Why We Can’t Have a Civil Conversation About Guns | Retro Report

Why We Can’t Have a Civil Conversation About Guns | Retro Report


“Scenes of panic outside the school this afternoon.” “An unbelievably catastrophic day. Seventeen are dead.” “Politicians who sit in their Senate seats
funded by the N.R.A. telling us nothing could have ever been done to prevent this – we call B.S.” The student-led protest following the Parkland
shooting promised to change the gun debate. “We will not stop until we get gun control.” But whether this moment signals a new era
may depend on remembering another fight over gun control three decades before – one that
also began with a horrific shooting. “The White House has confirmed now just
in the last few minutes that President Reagan has indeed been shot.” “We understand also that James Brady, the
White House press secretary, was among those injured.” “The president has a gunshot wound in the
left side of the chest. He is in stable condition. Jim Brady has been shot, it is a head wound. We have no information on his condition.” The attempted assassination of President Reagan
occurred at a time when gun violence seemed inevitable and out of control. “Month after month, year after bloody year,
it continues. There is a one-in-five chance you or a member of your
family will be attacked or threatened by someone with a handgun.” The National Rifle Association stood in
opposition to strengthening existing gun laws. “Gun control really is a waste of taxpayers’
time and a diversion of efforts that should be put elsewhere in very productive pursuits.” Then, just four years after the shooting of
Jim Brady, his wife, Sarah, saw that the N.R.A. was pressuring Congress to make it easier
to own and sell firearms. “Sarah was shocked when she learned that
the N.R.A. was going to be trying to weaken the country’s existing gun laws. It was clear that the laws needed to be stronger,
not weaker. She picked up the phone and she called the
N.R.A. and she said, ‘You’re going to have to contend with me.'” In 1987, working with gun control advocate
Gail Hoffman, Sarah Brady began a campaign for background checks to make it harder for
guns to fall into the hands of felons and others already prohibited from owning them. “The bill’s proposed weeklong waiting
period will give local police time – time to run background checks on handgun purchasers
to reduce the number of persons with a history of criminal activity or mental illness who
buy handguns over the counter every year.” They called it the Brady Bill. “I firmly believe that if a reasonable waiting
period and provision for background checks had been in effect when John Hinckley walked
into that Dallas pawnshop, my husband, Jim, would be spending his days pursuing a successful
career and in his spare time, climbing trees with our eight-year old, rather than in hours
of painful and rigorous physical therapy.” “We had the Republicans and the Democrats
against us, when we first began this fight. My own congressman, then Barney Frank, not
too soon after, wrote an editorial that liberals needed to abandon gun control. People were not willing to touch the bill
with a 10-foot pole.” “I ran N.R.A.’s grassroots efforts in
1991 against the Brady Bill.” “One of the things we told members was that
this was, as the proponents claimed, just a first step.” “Is the Brady Bill then merely a first step?” “It is only a first step.” “This is only the first step.” “The first step…” ” This is the first step.” “Well, I think the Brady Bill is a good step. It may not be the end, there may be other
things that will happen later.” “Charlie Schumer said all the time, ‘This
is a first good step.’ Well, if this the first good step, better
to prevent the first good step than have to fight over the last bad step.” “We sent out messages into districts where
a congressman was wavering. When you start getting, you know, 3,000 phone
calls and no other work can be achieved, you know, you get the message. These
people are going to be around in November.” But the Bradys had their own message. “We were not gun-grabbers. Jim owned guns. Sarah grew up around guns. My husband’s family in Tennessee, whenever
we’d visit them we’d go shooting.” “We made very clear to members of Congress
that we did not support a ban on handguns. We didn’t support a ban on long guns. This is about making sure that bad guys don’t get them.” The Brady Bill’s focus – passing a background
check – seemed a reasonable measure to many organizations that had long supported the
N.R.A. – including law enforcement. “Mr. Chairman, how many more police officers
need to be killed before this government decides to get serious about this problem? How many more citizens have to be maimed? How many more body bags need to be filled
before all of us say, enough is enough?” “Very, very pleased to have both of you
as witnesses here and an unusual bit of testimony here today. Jim Brady.” “Just by seeing him and seeing what had
happened to him, they saw right before them the results of a gun in the wrong hands without
a background check.” “There are some who oppose this simple seven-day
waiting period for handgun purchases because it would inconvenience gun dealers. Well I guess I am paying for their in- their convenience. I don’t question the rights of responsible gun owners. That’s not the issue. The issue is whether the John Hinckleys of the
world should be able to walk into a gun store and purchase a handgun instantly.” “It was very difficult for members of Congress
to say, ‘Yes, I believe a convicted felon should be able to walk into a gun store
and walk out with a handgun.'” After nearly seven years of congressional
battles, the Brady Bill was signed into law. “The Brady Campaign did a very good job
of selling the bill, and over time it didn’t seem like such an imposition on gun owners,
so much so that even though when I was still at N.R.A., we opposed it,
by the time I got to the industry, I could see a lot of good things
coming out of the Brady Bill.” The following year, the N.R.A.
suffered a second defeat when Congress passed the assault weapons ban,
which outlawed several kinds of semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines. “People were euphoric. And they thought that, that
anything could be done. That the N.R.A. could be defeated and they
move forward with legislative packages that went way beyond what anybody had been
talking about in the past and really didn’t have a snowball’s chance. The N.R.A. was able to jump on this and
they were able to go back to members of Congress and say, ‘See, this is what they
wanted all along.'” For the N.R.A., the losses became a rallying cry. “We haven’t been winning on Capitol Hill. Is the Brady Bill a win? Armor-piercing bullet ban a win? Is a ban on gun ownership for people convicted
of minor domestic violence misdemeanors a win? If that’s winning, what do we call losing? Ninety-seven to two the Senate of the United
States voted for that domestic violence gun ban. Tragedy. We’ve got to start winning
and we must win consistently we must stop this erosion
of the Second Amendment.” “When the gun rights community was looking
down the barrel – pun intended – of those two losses, they doubled down.” “So, as we set out this year to defeat the divisive
forces that would take freedom away, I want to say those fighting words.
‘From my cold dead hands.'” “And what was the result? All the wins in the latter part of the 1990s
right into the 2000s, right till now.” It’s been almost twenty-five years
since the Brady Bill became law, and with the assault weapons ban allowed to lapse, it remains the last major piece of federal gun
control legislation passed in the United States. “If we gave up after our loss the first
time on the Brady Bill, I can’t even imagine what would have happened.” “Joaquin Oliver. Joaquin went by the nickname Guac and was
interested in football, basketball and hip hop. This one is for Joaquin.” “There is a responsible middle. And that is what is critical even today. That people understand that nobody is going to take guns away from law-abiding citizens.” “Guns are a symbol of so many other things. Positive, negative, but they are symbols. Gun owners see a picture of a gun and they
see all sorts of positive American values: freedom, independence, interdependence. When anti-gun people see the same gun,
they see dissolution in the streets, shootings in our schools, all sorts of negative things.” “So, we’re two societies coming at the
gun issue with completely different orientations, and it almost prevents us from day one having
an intelligent conversation about what the problem is, what the issues are,
and what the potential solutions could be.”

Comments

  1. Post
    Author
    Eagle Eye

    Gun control propaganda debunked:

    The USA already has fairly strict gun regulations because the Natl. Instant Criminal Background Check System "NICS" has processed firearm background checks on felons since 1998. All federally licensed gun sellers must run background checks at stores, online, and at gun shows. Private sales make up a small minority of transactions, and are considered a misnomer at best by the government.

    The National Firearms Act of 1934, already heavily regulates 'assault weapons', which are firearms that can fire intermediate powered cartridges on automatic fire. That means machine guns! AR-15's are NOT military assault rifles, because they can only fire one single shot at a time per squeeze of the trigger. That is why they are considered "semi-automatic" and not automatic firearms. Over 90% of rifles, shotguns, and handguns are "semi-automatic" and the rest are "bolt action" to single shot.

    In America there are roughly 325,000,000 people. On average about 33,000 people a year die by firearms. Roughly 20,000 of those deaths are suicides, and the rest of that figure is made up of intentional homicides, self defense, and accidental discharges. The majority of the actual gun homicides are committed by criminal factions murdering each other with unregistered firearms exchanged illegally on the black market.

    According to the CDC, up to 3 million American citizens use firearms for self defense every single year. According to the ATF and FBI, the gun homicide rate dropped by over 1/3 since 1993 while gun ownership more than doubled amongst law abiding citizens.
    Mr and Mrs John Q taxpayers make up the majority of legal gun owners, and they aren't the ones committing 80% of gun homicides, its gang members, outlaw bikers, and drug cartels.

  2. Post
    Author
    strongheart227

    So if more gun control laws are passed and mass shootings still happen… Do we get to laugh to the failure of gun control advocates?

  3. Post
    Author
    adonaiinfidel

    Because America was born out of "gun control". The American revolution started with a failed British gun confiscation in Boston and the entirety of the American experience hinges on that fact.
    Effectively without the realization ,implementation,and steadfast maintenance of the 2nd Amendment , America would never have and never will continue to exist.

  4. Post
    Author
    Tyran Ocisari

    Their ultimate authoritarian goal is to turn the rights which the Constitution was written to protect, in to privileges that will be lorded over by a bureaucracy. To them the truth is a nonissue. That is why they lie about the complete ineffectiveness of gun control. It's why they lie about the capabilities of firearms and deceptively mislabel weapons in order to demonize guns and gun owners. It's why they bombard people with censored data and expurgated stats. It's why refuse to have an open debate about the unfettered facts and the whole truth.

    It's disgusting how these kids are being manipulated and exploited by an anti individual rights agenda. They're using children to evoke peoples' emotional attachment to their propaganda, which is purely based on lies and half truths.
    The truth is violent crime and homicide rates, which includes mass murder and mass shootings, are at one of the lowest points in over forty years. Kids today are not living in a time where they are more likely to be murdered. But they've been dupped into believing this utter fantasy by anti 2nd Amendment propagandists and their puppet media, who peddle this lie every day.
    The reality is that neither gun bans or restrictions have shown correlation to reduction in overall violent crime or homicide rates. That's why anti 2nd Amendment advocates don't show data on trending overall violent crime or homicide rates compared to gun possession or availability rates. It doesn't support the false anti 2nd Amendment narrative. It doesn't matter even if you have ZERO gun crime or ZERO gun homicide. If overall violent crime or homicide rates go up or continue as previously trending then ZERO lives were saved.
    The bans and restrictions being proposed will do nothing to save lives. They have already been proven completely ineffective. The deadliest mass murders aren't even perpetrated with guns. Removing one method of violence without removing the propensity for violence will save ZERO lives. They are nothing more than a means to undermine the 2nd Amendment and move the US closer to complying with the European Firearms Directive. As long as weapons exist and people have the right to life, then people have the right to be armed in defense of life.

    https://youtu.be/jyI3uSk1xLw

    https://youtu.be/-GPUYBcHyTc

    https://youtu.be/STo3hwN–5E

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/compendium/focusonviolentcrimeandsexualoffences/yearendingmarch2016/homicide#what-does-the-long-term-trend-in-homicide-look-like

    http://crimestats.aic.gov.au/NHMP/1_trends/

    http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/previous series/vt/1-9/vt01.html

    http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current series/tandi/341-360/tandi359.html

    https://crimeresearch.org/2013/12/murder-and-homicide-rates-before-and-after-gun-bans/

    www.cdc.gov

    www.fbi.gov

    https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/

    https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/table-12

    https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent

    https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

    https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/hvfsdaft.txt

    www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

    http://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/Screen-Shot-2015-12-21-at-3.02.42-PM-2.jpg

    https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_household_gun_ownership_vs_violent_crime_2001.png

  5. Post
    Author
    jonathan boyce

    They are coming for your guns. Then they will come for your freedom of speech. Then they will come for the rest of your rights.

  6. Post
    Author
  7. Post
    Author
  8. Post
    Author
  9. Post
    Author
    Brandon Davidson

    "Where does it end" freaking somewhere! Everytime someone asks that, it's always a situation where "it ends" you know… somewhere.

  10. Post
    Author
    Lisa A Johnson

    Americans are idiots over guns…that’s all. Men are violent by nature and it’s this deep seeded violent tendency that’s triggered (pardon the pun) when discussing guns and they get testy over loosing their weapons. Simple as that.
    I support the abolishing of all guns in society. No guns with the citizens, the police or the military. Grow up and learn to settle your differences like adults. Guns are just to adult toddlers who aren’t mature enough to be responsible.

  11. Post
    Author
    Alison Voshell

    Is the prohibition of gun ownership by those convicted of misdemeanor DV a win? Uh, yeah?! When you make it a felony to beat the fuck out of your family member I guess we can roll that one back but til then, yeah, that's a fucking win.

  12. Post
    Author
  13. Post
    Author
  14. Post
    Author
  15. Post
    Author
    bran3227

    Hey Retro report. Wow what a one sided film. This is why you can't get people on your side. Quick question do you think that John Hinkley could not get a gun. Come on you fools

  16. Post
    Author
  17. Post
    Author
  18. Post
    Author
    Steve 3Sport

    Didn't Brady's wife also have a child drown under her watch. She wrote and forced a needless law requiring pools to be re-designed; which put many community pools out of business and saved zero lives. Irony: in passing more gun laws and getting zero response???

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *