|
||
The Best Mother's Day Gift of All
On Mother's Day, May 14, 2000, approximately 750,000 individuals, led by mothers concerned about gun violence, gathered on the National Mall in Washington, DC to demand sensible gun laws. Across the country, an additional 150,000 to 200,000 people marched in their own communities.
Marsha McCartney and her family, including two grandchildren, marched on Mother's Day in 2000 at the local event in Fort Worth, Texas. Marsha went on to become a member of the Brady Campaign Board of Trustees as well as the Chair of the National Council of Million Mom March Chapters.
Concerned about the violence in our country, Marsha left the May 2000 events ready to do what she could to help make her community safer. Now the co-president of the North Texas Brady Campaign Chapter based in Dallas, as well as state president of the Texas Million Mom March Chapters, Marsha believes that one day her state will strengthen its weak gun laws, and that Texas communities and families will be safer because of it.
Marsha sent me the following column she wrote for this Mother's Day, and I wanted to share it with you:
The Best Mother's Day Gift of AllThis Mother's Day, millions of American moms will receive flowers, gifts, and the special attention of loved ones.
But approximately eight moms will receive something else - the news that one of their children has been killed by a gun. Another 48 moms will learn that a child has been shot, but has survived. On an average day in America, 56 children and teens are the victims of gun violence - and eight of those die of their injuries.
That's every day of the year, Mother's Day included.
And those figures don't include the 76 adults who will be killed by a gun, or the 148 other adults who will be shot and wounded on Mother's Day. Each of these victims is someone's child, too.
Why does this happen? Because right now, it is far too easy to obtain a gun in America. In most states, even convicted felons and the dangerously mentally ill - like the perpetrator of the Virginia Tech massacre - can walk into any gun show and buy any weapon from an unlicensed seller without anyone checking their background. Or even asking them any questions.
It doesn't have to be that way.
Effective gun control legislation works. The Brady Bill, which was passed by Congress in 1993, has kept at least 1.5 million dangerous people from purchasing firearms. Think of how many moms have been unknowingly spared the pain of losing a child simply because the law prevented the purchase of a gun by someone who has no good reason to have one.
Unfortunately, the Brady Bill contained a loophole. The sensible and effective background checks imposed by Brady cover only sales by licensed gun dealers, but are not applied to the significant share of guns that are sold every day by unlicensed sellers at gun shows. It doesn't take an advanced degree to figure out that if you want a weapon but can't pass the background check, you go to a gun show.
What can we moms do? One common-sense step we can take is to help close the gun-show loophole. Legislation has been introduced in Congress to do just that, and all three of the leading presidential candidates have previously voiced their support of the idea. But our elected representatives need to hear from every mom, loudly and clearly, that we support this bill and that we will keep pressuring them until it is passed and signed into law.
Getting gifts on Mother's Day is wonderful. But imagine if every mother in America joined together and persuaded Congress to close the loophole that makes gun violence against our children so prevalent.
That means eight more moms may get to kiss their child good night on Mother's Day. That means another 48 moms might get to tuck their kids into their own beds instead of spending Mother's Day at a hospital bedside.
Now that gift would be priceless.
(Note to readers: This entry, along with past entries, has been co-posted on bradycampaign.org/blog and the Huffington Post.)
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
What's happening to these reply icons?
"When the NRA talking points are shot down and the lies exposed"
I was referring to this Jade. When did this happen? And yes, I know who Mary Rosh is.
I should also point out that Jade's posts continue to be a failing attempt to change the topic away from the fact that he intentionally fudged numbers in order to claim that Chicago's homicide rate was actually lower than the state as a whole. It is also an attempt to distract that he has not shown one iota of evidence of his claims that anyone here are sockpuppets.
But this is SOP for those who are adverse to reality.
Thirdpower--for ironpyrite to call you a sockpuppet is a compliment--because those he calls "sockpuppets" seem to be doing the right thing--trying to defend the 2nd amendment (as opposed to the l owroad smears of the anti civil rights bunch)
I should also point out that in the case of Theodore Fiddleman (aka Paul Blackman, NRA employee), many of Fiddleman's articles were co-authored with NRA adherent, Dave Kopel.
When Fiddleman's/Blackman's sockpuppetry was initially disclosed, Kopel denied knowing Fiddleman was actually Paul Blackman of the NRA. He now admits he knew who Fiddleman was all along.
Kopel is a lawyer and while his actions WRT Fiddleman/Blackman weren't illegal--they certainly raise questions as to his ethics.
Drurylane--I thought you said you were looking forward to Paul's new blog, the Kelli I so love used to relish the idea of the proRKBA people demonstrating the weakness of the Brady position.
Do you prefer Drurylane or Kelli? Do you always let Jadegold do your thinking for you? Are the two of you always so offensive?
As far as the name goes, it has nothing to do with Woodrow Wilson. I think you may have an overblown sense of your own importance.
I have a black and white French Bulldog. He looks like a soccer ball with ears. I named him Wilson after Tom Hank's ball is 'Castaway'. It's the dog's name, not mine.
Goodness. Is there no shame?
Wilson333 is now blaming his dog!
Goodness, is there no evidence?
Of course not, it's Jadegold.
Is there something wrong with you? I took the advice of one of the others today, and did a Google search on you. I saw your website. I saw what everyone else is saying about your trollery. I'm not sure if that's a word. You have quite a reputation, and it is not good.
I also visited Bryan Miller's site. It looks like you were chased out of there by everyone, because you simply do not tell the truth. Some of the claims you make are just bizarre. You also have a talent for being obtuse, when presented with evidence from the other side.
And I wonder exactly what is causing the obvious anger management issues of yours?
WIlson--I have an undersized chocolate Labrador (he only weighs 90 pounds) that would love to be friends with your French Bulldog (Coco has been known to chase other Labs into our backyard to play and very happily accepts Maltese lapmops and cats)
Wilson is pretty goofy looking. Coco might die laughing. Have you ever seen one of these guys? He looks like a little alien. The ears look like they belong on a shepherd, and this guy is a little smaller than an English Bull.
*Wilson*
I posted a few quotes by Woodrow Wilson on rights ... and soon thereafter, a sockpuppet by the name of "Wilson333" joins here.
Can they be anymore obvious, I wonder?
Does Kelli have an original thought in her head or does she have to take all her prompting from others.
Of course you notice that she has to ignore the fact that the IL rep from Lake County is under attack by the Brady Campaign for recognizing the facts. I wonder who she thinks are the "meanies".
You'd have to ask her, wouldn't you RK?
But I can tell you, this particular rep. you keep referring to is into Conservation, keeping tabs on Urban Sprawl, Adoption Reform, etc. She has never been considered (nor is she now...) a progun type like yourself. My kids met her while learning about the Illinois General Assembly; and they liked her!
Like I said before quite appropriately, RK -- you would have to ask HER ("her" meaning the legislator you're referring to). She's an elected official, and can probably speak for herself ... don't you think?
Again, this is SOP.
When the NRA talking points are shot down and the lies exposed, you will see the NRA-sanctioned sockpuppetry arise. John Lott is such an example.
Anybody ever hear of Theodore Fiddleman?
{{More recently, JAMA received a letter from Theodore H Fiddleman, which was critical of a study it had published correlating tobacco firms' campaign contributions and legislation in favour of the industry. Fiddleman has now been exposed as an invention of Paul H Blackman, research coordinator for the National Rifle Association's lobbying and research arm.8 Blackman admitted to a string of essays and letters published since the 1970s under Fiddleman's name. JAMA fortunately uncovered the fraud before publication; Blackman's writing style had been recognised. }}
Wilson333 has appeared on other forums under different names.
Lather, Rinse, Repeat.
Again this is Jade SOP. When he has no evidence to back himself up, he'll continue to repeat himself and throw in more ad hominems to change the subject.
He must be getting advice from the 7 million people he invented for Chicago.
Notice that there's a citation there but Jade doesn't have the "stones" to present the source of it?
Keep your head down Wilson! You're being "cyberbuillied"(tm)!!!
Stones said:
"When the NRA talking points are shot down and the lies exposed, you will see the NRA-sanctioned sockpuppetry arise. John Lott is such an example."
When did this happen? You have some case of denial going there, pal. Wilson, and everyone else who has never been to Bryan Miller's blog, this guy gets caught in a lie every day when he posts there. Then he denies it, even when you use his own posts against him, and show it to him in black and white. He is a troll.
Do a Google search on Jadegold. He's famous for harassing people on conservative forums, and here. He has been known to publish people's personal information on the web. He even admits it.
"Wilson333 has appeared on other forums under different names."
Another lie that can't prove, so he just keeps repeating it.
Kelli--it would be nice to see you come up with something original--reach down REAL DEEP, try to come up with some facts (as opposed to your usual fictions and spoiled cud), remember the goal is HIGHROAD (and keep out of the muck), counter the opposition with truth and not ignorant whining. and being derivative is bad
Gonna have to go with more *crickets*! For a group that so passionately believes what they claim, where are you come time to argue the claims made by your opponents? Why do you flee so quickly? If there is a basis to stand your ground - do it!
And just out of curiosity, realizing of course Bryan Miller is no shining beacon, at least he is willing to address those who present arguments against his position. I have never, EVER, seen a post (or further comment) from Mr. Helmke, either to address or refute a comment made here. Why is that? (Truly curious...)
Expecting nothing, but thought I'd ask.
It's never happened in the year and a half thaat I've been paying attention. He has hirlings deal with us. First it was Macca and Kelli. Now it's just Kelli. BTW, Macca fervently denied being an employee of the BC. We found out later that this was not true.
An anti caught in a lie. Imagine that.
Hey guys, Paul is breaking into Showbiz! Check out the email I got from Sarah Brady today!:
"Watch Brady President Paul Helmke on The Colbert Report with Stephen Colbert. Paul will be on a segment called "Better Know a Lobbyist."
Date: Tuesday, May 13
Time:
11:30 pm Eastern and 10:30 pm Central
11:30 pm Pacific and 12:30 am (Wed) Mountain
Channel: Comedy Central
Check your local listings to confirm times and channel. It will be rebroadcast on Wednesday. Visit The Colbert Report for more information.
Sincerely,
Sarah Brady, Chair"
Break a leg, Paul!
With the whopper that Paul kept repeating (that the Brady Campaign was not trying to ban civilian ownership of guns)--good thing his nose did not grow like Pinocchio's
Semi -Precious Stones said:
"You're a sockpuppet, Wilson333.
Either that or you're plagiarizing the comments of other sockpuppets.
Neither alternative is particularly admirable."
Stones, you are the last person on the planet who should be telling other people what qualities are admirable. Personally, I think you are trying to "cyberbully"(tm) the new guy out of here.
I don't blame you for being desperate to get away from the Chicago crime issue, but to accuse a brand new contributor of plagiarism, just to change the subject, only speaks of your own desperation.
Black shame on you.
Maybe Kelli will call the National Guard on him.
the national guard can always need another laugh,
*crickets* *crickets**crickets* *crickets**crickets* *crickets**crickets* *crickets**crickets* *crickets**crickets* *crickets**crickets* *crickets**crickets* *crickets**crickets* *crickets**crickets* *crickets*
Parents take note: If you want to quiet an unruly child, just read them some factual-based studies which debunk the gun control myths....
Seems to be working wonders over here.
Drurylane-when are you hooking up with Jadegold and Lady Solitude at Roscoe's Chicken and Waffles?
I don't much care for waffles.
So have the chicken.
Edu -- I have to wonder: How old do you think this little group of progun "regulars" are ... in their 70s, 80s? They never seem to have to 'get back to work' like the rest of us. And I doubt they're especially fast typists. LOL
BTW, waffles are really good. You just haven't had a good one...
Hello all. I'm a new poster here, but I've been a regular reader of the Brady Campaign Blog, and have been following it for over a year. I've been sort of a fence-sitter on the issue of gun control. I was never in favor of banning any type of gun, but I had previously thought that some controls were necessary, like background checks, registration, permits, that sort of thing.
I no longer feel that way, after seeing what these draconian gun laws have done to my former city, which I loved. Chicago is a pit of crime. I don't think I even know anyone there who hasn't been mugged at least once. Most were mugged at gunpoint. The gun ban hasn't done a thing to prevent crime, or keep guns out of the wrong hands.
Further, I have noticed over the last year, that the pro-gun side of this issue always seems to have their ducks in a row, so to speak. The links that they post to the sources for their information have been very helpful and educational. I am especially fond of links to government agencies, like the FBI and DOJ. You have to figure they are about as objective as you can get. Thank you, for helping me open my eyes.
The other side has a lot of emotion based rhetoric and ad-hominem, not to mention a liberal sprinkling of junk research. No ducks.
Sorry, Jadegold, but you don't have a clue about Chicago.
Welcome aboard, Wilson. New voices and fresh perspectives are always welcome.
Welcome Wilson333.
I've always known there to be a number of lurkers who read but never or rarely post. That is why we are here.
As I've said many times before, don't believe anything as gospel from either side. Check out the info for yourself and decide for yourself who is armed with the ultimate weapon...the truth.
Welcome aboard, WIlson333. Here's some more interesting facts about Chicago of which you are probably already aware.
"Since the beginning of the year through March, 70% of the murder victims had prior arrest records and 97% of the offenders had prior arrest records."
Approximately 81% of murders involved firearms with the most common motive being gang-related. Almost 30% of the murders were gang-related..."
http://egov.cityofchicago.org/webportal/COCWebPortal/COC_EDITORIAL/March08CrimeStats.pdf
Anti's like jade and Kelli and Paul Helmke like to ignore recidivism as being a key component of crime, and how our court system is letting career violent criminals onto the streets to re-offend again and again, regardless of the implement they choose to use. Case in point, the lengthy rap sheets of the three scumbags who just killed the philly officer. All career criminals, all out early.
None of the anti's can ever give a rebuttal or explanation to Thirdpower's often-referenced statistic about Chicago, accounting for 22% of the state's population, contributes 60% of the state's homicides either.
There's plenty of statistical-based research out there which debunks the gun-control myth. The problem is that many sheeple only believe what their spoonfed by the media.
"Since the beginning of the year through March, 70% of the murder victims had prior arrest records and 97% of the offenders had prior arrest records."
This is pretty much the same story all over the country. Most of the homicides in the US are related to a criminal enterprise, like drugs, or gang issues. The overwhelming majority of the homicides are criminal on criminal. And, all indications are that they are not getting their guns from gun shows (another thing the Bradys keep harping on that makes no sense).
Speaking of Philly, I have a sister who lives in lower Bucks County, about a half hour north of the city. She used to live in the Writtenhouse area of Philadelphia, which is very nice. There are a lot of exlusive shops, brownstones, and high-rise condos. It's the high rent district you might say.
About 3 years ago, they found the dead body of a young woman in a stairwell about a half block from her front door. Since then, there have been a number stabbings, shootings, muggings, and serial rapists plaguing her neighborhood, so she moved to the burbs. And this was a nice part of the city.
Another tactic of NRA cultists is to resort to sockpuppetry when their arguments have been exposed as so much gas.
Joh Lott aka Mary Rosh is a famous example. Lott was getting a good going over on a forum and decided to create 'Mary Rosh' who thought John Lott and his research was simply the greatest thing since sliced bread.
However, NRA-sanctioned sockpuppetry occurs on blogs--like this one. Wilson333 is a perfect example. In fact, his post above is almost verbatim to ones he has posted on this site, the Brady Campaign blog, and other forums where gun policy is discussed.
The MO is identical: the sockpuppet claims to be somewhat neutral on the issue of gun control; a fence-sitter. But he cannot hide his admiration for the logic, reason, facts, and civility of the NRA quislings. OTOH, he is saddened and chagrined by the gun control types who are raving lunatics. The sockpuppet then, almost tearfully, thanks the NRA serfs for "opening his eyes" or the like.
This is generally followed by a Kumbayah session with his fellow NRA dupes.
Kabuki (not Kecibukia) theater at its finest.
Another tactic of Jadegold is to resort to ad hominems and red herrings when his arguments have been exposed as so much gas.
Claiming Chicago has 9.7 million residents is a famous example. Jade couldn't respond to the fact that Chicago has 5x the murder rate of the rest of the state, completely destroying his regular claims of absolute causality, so had to fudge the numbers to make it seem like gun bans were the greatest thing since sliced bread.
However, Jade-sanctioned "reasoned discourse" occurs not only here but on his own blog where he has been caught editing and deleting posts.
The MO is typical. When Jade presents facts and is shown to be completely wrong or disingenuous, he then makes posts completely changing the subject and/or attacking groups based on claims only he makes.
Slapstick comedy at its finest.
Jadegold: Proving once again that ad hominem and strawmen are all the anti's have.
jade, why don't you take a stab at the Dr Moorehouse study and the Chicago recidivism link I've provided below. Your venue may have changed (getting embarrassed from Bryan Miller's blog and running over here) but your unsubstantiated drivel hasn't.
Jade, as far as I've seen, the only person here who has been exposed as being less than truthful is you. I've never posted on this, or any other gun control blog. I have posted on a pro-gun blog a few times. I am a gun owner, after all. I owned one when I lived in Chicago, and it was illegal. That hardly sounds neutral to me. Now, I live in a free state, so I needn't worry about it.
Although, I would be interested to know who I am supposedly quoting verbatim.
I never said I was neutral. I thought that some controls were necessary, even though I didn't believe they were constitutional. I always believed that the 2nd Amendment referred to individuals.
You should spend some time in Chicago, Jadegold. It might open your eyes.
Sorry Jadegold, sock puppets are of no value when one has the truth on their side.
P.S. Ask Kelli why she bothers to post here.
I think if Kelli wants to talk to legislators about the NRA being "meanies", she needs to talk to Lake County Il Rep Sandy Cole. The Brady Bunch have used some of their dwindling resources to send out misleading mailings and robocalls attacking her vote against forcing people to go through FFL's for handgun purchases.
What Ms. Cole realized but the Brady's don't mention is that to purchase a handgun in IL, one needs a FOID card. That database is updated by the ISP daily w/ criminal and mental checks. So there already is a background check unless the ISP fail in their job.
The funniest part is that calls supporting her vote are outnumbering the Brady's calls by a wide margin and she is running unopposed in her district.
Think the Brady's have made a friend?
Will Kelli call and actually try and discuss it? Rep. Cole's office people are quite friendly.
This isn't the legislator I referred to in my earlier post, RK.
But you do make me wonder: Why would you & your gunrights advocates be constantly calling a representative in northwest Illinois when you don't live in her district?
Jade, just in case your Eleutherophobia prevents you from opening the link. I'll continue....
"Moorhouse: [...nor did we find that there was this contagion effect. That is, that a neighboring state with weak gun control laws seemed to have no effect on crime rates in the primary states.....But if I may go on, what we did find was kind of the reverse. In areas that had high crime rates, there seemed to be political support for more stringent gun control.....
Kokai: One of the political implications of your study would seem to be that the argument that you set out to test would lead some to think that, well, if we want the most effective control, then all the states should adopt the most stringent forms of gun control to avoid having this spillover or the contagion effect that you were talking about. It sounds as if your study would suggest that, no, that wouldn't have any difference. You'd just have stronger gun control with no impact on crime.
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=3628
Moorhouse: Yes, exactly. There is just no support for this contagion effect. But you --continually hear people talk about good gun control laws being undermined by the laws of an adjacent state. I had not seen any studies that really explored that in a systematic, statistical way. And our study, again, found no support for that hypothesis."
Jadegold-
Instead of kicking your strawmen around, maybe you'd like to have a look at an actual study done. Dr Moorehouse has completely debunked your gun control and contagion theory. I don't expect a response. Bryan Miller still won't comment on it.
"Kokai: So, how did you go about trying to test just how good the correlation was between gun control laws and the amount of crime?
Moorhouse: Well, as I said earlier, I'm looking at, or looked at, crime rates by state. And there are a number of factors: demographic factors, economic factors and law enforcement factors. And I took those into account. Then I had an index of gun control, which was constructed out of 30 facets of gun control put into six categories and weighted...
Kokai: So, putting together this study, seeing this index of gun control, comparing that then to the crime rates in the 50 states, did you find any relationship?
Moorhouse: I found absolutely no support that gun control laws reduce crime rates. And crime rates, we looked at property crime, violent crimes -- ten categories of crimes -- and in not one of them did we find any impact of gun control, nor did we find that there was this contagion effect."
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=3628
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
