Newtown Group Marches for Universal Background Checks

[premium]

Posted by Kathy Meier, Community Contributor

11:37 p.m. CDT, July 4, 2013

At today's 4th of July parade in Glen Ellyn, a new group marched for gun violence prevention. Participating as a chapter of the Newtown Action Alliance (a gun violence prevention group out of Connecticut formed after the shooting at Sandy Hook last December), this DuPage based group wants the local communities to know that there is broad support for gun violence prevention, especially universal background checks.

“I was stunned by the level of support and encouragement we received from the crowd,” said parade marcher Diane Sloan. “People were on their feet cheering us on as we passed by. It was very moving.”

The Congressman for Glen Ellyn and the group marching is Representative Peter Roskam, who at this point does not support universal background checks, a gun violence prevention measure that has overwhelming support from Americans.

“Honestly, I’m disappointed that Representative Roskam has not come out in support of universal background checks yet,” said community organizer and marcher, Kathy Meier. “This is really an opportunity for him to use his high ranking position in Congress to do something of significance. The families in his District want universal background checks and we are looking to him to get it done.”

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/suburbs/glen_ellyn/community/chi-ugc-article-newtown-group-marches-for-universal-backgroun-2013-07-04,0,4557670.story

Universal Background Checks? I'm all for it, hopefully the new bill in the Congress will pass this time as long as all kinds of amendments aren't attached to it.

Almost had it in Nevada, but thanks to Blooming Idiot and his minions thinking they should tell us what's good for us, we didn't get it. Ah well, we'll try again.

[petronius]

1. I agree that universal background checks would be useful and doable

If I was in charge of prioritizing and delineating the debate, I'd say that the focus should be on UBCs, state-level expansion/enforcement of the Lautenberg domestic violence firearms prohibitions, and development of mechanisms to remove firearms from the possession of people who have become disqualified. A basic safety-training requirement for all purchasers would also be nice, perhaps like the handgun safety certificate we have in CA.

On the flip side, I'd like to see the abandonment of AWBs and a shift toward reasonable shall-issue CCW everywhere. (And, I'd certainly exclude some of the more obnoxious new proposals we have here in CA, like the fee/permit to buy ammo, or bans on detachable magazines.)

[premium]

2. I agree completely,

I would also like to see a basic safety training course for first time buyers of firearms.

[rdharma]

3. Oh, puhlease! It was the teabagging Gov. of NV who vetoed the bill!

The bill passed the NV legislature. Maybe it's time you started giving credit where credit is due! Jeesh!

[premium]

4. He veto'd it because of all the calls he received in opposition of it,

thanks to Blooming Idiot and his merry band of Minions interfering in our politics. I live here, you can deny it, belittle it, insult it, but I live here, I know how Nevada politics work a whole lot better than you.

BTW, did you ever find those links of me praising and applauding Sandoval for his veto?

[rdharma]

5. Don't give me that crap! He would have vetoed it anyway!

[premium]

6. Maybe, maybe not

the point is that Blooming Idiot and his merry band of Minions galvanized people to call the Gov. office in opposition to signing the bill, and that pushed him to veto it.

[rdharma]

7. Fact is........ that's the rightie Gov's talking point! nt

[premium]

8. Yeah, you just keep on believing that rdharma.

But I live here, I know what happened and you don't.

So, did you ever find just 1 link? Just one.

[rdharma]

9. Yup! I'll just have to keep believing the facts.

Are you ready for your next lesson on interview techniques?

[premium]

10. Where's the links?

[Duckhunter935]

26. he has nothing

[jimmy the one]

11. sandoval, (R-NRA)

premium: He veto'd it because of all the calls he received in opposition of it, thanks to Blooming Idiot and his merry band of Minions interfering in our politics. I live here, you can deny it, belittle it, insult it, but I live here, I know how Nevada politics work a whole lot better than you.

If Sandoval 'veto'd it because of all the calls he received in opposition of it', then it's Sandoval who's the idiot, not bloomburg. Phone calls are recognized as being unscientific & padded due gunnut fanaticism, one gunnut could call all day long - some did. (one report on phone calls was ~155,000 progun to 27,000 - obviously not scientifically representative). Why didn't sandoval use the more reputable polls which showed 86% support for the bgcheck bill?
Bloomburg was advocating on behalf of those 86%+, sandoval sided with the lunratic fringe.

Jun 13, 2013 ... Whatever the case, Governor Brian Sandoval (R-NRA) just vetoed SB..
Although it was no secret that Sandoval was going to veto.., the veto message sparked the ire of progressive groups that had lobbied for its passage. Repeating an oft-cited result of a poll showing 86% of Nevadans favor background checks for private party gun sales.. "He is standing with extremists who are mostly filled with paranoid fears of the govt taking away their guns."
Along with local groups like ProgressNow Nevada, the national coalition Mayors Against Illegal Guns has been spending money advocating for the bill.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/jun/13/governor-vetoes-gun-bill-says-it-would-erode-right/#ixzz2YHVZqDeA

[gejohnston]

12. you mean the poll

MAIG hired Frank Luntz to do?

[premium]

13. Hey, JtO, anything you post here

is, IMO, pure bullhockey, I refuse to take anything you have to say on the 2A issue seriously, you have proven yourself to be nothing more that a hack for the gun control groups.
That 86% you and your minions often cite? Guess what? 90% of the poll was done in Clark County, which encompasses Las Vegas, which is heavily Blue, they didn't even bother to poll the rural counties of Nevada, so take your skewed poll and do what you want with it.

I live here, I have most of my life, I know what Nevada politics are, you don't, so, anything you opine about NV. politics, I'll take with a huge grain of salt.

What's the matter JtO? Not enough action in Castle Bansalot? Things getting boring over there?

That is all.

[jimmy the one]

14. shootout at Fort Gunsalot

johnston: you mean the poll MAIG hired Frank Luntz to do?

Dunno that much about the names, but this come up: Douglas E. Schoen LLC showed likely voters in a wide range of states and congressional districts overwhelmingly support background checks for all gun sales. The average support for background checks among 21 statewide polls was 86 percent..These findings are in line with recent independent polls that have found more than 90% of Americans support background checks for all buyers http://www.demandaction.org/polls Previous polling by Republican Frank Luntz for MAIG found that 82% gun owners.. http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/media-center/pr_20130323.shtml

So I'll tentatively say 'evidently not' done by luntz. You can look up 'polling report' & verify all those reputable polls showing near 90% support for bg checks, dunno why you both are surprised by nevada showing similar. Here's one from gallup dec2012: 92% support bgchecks, 7% oppose. http://www.gallup.com/poll/159569/americans-stricter-gun-laws-oppose-bans.aspx

premium: Hey, JtO, anything you post here is, IMO, pure bullhockey, I refuse to take anything you have to say on the 2A issue seriously, you have proven yourself to be nothing more that a hack for the gun control groups.

Truth hurts dunnit? 2ndAmendment Mythology exposed & shown to be what it is, based upon fraud & half truths & rightwing propagunda.

prem: That 86% you and your minions often cite? Guess what? 90% of the poll was done in Clark County, which encompasses Las Vegas, which is heavily Blue, they didn't even bother to poll the rural counties..,so take your skewed poll and...

I doubt it's a skewed poll, your paragraph above appears what is skewed. Show some other poll which refutes it then. Nevada results follow closely national poll results on bgchecks; as I said, the truth about 2ndA Mythology hurts, ow.

I live here, I have most of my life, I know what Nevada politics are, you don't, so, anything you opine about NV. politics, I'll take with a huge grain of salt.

I don't need have lived in a state to cite polls & excerpt others, which I believe in far more than I ever would you about nevada politics or anything in general. I was to reno sparks & lake tahoe, nevada politics seemed centered upon how many free drinks at casino slots.

What's the matter JtO? Not enough action in Castle Bansalot? Things getting boring over there?

I like to come to Fort Gunsalot for a shootout now & then. The other is more like Camelot, ahhhhhhhhhh.

[Eleanors38]

15. Dump the italics, I'm losing horizontal hold. nt

[BainsBane]

16. Now it's Bloomberg's fault?

Before it was Feinstein's, and before that people on DU.
Everyday a new fantasy in here.

[premium]

17. I never once said that it was Sen. Feinstein's fault for the veto of

Nevada's UBC, the failure of the Federal UBC can be tied to Sen. Feinstein's push for a Fed. AWB, I've said that Bloomberg telling Nevadans whats best for them led to the overwhelming calls to the Gov. office in opposition to signing, calls were 3.5-1 against.

The only fantasy here is yours.

[BainsBane]

18. Oh excuse me

That was the national background check bill. It's always the fault of people who dare to exercise their First Amendment rights in promoting gun control, not that actual cowards who voted no or the NRA and gunners who pressured them to do so. Nothing more objectionable than people who have the nerve to disagree with the corporate gun lobby, hence the ongoing efforts to erode the First Amendment.


The only place the failure of the national background amendment is tied to Feinstein is on Fox, Rush, and through NRA propaganda. There is no relationship in reality, but why let facts interrupt your chorus of excuses. They've never mattered before.

[BainsBane]

19. Let me guess

The NRA ran an ad like the one in WV telling Nevadans not to let those filthy Jews (Bloomberg) and blacks (Obama) tell you what to do?

Sounds to me a lot like blaming lynchings on the NAACP. If only those folks hadn't gotten so uppity, the Klan wouldn't have had to kill them.

The gun lobby wants criminals to have a steady supply of guns because it generate profits, both from felons making illegal purchases and those buying guns because of fear of crime.

[premium]

20. Let me see if I get this right,

you're hinting that if the NRA ran that particular ad in Nevada, which they didn't AFAIK, Nevadans suddenly turn into nazi's and racists?

Can't be anyworse that this gem.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12623657#post3

[BainsBane]

21. Since they ran an ad in WV

Is it not unreasonable to speculate they might have run a similar ad in Nevada. The NRA knows their constituency, and they know the racial buzz words that resonate with them. Why is this concept so difficult for you to grasp? No body needs to turn them into anything. All the NRA does is play into their preexisting prejudices.

What does a post on a completely unrelated matter in another group have to do with background checks? Are you now blaming me personally for the failure of the Nevada legislation. I posted that so the world came undone?

You have your friends here in the Gungeon to thank for showing me just what the urgency to expand shall issue concealed carry is all about. Two of them were quite clear in asserting they see CCW holders as justified in killing people, and unarmed African-American teens like Trayvon Martin in particular. If only you were as outraged about killing as you are about what I write. No one will be holding their breath on that one.

[premium]

22. Yes it is unreasonable to think that they might have

all you had to do was google it and found out they didn't.

[friendly_iconoclast]

23. You've been making a lot of evidence-free claims lately.

For example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12623657#post3

It's clear to me they see a CCW permit as an entitlement to kill, as is evident in their defense of Zimmerman's right to murder an unarmed teenager. On one hand they push for shall issue CCW, and then they argue CCW holders are justified in killing whenever they feel spooked. Concealed carry holders have killed more than 500 people. Many spend their days thinking about taking the life of another, and they take keen interest in the Zimmerman trial because he did exactly what they want to do.

And yet, there are no links to anyone saying what you claim has been said.

On a similar note:

Two of them were quite clear in asserting they see CCW holders as justified in killing people, and unarmed African-American teens like Trayvon Martin in particular.

Which two are those, and where did they say it?

(Added on edit)

Is it all killing in self-defense that you object to, or just the use of a gun to do so?

Because if it's the "using a gun" part, I can assure you that it makes no difference whatsoever to the deceased...

[premium]

24. Funny,

she can make evidence free and outright falsehoods about us here in the gungeon and not get her posts hidden, and yet, when I belittle Mike B., my thread gets hidden.
I guess some are more equal than others.

[friendly_iconoclast]

25. Also, there's no evidence for that planned pogrom you claimed I'm abetting:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172123735#post155

As I said, I believe the the purpose of the policy is to kill people of color to reestablish white only rule in the nation. The GOP and the racists who make up the NRA cannot regain political control without decreasing the population of color. That's where policies like that discussed in this OP enter. The gun lobby and the GOP are one interest, and they are now joined at the hip with white supremacists.