Why Congress doesn’t do anything about gun violence in America | Steve Israel

Well, here’s why I wrote Big Guns: I had
served in Congress for 16 years, and in those 16 years I witnessed a shooting at a university
in Virginia, a shooting at a movie theater in Aurora Colorado, a shooting at a nightclub
in Orlando, a shooting at an elementary school in Connecticut—and after every single one
of those mass shootings I and virtually every one of my colleagues were confronted with
the same question, and that is: when is Congress going to do something about it? When will this stop? Not necessarily “when will congress do everything
about it,” but just “do something,” do universal background checks or some commonsense
legislation. And when my constituents in New York would
ask that question I knew that the honest answer (and the painful answer) was: we’re not. Congress is not going to do anything because
of the politics that surrounded the gun safety debate. And I decided to try and answer that question
in the best way I can, and that is with snark, with humor, and from the very inside of Congress. I wrote this book during hearings on gun safety;
I wrote this book on the floor of the House of Representatives; I wrote this book on that
little balcony off the floor of the House of Representatives where members go to rest
while they’re not beating each other up inside. And so this book—really it’s a reflection
of what I learned as a member of Congress, and it is my way of explaining to readers
why Congress seems so paralyzed in the face of this mass violence that is effecting so
many communities and so many of our constituents. Ninety percent of the American people support
strengthened background checks, about 80 percent of Republicans support strengthened background
checks, a majority of an RMA members support strengthened background checks, and yet when
we offered this amendment for stronger background checks in the Appropriations Committee it
was defeated virtually in a party line vote. And I was wrestling with this. Why would members of Congress vote against
something that has such massive support? Well, I learned the lesson, and the lesson
is reflected in Big Guns. After that hearing I went to one of the most
sacred places on Capitol Hill, not a church but the members-only elevator. And the reason it’s sacred is because on
the members-only elevator you can’t have tourists in, you can’t have the media in,
you can’t have staff in, and so you reach a real level of confidentiality in that cramped
space. And a bunch of members piled onto this elevator
after the committee meeting, and one of the Republicans on this elevator said, “Why
did you try and force us to vote for this amendment for background checks?” And I said, “Well, we didn’t force you
to do anything. You voted against it. My question to you is why would you vote against
it?” And this member looked at me and said, “I
wanted to vote for it, but I can’t go home and explain that vote to my gun lobby voters. It would be the end of my career.” That tells you everything you need to know
about why Congress seems so paralyzed. I did not want to write Big Guns as my personal
screed against the NRA and the gun lobby. I thought the best and most credible way of
writing this book was to bring different characters in with different viewpoints. And by the way, that’s what Congress is
like. It’s different characters with different
viewpoints. And I felt that the best way to tell this
story was as a satire, but all satire has to be based on a kernel of truth. And the truth in this book is the fact that
Congress does nothing. The book was actually based on an extraordinary
and shocking event after the Sandy Hook massacre that killed children in this elementary school
in Connecticut. I was reading, sitting having breakfast right
after that, I was so convinced that we in Congress were finally going to do something;
when first graders are gunned down it would seem that Congress would do something. And my confidence was really high and I was
having breakfast and I was reading my New York Times one morning and I came upon this
article, and I could have sworn that the New York Times had been infiltrated by the writers
of The Onion, because it seemed so bizarre. The story was that—while most state and
local governments were actually passing local ordinances for gun safety, because Congress
would do nothing—the small city of Nelson, Georgia decided that they would go in a different
direction. This small city passed a local ordinance requiring
that every resident of the city must possess a firearm. And that was my kernel of truth. And when saw that I—first I had to figure
out if it was actually true, and then when I realized that it was true I decided to build
a satire around this, only instead of making it applicable to one small city in Georgia,
I “federalized” it. I create this law that requires that every
American must own a firearm that works its way through Congress. Now, if I had just written about the process
it would be maybe a slightly lighter version of the Congressional record, still very boring,
and so I decided I had to weave into it real characters. And I had to make sure that the characters
express different viewpoints because the gun debate is influenced by so many different
viewpoints. So it was important to me that this story
reflect both sides of the issue, but also make the point that Congress will not act
because of the politics that surrounds us and the fear that so many of my colleagues
have—not that their constituents are going to be shot, but that their careers may be
ended if they take on the NRA and the gun lobby. And I’ll just say one other thing on this:
after every mass shooting the entire country is galvanized, they want to mobilize. I mean think about what happened after Parkland. It was so certain that Congress was going
to pass something. There were rallies and marches, and everybody
was talking about it. But now we’re months from Parkland and what
has Congress done? Nothing. I wrote this book so people will be reminded
that the solution to this is in the Congress and they have to keep pressuring their members
of Congress to pass meaningful reforms that will make our kids safer.

100 thoughts on “Why Congress doesn’t do anything about gun violence in America | Steve Israel

  • I don't own guns and believe in gun control, however the mass shootings are a mental health issue that has been exacerbated by the Media's sensationalizing the shooters and then blaming the shootings on "guns" when the shooter is 100% responsible for the crime. The media needs to stop publicizing the shooters and simply refer to the as " Piece of Sh*t #xx". There are mass killings using kitchen knives happening but the Media is not hysterically blaming Kmart for them. The media switching the blame from the shooter to gun control shows how politicized the media is. So the media are in favor of no police, always supporting criminals as "victims" but don't want people to be able to protect themselves? Why is a women's right to own a gun not a feminist issue? If I were a woman, I would own a gun and wear it on my hip in plain view.

  • Gun violence is already illegal.

    heh. Why don't we put more police to enforce the law? Oh wait, its racist! Where are these gun violence occurred? In Democrat ran district.

    Yes, let's blame it on guns.

  • Taking away or regulating the tools (eg guns) does actually nothing for stopping violence in general. Oh sure it reduces the "gun violence" numbers but has had zero effect on violence in general and murders in particular. After over 20 years of strict gun control in Australia their violent crime and murder rate was unaffected, just the tools change to bludging or edged weapons. The very saddest part is no one wants to talk about or even admit that if you waved a magic wand and made all guns vanish tomorrow the violence and murder rate would not be reduced. This is really about self defence options as it has always been well known criminals do not follow gun control laws thus gun control laws only affects law abiding citizens negatively. This is the VERY typical and quite bias reporting of this issue from the very start. Human nature cannot be controlled or regulated by laws. Only major sociological change can do that. Get off the blaming of an inanimate object and let's talk about the real problems behind those tragedies they love to hold up as reasons to ban / control firearms. So so dumb and if you look at the reporting they alway brag about the "gun violence" numbers not overall violence statistics which have never been effected even in Europe. In fact the UK is considering regulating sharp edged knives and pocket tools with blades because guess what; gun control there is still not working or reducing the murder rate. Lame…so lame.

  • Now there is pandering and there is pandering, that's like having congressman from South Carolina named Jesus H Gun.

  • Big Think is at it again trying to manipulate its subscribers. What a ridiculous presentation. The argument is that Congress will not do anything even tightening "background checks."

    But what does that actually mean? It means nothing because it is only a Band Aid. It does not deal with the core issues of gun violence. And that "violence" breaks down to two broad categories: 1) drug violence, 2) Mental Illness.'

    I find it incredibly IRONIC that Big Think would host a Congressman that clearly has an agenda and refuses to discuss the main drivers of 99% of Gun Homicides: " Gang related killings and Mental Illness.

    It should be noted, that if Congress was really interested in protecting children, it has a choice. We can remove all guns from our communities, and by doing so we become a totalitarian state. OR, we can make proactive decisions on how to protect our children, which is actually very simple: " Put proactive measures into place just like we do at federal buildings and at airports. '

    For a Congressman to argue otherwise demonstrates a remarkable level of Myopia. In reality, it isn't the "Gun Lobby" that is the problem. It is the Education UNIONS that don't want more armed guards, more metal detectors in schools. THEY, the Education Industry and the USA's Soccer Moms are actually tying the hands of Congress by frightening the Congressmen into not acting because of supposed fallout at the ballot box. And if Congressman Israel is correct in His assumption, the problem is actually the systemic breakdown of Congressmen and their overwhelming NEED to become reelected. In truth, according to Congressman Israel's main admission, the problem is really the PERVERSE motives of individual Congressmen, which is to get reelected at all costs, regardless how injurious it is to their constituents.

    If the Education Unions and the Big Think Management subscribe to this kind of thinking, they why not remove the TSA from the Airports ? After all, the solution is very simple Just stop people from coming into the country or leaving it. ONLY American citizens can enter and reenter the airspace of the USA. Close our borders and become hermetically sealed. Makes sense? Not really.

    There are opposing forces working and advocating in Congress. But for Congressman Israel to criticize ONLY ONE SIDE and not even mention OTHER opposing forces is indicative of Partisanship and promoting one's agenda.

    No mention is made on the push back to FORCE psychiatrists and Psychologists and counselors from being responsible for turning in those mentally ill people that are dangerous to the community. In EVERY mass shooting of children, the perpetrators have been mentally ill. YET there is no mention of that by Congressman Israel.

    He WHINES about not passing tighter Background Checks and FAILS to mention that UNLESS these cases are reported to the authorities, nothing can be done.

    It should be a matter of STANDARD POLICY to take the guns away from ANYONE that is mentally ill. We do exactly the same thing with people that have Epilepsy and active heart conditions and driving. We restrict their ability to utilize a vehicle for the good of the community. Sadly, we don't use the same common sense for the mentally ill. And the REASON we do not is because of the bizarre patchwork of Statutory laws protecting the privacy of mentally ill patients and the rather unique relationship between the mentally ill and the caregivers attempting to help them. In other words it is a legal and ethical issue.

    The sad thing about this disgusting MANIPULATIVE presentation is that the killing of our children in our Schools is 100% PREVENTABLE. It isn't the NRA's constituency that is the problem, but the management of Big Think and the Congressmen Israel's in congress.

  • Why did you guys let this douche plug his book? These self-serving assholes are the problem and his conduct here showed that they are more interested in lining their own pockets than improving our nation.

  • I thought the comments would be civilised and rational, but of course I should've guessed you retarded americans would defend the right to bear arms. Christ I'm so glad to not be born in the hellhole called America.

  • Why doesn't congress do anything about gun violence in America? Job security.

    It's nothing else more or less glamorous than that kiddies.

  • All of you people pointing the finger at mental health… You do realize that mental health isn't an issue ONLY in the US correct? It's an issue throughout the globe, yet the US is the only issue with mass shootings? So why are you blaming mental health issues? It has absolutely nothing to do with mental health, its about the fact that literally anyone with hands is able to obtain a firearm and use it on anyone they want, because they'll be famous after they do so from all of the media coverage they'll get with their face plastered on every TV station and news outlet.

    If you blame mental health for you're horrible gun laws then you're essentially part of the problem, the average person does not need to be walking around with a concealed firearm when they go to a fckin Walmart. This isn't rocket science. Look at Japan for example, one of the most densely populated countries in the world and they have next to no gun violence (in 2015 a total of 6 gunshots were fired) simply due to the fact that a civilian is only allowed to own either a very close-range shotgun, or a simple small caliber weapon for getting rid of vermin. More guns are not your solution. Wake up.

  • the more i read the comments, the more i feel sick.
    owning a gun as "self-defense" is a stupid idea. against who? your neighbor? your local postman? person walking their dog too close to you? criminals? mafia? aliens?
    let the police and army do the defense for you. or are they on your list of who to shoot as "self-defense"?
    i would recommend better gun control, but of course bloody eyed people of the internet will start screaming about their right to own a gun. like it's more valuable than any life taken by the guns.
    world doesn't need more guns, and even the guns we have now is too much. we should be thriving for non violent future yet some still want to linger in the past.

    i'll sit here, prove me wrong. i dare you

  • Forget our "We the people …" since money is the root of all evil and has become the root of what runs Washington D.C..

  • Meanwhile i watch this from france with our 4times lower homicid rate by firearm per 100.000k inhab. And its lowering every year.

  • Everyone is sick of your same old sorry ass solutions. That is why you lost, and will continue to do so thank God!

  • It really says a lot that the general feeling among gun-control advocates in Congress felt Sandy Hook would be a watershed moment. It shows they believe (1) opponents of gun control secretly believe guns exacerbate violent crime, but just won't admit it until it gets bad enough; and (2) the fight for gun control needs to happen on an emotional level, as opposed to a reason and evidence-based debate.

    The fact of the matter is gun-rights advocates take the position that legal firearms ownership does not affect violent crime (or has a negative effect on crime). Assuming they don't actually believe this, and are just arguing in bad faith, is one of the reasons why the issue is deadlocked; the other problem being that gun-rights advocates fight against any proposed gun-control due to the potential snowballing effect ("if we give an inch, they'll take a mile").

    There's clearly a divide on the gun issue that needs to be addressed, but neither side is willing to compromise. A serious effort needs to be made to bridge this divide; perhaps a bi-partisan omnibus bill, crafted by both sides, that introduces evidence-based gun-control measures that respect gun-advocates, while removing some existing ineffective gun-control legislation. In other words, a show of good faith from both sides.

    I'd argue that the status quo favours gun-rights advocates, so gun-control advocates stand to gain the most by bridging the gap; as such, they need to be the ones to extend the olive branch.

  • No, Congress does not have the solution. We need to stop searching for governmental answers to cultural problems. He is arrogant, and we are lazy, for choosing to believe otherwise.

  • Wow, contradicting much? "Most Americans are pro regulation, yet congressmen don't do anything because the constituency is against it." Only one of those clauses can be true in that context.

    Here's why the gun discussion won't get anywhere: no side presents anything but politicking. It's all heavy rhetoric and no one looks for the actual facts and most sensible solutions.

  • So basically congress wouldn't pass the bill because they would lose votes. They care more about votes and getting re-elected than the safety and lives of America

  • Lobbyists, that is why congress will not do anything. Take big money out of politics and maybe that will change. I mean, why are we allowing companies like this to influence politicians anyway. Seems counter intuitive to the whole idea of Democracy.

  • If you want to know why Republicans will not easily vote for any new gun laws or reforms, just ask a Democrat what they will do if this new change does not achieve the desired outcome.
    Any honest Democrat (lol) would say that they would immediately seek to create and pass more gun restrictions immediately after the last one has been passed, and every mass shooting that occurs from that day onwards, would be used to push the next law, and the next law and so on.

    There is no end game here. In politics you are either pushing to pass your new law, or you are fighting against your opponents new law.

    The longer it takes to pass the 'sensible' laws, the longer until the ridiculous laws show up.

    Don't believe me? What happened after gay marriage was passed for the LGBT community?
    Did they declare mission accomplished and stop?
    They started pushing for trans laws, and hate speech laws and on it goes.

    Expect the very same thing every time a 'common sense' law is passed.

  • only 2 types of people own guns, those that can pass even universal background checks, and those that don't even submit to them yet still get them.

    theyre pointless, more security theater.

  • The most important purpose of having gun is to resist the tyranny of government.

    Look at what happened in communist countries. History is a book that should never be forgotten.

  • Gun violence is an indication of the moral integrity of our culture today. We've a vain and narcissistic mind frame in the US today, which is perfect for the people who want to sell you stuff. It's not, however, the state of mind that fosters cooperation and compassion for your own people. If you want to legislate an improvement, it should somehow be directed at what it is that has eroded the stability of the family and the integrity of our values. Guns don't kill people. People who don't value life kill people.

  • Ad before this video: rape, murder, war, what do all these things have in common? Men.

    Me: okay, I didn't come here to be preached to YouTube.

  • strengthened background checks does nothing if school administration, the local, state, and federal law enforcement dont do their jobs. until govt employees are held criminally and financially liable for not doing their jobs "strenghting" a broken system will do absolutely nothing.

  • Stricter gun laws lead to more gun violence. Its the unfortunate truth. Just look at Chicago, New York, etc.. The reason being is because if your a criminal your probably not going to go thru the legal procedure of owning a gun. The real problem is not "gun violence" its "violence" period. Humans are one of the most aggressive animals on the planet. Its not a problem congress can fix or even slightly alter. Btw, in Mexico guns are illegal and look at them. Let that just sink in.

  • Okay i think big think has officially jumped off the deepend and has become an extreme leftist echo chamber, gun reform makes no one safer only helps out criminals who dont care about the law and will use illegal guns against people who cant defend themselves because they follow the law

  • If everyone had a gun and everyone knew that everyone else could defend themselves from a robbery or any other type of violent crime that would totally make violent gun crime go up
    Id say 99% of american gun owners use there guns properly and would never imagine hurting another person unless to defend themselves and there families

  • Nice to be able to write books wile at work.How about addressing perpetual war ,damaging effects of technology on our kids psyche and the dangerous medications being prescribed to them which ironically are known to bring about the very same acts of violence you so vehemently want to stop.

  • I'm pretty sure the root of gun violence is the mixture of different cultures in stuffed cities where they will crash into each other every day. Just look at countries that now will open up for more cultures, but no integration. This won't work. I think unfortunately they will slowly turn into US and A, the greatest country in the world, god bless America

  • He leaves out that the reason those of us that understand current gun laws won't support more gun control is nothing he is offering up would have stopped the shootings he is referring to. Good legislation would actually reduce homicide, not just place more restrictions on those who have no desire to harm others.

  • Calling the NRA the "gun lobby," isn't exactly accurate. They are funded by firearm manufacturing companies, not denying that. The NRA however has millions of members, and all of them vote for politicians who promise to protect gun rights.

  • Not sure where you are getting your information. No NRA member I have ever talked to supports stronger background checks. Most of us support removing background checks all together. The government has no business knowing what guns people own. We don't have a gun problem in this country. We have a mental health issue in this country.

  • why does this guy focus, literally, on the 0.1% of the problem: "mass shootings". they are an anomaly. if he actually cared about saving lives, he'd be advocating for nuclear families instead of railing against guns….

  • I always love hearing the behind the scenes of politics from actual politicians, when they're not campaigning.

  • London now has a higher murder rate than NYC & guns are highly restricted in England. Chicago restricts guns & is incredibly dangerous. The same for Washington, Baltimore & San Francisco. It's absurd to think restricting gun ownership is going to make anyone safer. In fact, it probably will have the opposite effect. When criminals know citizens are unarmed it emboldens them. The criminal weapon of choice in London now is acid. Are we going to restrict drain cleaner after the gun ban fails in the USA ? We passed drug laws that were supposed to stop people from getting drugs but anyone who wants drugs today can easily procure them. Does Steve Israel REALLY think outlawing guns will make it so no one can get guns ? Why not legalize drugs ? That alone would decrease "gun violence" a huge amount. But Mr Israel won't ever talk about that because he doesn't CARE about violence; he just wants the guns.

  • so if CONgress doesn't do anything … WHY ARE WE THE PEOPLE PAYING THEM FOR ??? I sure would like a high paying job with benifits and NOT do ANYTHING

  • The problem with blaming political lobbyists for any problem is that not all lobbyists are the same. There are industry organizations and membership organizations. Industry organizations represent businesses (like pharmaceutical companies) and they wield power much greater than the voters they actually represent. Membership organizations are groups like the AARP, the NRA, and the Sierra Club. Those membership organizations represent the wishes of real people.  So when a congressmen votes a certain way because the NRA wants them to vote that way, they are actually doing their job and representing the wishes of a large number of their constituents. It would be great if we didn't need organizations to make our voices heard, but when you have a population of over 300 million people being represented by a couple hundred congressmen, banding together is one of the only ways to make our voices heard.

  • Steve "Israel" Well isn't it surprising a supremacist dual citizen JEW would want to ban guns in America? I'd never have imagined….

  • are there other big think videos that become commercials for books? that isn't ok is it? let alone for a member of congress to be enabled to do so… how do you satirize a local community making guns legal as a commentary on the nra? answer parkland and sandy hook with snark? that's some detached bullshit right there

  • Well, the good news is that the NRA is on the brink of bankruptcy. That'll be one less gun advocacy group that won't be able to bribe (lobby) congressmen.

  • Our Government: Of the rich, by the rich and for the rich. Why do we continue to pay taxes? The only things the government can do involve favors for their golf buddies. If you haven't got 100 large for the campaign, then your welfare is not worth examining. Rise up.

  • Shall not be infringed. Yet penalize the people who follow the laws knowing full well the criminals dgaf about them. Neato

  • I want to see that study that says 90 percent of Americans support universal background checks. I don't think it was a good study. I think the questions we're most likely leading questions.
    Also the beauty of living in a constitutional protected republic means the rights of the minority are protected from the opinions of the majority. Gun control is a inefficient way of lowering crime and death. We don't have a gun violence problem we have a gang problem in the United states. There are not more mass shootings per capita than when I was a kid. The perception is there are more because we keep hearing about all the time.

  • 1)"The police are corrupt, kill blacks, and cannot be trusted to protect us"
    2)"The people cannot be trusted with firearms, and should call the police for protection."

  • Damn so the comment section is full of trash today. Tons of people spewing shit they dont have a clue about, many people saying "we need background checks" my state has a direct line to the FBI where all gun purchases are process against a national database of criminals the process takes 10 minutes for the computer to scan and the FBI desk jockey to say someone is clear or isn't. That is just one example of how we already have what a loud group of people think we need. Now im not saying stuff doesnt need to change and be fixed and overall made better because it absolutly fucking does, but too many people dont know a god damn thing about ANY laws regarding this. Also go look at the unslanted statistics and everyone will see that mental illness plays less that 15% of the role of mass shootings and no I dont have a source its from a database my college pays for. Mentally ill people are FAR more likely to be the victim of a violent crime not the perpritrator. At least educate yourselves.

  • Guns are neither violent nor peaceful: they are inanimate objects. There is a crazy person with a gun, a knife, a motor vehicle, etc. The inanimate object is never a problem, the crazy person is! The question is a non sequitur. The guy above, selling his book, is not too swift. This video should have been sponsored by 'Small Think.' Thank God he's no longer in congress.

  • The firearms industry must by definition sell guns. How do they sell guns? By creating a need for guns. How do they create a need for guns? By sowing fear… fear of the government, fear of people with different color skin, fear of people with different political views, fear of immigrants… the gun lobby is one of the root causes of the terrible state of American political discourse because this is exactly what works best for them.

  • Congress does nothing because their voters would kick their ass out of office. Thats the damn point its called a representative republic.

  • That's BS! No to tyrant control. Stop assaulting the 2nd Amendment. The Constitution isn't a toy. The Right to bear arms protects the people against demokkkrats.

  • No Steve.

    No amount of background checks or "common sense" gun control can possibly decrease gun violence. I could go buy a fully automatic rifle right now and that's not even legal, legislation isn't going to stop that.

    Guns aren't the problem and focusing on them misses the forest through the trees.

    Gun control makes it harder for honest citizens to obtain guns, and on net guns save more lives. You may not think it does cause you're wealthy and entitled, but when you're a single mom working two jobs and need protection walking home from work at night and extra $10 or an extra month wait can make all the difference.

    You can't decrease violence or poverty by restricting people. FREE people are less violent and create wealth. Americans haven't been free in 100 years.

    You want gun control? Make an amendment.

    "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

    Don't give me that "there are restrictions on all rights" bullshit. That's like saying, we've already taken some of your rights so why not this one. "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" I know you probably went to one of those socialist indoctrination centers most Americans go to where postmodernists teach you words don't mean things, but that document, the constitution, that's thr foundation of the law. Not following that document, even a little bit, is like just being a little bit criminal. If everyone including the government is just a little bit criminal, why not everyone else? That's when citizens need guns. We need guns now more than ever, $120 trillion in debt and unfunded liabilities (you probably don't know how big that number is cause it's just a word) increasing regulations, the left and MSM justifying unprovoked violence, calling everyone they disagree with racist, advocating for full on socialism, not even hiding anymore, blatantly advocating for censorship of free speech. I wouldn't buy a gun now legally, I don't want the government knowing I have them. With as bad as things are getting I know we're going to need them, but I'm gonna cut and run, America is too bad to fix, a burn to clear out the deadwood is probably what it needs.

    You know the Nazis took their citizens guns? (Which is the end goal, maybe not YOUR end goal but that's why rights shall not be infringed, you're not in charge) Nazis were in a bad financial bind too. They had laws against free speech. They had all kinds of socialist laws like healthcare. To the average German citizen the deathcamps were a conspiracy, a lot of people didn't even know it was happening, but the reason it COULD happen is they turned over all their responsibilities and thereby their rights to the government.

    A lot of people insist that Trump is Hitler "Hitler drinks water and Trump drinks water, they're exactly the same" thanks socialist school system for those advanced reasoning abilities. America is more fascistic than ever before. The Affordable Care Act, by definition, is a fascistic piece of legislation. You can bicker all you want about the reasons it's different, and you'd be right, it's not COMPLETELY fascistic, but if you're anti-fascist, why would you be ok with SOME fascism.

    Here I baked you a cake, I just put a little shit in it, don't worry, the cooking should have killed all the pathogens.

    Here's another cake, I just put a little more shit in it. C'mon, you already ate shit, this is just a little bit more.

    Right now America is a good 30% shit. Feel free to keep eating it, I'm leaving this shit hole.

  • So, what you are saying is that you utilized the time that you were being paid by your constituents to represent them and decided to write a book with it? Shouldn’t you have been arguing points and making your best effort to address their issues and perhaps work on legislation to benefit them? Instead you do as every other politician and allow the judicial branch to change interpretations and decide based on previous law new definitions. SCOTUS doesn’t have to worry about re-election so just dump the hard decisions, or maybe just all decisions on them? Seems like a sissy way to deal with issues, and it completely breaks the system. Seems money is more important to you than gun violence. How does that make you any different? Thanks for being a part of the problem and not the solution.

  • The objection to universal background checks is that a government gun registry would allow the government to monitor and seize guns in the future which defeats the purpose of the 2nd amendment. If you have 90% support as claimed then campaign to change the constitution. If you can't do that given your claimed level of support, you're full of shit.

  • Congress does a lot for law abiding citizens. We have universal background checks…
    What the fuck planet are you on???? Go after the retards….it was defeated because it was done wrong and it does nothing to stop the criminals.

  • Fwiw, age 60, I have noticed that ANYTHING 90% of American's want is passed into law, long ago. Think for yourself. Long before the 90% support threshold, we see it manifest. I have heard this claim for 90% demand for preconfiscation checklists, a.k.a. gun registration for decades. It is simply untrue.

  • Actually, the vast majority of guns crimes happen in large cities. So, based on that, the solution would be to forcibly relocate everyone so there were no more big cities.

  • I don't believe these often-quoted "statistics" of "85% of Americans support improved background checks" or whatever number it is. I think it's all made up. We already have background checks anyway. The crux of it is that an individual can sell a gun to another individual and there's no background check done. The gun haters can't stand that idea! But that's part of our freedom. Do you REALLY want to give the government the authority to supervise every personal transaction? Cause that's where that road leads.

  • Because we know a police state when we see it and we intend to be able to fight back when they all round up together and try to corral us.


  • trash 'politician'

    Yea, the NRA literally is just American gun owners. If you oppose the rights that citizens have then the people SHOULD oppose you and make sure you NEVER get a job anywhere ever again, you are trash.

Leave a Reply

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