing some remote seller something the purports to be an adult driver's license, and then everything's just fine? That's just ridiculous, and we both know it. I don't want to restrict your ability to buy ammo, but I don't want to make it that easy for some 16-year-old to order it online and have it dropped off at his parents' house while one or both of them are at work.
I realize that no one can create a hermetically sealed system, but there are just too many gaps in what we have now. I fully recognize how ridiculous some of the crap is from the "anti-gun" side, but if you stand back and try to see this particular issue with more objectivity, I think any good-faith reading of your position would highlight some real weaknesses in it.
As for the Patriot Act, etc., I have very mixed feelings about what's gone on, but I return to my earlier statement that,. with the Supreme Court's clear interpretation of the second amendment and the 100 million-plus guns out there, it's time for the gun lobby to climb off the ledge. Regardless of what some idiots might argue here, I really don't think anyone's going to even try, much less succeed, in taking guns away from lawful owners.
20
@13: Registration leads to confiscation? So I suppose you're also against car license plates, because Uncle Sam is totally going to come take away anything he knows we have.
Try sticking your head outside your paranoid little bubble and get some air.
Try sticking your head outside your paranoid little bubble and get some air.
21
#20, I don't blame him for being nervous, given what obnoxious "progressives" like you say about guns and gun owners. But the laws and practical reality are on the side of gun ownership, so I think gun owners should be a little more confident than they are.
23
@20
Are you familiar with the term "impound lot."
Also vehicle registration is not required for vehicle ownership, it is only required to operate a vehicle on public roads. There is also an argument as to weather it is required at all for a non commercial vehicle, but it tends to be easier to pay a sticker rather than pull out a pile of case law documents when you get pulled over.
The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." - Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.
http://www.land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/ri…
Are you familiar with the term "impound lot."
Also vehicle registration is not required for vehicle ownership, it is only required to operate a vehicle on public roads. There is also an argument as to weather it is required at all for a non commercial vehicle, but it tends to be easier to pay a sticker rather than pull out a pile of case law documents when you get pulled over.
The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." - Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.
http://www.land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/ri…
24
Safe storage laws, like those in Great Brittan, should be implemented as soon as possible. It's a win for manufacturers, it's a win for keeping guns off the streets, and most importantly, it's a win for gun safety, not gun control.
25
I'd sure hate to be the one to tell all those Newtown, Connecticut parents that their kids, who simply went to school on Friday along with several teachers and other adults, are now dead because of yet another crazed gunman.
How do we ensure the rightful gun ownership of responsible people WITHOUT firearms getting into the wrong hands? Whatever happened to the Brady Bill, implemented by the wife of Reagan aide, James Brady, left paralyzed after getting shot by would-be presidential assassin and rabid Jodie Foster stalker, John Hinckley?
I'm not being paranoid, here. I just feel stupified by all this senseless killing.
How do we ensure the rightful gun ownership of responsible people WITHOUT firearms getting into the wrong hands? Whatever happened to the Brady Bill, implemented by the wife of Reagan aide, James Brady, left paralyzed after getting shot by would-be presidential assassin and rabid Jodie Foster stalker, John Hinckley?
I'm not being paranoid, here. I just feel stupified by all this senseless killing.
26
Mr. Bacon I wish you would not spreading this nonsense about not needing a driver's license to drive. I've stood next to clients as they have been taken to jail for not having one because they believed the sort of nonsense you are pedaling. The right to travel does exist but it is like every other constitutional right in that it has limits. You need a drivers license to drive on public roads and anyone who tells you otherwise is a huckster or a fool. Selective quotes from random court cases don't mean anything. One has to read the entire case and understand the quotes in context.
27
Let's get real about gun control. Remember Humpty Dumpty when he fell off the wall? All the King's horses and all the King's men could not put Humpty Dumpty together again. With over 300 million guns and millions more of all shapes and sizes unregistered in the USA today, does anyone in their right mind think that gun control will ever work? Once a cancer spreads there is little hope. Congress, the NRA and the total co-opting of the Second Amendment by a gun crazed public (mostly men), stand your ground state policies--all would doom any attempt to place restrictions, past, present or in the future impossible. Sad but true. If we can't stop the guns, maybe we can attempt to slow down or even halt the purchase of all and any ammo.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Foie Gras Tastes Like Cat Food by Callan Berry
-
SL Letter of the Day: The Tell-Tale Handjob by Dan Savage
-
Pizza Update: Breaking the 5-Minute Barrier by Goldy
-
Cap Hill Is Becoming a Little Like What? by Charles Mudede
-
Today in the Surveillance State: The "War on Reality" by Brendan Kiley
-
Slog Bible Study: Leviticus 20:9 by Goldy
-
President Obama Says NSA Spying Is "Transparent" by Paul Constant
-
The Monday Morning News by Goldy
-
Egyptian Theatre to Close at the End of This Month by Paul Constant
-
NHL Could Move Phoenix Coyotes to Seattle in Time for 2013-2014 Season by Goldy
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (27) RSS