On one side are those who explain these ghastly incidents as the outcome of a failed mental health system. On the other are pundits who say these preventable deaths are the consequence of America's patent inability to regulate guns. They are both right.
Recently U.S. Senators Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) proposed naming the Washington headquarters of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives after Eliot Ness, leader of the famed "Untouchables."
One year later, despite Congress's appalling lack of action, there has been important progress in some areas and states. The White House has quietly delivered on most of the executive actions President Obama promised in the aftermath of the Newtown shooting.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) was able to send its national response team to begin looking for a possible crime. The problem however, is that this has been getting in the way of the Chemical Safety Board (CSB).
As a House Committee prepares to vote on a resolution citing Attorney General Holder for contempt over the botched "Fast and Furious" gun trafficking operation, the American people should be wondering: Why is there no mechanism for us to hold the Congress in contempt?
Attorney General Eric Holder has been the subject of vicious partisan personal attacks on his integrity over the failed "gun walking" operation, "Fast and Furious." The hypocrisy of the double standard by congressional Republicans is obvious.
Gun rights activists are generally from the political right while marijuana reformers are typically from the political left. Ironically, if they could get past their distrust of each other, the two groups would discover that they are quite similar.
Now that Republicans in Congress won important concessions in the debt ceiling debate, the next partisan battle is likely to be over what promises to be the first major scandal of the Obama administration: the botched gun sting known as "Operation Fast and Furious."