Today is the 11th anniversary of the 1999 mass shooting at Columbine High School, which left 13 dead.
Last Friday was the 3rd anniversary of the 2007 mass shooting at Virginia Tech, which left 32 dead.
And since those dark days, tens of thousands more Americans have been killed with guns by criminals and people with dangerous mental illness -- people who never should have had access to guns in the first place.
At Columbine, the killers bought their guns through a gap in federal law known as the "Gun Show Loophole," which allows anyone to walk into a gun show and buy a gun from a private seller with no background check at all.
At Virginia Tech, the killer was able to buy two guns after he passed a background check that was incomplete: it didn't include key information about his mental health that would have stopped the sale. Even worse, if his attempt to buy guns from a licensed gun dealer had been blocked, he could have simply gone to a gun show and bought his guns without any background check at all. That's why the Virginia Tech review panel called for closing the Gun Show Loophole.
And that's why the families of both Columbine and Virginia Tech victims and survivors have been working tirelessly for years to close the Gun Show Loophole. On Monday, in Colorado and Virginia, family members ran newspaper ads calling on Senator Tom Udall and Senator Jim Webb to add their support to the fight to close the loophole. The families know what's at stake, and they are working to make sure Congress does what's right.
But 11 years after Columbine, the Gun Show Loophole in federal law remains wide open.
So, today, the coalition of Mayors Against Illegal Guns that I co-chair with Mayor Tom Menino of Boston, now more than 500 mayors strong, is proud to join the Columbine and Virginia Tech families' effort by releasing new television ads which are running both nationally and in key states, calling on Congress to finally close the Gun Show Loophole. You can watch the ads at www.closetheloophole.org.
Watch the ads at www.closetheloophole.org/ads
In addition to the television ads, the coalition has launched a new grassroots petition campaign. Congress needs to hear directly from the American people that they support closing the Gun Show Loophole. We know that even 83% of gun owners support the measure, but Congress still hasn't listened to the people. We should all send them a message.
The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has concluded that gun shows are a major source for criminal traffickers -- and an undercover investigation that New York City conducted last year at gun shows in three states confirmed that truth.
When our investigators approached 30 unlicensed gun sellers to try and make purchases through the Gun Show Loophole, 19 of the 30 -- 63% -- sold to a buyer who said they probably could not pass a background check. Knowingly selling to someone you have a reason to believe is a prohibited purchaser is against the law -- even for sellers who are not required to conduct background checks.
The Gun Show Loophole is not a theoretical concern. Far too often, these illegal sales made through the Gun Show Loophole are arming criminals, leading to the deaths of innocent victims.
You can see for yourself by watching the undercover videos at www.closetheloophole.org/undercover.
More than a decade has passed since Columbine, and Congress has yet to address a clear gap in the law that endangers the lives of Americans everywhere.
Yet respect for the Second Amendment goes hand in hand with laws that help keep guns out of the hands of criminals and people with dangerous mental illness.
Enough is enough. We need Congress to finally do the right thing and take action on S.843/H.R.2324, the bill to close the Gun Show Loophole.
You can help. Visit www.closetheloophole.org to sign the petition today.
Let's all just sit back and appreciate the hypocritical irony there...shall we?
That said, I accept your tacit admission that you really have no substantive response to offer.
You explicitely said that guns were to blame. Guns are inanimate objects. You were blaming guns. Try again. "
Response
If two boys had gone into Columbine High School armed with knives intending to do harm, there would be a whole lot more kids alive.
Inanimate objects are not to blame, but the use of them, the choice of them is. And you can parse words all you want, but the facts don't change. The facts are that to kill someone with a knife means you have to get very close, and while you are doing it others can more easily stop you.
When you have a gun you can stand yards or feet away and shoot 5 people before anyone else can act. Now, parse that.
Oh, yes, and while there are lots of children who accidentally kill or are killed with their parents' guns each year, the truth is that those same kids would probably only have injured themselves on the off chance that they have become as fascinated with their parents' knives.
Now parse that.
To admit that guns are to blame for even one of these events, the Cons would open a pandora's box of additional cases where they would have to admit guns were to blame. If they have to admit that often enough, people who currently support guns might start to see guns as a problem.
"Gun culture" had nothing to do with Columbine, "glorification of violence" did.
These boys appeared to have an "us" against "them" mentality, and they chose to express it in this horrendous and violent way.
And somehow their parent's were oblivious to the clues to this aberrant mindset, or they chose to ignore it and hoped it would go away or resolve itself magically.
Their access to the guns was merely another trigger in an already sociopathic mentality. Obviously, bombs also intrigued them and were devised and implemented as a potential murder weapon.
It is already against the law to sell to an ineligible persons. If you know anything about gun laws, then you will know who these ineligible persons are.
Closing "that gap" is a ludicrous endeavor...just think of gang bangers selling guns to each other in an alley.
In which city are you statistically more likely to be the victim of a violent crime?
A) New York City
B) London
Hospitals kill people over guns by about a hundred to one. Falling off ladders kills more people than guns. So does diet, obesity, smoking and power tools.
By that tortured logic, the military kills people. Beestings kill people. The crap which passes for USDA approved food kills people.
Knives kill more people than guns and have for the past 375,000 years.
It's not such an absurd idea if you target only the knives whose primary (or sole) purpose is to kill or maim people. Admittedly, machetes are useful in a jungle but, last I checked, England didn't have one of those.
Its odd that people who think that not letting people have arsenals of assault weapons don't think that requiring people to carry weapons that they neither need or want isn't an assault on peoples' liberty.
I'm guessing you've never heard of a place called "Switzerland", eh?
i used to say that a 45 should be issued at birth, and then anyone who survived would learn to be civilized and polite.. a little sarcastic, but a little bit true.
I too would like it if guns were no longer, that the nuclear bomb was never invented, that there was no war.. we could live in a paradise if all our recources were devoted to peace and harmony.. but that is not so. not in this life.
thanks.
We understand Mike,
The little people
See if everyone turns in their gun.
put video on youtube when the gang members start turning their guns.
If you have no murders over a 5 yr period we can consider the law for the rest of the nation as well.
Should outlaw knives and scissors as well. I have heard that children can hurt themselves running with scissors.
It is ludicris to think we can get all of the guns
Why don't you go after the criminals ands teach safe gun handling in every school!
After watching police and shoot-um up shows I can honestly state that they do not show the real ability of a gun, if they did more people would fear them. From Cowboy movies, "I'll hide behind a table", to cop shows, "I'll hind on the other side of the door way!" guns are shown that they are not dangerous.
So, Sir! Please! Education, real criminal laws against the criminal not the citizen and reality in shoot-um up shows!
How can a gun law stop a criminal who does not follow laws ? Answer it can't, because it is impossible for a law to stop a criminal !
Whats the matter cat got your toung and you can't answer because you have no logical response to that cold hard fact which proves your whole premise a sham meant simply to further disarm people so as to move closer to the Satists goal of a one world corporate state which the left in America unkonwingly supports ....
Thast what I thought !
Next you will be telling us that laws against drugs are not working?
Another way would be to severely penalize those caught with illegal guns or selling illegal guns. Those selling dangerous narcotics are often given extensive prison terms and those drugs are, in my opinion, less dangerous than guns (because narcotics almost always only hurt those who choose to use them)
The gun argument is, on its face, based on the second amendment and the "fear" that government will become totalitarian. That's not a reasonable stance in the 21st century, in my opinion. In reality, I suspect the gun argument is based on the fact that the gun fans are insecure about something they have packed since birth and, instead, want to pack something that won't make people laugh. Of course, that's just my opinion. Flame away people.
The biggest thing I want to commend you for is the myth that if we have no guns the government will turn into a totalitarian regime. It is nonsense. There is no way that something like that could happen in this day. There are enough of us to fight it without guns if it were possible anyway. I think other countries with interests here would also try to intervene anyway.
The point is, guns are made to kill people. The fewer guns there are, the less likely a criminal will get one.
So much for that theory.
Funny how now it's the Democrats who supposedly support the blacks are still seeking to disarm them.
let's look at their racism even deeper, consider the FACT Al Gores father voted against the cival rights act of 1964 !
Did you know that the Democrat Party could not pass the cival rights act of 1964 and needed Republicans to pass it even though they had the majority in Congress ?nThats right my brother, they have been lying to you !
Here is the historicl record of how the vote on the Cival Rights Act of 1964 went down, which clearly shows Republicans supported it more than Democrats did ! So who is the racist now ?
The original House version:[9]
Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
Cloture in the Senate:[10]
Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version:[9]
Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:[9]
Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)
I guess the message is we as democrats care about you folks. You know those republicans will not.
Where does Jessie Jackson get his money. Does the DNC or the federal govt support the rainbow coalition?
McCain used to be a "maverick". Now he is just a shill for corporations and the delusional tea partiers. You can't go around lauding him for his mavericky stance when he is bending over for his new special interests
Your argument is akin to saying: the U.S. was attacked in World War II and so they fought a war to defend themselves. Therefore, the war in Iraq must have been fought to defend the U.S. (not for Halliburton's profits) bs.ecause in the 1940s the U.S. fought wars to defend itself. See how stupid that sounds?