“Those seeking to politicize these tragedies make it more difficult to address the underlying causes.” – U.S. Rep. Bill Huizenga, Aug. 4

In case you have forgotten, it has now been 40 days since a white nationalist/white supremacist murdered three people and maimed 12 more with an assault weapon in Gilroy. It has now been 35 days since 20 people were murdered and 26 more injured by a white nationalist/white supremacist in El Paso, using an assault weapon. It has now been 34 days since nine people were murdered and 27 more maimed by an angry white man using an assault weapon that mutilated these individuals in the 30 seconds before he was shot and killed by police.

Just to put that all in perspective, from the time the Coast Guard Festival started to its conclusion, 32 Americans lost their lives to violent, white nationalists/white supremacists in our country carrying assault weapons. That’s 97 families and extended families whose lives will forever be changed, all in the span of a week, who were doing nothing more than you and I might do – attending a festival, back-to-school shopping or celebrating a night out.

And if you don’t think it can happen here, I have a bridge I’d like to sell you. I suspect that when it happens here, Bill will be there with his thoughts and prayers, and more than willing to explain to us that it’s not the appropriate time to address the issue.

Just to be clear, every time Bill votes the way the NRA tells him to, it is political. When in February 2017 he voted to make it easier for people with mental health issues to obtain an assault weapon, it was political. Every time he refuses to listen to his constituency, it is political. And every time he sends his thoughts and prayers or tells us now isn’t the time – it is political. It’s simply the politics of a coward.

And what does the individual who is supposed to represent us in Washington think? Well, once again, Bill H. has chosen to show his total lack of respect for you and me. Why? The answer is simple – he doesn’t care about you and me, he never has and never will. His only constituency and the only people he cares about (besides himself) are those who finance his re-election. He doesn’t care that even before these shootings occurred, 57 percent of Americans thought banning assault weapons was a good idea and that an overwhelming 89 percent thought that background checks were a good idea. He doesn’t care that since the shootings, 90 percent of Republicans support background checks and 55 percent of Republicans support a ban on assault weapons.

So why is it that Bill H. will never support the common-sense gun legislation? Here are the top seven reasons that are obvious to me:

(1) He is unwilling to accept simple solutions. There is very little complexity in implementing background checks and an assault weapons ban. We now know what needs to be improved and updated in previous bills, and both could be implemented quickly while the complex issues are worked through.

(2) Of course, there are complex issues that need to be worked through and addressed. However, Bill prefers to “talk” about the complexity of issues, just not now. And knowing that there will be more, he knows the time will never be right. And, more importantly, like his fellow Republicans, he is unwilling (perhaps unable) to sort through and understand all the issues and develop a workable strategy, because it might mean compromise.

(3) He doesn’t understand the horrors of war. Bill, like his hero DT, chose not to serve his country in the military, so he really doesn’t understand and can’t comprehend the carnage that an assault weapon can create in just seconds.

(4) He’s chosen to ignore the facts that in the 10 years when assault weapons were banned, mass murders dropped by 43 percent. He has chosen to ignore the fact that since the ban was ignored by his Republican allies, mass murders have jumped by over 200 percent.

(5) He can’t differentiate between protection and assault. Just to clarify, the definition of an assault rifle is: “a rapid-fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use.” The whole idea of an assault weapon is just that – it’s a military weapon designed to assault and kill, not to protect.

(6) He has no common sense. His theory is that it’s not the gun that kills, it’s the person pulling the trigger that kills. With that logic, I guess it’s OK if Kim Jong-un gets a nuclear weapon as it won’t be the bomb that kills us, it will be Kim. Sad part is, we will still all be dead, like the more than 40,000 Americans who died from gun violence last year.

(7) He claims to be a sportsman and hunter, and I guess one who hunts with an assault weapon. I wonder what he does with the meat that came from any animal hit by over 200 bullets into it in 30 seconds?

As a community, we need to accept and realize that Bill isn’t our representative; never has been, never will be. Maybe with some hard work by you and me, we can send him back to selling real estate and finally elect someone who is interested in representing all of us!

Peace.

(10) comments

randybuist

Interesting how we want to complain about 'leftists' but have zero solutions to our violent crime in America. We seem to have zero interest in fixing any of our problems. We simply say it's 'leftist' and then hope for no change in our behavior... obvious Huizenga voters who hide behind screen names.

Vladtheimp

Surprise, surprise – another cog from the Tribune’s boundless stable of Leftwing Democrat “Community Columnists” produces a Manifesto that is long on myth and falsehoods and short on truth.

Surely this cog knows that he is spreading disinformation and misinformation but, as with all socialists, the ends justify the means – he hates the Second Amendment; he hates that the Left doesn’t control Federal, State, and local government levers of power, and he hates freedom.

• How else to explain his unfettered hatred of his duly elected Congressional Representative:

• How else to explain his misrepresentation of the Leftwing Environmental Zealot murderer in El Paso?

• How else to explain his failure to note the Dayton shooter was an Elizabeth Warren fan and a self-described “Leftist?

• How else to explain his borrowing the bogus Democrat definition of ‘assault weapon’ that describes it as ‘rapid fire’ when like virtually all modern weapons (semi-automatic) it fires one round with each trigger pull, like a Daisy BB gun;

• How else to explain his bot-like disinformation on the assault weapon ban when he must know the Department of Justice and the New York Times found it had virtually no effect?



Actually we should be grateful that Tribune provides these Leftists a forum to demonstrate to all informed and thinking people the lengths they will go to attempt to propagandize their radical agenda, and to respond in the manner that hurts them most – at the ballot box.

T-Bird

Vlad, these lefties are getting more and more authoritarian with each passing day. Now we will all have to drive electric cars and not eat red meat to save the planet from their religious belief of Global Warming. This is simply about control of every aspect of your life. There is no science involved. This is why they also need a disarmed populous or their religion can't be implemented. Mark here is just the proverbial useful idiot for them.

Vladtheimp

Obama’s National Institute For Justice:

Regulation of Large Capacity Magazines



• In order to have an impact, large capacity magazine regulation needs to sharply curtail their availability to include restrictions on importation, manufacture, sale, and possession. An exemption for previously owned magazines would nearly eliminate any impact. The program would need to be coupled with an extensive buyback of existing large capacity magazines. With an exemption the impact of the restrictions would only be felt when the magazines degrade or when they no longer are compatible with guns in circulation. This would take decades to realize.

Background Checks





•The secondary market is the primary source of crime guns. Ludwig and Cook (2000)compared states that introduced Brady checks to those states that already had background checks and found no effect of the new background checks. They hypothesized that the background checks simply shifted to the secondary market those offenders who normally purchased in the primary market.



Supply sources can vary in different parts of the country. An NIJ funded studyof the Los Angeles illicit gun marketnoted: “Results showed that many crime guns were first purchased at local—that is, in county—licensed dealers, rather than from out of state. That is, contrary to the conventional wisdom that crime guns were being trafficked across state borders from places with less stringent regulations, such as Arizona and Nevada, we found that a majority of the guns used in crimes were purchased in Los Angeles County.”Thus, gun markets can be highly local.

Assault Weapons Ban





• The exemption of pre-1994 models ensures that a large stock, estimated at 1.5 million, of existing weapons would persist. Prior to the 1994 ban, assault weapons were used in 2-8% of crimes. Therefore a complete elimination of assault weapons would not have a large impact on gun homicides.

• Since assault weapons are not a major contributor to US gun homicide and the existing stock of guns is large, an assault weapon ban is unlikely to have an impact on gun violence. If coupled with a [government mandated] gun buyback and no exemptions then it could be effective.





So, who are we to believe – President Obama’s Department Of Justice or Mark Smith, a ‘Community Columnist’? (I would have jumped to #1 immediately until Obama’s attempted soft Coup d’etat using his Justice Department is being revealed before our very eyes.

anonymous

And this is precisely what makes our country so dangerous - people that are too stupid to do any real research before opening up their mouths and then voting, especially the Tribune as of late. For example, fully automatic weapons are illegal for civilian use and ownership. An "assault weapon" by definition is NOT a fully automatic weapon. Stupid. I myself proudly walk around GH with my handgun, as does my girlfriend. And we're white.[tongue_smile]

T-Bird

That's right anonymous. A handgun could be termed an "assault weapon" if it used to assault someone. It is a disingenuous term thrown out there by lefty nincompoops. They think every AR-15 is a "weapon of war" when as I stated before, it shoots one bullet for every pull of the trigger and can in no way be switched into a fully automatic weapon like the M-16 that is actually used by the military in war.

Gord/Claiare

Funny my AR I use for hunting doesn’t shoot 200 end in 30 sec stop wither scare tactics reporting!! Also since the first of the year we have had what the FBI classified as mass shootings 4 or more victims 218 shootings as such an AR was used in 1 in 10 of these shootings. The common denominator in these shootings isn’t an AR it’s mental health issues!!

T-Bird

That's because Mark here doesn't know what he's talking about. This is the typical behavior of lefties. Write an article full of falsehoods that he and his ilk believe with all their fiber are the truth. Otherwise, he has no argument. By the way Mark, AR-15 doesn't stand for "Assault or Automatic Rifle" as lefties like you believe. It stands for "ArmaLite Rifle" after the company that originated it. The fully automatic weapons Mark thinks everyone has out there have been pretty much illegal for civilians to possess since the days of Machine Gun Kelly and Baby Face Nelson. You have to get a special permit that is very expensive to obtain and it's done mostly for vintage pieces that fully vetted collectors display and don't usually fire. An AR-15 shoots 1 bullet for every time the trigger is pulled, just like any semi-automatic weapon out there. You'd have to have a mighty itchy trigger finger to shoot 200 rounds in 30 seconds while also being a quick-handed fellow to swap out magazines that fast. Pretty much a physical impossibility. The statistics also show no discernible difference in mass shootings when there was a ban versus when there hasn't been a ban. Mark has some bad information he is pawning off as gospel. Again, this is typical of lefties. They think everyone is as ignorant as they are. Gord/Claiare, you've hit the proverbial nail on the head when you state that it takes a mentally ill individual to just randomly shoot his fellow man down in cold blood. Someone who is rational doesn't behave like that. Gord/Claiare, I know we'll never convince Mister Peace here he is mistaken. He and his ilk are never wrong about anything in their minds.

randybuist

such a great sportsman when you need a dozen shots to take down an animal... or maybe not.

Vladtheimp

The Second Amendment to the Constitution is not about hunting - it's about a free people being empowered to defend themselves, especially from the predations of an all powerful government intent on destroying their freedom and liberty.

It was deemed so critical to our Republic that it was placed second only to the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment.

Gun control, registration and confiscation laws immediately preceded the enslavement and death of millions of people:

• 1911 - In Turkey

• 1928 In Russia

• 1938 In Germany

• 1935 In Germany

• 1964 In Guatemala

• 1970 In Uganda

• 1956 In Cambodia

If you don't want to hunt with a weapon with a large magazine - don't - but don't pretend the Second Amendment is about hunting and deprive the rest of us of the means of self defense to protect our lives, liberty, and property!

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.