Lies Over Lives
Posted by Michelle Moquin on April 18th, 2013
Good morning.
Ninety percent of the American people support universal background checks…and supported a gun-buyer background check bill put together by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.). Yet the bill didn’t pass because of a lie that the bill “Claims that this legislation would create a gun registry…” It did not. LSOS’s.
And I heard on the news that Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) was actually begging his colleagues to actually read the text of the bill…the bill that they were voting on. How messed up is this? People’s lives are at stake here and the lies are winning. I am so sick of the other side, (yes I am speaking about the repubs) and their senseless arguments.
From the Huff Po: Please click on the title below to watch the video if you are unable to watch it here.
Gabrielle Giffords On Gun Control Failure: ‘I’m Furious’
Former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) ripped senators who “gave into fear and blocked common-sense legislation” on background checks in a New York Times op-edpublished Wednesday evening.
“Speaking is physically difficult for me. But my feelings are clear: I’m furious,”Giffords wrote. “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.”
Giffords’ op-ed echoed the sentiment of President Barack Obama, who was visibly angry while giving remarks in the White House rose garden after the amendment was defeated.
“There were no coherent arguments as to why we wouldn’t do this,” Obama said as Giffords and others affected by gun violence stood behind him. “It came down to politics — the worry that that vocal minority of gun owners would come after them in future elections. They worried that the gun lobby would spend a lot of money and paint them as anti-Second Amendment.”
The op-ed wasn’t Giffords’ first takedown of the senators for the gun vote. Seconds after the amendment was defeated, Giffords sent a fundraising email skewering the lawmakers for doing “the unthinkable.”
“Over two years ago, when I was shot point-blank in the head, the U.S. Senate chose to do nothing. Four months ago, 20 first-graders lost their lives in a brutal attack on their school, and the U.S. Senate chose to do nothing,” Giffords wrote. “It’s clear to me that if members of the U.S. Senate refuse to change the laws to reduce gun violence, then we need to change the members of the U.S. Senate.”
Giffords and her husband, retired astronaut Mark Kelly, have formed a political committee that supports candidates who back gun restrictions. The couple met with senators – including Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Patrick Toomey (R-Pa.), who crafted the background check measure – ahead of Wednesday’s vote.
Click here to read Giffords’ full piece in the New York Times.
*S*I*C*K*
Thoughts? I’m sure you’ve got plenty to say. Blog me.
Lastly, greed over a great story is surfacing from my “loyal”(?) readers. With all this back and forth about who owns what, that appears on my blog, let me reiterate that all material posted on my blog becomes the sole property of my blog. If you want to reserve any proprietary rights don’t post it to my blog. I will prominently display this caveat on my blog from now on to remind those who may have forgotten this notice.
Gratefully your blog host,
michelle
Aka BABE: We all know what this means by now :)
If you love my blog and my writes, please make a donation via PayPal, credit card, or e-check, please click the “Donate” button below. (Please only donations from those readers within the United States. – International readers please see my “Donate” page)
April 18th, 2013 at 9:56 pm
well there are plenty furious out there also who are furious at you people who want to take away their second amendment rights. the founding fathers wrote them & knew how important that one was that they made it #2! people are not asking for a new right but for their rights to not be messed with.
April 18th, 2013 at 9:58 pm
I constantly wonder how people would feel if they had lost a loved one to a gun shot. My youngest son was shot down five years ago while taking his friend to work, her ex-husband was hiding behind the building and when he saw the car and came out firing.
My son was killed instantly and the young woman who was shot twice in the head is living in a long-term care hospital in a vegatative state. Six children were left without a parent, My son left two small children, his friend left four.
I wish I could say that these were the only losses I have had due to gun violence but I am among the unfortunate who have had multiple losses due to gun violence. I don’t know the answer but this legislation was a start and the thing that makes it so sickening is when they were face to face with the parents of children killed they were all for this bill but when it came time to vote they did an about face which says to me that they caved to the NRA.
As for you people who are criticizing Gabby Giffords all I can say is you sound pretty cold. This woman is a good person who worked her behind off for this district and she is loved by many, many people who miss her realizing she continues to suffer yet she bravely continues to voices her opinion for what she believes..
April 18th, 2013 at 9:59 pm
I am furious too that instead of you democrats going after the stalled economy, corrupt corporations and banks, the wall street and the federal reserves – wow – right there a lot of work and good rightgeous ones to be done that are imperative and it will take sometimes to accomplish,
you’re wasting political capital chasing our individual freedoms from guns to chocolate and soda yes – seriously using emotional blakmail and props we Americans are not comfortable with even when you might have a good point.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:00 pm
I have two objections to the hypothetical legislation.
1 – The law relies on the individual buyers and sellers to police themselves. If a criminal wants to buy or sell a gun, there isn’t any mechanism to actually stop them.
What motivates two individuals to comply with the law (gun dealers would comply because not doing so would bad for business)? If this kind of strategy worked, we could just make it illegal to murder people and then step back and enjoy peace on earth.
2 – The freedom to bear arms makes a society safer precisely because there ISN’T a registry. I don’t want ANYONE (government or otherwise) knowing for sure whether or not I own a gun. I don’t want criminals looking to steal a gun targeting my home, and I don’t want criminals looking to steal anything else exploiting me because I DON’T have a gun.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:01 pm
Gun grabbers just don’t get it. You can’t punish the law abiding for the transgressions of criminals. You say proposed legislation makes it more difficult for criminals…not true. It just isn’t true.
What is true is that proposed legislation seeks to lay groundwork for later legislation down the road that will further punish the law abiding. The senators that voted no are wise and can easily see what the left is up to. I applaud the senators for defending the constitution.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:03 pm
Freda, I can see you have a firm grasp on the most pressing issues of the day.
Fox is a wonderful place to go for your news and information.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:05 pm
Sorry, Gabby, in politics nobody always wins, except for the NRA and other monied special interests, of course.
If you truly believe in your cause, keep fighting. This is America, you have the freedom to keep up the fight. Best of luck, Gabby. But with Sandy Hook tragedy as backdrop, still no victory this time…it’s tough, then; quite an uphill.
Again, keep up the fight, don’t lose hope, if you truly believe in your own cause.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:07 pm
I suppose someone should care what she thinks?
Well I’m Furious also. Why are the showing so many reruns right
before the summer TV season? Gabby’s 15 minutes of fame and
those of her husband good old what’s his name will join the ranks
of the other has beens in the B.H.O. Pile of photo op props.
Yawn, next tragedy to exploit please…
43 votes
April 18th, 2013 at 10:12 pm
Here’s the “No” vote list for Senate bill S.649:
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
Cruz (R-TX)
Enzi (R-WY)
Fischer (R-NE)
Flake (R-AZ)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (R-WI)
Lee (R-UT)
McConnell (R-KY)
Moran (R-KS)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
***Reid (D-NV)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Scott (R-SC)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
***Harry Reid’s “No” vote was just a procedural move, to allow for him the right to bring up the bill again.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:14 pm
I’m “furious” too Gabby! Furious that your controlling husband used you and the fact that you were attacked by a NUT CASE, to try to influence America that “Gun Control” (again) will cure this nations ills. And when it happens again………and everyone knows it will, what then?
More God damn gun control that will never work! More control over honest citizens rights because of what every one of those nut bags who shot innocent people did? And from YOU and your controlling husband Gabby? Hardly a word about the rampant “NUT” problems (and just ask every state government) we have in this country.
Start with this country’s state of affairs when it comes to this massive problem with the Criminally INSANE roaming our neighborhoods Gabby. That’s if your controlling husband lets you.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:40 pm
Well, an overwhelming majority of GOP/Teabaggers voted to allow unfettered, free access to anyone who wants to own a child-killer weapon. The real winners here? Lobbyists (NRA), corporate interests (firearms manufacturers), and those small-peckered idiots who need to rap off 30 rounds of penis-enhancing exhilaration
April 18th, 2013 at 10:41 pm
Background checks, that’s what this bill was about? Does this bill take away anyone’s right to own a gun if not mentally challenged or a felon? I don’t see what kind of impact this bill would have on current gun owners or someone that wants a gun in the future.
What’s the real issue here, is it the lobbyists that line the pockets of these politicians that made them vote “no”? I just don’t understand why anyone would be against background checks when buying a gun, caring for a child or an elderly person, driving a school bus, etc.
Maybe it won’t stop someone from getting a gun and killing innocent people, but at least we did everything we could possibly do to try to prevent it. I’m not “furious”, I’m just so sad.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:43 pm
Dear Gabby,
I am very sorry you got shot in the head.
However, for you to slam Senators that upheld the Constitution as they took an oath of office to do, is to me simply amazing. If you don’t like the law, then maybe you should point your efforts to changing the law, not to trying to pass legislation that violates the law.
I have grown weary of the political hype, the use and abuse of victims as props (you included) in an effort to attempt to push through legislation that is clearly not in keeping with the Constitution and Supreme Court rulings.
You seem to be a member of a group of elitists that disregard the law on a regular basis, and I am sure there are a lot of people that are growing weary of you and others doing this in the name of the “children” or whatever prop you can muster.
Maybe, just maybe, if you had been vocal about the president violating Article 2 section 3, where he is charged to make sure the laws of the land are faithfully executed, maybe if your voice had been raised in protest to his announcements that certain laws would no longer be prosecuted, laws that were Constitutionally enacted by elected representatives of the people, then maybe you would have a little more credibility than you now do.
You come accross as a political hack being used as a willing prop for whatever the left wing element is interested in at the moment. When gun control is no longer in vogue, you will be ignored. You are only being used anyway,and it is a pity you don’t see this.
Senator Reid, like you, appears to be just another political hack that would rather have an issue to demagogue than to make real progress legislatively. So Reid sponsors a bill in the Senate for immigration reform that does not require securing the border. His Bill only requires the creation of a plan to secure the border.
Why? So immigration reform is DOA in the House. Then Reid and you and the other minions of spin will be able to use the lack of progress on immigration reform as a political weapon aimed at those evil Republicans that blocked it. Right out of the liberal playbook.
The people of this great land are not as ignorant as you folks in Congress think. You folks in Congress took an oath to do only one thing and that one thing is to uphold and protect and follow the Constitution. You, apparently, lack sufficient honor to keep that oath.
You, and that idiot Feinstein that wants 51 votes in the Senate so she can confiscate all guns. Just how is this following the Constitution. And where was your voice criticizing the idiot Feinstein as she stepped out of the bounds of the Constitution.
No Gabby. Once again, your silence was deafening. You seem to have forgotten your oath of office. Maybe being shot in the head has damaged your ability to remember what that oath said.
I am very sorry you got shot in the head. It was a terrible thing for someone to do. But your being shot in the head does not grant to you a license to set aside the Constitution. You need to stand down on this issue and if you want to do something constructive, try speaking out against the president when he violates the Constitution, or speaking out when Ms. Feinstein violates the Constitution, or even working towards getting your party to be the party that tries to amend the Constitution by removing the Second Amendment.
Try amending the law that prevents anything from being done, rather than setting the rule of law aside for a political expedient. Failing to do these things, you are just another shrill shill.
If you can’t keep your oath of office to follow the Constitution, or keep your oath to protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies, including those in your own party, then you my dear have no place in Congress. You my dear, not the Senators that upheld the law, are the true blight on Congress.
You said nothing when the president used an obscure white-house legal opinion to replace the 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendments to the Constitution and had a citizen killed without due process. You said nothing when Leon Panetta passed an illegal order to officers in the military to have those citizens killed. You said nothing when another citizen was killed who was a minor.
You said nothing when innocent civilians nearby were killed with the drone fired weapons. When Fast and Furious released hundreds of rifles illegally and placed these rifles in the hands of drug cartels in Mexico, you said nothing. These rifles resulted in the murders of untold hundreds of Mexicans.
Death by illegal guns supplied by your own political party of hundreds of Mexican civilians, and you said nothing. You said nothing when one of our own government agents was killed by one of these Fast and Furious guns released illegally by your own political party. You said nothing about the cover-up that followed.
Obviously, to you, Mexicans and other innocent civilians are not worthy of your attention when it comes to their deaths at the hands of criminals that were supplied guns by your own administration. Your hypocrisy is astounding. So would you please just go away and recover from your wounds and stop being a prop for an administration that has a history of violating its own oath of office. Stop being a supporting player in this. Please. Just go away.
91% of the American people are tired of your comments. Where did this 91% number come from? The same place that it came from to support how many Americans are in favor of your gun control agenda. It came out of thin air and was just manufactured by political hacks within your political party.
I am really sorry you got shot in the head. No one deserves that. But soldiers fighting for our Constitution get shot all the time. Some die, some don’t. Some have injuries far worse than yours. I refuse to allow you to violate the constitution that all soldiers fight for and some die for, just because you got shot in the head. You need to look at yourself in the mirror and examine your own motives and actions and your poor record of protecting the Constitution as you swore you would do. Your record in that regard is not very good.
52 votes
April 18th, 2013 at 10:45 pm
Only the dimmest
harp on that question.
The background checks are for those wielding illegal pistols bought because of NO BACKGROUND CHECKS..and YOU aren’t even willing to stop that.
BANG… street murder…. and you’ve done NOTHING
BANG… suicide…. and you’ve done nothing
54 to 46…. primarily based on party lines… the vote was a (R) sham, and yet the MAJORITY voted for Universal Background Checks…
Did YOUR Senator get elected by that kind of margin? Most (R) did NOT.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:47 pm
FYI. Background checks in no way shirk the Constitution. Millions of background checks are conducted daily in this country. Do you find THEM Unconstitutional as well?
The argument that filibustering a bill on background checks was somehow “upholding the Constitution” is really no argument at all. It’s false, not grounded in reality.
If the filibuster was used on a bill like an “assault weapons ban” or “magazine size limit,” you might have a point. With background checks you do not.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:48 pm
no sweat. I’m not a crazed, anti-gun lunatic. I don’t necessarily support “assault weapons bans” and “magazine size restrictions” (mostly on the grounds that they are ineffective and costly to enforce, not on Constitutional grounds).
I try to drive this point home when discussing gun control on the vine because everyone tries to lump each other into two categories only (e.g., pro-gun everyone needs a bazooka, and anti-gun we should outlaw everything) which is NOT a true description of the gun sentiments in this country.
But background checks and a basic form of gun registration (which will NOT lead to confiscation, that’s just crazy talk. We can’t even get background checks, and you think the government’s gonna go door-to-door and confiscate guns?!? really?) would be the two most effective means of curbing gun violence in this country, which predominantly occurs in the inner city, and predominantly occurs with handguns.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:49 pm
Your concealed carry
will not
get your gun into any GOP NO BACKGROUNDS CHECK meeting
AND
THE NRA will not allow your gun into their headquarters.
The NRA will protect themselves with a NO GUN policy for their building……. & then insist on putting guns into schools as a solution.
There is NO EFFORT from the NRA to PAY for that gun security.
If you’ve passed a check..why wouldn’t you want EVERYONE to pass a check?
Why the excuses?
Why are you “guessing” it will do nothing?
The MILITARY does background checks. They don’t “guess” the way you do.
STRAW SALES…BIG $$$$ business… and that is a fact.
Did the parents and families of the Newtown Dead annoy some of you? Well, too bad… because a lack of compassion is nothing to brag about.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:51 pm
So here’s the thing:
I’m all for background checks for two reasons:
1. I don’t think my crazy neighbor Larry (and I do mean 100 percent, absolutely bonkers) should be able to get a gun at all, but if he does he should at least be subject to a stringent background check.
2. I don’t think a more stringent background check would impede my ability to purchase and possess a gun.
So go ahead and pass the damn thing…
HOWEVER (and I went all caps on you because this is a big damn however!)
Don’t kid yourself that if you pass this thing it will change anything – it won’t. Instead of getting all worked up over the failure of something that wouldn’t make a bit of difference, how ’bout we figure out how to do something that would make a difference?
What they’re talking about passing wouldn’t have prevented Newtown, Va Tech, or any other you want to mention – the avenues available to purchase guns are too numerous to count (OK, that’s an exagerration, but if you want a gun you can get a gun, period)
Why get all righteous about the failure of what was nothing more that a “feel good not gonna change a damn thing” bill?
April 18th, 2013 at 10:52 pm
Well, here’s another piece of legislation I didn’t know about, on top of what the NRA already had gotten passed as a law for the gun makers benefit. Possibly you know or don’t know this, but gun manufacturers are the only business entities in this country never to be subject to lawsuits or to be litigated in a court of law due to whatever incident occurs from the use of firearms (whether accidental, through malfunction, etc); this is true and approved by congress.
But, now I found out something else that helps the NRA can keep its blood drenched hands permanently soaked in red. If explosives are made and used for whatever purpose (like at the Boston Marathon), by law they cannot be traced back to gun manufacturers, because they are the only entities not required to use taggants in their products that are not plastic explosives. From MSNBC (excerpt):
“But a crucial piece of evidence called a taggant that could be used to trace the gunpowder used in the bombs to a buyer at a point of sale is not available to investigators.
“If you had a good taggant this would be a good thing for this kind of crime. It could help identify the point of manufacturer, and chain of custody,” Bob Morhard, an explosives consultant and chief executive officer of Zukovich, Morhard & Wade, LLC., in Pennsylvania, who has traced explosives and detonators in use in the United States and Saudi Arabia, told MSNBC.com. “The problem is nobody wants to know what the material is.”
Explosives manufacturers are required to place tracing elements known as identification taggants only in plastic explosives but not in gunpowder, thanks to lobbying efforts by the NRA and large gun manufacturing groups.
NRA officials at the group’s headquarters in Fairfax, Virginia declined to respond to calls and emails from MSNBC.com requesting comment.”
As you can see, it’s in the gun manufacturer’s best interest, that they keep the NRA funded to lobby unabated, so that unlimited gun types, unlimited ammo and untraceable gunpowder gets out to any all all who want to use it for whatever purpose, even the criminals and the crazies.