Tag Archives: Background check

May 8, 2013 · 9:27 PM

Connecticut gun rights group smears father of boy killed at Sandy Hook

Neil Heslin screenshot

More despicable “gun rights” smear campaigning.

This man lost a son to gun violence and what they do is smear him to shut him up.  Something tells me that Neil Heslin will not be silenced or deterred by this group of low-life idiots.  In fact I hope the blow-back from their actions is swift and fierce.

The Raw Story

A small Connecticut gun rights group gained attention on Wednesday after issuing a press release that smeared the father of a boy killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Connecticut Carry released a “rap sheet” of Neil Heslin, listing his multiple arrests for driving under the influence and conviction for felony narcotics possession. The group also published a document entitled “Neil Heslin’s Troubled Past,” which included lawsuits related to foreclosure, collection efforts, and child support.

“So often we find that the strongest critics of the right to bear arms are those people who cannot be trusted with firearms themselves,” the nonprofit group wrote it its statement. “A felon within arm’s reach of the president of the administration so dead set on background checks. No better testimony to how ineffective background checks are needs to be presented.”

Heslin has spoken out in support of stronger gun laws, including expanding criminal background checks and restricting high-capacity magazines. His appearances on TV and at legislative hearings have made him one of the more well-known relatives of the victims of the tragic school shooting, which left 20 young children and 6 adults dead.

“While we all, as humans, share in the sorrow and outrage of Mr. Heslin’s tragic loss, as well as everyone who lost someone on that terrible day; we don’t all have to feel ok with Mr. Heslin profiting off of the tragedy and hurting the gun owning, law abiding citizens who did nothing wrong that day,” Connecticut Carry said.

How Heslin is profiting from his advocacy is unclear. The Huffington Post contacted several prominent gun control groups, but none of them said they ever employed Heslin.

Related articles

4 Comments

Filed under Gun Advocates, Gun Lobby

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

May 2, 2013 · 1:08 PM

MSNBC’s Brzezinski And Heilemann Blast ‘Childish Purely Political’ GOP

TFC wrote about Sen. Pat Toomey’s “revelation” here.

Mediaite

On Thursday, Morning Joe took on Sen. Pat Toomey‘s (R-PA) remark about how many Republicans opposed background checks because they didn’t want to be seen helpingPresident Obama. The roundtable criticized the GOP for being “childish” about an important issue, making their moves based purely on politics. It may work now, John Heilemannargued, but it’ll do the party long-term damage.

“In the end, we didn’t [pass the measure] because our politics have become so polarized,” Toomey said. “There were people on my side who did not want to be perceived to be helping something that the president wanted to accomplish, simply because it’s the president who wants to accomplish it.”

“You would want to argue that that potentially couldn’t be happening” Mika Brzezinski remarked. “And that, potentially on issue is as important as this, would not happen — that Republicans would not be so childish.”

Yet polling shows otherwise, she asserted, including among Republicans. It’s “purely political throughout,” Heilemann later added, noting that it’s just the latest development in what has been congressional Republicans’ strategy for some time: Opposing Obama.

“This feeds into this fundamental dynamic of the Republican Party right now,” he asserted. “The things that they do to try to thwart the president every turn do not hurt them particularly at the level of congressional politics. They will likely hold on to the House of Representatives in 2014, they may even make gains in the Senate in 2014. But they continue to do themselves long-term damage at the level of a national party because of the fact that 88 percent of people are in favor of this bill.”

Take a look, via MSNBC:

Related articles

1 Comment

Filed under GOP, GOP Hubris

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

May 1, 2013 · 7:52 PM

Pat Toomey: Background Checks Died Because GOP Didn’t Want To Help Obama

Pat Toomey Background Checks

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) blamed partisan politics for the failure of his bipartisan push to expand background checks for gun sales. (Photo by Jeff Fusco/Getty Images)

Most folks knew this since Robert Draper’s book came out.  It’s not often that a GOP Senator spills the beans in this way though.  Bravo Sen. Toomey…

The Huffington Post

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) revealed that some members of his party opposed expanding background checks for gun sales recently because they didn’t want to “be seen helping the president.”

Two weeks ago, only three Republican senators voted for the bipartisan background checks amendment sponsored by Toomey and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), despite overwhelming popular support for such a measure.

“In the end it didn’t pass because we’re so politicized. There were some on my side who did not want to be seen helping the president do something he wanted to get done, just because the president wanted to do it,” Toomey admitted on Tuesday in an interview with Digital First Media editors in the offices of the Times Herald newspaper in Norristown, Pa.

The Times Herald noted that in “subsequent comments,” Toomey “tried to walk that remark part-way back by noting he meant to say Republicans across the nation in general, not just those in the Senate.”

Last week, Toomey placed more of the blame on the president himself, telling the Morning Call, “I would suggest the administration brought this on themselves. I think the president ran his re-election campaign in a divisive way. He divided Americans. He was using resentment of some Americans toward others to generate support for himself.”

Manchin has argued, however, that the National Rifle Association’s decision to score the vote was the main reason the compromise amendment on background checks failed. Without it, he believed, 70 senators — well above the 60-vote threshold needed for passage — would have supported it.

Opponents also pushed a significant amount of misinformation before the vote, including the myth that the legislation would lead to a federal gun registry. In fact, the bill would have made the creation of such a registry a felony carrying a prison sentence of up to 15 years.

Toomey was pessimistic on Tuesday about the prospects of gun legislation moving forward, saying it’s “not likely to happen any time soon.”

“The bill is available right now and Sen. (Majority leader Harry) Reid could bring it up for a vote at any time, but we need five people to change their minds,” he said.

Sens. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and other lawmakers who voted against the background checks legislation have seen drops in their poll numbers since opposing the legislation.

Toomey, on the other hand, has seen his poll numbers rise.

Related articles

 

4 Comments

Filed under GOP Agenda, GOP Malfeasance

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

April 24, 2013 · 1:54 PM

Kelly Ayotte’s Approval Rating Plunges After Vote Against Gun Background Checks

Kelly Ayotte Approval

I’d call this revelation an excellent example of just desserts…

The Huffington Post

A new poll has New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte down a total of 15 points from her previous approval rating in a survey that followed her vote against requiring background checks for firearms purchases.

Ayotte’s plunge underscores the changing politics around gun control and gun safety. In years past, lawmakers worried that a vote for gun control would bring the anger of the National Rifle Association. In the new reality, votes against gun control also carry a political risk, as the Ayotte (R) poll indicates.

A full three-quarters of New Hampshire voters support such background checks, along with 56 percent of Republicans, according to Public Policy Polling. A WMUR Granite State Poll taken in January and February found that more than 9 in 10 state residents supported implementing background checks at gun shows.

It’s not entirely clear yet how opposition to background checks will play out at the polls, but there are signs Ayotte’s vote may have taken a toll.

In October, the last time that PPP surveyed voters about Ayotte, she had a 48-35 approval rating. She has now tumbled underwater, with 46 percent disapproving and 44 percent approving. The 11-point surge in disapproval threatens Ayotte’s 2016 reelection, when she could face popular Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan. Ayotte won her 2010 race by 23 points, but in a hypothetical matchup against Hassan trails 46-44.

Forty-five percent of independents in the state disapproved of Ayotte, up 13 points since October. Half of voters said her vote on background checks made them less inclined to vote for her, with only a quarter saying it made them more likely to support her.

Among the critical third of voters who described themselves as moderates, disapproval of Ayotte increased by 21 points, with two-thirds saying her vote against background checks made them less likely to vote for her. Only 13 percent said it made them more likely to back her, an overwhelming 5-1 margin.

Local coverage has not been friendly to Ayotte. Sunday’s Portsmouth Herald headlined its editorial: “If you want gun control, vote Ayotte out of office.”

“New Hampshire voters who care passionately about sensible gun legislation can contribute to the effort by defeating U.S. Sen. Kelly Ayotte, the only senator in New England to vote against the Toomey-Manchin bill. Ayotte justified her vote by parroting the NRA, saying the measure would ‘place unnecessary burdens on law-abiding gun owners and allow for potential overreach by the federal government into private gun sales.’”

The Concord Monitor was flooded with angry letters and ran a rough cartoon of her. The editorial page called it a “double abomination.” She was hit by a tough ad paid for by Gabby Giffords’ group — the kind of on-the-ground spending that is helping to alter the political dynamic.

Dean Debnam, president of PPP, sees it as trouble for Ayotte. “New Hampshire is a good bellwether for fallout from the gun vote,” he said. “There’s serious backlash from voters toward Kelly Ayotte for how she handled this issue.”

The PPP poll surveyed 933 New Hampshire voters using automated phone calls between April 19 and 21.

 

Related articles

2 Comments

Filed under Gun Background Checks

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

April 18, 2013 · 1:00 PM

Gun Violence Victims Detained, Put Through Background Check For Yelling ‘Shame On You’ At Senators

Shameful…

Think Progress

“Shame on you!” Patricia Maisch and Lori Haas yelled in rapid succession at the 46 senators who had just voted to kill a compromise amendment to expand background checks for gun purchases at gun shows or online. The women were sitting in the gallery with a large group of gun violence victims as the Senate responded to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut by defeating the measure advocates and law enforcement officials consider crucial to keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill.

The pair has first-hand experience with the consequences of the broken system. In 2011, Maisch was hailed as a hero for disarming Tucson shooter Jared Loughner by preventing him from reloading a fresh magazine. Haas’ daughter Emily was shot twice during the Virginia Tech shooting in 2007 and survived, leading her to become a proponent of stronger gun regulations. But on Wednesday afternoon, the two women faced tighter scrutiny for interrupting a Senate proceeding than many individuals seeking to purchase guns.

As they left the Senate gallery, a police officer approached and asked them to follow him. The three walked downstairs to a public hallway, where they were peppered with questions: “What’s your name?” “Where are you from?” “What are your Social Security numbers?” The officer left to run a background check on the women, who were instructed to sit on a bench. Another uniformed officer watched over them, even escorted Haas to the bathroom and told her she couldn’t lock the stall door.

Sitting there, waiting for the officer to return, Haas stewed over the failed vote. “I just can’t fathom that these people don’t have a heart,” she told ThinkProgress in a phone interview. “If they had seen, just one miniscule of the pain I’ve seen from the Virginia Tech families and so many other families that I’ve worked with in the last 6 years, they couldn’t help but want to do something about stoping gun violence.”

An hour and a half later, another law enforcement official approached and quizzed the the two women further. He asked them about their intentions and where they were from, why they were in D.C., how long they planned to stay and when they were leaving.

The entire ordeal stretched for almost two hours — approximately 115 minutes longer than a background check at a federal gun dealer. Haas noted the irony of undergoing hours of questioning while permitting gun purchases without any screening at gun shows or online.

“The irony is not lost on me and it’s not lost on the American public,” Haas said. “Very ironic that an hour and a half investigation into two women shouting in the Senate gallery takes place and yet real criminals and other prohibited purchasers get willy nilly access to fire arms.”

3 Comments

Filed under Guns

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

April 17, 2013 · 4:44 PM

SENATE KILLS BACKGROUND CHECK AMENDMENT

 

Background-Check Amendment Fizzles

The Huffington Post

The Senate failed to muster sufficient support Wednesday for a gun-buyer background check bill that’s supported by nearly 90 percent of Americans, voting the measure down in a procedural vote that likely dooms any major legislation to curb gun violence.

The measure — painstakingly crafted by the bipartisan duo of Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) — was seen as the key to getting the first measure in decades to address the sorts of mass slaughters that so recently horrified the country in Newtown, Conn., where 20 children and six teachers were gunned down, and in Auroro, Colo., where moviegoers where killed in a theater.

The amendment failed 54 to 46, falling short of the 60-vote threshold needed to break a filibuster of the measure, even as victims of the Sandy Hook shootings watched from the Senate gallery and activists at a vigil outside the Capitol read the names of people slain since then, hoping to prompt action.

Passage of the background check amendment had been seen as key because it represented a bipartisan agreement in a highly polarized debate, and would have preserved a major part of the overall bill that many advocates against gun violence saw as a minimum step toward stemming gun massacres.

Stronger measures up for a vote also appeared headed for failure, including a ban of assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines. The only significant steps that all sides agreed on were stemming illegal trafficking of weapons and improving mental health efforts.

The background check measure would have expanded the current check system to cover sales of weapons on the Internet and at gun shows.

Democratic aides privately conceded that with the failure of background checks, the rest of the bill would likely go down. One described it as a “pyrhic victory,” noting that a majority of the Senate backed the bill that is so popular outside the halls of Congress. “It’s the farthest we’ve come,” said the aide, speaking on background to talk freely.

The aides saw little hope of it being resurrected, although leaders kept that option open.

Opponents argued that the expanded check system would have laid the groundwork for a national registry of gun owners, although the measure expressly forbid such a step with a 15-year jail sentence for anyone who tried to do that.

They also called it a useless step that would achieve little.

“Expanded background checks would not have prevented Newtown,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Neb.) said.

But Toomey said his amendment would have at least been a modest step in the right direction.

“The goal was to see if we can find a way to make it a little bit more difficult for people who have no legal right to have a gun for them to obtain it,” Toomey said. “That was the goal.”

The Seante failed to meet it.

 

2 Comments

Filed under Gun Control Legislation, Gun Lobby

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

April 6, 2013 · 5:35 AM

These Women Were Murdered After Their Stalkers Acquired A Gun

Think Progress

Every year, thousands of domestic abusers fall through the cracks of our current background check system, often with tragic consequences for the women they terrorize. The “gun show loophole,” which the Senate is considering closing as part of a gun reform package, allows violent individuals who are banned from buying or owning a gun to easily skip background checks through private sales.

Technically, under the Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban, people who have committed a misdemeanor of domestic violence or are the subject of a restraining order are prohibited from buying or owning a gun. Yet it is all too easy for convicted abusers looking to punish or kill their targets to get their hands on weapons. Over 90 percent of female homicide victims are killed by someone they know, and 76 percent of these victims were stalked before their deaths. Guns are the most common weapon used in these murders.

Moreover, federal gun bans are so narrowly defined that many abusers can pass a background check to buy guns legally. For instance, current federal law does not disqualify convicted stalkers from buying guns. Federal domestic abuse protections also do not extend to people who were not married, related to, cohabitated, or had a child with their abuser. A new billintroduced by Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA) would extend the gun ban to people who abused a dating partner, a relatively common occurrence.

Access to guns all but ensures that an abusive situation turns fatal. Domestic abusers who have access to firearms are over 7 times more likely to kill their partners. From 2009 to 2012, 40 percent of mass shootings started with the shooter targeting his girlfriend, wife or ex-wife. Meanwhile, in states that require a background check for private handgun sales, 38 percent fewer women are shot to death by their intimate partners.

Behind these statistics are countless women the law failed to protect from a clear threat. Below is a sample of their stories:

 Daniel took out a restraining order against her husband after three years of abuse. The restraining order should have prevented her husband, Radcliffe Haughton, from buying a gun. Regardless, Haughton was able to skip a background check by buying a gun on the internet, which he used to shoot 7 people the very next day. He murdered Zina and two of her coworkers before shooting himself. In a new ad for Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Zina’s brother, Elvin Daniel, makes an emotional plea for stricter background checks that could have kept Haughton from buying that gun.

 

Jitka Vesel was murdered by her ex-boyfriend, Demetry Smirnov, outside her office on April 13, 2011. Smirnov, as a Canadian citizen, should not have been able to buy a gun, yet purchased a handgun from a private dealer via a gun exchange website, Armslist.com. Jitka’s brother and best friend have sued the website for facilitating illegal gun sales.

 

 

Johanna Justin-Jinich, a student at Wesleyan University, met Stephen Morgan at an NYU summer program. Morgan, a fervent anti-Semite, began stalking and harassing Johanna, who was Jewish. A few months after she filed a harassment complaint with the police, Morgan shot Johanna seven times at the bookstore where she worked. Morgan did not have a permit for the gun he used.

 

Stock filed a protective order against her ex-boyfriend, Jeffrey Calvert, just five days before she was found murdered in her home. Calvert had already been convicted of stalking another woman in 1995. Despite the prior conviction and the protective order that should have compelled him to give up his guns, Calvert was able to buy the two guns, a stun gun, and ammunition that he used to kill his ex-girlfriend and himself.

 

Yvonne Flores was stalked by her neighbor, Anthony Medina, for nearly two years before he was arrested. Medina would follow Yvonne and her husband everywhere, prompting her to get a temporary restraining order against him. Two weeks after Medina made bail, he waited in Yvonne’s driveway and shot her twice as she was returning from the store. Medina then killed himself.

The Senate will soon debate universal background checks as part of a gun reform package, which would require all private sales to use background checks. However, Capp’s bill to tighten restrictions on gun ownership by convicted abusers within the existing system will not be part of the final package. Both measures will face staunch Republican opposition. Repeating aconspiracy theory from the National Rifle Association, many Republicans claim the background check system could lead to a national gun registry that the government could potentially use to confiscate guns and establish a dictatorship. Should these measures die because of this baseless hypothesis, millions of women will continue to live in fear of dying at the hands of their abusers.

Related articles

4 Comments

Filed under Gun Violence

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

March 22, 2013 · 2:17 PM

Gun control: Why the fight over universal background checks is the key

The Week

The controversial proposal to ban assault weapons has gone nowhere, and now there’s a new focus in the gun debate

After scrapping a proposed assault-weapons ban, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid declared this week that the gun-law reform package headed for a vote in early April will include background checks on all gun buyers. Current law requires checks only on sales by licensed gun dealers. Other elements in Washington’s collection of gun-related bills would step up school safety and tighten sanctions on the illegal transfer of firearms, among other things. Reid said he dropped bans on military-style semiautomatic weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines because he didn’t have enough votes to beat a filibuster by Republicans — and even some red-state Democrats. But he’s drawing a line in the sand over the paperwork on gun buyers. “I want to be clear,” Reid said. “In order to be effective, any bill that passes the Senate must include background checks.”

Gun-control advocates demanded a host of new measures to reduce gun violence after the December massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., in which 20 children and six adults were gunned down by a single killer armed with an assault rifle. The ban on military-style weapons and ammo clips were the most headline-grabbing provisions in the bunch, and now that they appear doomed, “a background check requirement is, in the eyes of many, the most important provision left on the table,” says Sean Sullivan at The Washington Post. If Democrats can’t win on this one, they’ll come out of the 2013 gun debate defeated and demoralized.

The lack of traction the assault weapons ban has gotten has already been met with disappointment by some gun-control advocates. But imagine how much broader and deeper the discouragement will be if background checks aren’t passed. The perception that the White House and congressional Democrats failed to pass meaningful reform would be a likely consequence. [Washington Post]

[...]

The [universal background check] will require any citizen selling their gun to go through their local FFL [Federal Firearms Licensed] dealer. That means: you find someone who wants to purchase your firearm. Both of you go to a gun store and pay the gun store a processing fee to do the paperwork on the sale… and if everything turns out okay, the purchaser comes back 30 days later and picks up his gun. If everything does not turn out okay (e.g. if the purchaser has an unpaid parking ticket from 5 years ago) then the sale does NOT go through…

The worst part of UBC will be the check on the seller (that’s you and me). In the interest of getting illegal guns off the street, the left will want to throw in this little addition to the universal background check scheme: the seller must prove that they legally own the gun they are seeking to sell… If you attempt to sell an old shotgun your father left you years ago, to your neighbor you have known for 10 years, both of you must go to the FFL dealer and fill out the paperwork. When it turns out you don’t have a bill of sale for the shotgun IN YOUR NAME, you are now in possession of an illegal gun. The shotgun will be confiscated and the police will now have a reason to search your house for any other illegal weapons you might have in your possession. [American Thinker]

Advocates of the expanded background checks, however, say it would indisputably discourage gun violence. That might explain why the vast majority of the public — including most National Rifle Association members — support this measure, says Zack Beauchamp at Think Progress. “Universal background checks deter criminals from purchasing guns.”

This isn’t really a contestable point. 80 percent of crime guns are purchased through “private” sales, which means from unlicensed dealers at gun shows or other people currently exempted from having to run background checks under federal law. Forcing all sellers to run background checks both deters criminals from buying guns (if they fail the check they can be prosecuted) and prevents a check on sellers that might be inclined to sell to shady characters if they didn’t know they were committing a federal crime. [Think Progress]

Related articles

 

2 Comments

Filed under Gun Background Checks

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

March 6, 2013 · 12:10 AM

They Deserve a Vote

Think Progress

Background Checks 101

Later this week, the Senate Judiciary Committee will take up four gun violence prevention measures. One of them is an important bill to strengthen the background check system and mandate universal background checks so we can keep guns out of the hands of people that should not have them.

Check out this infographic for everything you need to know about how universal background checks can help us prevent gun violence.

Evening Brief: Important Stories That You Might’ve Missed

The latest embarrassment for the Daily Caller.

Report: number of radical anti-government groups reached “all-time high” in 2012.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has died.

Poll: immigration now top issue for Latinos, who are following the immigration debate closely.

Everything you need to know about judicial nominations.

The Daily Caller’s brand of “entertainment.”

Jeb Bush followed up his triple-flip on immigration today with a flip-flop on Medicaid.

The House GOP is going after birth control — again.

OOPS: Dow hits record despite pundit predictions that the stock market would plunge under Obama.

Related articles

1 Comment

Filed under Gun FAILS, Gun Violence

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

January 29, 2013 · 4:06 PM

NRA’s LaPierre: Universal Background Checks A Waste Of Time

National Rifle Association executive, Wayne LaPierre will say and do anything to protect the NRA’s hard-line stance on the issue of gun control…

TPM Live Wire

There’s no point in pursuing universal background checks for firearms purchases, National Rifle Association Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre plans to tell the Senate tomorrow, because bad guys will get guns anyway.

LaPierre is among those scheduled to testify at the Senate Judiciary Committee’s gun violence hearing Wednesday. The NRA sent out his testimony Tuesday. LaPierre once again plans to tout the NRA’s call for armed guards in every school as well as the group’s call for loosen privacy laws the group says keep mental health records from being included in the existing background check system. But when it comes to expanding background checks to cover all firearms transactions, LaPierre will tell the Senate there’s little point.

“When it comes to the issue of background checks, let’s be honest – background checks will never be ‘universal’ – because criminals will never submit to them,” LaPierre’s testimony reads.

LaPierre will say the NRA is ready to pushback on gun control advocates calling for new legislation after Newtown.

“While we’re ready to participate in a meaningful effort to solve these pressing problems, we must respectfully – but honestly and firmly – disagree with some members of this committee, many in the media, and all of the gun control groups on what will keep our kids and our streets safe,” the testimony read. “Law-abiding gun owners will not accept blame for the acts of violent or deranged criminals. Nor do we believe the government should dictate what we can lawfully own and use to protect our families.”

 

Related articles

1 Comment

Filed under NRA's Wayne LaPierre

Tagged as , , , , , , ,