Posts Tagged ‘guns’

Shooting at Aurora, CO Starbucks—No Gun “Requests” Not Enough

Wednesday, February 3rd, 2016

starbucksphoto610_custGuns
February 3, 2016
 
Last weekend in Aurora, Colorado a juvenile was rushed to the hospital after a shooting at a Starbucks. (The same Aurora where 82 were shot at the movies.) Police said there were no arrests or suspects. Was it an “accident”? (more…)

MORE RUSSIAN ROULETTE AND NOW IT’S ON OBAMA AND IT IS NOT EXECUTIVE ACTIONS

Wednesday, December 2nd, 2015

by Elliot Fineman
CEO National Gun Victims Action Council
December 2, 2015

R_Roulette_gfk_610
 
(more…)

A Time for Mourning… Or A Time To Promote An Absurd Pro-Gun Fanatic Position?

Monday, November 16th, 2015

Paris, France
by Elliot Fineman
CEO National Gun Victims Action Council

November 16, 2015
 
I was not going to write anything about guns in this week’s update. My only comment was going to offer my complete and heartfelt sympathy to the French people who lost loved ones in the unthinkable Friday evening massacre and to express my deep anguish about the lives cut short by the madness of ideological fanatics.
 
(more…)

Armed Husbands Shoot Seven Women This Week, Five Die

Tuesday, September 1st, 2015

 

Gun Gendercide Continues

 

 

While the nation tries to digest the crime of two media members killed on camera in Virginia by a legal gun owner, a spate of women killed by enraged armed husbands has received less notice.

 

Hours after receiving a year of unsupervised probation for violating an order of protection against domestic violence filed by his wife, James Terry Colley, Jr. shot and killed his wife Amanda Cloaninger and her friend Lindy Dobbins in St. Augustine, Florida last Thursday, say police. Until Colley was apprehended, three nearby schools were locked down including one where the couple’s child attends.

 

Two days later, Blessing Okereke was fatally shot in the Bank of America tower in Oak Cliff in Dallas by her husband say police. Husband David Thompson told police he believed his wife was reaching for his pistol, so he shot her in self-defense. Right.

 

The following day, Nuria N. Kudlach was fatally shot at her home in State College, PA and her husband was charged with first- and third-degree murder the following day. And yesterday Sonja Wells Raine was fatally shot on her job in Pascagoula, MS by her enraged husband according to police. Raine’s “sister got killed the same way by her boyfriend or husband, so that is shocking,” said co-worker Kim Pinkney.

 

domesticREVupdated

 

Amazingly, more women were shot by enraged husbands last week. Also shot were Francisca Jew at a donut shop in Devine, Texas and an unidentified Arlington, Washington woman. The Devine and Arlington women are expected to survive.

 

Half the murders of women in the US each year are by intimate partners and homicide increases 500 percent when a firearm is present. Yet the overwhelmingly male NRA is okay with the gendercide statistics and actually works for the “gun rights” of suspected domestic abusers, also overwhelmingly men. In Michigan the NRA sought to push through a law allowing people under court issued restraining orders to keep their guns. Like David Thompson, the suspect in the Bank of America tower murder in Dallas, they might have to “defend ” themselves.

 

When women are gunned down by enraged partners, often in public places where others are injured too, the NRA likes to say if women are really scared they should arm themselves too. The rhetoric is offensive. Should Nadia Ezaldein, fatally shot by an enraged boyfriend in front of horrified shoppers as she worked behind the cosmetics counter at Chicago’s Magnificent Mile Nordstrom’s last Black Friday, have kept a gun under the counter just in case?

 

“Women should arm themselves” is an NRA fiction to occlude the bloody gun “gendercide” committed by known domestic abusers under orders of protection who the gun lobby says have “rights.” In at least four instances in recent years, women who had armed themselves were killed with their own guns because of the element of fear and surprise and because the men were bigger, angrier and motivated perpetrators.

 

The NRA also likes to say no laws can stop partner murderers, ignoring every developed country in the world where domestic gun homicide does not happen weekly--or at all. If seven men were shot in the head in one week by wives who were known to be violent and armed, would it say the same thing?

 

Tell these top corporations, with pre-written tweets, to protect their employees and customers by banning guns in their stores and offices.

 

 

 

Violent Domestic Abusers Have Gun Rights Too–NRA

Thursday, May 14th, 2015

More than three fourths of domestic homicide victims are stalked before they are killed. Yet both stalking and domestic abuse are only misdemeanors in Louisiana. Recently the NRA and other pro-gun groups came at Louisiana lawmakers who were considering stronger regulations against domestic violence with both barrels blazing.
 
The bill under consideration would add “dating partner” as a qualifier for domestic abuse battery charges which currently only name household members such as spouses, family members or co-habitants. Ray Rice, the former Baltimore Ravens running back caught on video battering his fiancé in an elevator, would likely not be covered under current Louisiana domestic battery laws said Rep. Helena Moreno, D-New Orleans, the bill’s sponsor. The bill would also enhance penalties for violations of protective orders.
 
But the bill would violate “gun rights” said gun lobbyists descending upon Baton Rouge. “We don’t need to rush to take away people’s rights just because they made a mistake,” Bradley Gulotta, from Guns Across America told lawmakers. “Not everyone who got in an argument–had a push, had a shove–is gong to come back and do more bodily harm or be a danger to other people.” Let’s give the pushers and shovers the benefit of the doubt …and their firearms? Beside, what if the person had only had “one date” whined gun lobbyists–no fair!
 
batterer post
 
The NRA’s Tara Mitchell agreed that strengthening laws would take away “citizens civil rights.” The proposed 10-year prohibition on gun owning for convicted batterers violates “a constitutional right” and is “just not something we can support” she told lawmakers.
 
NRA spokeswoman Jennifer Baker was not present at the hearings but echoed the pro-domestic batterer rhetoric in an email to the Times-Picayune. The bill “is so overly broad that it could make a felon out of a girlfriend who pulls a cell phone from her boyfriend’s hand against his will.” Or a man who pummels and drags his girlfriend in an elevator?
 
Both Mitchell and Bakers said the answer to domestic violence was enforcing existing laws–which, of course, deem stalking and domestic battery misdemeanors.
 
The gun lobby’ work to restore “gun rights” of convicted felons, suspected batterers under orders of protection and people who have been hospitalized with mental illness is well publicized. Why should violent or disturbed people have guns? Because if you take away their “gun rights” pretty soon we will all be disarmed and living under violent fascist dictatorships like the oppressed peoples in EU countries, Canada, Japan, New Zealand and Australia.
 
“When you begin taking away the rights of people that you don’t like, that’s the slippery slope,” said NRA lobbyist Marion P. Hammer when the Sun Sentinel reported that valid concealed weapon licenses were issued to 1,400 probable felons including a man who shot his girlfriend as she cooked breakfast, a pizza deliveryman wanted for fatally shooting a 15-year-old over a stolen order of chicken wings and six registered sex offenders. People “you don’t like?”
 
Domestic violence allegations have touched the top echelons of the NRA. The wife of the NRA’s own New York City field representative Richard D’Alauro, Maribeth testified on Capitol Hill that she endured years of bullying and abuse from the NRA honcho. D’Alauro possessed 39 guns when charged with assault, harassment and endangering the welfare of a child. Nice.
 
The truth is the gun lobby is okay with US domestic violence deaths–estimated at 1,000 a year, mostly women–to preserve the “gun rights” of its constituency also known as its revenue stream.
 

Join our action to tell corporate America to get off the “sidelines” and take a stand against gun violence including the “can’t miss” sniper rifle sold to civilians. When corporations want sane gun laws, we will have sane gun laws. Follow us at @GunVictimsAct
 
 

Commercial and Residential Building Owners Face Massive Financial Risk Unless They Post “No Guns Allowed” Signs—Law Firm

Friday, April 24th, 2015

By Elliot Fineman

CEO

National Gun Victims Action Council

NGVAC Tell and Compel Initiative

 

Since “Concealed Carry” has become the law of the land, and open carry is allowed in several states, National Gun Victims Action Council (NGVAC) has speculated that property owners would be liable for gun injuries on their property if they did not ban guns. Now, Mayer Brown LLP, a top-ranked international real estate, finance and litigation law firm, has weighed in on the question at our request.
 
Mayer Brown, named “Firm of the Year” in the Appellate Law category by U.S. News & World Report for the second consecutive year, advises that “a property owner who did not put up the [no guns allowed] signs” would face the argument that it was entirely “foreseeable” that gun violence, injury or death “would occur, since he or she failed to prohibit” guns carried either concealed or openly on his property. Click Link for Illinois Property Owners Research Memorandum
 
Just as supermarkets would be responsible if someone slipped on a spilled liquid and coffee shops would be responsible if someone burned themselves with a hot liquid, property owners are governed by a “common-law standard of care,” Mayer Brown LLP told us, that requires them to provide a safe environment for employees, visitors and customers. Failure to satisfy the common-law standard of care has resulted in massive financial awards against property owners. Several years ago, airlines, theme parks and health clubs began to be sued under this precept for failing to keep external defibrillators available for customers and employees.
 
Property owners who fail to put up signs banning guns may well be found guilty of not maintaining a “common-law standard of care” and face significant financial risks, says Mayer Brown. Even defending such a suit would prove extremely costly.
 
What does this mean to you if you own property or are injured on a property by a legal gun carrier? It means that:
 
If you are shot accidentally or otherwise in a gun-related incident whether in an office, retail, mall or residential building, you can sue the property owner if “No Guns Allowed” signs were not posted.
 
Additionally, if a Building Owner does not put up a sign, you are at increased risk of being a victim of a gun incident at your place of business, where you shop or where you live.
 
The Mayer Brown memo centers on Illinois in response to the Firearm Concealed Carry Act, implemented in 2014, but the principles are the same in every state including states with laws immunizing property owners.
 
Of course, the NRA will reflexively argue that people are less safe in a building that bans guns because they cannot “defend” themselves and others. But the Mayer legal research memo makes clear there is a body of evidence demonstrating that armed citizens do not protect themselves and others the way they think and, in fact, make the environment far less safe than if no guns were present. This is why all major corporations/companies—including the NRA—ban guns from their headquarter buildings.
 
Further, the memo reports that even fully trained law enforcement officers miss about a third of their shots. “It is not foreseeable or likely that armed individuals could successfully defend themselves in a crisis situation” and they may “create more danger,” says the memo, “A court could hardly claim that a duty of care was violated because a property owner put up signs to help prevent this additional danger posed by would-be heroes.”
 
If the NRA threatens to sue a business or Building Owner for not allowing guns, the owners will be on strong legal ground defending such a suit. Nor is the Building Owner even taking a position in favor or against guns. Owners are prudently making a risk avoidance (elimination) decision.
 
The Mayer Brown memo also removes the necessity of individual businesses located on the property owners’ property from having to make individual decisions about gun signage; the Building Owner or property owner’s ban accomplishes that in one felled swoop for all the chains and businesses located in a shopping center, mall, office or residential complex.
 
What can you do? You can discuss the financial liability risk and dangers of allowing guns at the places you shop, work, visit and live. Now that this legal research memo is public information, a property owner cannot claim he did “not know” as a defense. The memo establishes that the danger of gun injuries when guns are allowed is entirely “foreseeable.” Foreseeability is the legal standard for establishing liability.
 
This legal guidance is good news for anyone who wants to shop, dine, work or be in public spaces without the heightened risk of gun violence. Concealed and open carriers can walk up and down the street with their guns—but if they enter restaurants, stores, theaters, offices and other businesses with signs up they will be in violation of trespassing laws and subject to personal liability. The memo provides many powerful reasons for Building Owners to post “No Guns Allowed” signs.

 

A Note to Our Supporters About Our Tax-Exempt Status

Tuesday, April 21st, 2015

 

 

National Gun Victims Action Council (NGVAC) is a non-profit network of 14 million gun victims, survivors, the faith community and ordinary people leveraging their buying power to change America’s gun laws. We are indebted to our supporters for their outstanding energy, passion and commitment to gun safety.

 

A few months ago it was announced through the gun advocacy press that we had “lost” our 501(c)3 nonprofit status which allows donations to be tax deductible. While technically true because the prolonged illness and death of a loved one in my family delayed a yearly IRS filing, pro-gun bloggers used the lapse to discredit us.

 

We are pleased to announce that as per the normal IRS procedure, our 501(c)3 nonprofit status has been retroactively reinstated, as we assured our supporters it would. We regret the gap in our status but we more greatly regret the way the pro-gun movement exploited our situation to remove focus on the gun violence they perpetuate and the need for sane gun laws.

 

If you have not already done so, please join Operation Sideline to compel US corporations to take a stand against gun violence and weapons like TrackingPoint’s “Can’t Miss” Sniper rifle being sold to civilians.

Thank you for being our supporter and being the strength of what we do.

Elliot Fineman

Chief Executive Officer

National Gun Victims Action Council

 

SEMI-AUTOMATIC RIFLE USED BY THE SANDY HOOK KILLER

How “insane” are our gun laws?

 

* Known terrorists not allowed to purchase a plane ticket can legally purchase guns.

 

*The gun industry is the only industry exempt from federal regulation. (It used to be tobacco and guns, now it is just guns.)

 

* Guns are not registered, gun owners are not licensed.

 

*Criminals and people with mental illness, who cannot legally buy a gun from a gun dealer, can go to any gun show and legally buy guns.

 

“Concealed carry” is now legal in all states–pitting the rights of a paranoid minority against the safety of the majority of Americans.

 

*Guns can now be carried in national parks and on Amtrak trains.

 

*Despite Virginia Tech and other campus shootings, legalizing guns on campus is the gun lobby’s next goal.

 

How’s That Demographic Thing Working Out for You, LaPierre?

Friday, April 17th, 2015

At last week’s NRA convention, executive vice president and CEO Wayne LaPierre thundered that “eight years of one demographically symbolic president is enough.” The Democrats are trying to “reshape America” into an unrecognizable country, he bellowed.
 
But really it is the NRA not the Democrats that is on the wrong side of US demographics. Half of all millennials now support stricter gun laws and only 18 percent of those 18 to 25 even own a gun! Think about that.
 
Wayne LaPierre - Google Search
 
Yes, there are more total guns in the US than there were thirty years ago but they are concentrated in homes that already had them and heeded the “Obama’s gonna take your guns” warning. Now the post-Obama and Newtown “confiscation” gun rushes are over and gun makers admit they were a fluke. Last year, Smith & Wesson Holding Corp. and Remington Outdoor Co. reported profits down. Thomas Millner, outdoor retailer Cabela’s chief executive admitted the feeder frenzy after Newtown was “a bubble” as sales of firearms and ammunition dropped 50 percent.
 
While households that already had firearms now have more firearms, only a third of total households now have guns–down from half in 1977. The reason for the steep decline, says UPI, is “aging of the current-gun owning population, a lack of interest in guns by youth, the end of military conscription, the decreasing popularity of hunting; land-use issues that limit hunting and shooting and the increase in single-parent homes headed by women.”
 
Hunting isn’t even cool anymore to a growing number of young people. Kids are more involved with “cars, girlfriends or hanging out” and “think it’s boring to sit in a tree for hours,” said Kevin Kelly, a college student, to the lower Hudson Valley’s Journal News a few years ago. It’s not popular in middle school either agreed Carmel student Nick Sadowski.
 
“Only a couple of my friends really hunt,” high school student Jonathan Gibbons told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. “The rest have never really found the appeal of sitting out in the cold to shoot an animal.” According to the Wildlife Service, the number of young hunters, aged 16 to 24, fell by 300,000 in just ten years.
 
Nor do young people “get” NRA’s “Stand and Fight” message, rolled out insensitively after the Sandy Hook massacre. Who are we fighting?
 
“The NRA in the last 20-plus years has fed its followers a steady stream of angry, defensive, apocalyptic rhetoric about the government, about gun laws, about Democrats, about liberals,” says Vice, with dwindling success. “Most gun owners are white people over age 50 who primarily live in the South, Midwest, and rural areas—a shrinking group that the GOP is desperately trying to look beyond as it tries to broaden its appeal in 2016.”
 
At the recent NRA convention, an attendee verified the demographic problem. “Look around you–what do you notice?” she said to a reporter. “It’s very white isn’t it? And very old. Where are the young people? Where the Asians? Where are the Latinos? If this is the audience of the Republican Party we’re not going to win.”

 

Join our action to tell corporate America to get off the “sidelines” and take a stand against gun violence including the “can’t miss” sniper rifle sold to civilians. When corporations want sane gun laws, we will have sane gun laws. Follow us at @GunVictimsAct

The NRA Doesn’t Hate All Gun Laws–Look at The Ones it Likes

Sunday, March 1st, 2015

The NRA hates the government’s jackbooted ATF agents and loves to whip up its wild-eyed prepper population: they’re coming to take your guns. Yet the NRA has quietly enacted a lot of regulations of its own which it relies on the same government jackbooted agents to enforce. Who can say hypocrite?
 
oppressFor example, the gun lobby-backed Tiahrt amendments tacked on to U.S. Department of Justice appropriations bills since 2003 prohibit ATF from releasing firearm trace data for use by cities, states, researchers, litigants and members of the public. Tiahrt amendments also mandate the destruction of all approved gun purchaser records within 24 hours and prohibit ATF from requiring gun dealers to submit their inventories to law enforcement.
 
Let’s get those bad guys!
 
The NRA actually got a program passed to help felons and others whose gun purchasing rights were revoked petition for them to be restored. “Felons Finding It Easy to Regain Gun Rights,” said a chilling New York Times report in November of 2011. Why should someone’s gun rights be abridged just because they’re a violent criminal?
 
After the NRA got laws passed that make it legal for employees to bring their guns to work and leave them in the company parking lot, it added some spite. It pushed for laws in some states to make it illegal for employers to even ask if the employee brought a gun to work! It’s none of their business–until workplace shootings occur.
 
The bills are similar to the NRA’s moves to make it illegal for doctors to ask patients if they have guns in the home–those meddlers. Of course the NRA doesn’t mind doctors stitching up the children who find Dad’s gun practically every week.
 
The NRA has also pushed laws to make it illegal to publish the names and addresses of gun owners even though the information is considered in the public domain like real estate transfers. Guns make them so safe–owners don’t want anyone to know they have them. What will the neighbors think? What if bad guys break in and steal them? Maybe they need more guns to protect their guns.
 
Of course the NRA’s favorite law is the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act which gives gun makers, gun dealers and trade groups complete legal immunity from negligence and product liability lawsuits. Passed after Columbine and Red Lake, but before Virginia Tech, Tucson, Aurora and Newtown, maybe the gun lobby knew what was coming.

 

.

Join our action to tell corporate America to get off the “sidelines” and take a stand against gun violence including the “can’t miss” sniper rifle sold to civilians. When corporations want sane gun laws, we will have sane gun laws. Follow us at @GunVictimsAct

Charlie Hebdo Re-enactment Reveals NGVAC Tenet: Carrying a Gun Does Not Provide Self-Defense

Monday, January 19th, 2015

 January 19, 2015

 

Elliot Fineman

CEO

National Gun Victims Action Council (NGVAC)

 

Open and concealed carry laws are based on the tenet that carrying a gun provides “self-defense” to citizens. We at NGVAC disagree.

 

President Reagan was surrounded by Secret Service agents on the lookout for assassins yet John Hinckley Jr., untrained and armed with a $45 gun, shot the President, his press secretary, a police officer and a Secret Service agent. If carrying a gun provided self-defense, why would any law enforcement officer be killed? And if highly-trained officers are killed, why would armed citizens do better? The folly of “citizen defense” is exposed in the ABC 20/20 special “If I Only Had a Gun,” and recent episodes in which carriers’ guns were stolen.

 

Now a test of whether carrying provides self-defense conducted by a gun rights group has again proved it does not. The group, Texas-based The Truth About Guns, simulated the Charlie Hebdo shooting 12 times at Patriot Protection, a defensive and firearms training facility in East Plano with armed “employees” intent on defending themselves against the gunmen. Only one “employee” escaped death–by running away not by shooting back–and none of the armed employees “killed” the simulated gunmen.

Paris terror attack simulation conducted in Texas by gun group -

 

 

 

“Problem was, I ran out of ammunition, and they kept coming,” said volunteer employee Parks Matthews who was shot in the back of the head, forearm and finger despite his firearms training. “I wasn’t smart enough to get out of the way and take cover.”

 

At NGVAC, we are not surprised at the results. For three years, we have challenged the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA) to exactly such a simulation at police training facilities with agreed upon carriers and scenarios and it has refused. To remove any financial hardship, we proposed both NGVAC and ISRA post $50,000 earnest money, which the winner would keep, less the costs of the simulation. Given the bias-free terms and financial windfall to the winner, ISRA’s refusal meant only one thing: it knew it would lose.

 

While ISRA did not acknowledge our challenge, other gun rights groups suggested we would rig the results. That’s why the failure of The Truth About Guns’ simulation is shocking: it was conducted by a gun rights group.

 

Even without the Charlie Hebdo and ABC 20/20 simulations, statistics show a gun does not protect carriers and actually heightens their risk. Epidemiologists at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine found that people with a gun were 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun.

 

The Truth About Guns admits its failure. “Suffice it to say, things did not go well for the faux victims when a single armed defender faced a two-person terrorist team armed with rifles,” wrote publisher Robert Farago. “It’s interesting to see how people react under stress. It’s not what you’d expect people do,” conceded group member Nick Leghorn. (The Truth About Guns’ Dan Zimmerman may not be convinced. He writes that “more than just one good guy with a gun would likely have been needed to save lives.”)

 

If carrying does not provide self-defense, as proved again this week by The Truth About Guns, why are open and concealed carry laws, based on this myth, on the books? The only protection they provide is of gun manufacturer profits. The inescapable fact is that the element of surprise always defeats the gun carrier.

 
National Gun Victims Actions Council is the U.S.’s largest gun victims group. Join our effort to get corporate America to take a stand against gun violence. When corporations want sane gun laws, we will have sane gun laws.  Follow us! @GunVictimsAct


Visit Us On TwitterVisit Us On FacebookVisit Us On YoutubeVisit Us On Google PlusVisit Us On Pinterest