Dennis Anderson of the Minneapolis Star Tribune wrote a nice puff piece about Rep. Tony Cornish (R-Good Thunder) over the weekend. It lauded him for being a straight-talking, no-nonsense former police officer. Unsurprisingly, Anderson failed to mention any of the thunderously stupid bills he’s proposed. Like arming teachers.
The Strib and Anderson ignore the fact that America faces a gun violence epidemic. For the Strib and Anderson there is nothing morally wrong with that NRA stooges like Cornish enabling the ongoing epidemic. It’s just politicals. It’s just a game. There is no right and wrong.
“The background-check system needs to be improved, but it’s complicated and it will cost money,” [Cornish] said. “If we mandate upgrades to the system, we’ll have to get it right, and it’s going to cost money.”
Heather Martens of Protect Minnesota, a group that would like to see gun laws tightened, wants Cornish to go further.
“We just don’t agree with him, and we don’t think he operates in good faith,” Martens said. “He believes guns are an unlimited right, no matter how many people die. We believe gun deaths can be prevented and that prevention is warranted.”
Cornish disagrees. Background checks on gun sales between private parties? “No.” Restrictions on modern sporting arms, or what commonly are called assault-style rifles of the kind he uses to hunt coyotes? “No.” Prohibition of high-capacity magazines? “No.”
“None of those will reduce crime,” he said. “And none of those bills will pass. We’ve got the votes to block them.”
Anderson just let’s Cornish’s assertion that background checks, military assault weapon bans and high-capacity magazine bans won’t reduce crime just sit there. Cornish is lying. The statistics show otherwise.
But Anderson isn’t the kind of journalist who fact-checks. He’s just reporting on the back-and-forth. He’s just providing the play-by-play. Anderson and his editors at the Strib will continue to enable the NRA stooges by never fact-checking the lies they tell.
Heather Martens could have provided Anderson with the fact-checking he needs. Anderson wouldn’t have even needed to do any research. But either he’s too lazy or doesn’t care that Republicans lie and journalists always let them get away with it. And the same applies to his editors, too.
The Strib’s editors have become more like television news “producers.” They’re not journalists any more. They’re focused on marketing the readers’ eyeballs to advertisers.
They’re not trying to improve the knowledge base of their readers.
Offending readers with facts is no longer part of the game. This is why it took them so long to print anything anywhere near the truth about Michele Bachmann and who she works for. This is why Katherine Kersten lasted so long.
As an old accountant, there is an adage that rings true — liars figure and figures lie.
My Representative Tony Cornish can provide all the data you want to prove that adage is true … which does not have anything to do with effectiveness of background checks.
IMO, background checks are a false “feel-good” measure … as Police Chief in Lake Crystal, Cornish was involved in the James Nibbe murder investigation … his killer would have had no problem passing a background check. Cornish was also involved when a waitress at a Lake Crystal watering hole (Ashley Sullivan) was shot and killed in her bed by her ex-boyfriend … and he would be aware of the case of Jeff Skjervold of nearby Amboy (Amboy is next to his home town of Good Thunder) who shot two police officers who responded to a domestic dispute call. Skjervold said a deputy entered his house while he was arguing with his wife — he reached for a rifle not knowing that it was a deputy who had entered. The situation escalated … gunshots were also exchanged including Skjervold acknowledging that “he shot an officer in a tactical uniform in the face.”
My gut tells me that all these people would have been able to pass a background check … it is the guns and the ammo that are the problem.
Here are my questions on background checks — what happens after a person passes it as isn’t being considered as only required when you purchase a firearm … what happens if the police respond to a “welfare check” or “domestic complaint” — will they take away the weapons while the case is being investigated ? If someone is served with a restraining order, will they have to turn in their weapons ?
My gut tells me the answer is NO … and that is when people get killed.
And what about the aging process … sure you pass the background check but then realities of aging that involves diminishing reflexes, changes in eyesight, cognitive and memory loss issues, and side effects of prescription medicines … should you lose your rights to firearms ? Well, last month 83-year old Lloyd Tschohl of North Mankato held off the Swat Team with two pistols until they killed him (no one knew where he put his rifles).
IMO, if you want to control guns, then charge a tax. The Personal Proctection permit is way too cheap at not to exceed $100 for five years … that’s $20/bucks per year … there is only a 11% excise tax on firearms and ammo … and there is no personal property tax. Thus, raise the taxes (especially on the ammo) … if it gets as expensive as cigerettes … people will think twice.
Also, how about a requirement that police officials have to accept firearms from citizens. When my Father died, we found a gun that no one in the family knew he had … I went to the local police station and wanted to turn it in but they wouldn’t take it and sent me to a gun shop.
BTW… John Kline will be holding a hearing this week on student safety … hopefully Chairman Kline will call Johnny Price, the owner of Big Iron Concealed Handgun Training in Waco, Texas as a witness. Mr. Price offers a two day course to train teachers and school district staff in all they need to know to earn licenses to carry weapons out of sight.
Below is an excerpt from a news report about his service:
The afternoon at the shooting range — a makeshift outdoor setup where the bullets that penetrated the paper targets lodged in a bluff — was both a thrill and a trial for participants. Guns jammed, magazines were loaded backwards, and hands shook. But, eventually, brass casings flew as the mostly novice group of shooters ripped through the required 50 rounds of live ammunition from three-, seven-, and 15-yard distances from the paper targets.
“That,” Mr. Price said, pointing to a hole that missed the target completely, “is a child.”
“We’re responsible for everything that comes out of our firearm,” he repeated.
As acrid gunsmoke drifted over teachers’ heads, he stood firm on that point.
“That’s why most of y’all aren’t ready to carry in the classroom yet, without some additional training, a lot more trigger time, getting familiar with your firearm … without crisis assessment and crisis training, so you don’t take it to the next level when you don’t have to.”
“Anderson just let’s Cornish’s assertion that background checks, military assault weapon bans and high-capacity magazine bans won’t reduce crime just sit there. Cornish is lying. The statistics show otherwise.”
Can you show any statistics that assault weapon and high capacity magazine bans reduce crime? If I recall correctly, such a ban was in force for ten years and was allowed to sunset because there wasn’t any evidence that it had reduced gun violence.
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 1 trackback }