Subscribe
Shop Local
Magazine
Gas Prices
Today's Poll!Giffords, Kelly launch gun control lobbying effort
Former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, center, holds hands with her husband, Mark Kelly, Jan. 4 while exiting Town Hall at Fairfield Hills Campus in Newtown, Conn. after meeting with Newtown officials. Giffords also met with families of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre that left 26 people dead. Tuesday was the second anniversary of the shooting of Giffords.
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
TUCSON, Ariz. (AP) — Former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and her husband launched a political action committee aimed at curbing gun violence on Tuesday as her Arizona hometown paused to mark the second anniversary of a deadly shooting rampage that left her with severe injuries.
Tucson residents rang bells at 10:11 a.m. — the moment a mentally ill gunman opened fire on Giffords as she met with constituents in 2011, killing six people and leaving 12 others injured. Mayor Jonathan Rothschild rang a bell at a fire station 19 times — one for each victim.
At the same time, two politicians on opposite ends of the gun debate held dueling weapons buy-backs outside a police station. Such events have been held around the country since the shooting at a Connecticut school that revived the gun control debate.
City Councilman Steve Kozachik asked people to turn in their guns for a $50 gift certificate from Safeway — the grocery store chain that owned the supermarket that was the site of the shooting. He wants to get guns out of people’s home and bring pressure on politicians to change gun laws.
About 200 firearms, many of them old, some inoperable, were turned in during the event, Tucson police said. They were set to be destroyed later in the day. Kozachik said he handed out about $10,000 worth of grocery gift certificates.
“We inherited the guns, and we had no use for them,” said Jason Munday, who traded in two old rifles. “Figured we’d just get them out of the house.”
In response to the event, a Republican outgoing state senator organized a gathering outside the same station where about a dozen people offered cash for guns. Several people waved signs and held up money to approaching drivers to announce they would buy their weapons.
Giffords also took a prominent role in the gun debate on the anniversary. She and husband Mark Kelly, a former astronaut, wrote in an op-ed published in USA Today that their Americans for Responsible Solutions initiative would help raise money to support greater gun control efforts.
“Achieving reforms to reduce gun violence and prevent mass shootings will mean matching gun lobbyists in their reach and resources,” the couple wrote in the column. They said it will “raise funds necessary to balance the influence of the gun lobby.”
The move was hinted at in Kelly’s recent comments that he and Giffords want to become a prominent voice for gun control efforts.
The couple last week visited Newtown, Conn., where a gunman opened fire in an elementary school, killing 20 children and six adults in December. They also met with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a billionaire who has spent some of his fortune in recent years on gun control efforts.
The couple was expected to discuss the initiative in an interview that aired Tuesday on ABC News.
The network offered a preview of the interview Monday and during “Good Morning America” on Tuesday. Kelly described a meeting with a father of a Connecticut victim in which he “just about lost it” after the parent showed him a picture of his child.
When asked by Diane Sawyer about when such violence happens to school children, Giffords responded: “Enough.”
In the op-ed piece, Kelly and Giffords discussed what they deem lawmakers’ inaction on curbing gun violence.
“In response to a horrific series of shootings that has sown terror in our communities, victimized tens of thousands of Americans, and left one of its own bleeding and near death in a Tucson parking lot, Congress has done something quite extraordinary — nothing at all,” Giffords and Kelly wrote in the op-ed.
“This country is known for using its determination and ingenuity to solve problems, big and small. Wise policy has conquered disease, protected us from dangerous products and substances, and made transportation safer. But when it comes to protecting our communities from gun violence, we’re not even trying — and for the worst of reasons.”
They hope to start a national conversation about gun violence and raise funds for political activity, so “legislators will no longer have reason to fear the gun lobby.”
As a House member, Giffords was a centrist Democrat who represented much of liberal-leaning Tucson but also more conservative, rural areas. She voiced support for gun rights and said she owned a Glock pistol. In the editorial, the couple mentioned they own two guns that are locked in a safe at their house.
Frank Antenori organized his own event, offering cash for guns and noting that a $50 gift certificate is way too low of a price for valuable weapons.
Antenori and Kozachik accused each other of acting out of political motivations. Antenori said the councilman was sullying both the Tucson and Connecticut school shooting victims by the timing of the buyback. Kozachik said the outgoing legislator was just trying to keep his name in the news and remain relevant.
He said the cash-for-guns scheme in the police department parking lot only served to bolster his argument that firearms laws need to be enhanced. At his event, police documented each gun turned in, took down names of those dropping them off and checked to be sure they were legal before loading the weapons into a truck for destruction.
Just a few hundred feet away, men holding signs reading “Cash for Guns” bought rifles and handguns with no paperwork, no questions asked.
“We have a fundamental hole in the private sales of guns. You can walk up right in front of a cop and buy a gun, no background check, nothing,” Kozachik said. “How much more flawed can the system be?”
Those buying the guns refused to comment, citing fear of retaliation.
Marry Me
Comments
GrumpyGus 4 months, 2 weeks ago
A shame these two can't use their unfortunate high profile to tackle the real issue. In nearly every high profile case (Columbine, Tuscon, Aurora, and Newtown), the shooters have been on highly powerful mind altering psych meds since their youth (some were still youths of course).
Two issues. First lets look at banning these drugs. You think the NRA is powereful, wait until big pharma pushes back on this fight. Second, rather than banning guns from everyone, why not ban those who have been on these powerful psych meds, or at least have those people evaluated prior to purchase of a gun.
There were just as many guns in the U.S. prior to the advent of these drugs, with much more lax gun laws, yet we didn't have these issues to this extent prior to the prescription pill popping generation.
There is the third issue of the culture, but I will keep that in my pocket.
asb 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Your idea of evaluating those on major psych drugs is good. I doubt the NRA would agree. As to the number and availability of guns in the US, I think you'd find that there are far more guns produced, sold, and available to a larger segment of the US population today than when these drugs were first introduced. The number of families or facilities with guns may be close to historic levels, but the actual number of guns has gone up tremendously, and their availability is off the charts. Reasoned, consistant enforcement of existing controls (more taxes), plus a re-establishment of the assualt ban, are the best way to reduce gun violence while maintaining gun rights. Rifles and shotguns for sport, and handguns for self-defense, are not going away and nobody in any administration has moved in that direction - ever; no matter what anybody says. But assualt weapons? C'mon guys, these are phallic proxies no matter what you say. Bring their firing rates to that of rifles and fine, collect them and shoot cats with them, but semi and fully auto have nothing but military value. It's a cultural psychosis to have high fire-rate weapons as available as they are. Banning them won't prevent good basement machinists from establishing semi and full fire rates, and won't prevent importing them for gang and criminal use, but a ban would greatly reduce their availability. This would be a good thing and still preserve the 2nd amendment.
asb 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Actually I do know more than enough about weapons to make my above statements. They are simplified and generic, but accurate. I'll leave it to you to elaborate on the arania of weapons, I had my fill of it in the late 60's, thanks. And as far as millions of ignorant voting on important issues, well now let's see . . .
RuthThomas 4 months, 2 weeks ago
asb - What is your definition of an assault weapon?
Paroquet 4 months, 2 weeks ago
You first, Ruth. A true assault weapon I'll lay wager you've never laid eyes on in person, unless you had military experience.
The civilian weapons used in the tragedies are A) used and kept by cops, and B) identical to "regular" varieties considered "assault style" (syn. "Assault Weapon" by the media) on the sole basis of appearance. Their functionality is the same.
An true assault weapon is a pen, paper, and a media outlet.
JCLifer 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Any gun that is painted black or camo, especially if the stock is metal or plastic..
Littleinvestor 4 months, 2 weeks ago
So a shotgun used for turkey hunting, with camo paint on it 'cause turkeys see so well, is an assault weapon?
JCLifer 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Any gun with a clip?
Or any gun with a strap?
For sure all semiautomatic weapons should be confiscated and destroyed? ;-)
GrumpyGus 4 months, 2 weeks ago
ASB, actually, this is the major point the NRA has been trying to make, but the knee-jerkers won't hear it. ANY gun in the hands of law abiding, responsible, and stable people are no risk at all. Allowing the deranged, over-medicated, and criminals to get their hands on guns is the problem. Outlawing gun ownership won't achieve that goal. And you are incorrect, per capita there were just as many guns in the US in the 70s (pre psych drug explosion) as there are today, and the gun laws were much more lax back then. Kids used to take their .22 rifles to school with them when they had target shooting practice after school (a school sport back in the 50s and 60s). Get the kids off the prescription dope, and we go much further toward stopping the violence.
Sequoia 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Gus, your plan would have done nothing to stop the recent Sandy Hook shooter. Those guns were owned by his mother.
The NRA should learn something from the recent election. Meet gun control advocates halfway, or get steamrolled when the NRA goes the way of Grover Norquist.
GrumpyGus 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Responsible gun ownership by the mother would have stopped the shooter, as well as armed security or armed teachers at the school (which is what the NRA advocates). Also, more stringent laws related to the treatment of mentally unstable people would have nipped this in the bud. Banning guns won't stop crazy overmedicated people from doing crazy incomprehensible crimes. Apply some logic to this one, don't knee-jerk.
GrumpyGus 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Additionally, and luckily our forefathers predicted this, the low information voters that decided the last election can have zero impact on the 2nd Amendment. The nation is still conservative at heart, just ask the majority Republican governors.
Littleinvestor 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Trap shooting and archery are still school sports. Many FFA chapters in the Ozarks have trap shooting teams and some have archery teams. Archery is also being taught in some rural schools as part of PE and lots of 4-H chapters have gun and archery teams. My nephew has competed in .22 rifle competitions as part of 4-H the last two years. Two years ago, the kids filled facilities at Linn Tech to overflowing at the state archery shoot.
GrumpyGus 4 months, 2 weeks ago
But I don't think they allow loaded .22s in the classroom anymore right? Maybe I'm mistaken.
Littleinvestor 4 months, 2 weeks ago
No, they don't. I unload my guns inside the house too. But it is not unusual for a student who hunts to have a gun, maybe loaded and maybe not, in their vehicle at school. Out here in the country, the school officials just let them know the gun has to be where they can't see it and remind the kids to keep their trucks and cars locked. There is lots of hunting before and after school around here. I'm only aware of one problem with that and it was up around St. Elizabeth a couple of years ago. I think the teens got convicted after they shot a youngster playing on a porch. Beer was involved, if I remember right. The trap guns are kept secured by the sponsor until they get to the practice/competition facility.
bluesfan13 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Except that the whole point of the 2nd Amendment was so that we could form militias to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government...
Sequoia 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Funny how people who are lost in the ideological wilderness of movement conservatism can find a way to connect "government" to every problem in our society, but they can't get their heads around the connection between sales of semi-automatic weapons and mass killing.
You realize the NRA has fought tooth and nail to stop the kind of gun regulations you're talking about?
spelchek 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Funny how people who are lost in the ideological wilderness of movement liberalism can find a way to connect "gun owners" to every problem in our society...
"...but they can't get their heads around the connection between sales of semi-automatic weapons and mass killing." -- You mean like Fast and Furious? The sale of weapons by our government to Mexican cartels used against US agents and innocent civilians (mass graves). Is it because they're not white you don't get as upset about this? Or is it because Obama can do no wrong? Explain how the war on guns will be won when the war on drugs is lost. Explain to law abiding citizens why they need to accept being criminals now because you deem their possessions dangerous to you. There are so many with guns that walk amongst you yet nothing happens on a daily basis. Why? Because there are those with guns that walk amongst you. Criminals are not stupid (up to a point), they follow the path of least resistance. The freak in Colorado purposely chose a theater unfriendly to concealed carry, this is no accident.
spelchek 4 months, 2 weeks ago
"...we’re not even trying..." -- The Clinton era assault ban proved that gun violence didn't change at all.
" A 2004 critical review of research on firearms by a National Research Council panel also noted that academic studies of the assault weapon ban "did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence" and noted "due to the fact that the relative rarity with which the banned guns were used in crime before the ban ... the maximum potential effect of the ban on gun violence outcomes would be very small...."
Laws are for law abiding citizens, until gun haters figure this out, there will always be a problem. Libs would love to see the rise of another Gestapo using the fist of government to create a vulnerable unarmed population in fear of it's government. As an example, we have liberals who only cry foul when white kids get shot according to Cornel West:
“We can’t just shed tears for those on the vanilla side of town,” West said. "But it’s a good thing that we now have a discussion on gun control. We need one on drone control. Not a peep, not a mumbling word when black folk get shot,” West added. “But now, Newtown, Connecticut, vanilla side — low and behold we got a major conversation. That’s wonderful. Each life is precious, but it just upsets me when we’re so deferential.”
3633 4 months, 2 weeks ago
The issue is there is a problem with using assualt weapons to kill people. These weapons are for war. Now, we are looking for a solution to change what is going on in the US. Pres. Obama did not oppose folks having guns or the second amendment rights, nor did he cause all this violence. Let's get the facts straight. Now the issue is all the murders, so something needs to be done to find a way to prevent this from occuring over and over. Stop blaming and work on a solution. How would you feel if it was your relative killed??? When things don't affect us personally we seem to have a different view!!!!
John 4 months, 2 weeks ago
I will try again. They are NOT assault weapons. These used in these mass killings are NOT for war. They are NOT military nor military-grade. They ARE the same kinds of rifles that have veen available for years.
"Let's get the facts straight." Yep, you are correct, Please Get YOUR facts straight.
RobHunterJohnson 4 months, 2 weeks ago
3633, wrong, we need to enforce the laws on the books, a mother gave her mental case son an oppurtunity to shoot not relizing he would do what he did! A neighbor lady bought two of the 3 guns used to kill the firemen, and a young lady old enough to purchase guns in colorado supplied the weapons at Columbine to two creepy kids in black? Fix the violent video games, people use to baby sit their children with, some one on another page this morning was complaining about people becoming snitches? Young adults party at an all night club with firearms concealed? Then they shoot up neighborhoods and gas stations at 5 am? Its time to enforce the laws on the books instead of strapping people with GPS, how about busting some rocks all day for about 20 years, that gun won't be so cool at that point. Make a clear path to Mental Health available, or enforcible. The woman in Conneticut should not ahave been allowed to remove her child from school to hide his illness. These people are sick, Guns do not fire by themselves, people pull the trigger. They killed all the people on 911 and never fire a shot? Box cutters and Jets. Open your eyes up! Rob
3633 4 months, 2 weeks ago
You are right Rob, but we still need to come together to do something to fix it and of course enforce the laws already in place!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Paroquet 4 months, 2 weeks ago
There is no "fixing it". The more people you have, the more nutters you're going to have. If one of them takes a shine to do something, they'll figure it out if they are capable.
I'll add that Timmy MacVeigh didn't use a gun. Just conventionally available stuff. He was judged sane. The Columbiners were sane. Best we can guess on the Sandyhook nutter was that his mom didn't know he was capable of such violence. If she was, given her portrayal with respect to her passion for firearms, why weren't the guns better secured?
Why were none of these stopped? Because nobody saw it coming. You can't fix that, because if nobody sees it coming it doesn't matter what the surprise or how it is engineered.
Sequoia 4 months, 2 weeks ago
But, if you read research on suicide and other types of violence (there's a great New Yorker article on suicide off the Golden Gate Bridge), in fact, people only go through short periods of time where they are actually capable of carrying through with violence on themselves or others. People who attempt suicide and fail often do not make another attempt. People who are stopped from a suicide attempt very often do not make another attempt. As one of the guys who jumped off the Golden Gate bridge and lived said: "As soon as I was over the handrail, I suddenly realized that every problem in my life had a solution.... except for the fact that I had just jumped off this bridge."
You can't just say "Well if they don't do it today, they'll do it tomorrow. They'll do it somehow." That is demonstrably untrue. The actual evidence is that these acts are often committed when the person is in a temporary mental state (I'm not saying legally insane, just in a bad head space, I guess). If you stop them then, they very likely will be stopped for good.
You can't stop the problem of nobody seeing it coming. But you can stop the problem of someone being able to get their hands on a semi-auto in the heat of a derranged moment.
As Homer Simpson said when he went to buy a gun: "Waiting period? But I'm mad now!"
RobHunterJohnson 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Thanks 3633, could be a misdmeaner, 3 years on 1rst, 5yrs on the second, and 10 on the 3rd? Thats not good enough in my book! Not only are they a commiting a crime, they are probably are not right in the head from dope, drinking, or just not enough spankings! Read these laws: Chapter 571, sec 571.030 Weapons offense state of Missouri. If you commit a crime with a Gun it should be personally expensive when caught, and 2/3 of 3 years is not enough time to be removed from society! Rob
Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting
Or login with:
OpenID