Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drinks

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

The Growing Isolation of the Gun Nuts: Evangelicals Agree With Obama on Universal Background Checks

Posted by on Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 7:48 AM

Time:

Rev. Franklin Graham and other leading evangelical figures are publicly backing efforts to require background checks for all gun purchases, providing a shot in the arm to stalled congressional efforts to enact elements of President Barack Obama’s gun control plan.

Graham, the son of evangelist Billy Graham and the president of Christian relief organization Samaritan’s Purse, and Dr. Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission told TIME they have agreed to back universal background check legislation put forward by the administration in the wake of last year’s shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

Yes, the Evangelicals are still batty, still saying crazy things (they want Obama to tax Hollywood studios and to use the money on the victims of gun violence), but we desperately need background checks and to close those gun show loopholes...

Boysen was released last Friday from the Monroe Correctional Facility in Washington state, where he served a year behind bars for burglary. His grandparents picked him up, drove him around running errands and held a gathering for family members at their home to welcome him back, said King County Sheriff John Urquhart. The next day, the grandparents were found dead.

After Boysen and his grandparents did not respond to phone calls Saturday, his mother drove over with a key to the house in Renton, Washington, near Seattle, and found the couple's bodies. Boysen and his grandparents' car were missing.

Authorities have not said how the victims were killed. A gun was not used, but the deaths were violent, they said.
During the course of their investigation, detectives said they learned that Boysen had talked about killing his grandparents, acquiring guns and going after authority figures. He had searched the Internet for gun shows across the Pacific Northwest and Nevada.

The killer wanted guns. The killer wanted to kill more people with guns. And where do you go to buy guns if you have a criminal record? Gun shows.

 

Comments (16) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Karlheinz Arschbomber 1
Those cold, dead hands are still warm and sweaty. I totally agree with you, Charles, but the Connecticut massacre is 95% over the attention-span horizon, and if all those cute white kids being blown to smithereens has no political effect, not much will.
Posted by Karlheinz Arschbomber http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arschbombe on March 13, 2013 at 8:31 AM · Report this
Fifty-Two-Eighty 2
Hmph. Too bad criminals don't get their guns at gun shows, or maybe you'd have a valid argument there.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/U…
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on March 13, 2013 at 8:49 AM · Report this
raindrop 3
There shouldn't be a tax, but it would be most gracious for Quentin Tarantino to make a sizable donation to victims of gun violence.
Posted by raindrop on March 13, 2013 at 9:35 AM · Report this
4
First time I've agreed with Franklin on anything.
Posted by Patricia Kayden on March 13, 2013 at 9:47 AM · Report this
venomlash 5
@2: Yeah, the information we have is spotty at best. Why? Because schlubs like you consider it heresy to do any research whatsoever, and browbeat our legislature into suppressing such studies.
Posted by venomlash on March 13, 2013 at 9:52 AM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 6
@2

Your link only proves that the NRA's attacks on gun violence research have successfully made it difficult to draw firm conclusions. So now you can argue that we should fiddle while Rome burns because there's not enough good data.

The irony is that this cynical tactic is bringing more shit down on your heads than if you'd allowed honest inquiry into the causes of gun deaths. Then we could have regulations specifically tailored to the root causes instead of broader laws that affect larger swaths of people.

It's inevitable: as fewer Americans own guns (because sprawl leaves nowhere to hunt) guns become concentrated into the hands of the craziest, most paranoid and most fanatical gun nuts. Who then drive ever nuttier policies, which draw a harsher reaction from the sane population. Doh!
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn http://youtu.be/zu-akdyxpUc on March 13, 2013 at 9:59 AM · Report this
Urgutha Forka 7
still saying crazy things (they want Obama to tax Hollywood studios and to use the money on the victims of gun violence)
Why is that a crazy thing? Do you think violence in movies, tv, and video games have no influence on real violence?

Are you saying that advertising doesn't work?
Posted by Urgutha Forka on March 13, 2013 at 10:10 AM · Report this
keshmeshi 9
@7,

It doesn't seem to.

Yes.
Posted by keshmeshi on March 13, 2013 at 10:38 AM · Report this
10
What's wrong with taxing violent movies?

I don't find that nearly as hypocritical as California's 'Assault Weapons Ban' that doesn't ban Assault Weapons if you're filming a movie.

Where's the liberal outrage over this stupid loophole?
Posted by CPN on March 13, 2013 at 10:53 AM · Report this
11
Another vote for taxing violent movies.
Kind of hypocritical to decry "assault weapons" on the one hand and then crank out episode after episode showing heroes (good guys) using them.
Posted by fairly.unbalanced on March 13, 2013 at 11:07 AM · Report this
Urgutha Forka 12
@9,

Then I assume you're ok with cigarette companies and fast food joints advertising and marketing to kids, right?

Since it doesn't work anyway, what's the harm in it?
Posted by Urgutha Forka on March 13, 2013 at 11:09 AM · Report this
Fifty-Two-Eighty 13
I guess @5 and @6 are OK with their tax dollars going towards completely fabricated "statistics" too — as long as they agree with the results.
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on March 13, 2013 at 11:20 AM · Report this
Max Solomon 14
@13: @5 & @6 are fine with actual statistics and research, no matter what they show.

@8: are you the racist (newly registered) unregistered troll that i've heard about but never seen because i have unregistered comments turned off?
Posted by Max Solomon on March 13, 2013 at 11:40 AM · Report this
15
Is there any reason why Goldy, Charles and the rest of The Stranger staff can't start some funding for firearms research? Just because the Fed hasn't been funding research doesn't mean that anyone else with a few dollars can't fund it. Goldy was perfectly happy to drum up funding to buy movie props - you'd think funding some research wouldn't be that hard!
Posted by randoma on March 13, 2013 at 12:28 PM · Report this
16
If I were a criminal and needed a gun I wouldn't go to a gun show. I'd go to a gun buyback event under a freeway overpass.
Posted by CPN on March 13, 2013 at 12:42 PM · Report this
17
@15
"Is there any reason why Goldy, Charles and the rest of The Stranger staff can't start some funding for firearms research?"

No need for funding.
Just their time (and some web site space) collecting information in the local area.
I think the current term for that is "crowd sourcing".
People contribute information and The Stranger staff spends some time collating it.

Who shot at whom with what, why, where and when.
Also include how was the gun acquired.
Posted by fairly.unbalanced on March 13, 2013 at 1:03 PM · Report this

Add a comment

Commenting on this item is available only to registered commenters.
Advertisement

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy