Giffords shooting fall-out

Written By: - Date published: 7:20 am, January 19th, 2011 - 17 comments
Categories: us politics - Tags: , , ,

Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords survived the assassination attempt that killed six others, but the political fall-out has just begun. In the US’s strange post-modern politics, President Obama’s speech is the most popular thing he’s done, while Sarah Palin screwed up by defending the herself and the Tea Party. Meanwhile, guns like the one used in the shooting are flying off the shelves and Arizona is relaxing gun laws further.

Obama’s approval rating has bounced up 5% since the shooting and his speech. The speech itself seems to be the major reason for the turn-around with 78% approving of it and an 8% increase in the number of Americans who say he “understands the problems of people like you.”

But, it’s just words, eh? I mean a competent writer, a savvy political adviser, and a good orator are all that takes and it doesn’t actually change anything.

This is the guy who has brought in (basically) universal health-care – dragging the US kicking and screaming into the 1930s. That’s a goal that Democrat Presidents have aimed for and failed to achieve for decades. And it’s a speech that makes him more popular.

Palin, however, has drastically mis-stepped in her speech. After days of silence, she sat herself in a presidential setting (American flag behind her shoulder). In the speech, she made the issue all about herself and said who blame the violent rhetoric she and the Tea Party practice of inciting anti-Democrat violence where committing a ‘blood libel’ (insulting the Jewish population to boot). Again, in that bizarre post-modern way, it’s not the violent rhetoric she’s in trouble for or defending it, it’s the language she used in defending her use of violent rhetoric. Only 30% of Americans approved of her speech and there is talk that it could be the end of her presidential run.

The political debate in that country is so many levels removed from reality it’s astounding. Words matter more than actions; the signifier divorced from the signified.

Meanwhile, back in reality, those rednecks are behaving very oddly. The gun used to shoot Giffords and 16 others was purchased legally and had an extended magazine (also legal). There is no use for handguns with extended magazines other than shooting a lot of people very quickly at close range. You would think that people wouldn’t want people carrying weapons like that around anymore. But, since the shooting, sales of them in Arizona are through the roof.

Well, people have got to be able to protect themselves (with a 30-round magazine) when a mad-man starts shooting, eh? The thing is, two other people were armed when Laughner started shooting. One helped tackled him without drawing his weapon. The other drew his weapon and nearly shot someone else who had taken Laughner’s gun off him.

As MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow noted:

“To be clear, everybody who’s reacted to this shooting by saying, they wish there had been someone other than the killer with a gun at the scene. There was someone other than the killer with a gun at the scene. And the person he almost shot was one of the heroes who had just disarmed the killer.

I understand there are a lot of fantasies about guns and about heroism and about heroism involving guns. The fantasy that an armed responsible gun owner is all that would have been needed to have prevented this tragedy, that is disproved by what actually did happen.

When you talk about the fantasy of there being a responsible gun owner at that shooting on Saturday, it is not a hypothetical, that really happened. And it did not work out…

A panel of criminology and statistics experts with the National Research Council the National Academies published a study in 2004 that found no reduced crime in states with right-to-carry (RTC) laws.

A 2010 study from Stanford Law School found that “the most consistent, albeit not uniform, finding to emerge from the array of models is that aggravated assault rises when RTC laws are adopted.”

In Arizona, the Republicans are in charge. And they have already passing laws further weakening restrictions on guns:

Bills already introduced this year in Arizona in the Republican-controlled Legislature include barring landlords and homeowner groups from restricting the right to bear arms in self defense, and expanding the current law that allows gun owners to display a weapon in self defense. And John Wentling, a leader of the Arizona Citizens Defense League, a gun owners advocacy group, said his group’s priority bill, which he wouldn’t discuss, hasn’t been unveiled yet.

“I don’t think it really changes anything,” Republican state Sen. Ron Gould said of the mass shooting. “I don’t see how gun control could have prevented that shooting unless you take guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens.”

Of course, Laughner bought his weapon legally and fitted Gould’s definition of ‘law-abiding citizen’ – until he shot 17 people.

17 comments on “Giffords shooting fall-out ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. vto 1
    19 January 2011 at 8:14 am

    Why does “the right to bear arms” and all the arguments in support of that not get applied across the globe’s nations then? Iran could get support for its position from fellow republicans.

    Perhaps a republican out there can explain / self-justify?

    • Carol 1.1
      19 January 2011 at 12:40 pm

      The US gun control issue is about the rights of individual citizens to bear arms. It’s not about governments’ rights. One of the historical reasons given for this, is that citizens need guns to use against the government if they become undemocratic.

  2. mickysavage 2
    19 January 2011 at 8:33 am

    I find that the best way to understand the US is to watch lots of the Simpsons.

    It is the only way to make sense out of that strange place that is the leader of the free world.

  3. Tigger 3
    19 January 2011 at 9:03 am

    Palin has never had a Presidential run. She will have been told to make money while she can, go fundraise for the Republicans etc but there is no way that party would seriously consider her a candidate – she is too polarising, has too much baggage and she’s a woman to boot.

  4. ianmac 4
    19 January 2011 at 9:10 am

    Tigger:”……and she’s a woman to boot.”
    Tigger. Tigger. Tigger. No matter how naughty Sarah is, there is no need to boot her.

  5. prism 5
    19 January 2011 at 11:04 am

    My word is Aridzona.

    captcha – discount

  6. randal 6
    19 January 2011 at 11:19 am

    what is more frightening and pertinent in NZ is that so far all the episodes of the late show with david letterman that should appear have gone west and a whole week has dropped out of that programming here so all we get is another mashed up version provided by the limpdick nz press.
    bus as usual.
    kissing ruperts bum.

  7. Rusty Shackleford 7
    19 January 2011 at 4:52 pm

    A. I can’t believe anyone is taking seriously the notion of a Palin Pres run.

    B. Criminals don’t care about gun laws. That’s kind of why they are called criminals.

    • Pascal's bookie 7.1
      19 January 2011 at 5:59 pm

      “A. I can’t believe anyone is taking seriously the notion of a Palin Pres run.:

      http://www.pollingreport.com/wh12rep.htm

      She’s getting support from the GOP voters is why.

      • Rusty Shackleford 7.1.1
        19 January 2011 at 6:07 pm

        She is just prominent. I doubt many of the people voting on that poll are aware of who other candidates are.

    • Armchair Critic 7.2
      19 January 2011 at 11:11 pm

      “B. Criminals don’t care about gun laws. That’s kind of why they are called criminals.”
      No, they are called criminals because they committed a crime. Most crimes are committed without firearms.
      I’d be interested in any research you have links for on the attitudes of people who have been convicted of a crime (i.e. criminals) towards firearms, especially if they support your assertion. Unless you’ve got something better than a vague supposition I call bullshit.

  8. Rusty Shackleford 8
    19 January 2011 at 6:50 pm

    You have to be thick to believe there is a difference between the left and the right in the States.

    • Zorr 8.1
      19 January 2011 at 8:41 pm

      One is reasonably right wing by international standards and the other is the Repubs who are getting more and more batshit.

Links to post