There is no doubt that the high profile shootings of Aurora and Newton have reignited public debate over gun control. Senate Democrats are now pushing for gun-control legislation that would have universal background checks as one of its key provisions.

(More on  News at LAWS.com, contact Adam for interviews “adama@laws.com”)

However, as Senate Democrats and gun-control advocates push for this legislation, the Republican side is skeptical, stating that it makes no sense to add universal background checks when current checks are not enforced. Republican senators Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee have all threatened to filibuster the debate and full floor vote.

The Senate has returned from spring break only today, and no vote has been scheduled yet, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has been expected to bring the legislation to the floor in May next month.

Gun control is certainly a contentious issue in the nation. A recent poll from Quinnipiac University found that last month some 53 percent of Americans supported tougher gun control laws, while 42 percent opposed.

Stop Handgun Violence is a non-profit organization that seeks to prevent gun violence through public awareness, effective law enforcement, education and common sense gun laws. Stop Handgun Violence does not call for a curtailment of the Constitutional right to bear arms, but, rather, advocates for common sense gun legislation that can help save innocent lives.

The following is an interview with John Rosenthal, Founder and Chairman of Stop Handgun Violence, on his thoughts and feelings about the pending gun-control legislation.

In your opinion, does the pending legislation offer the type of gun control you would like to see at the federal level?

Yes! The President’s proposals for universal background checks for all gun sales, limiting the  ammunition magazine size to ten rounds, and renewing a federal ban on military-style assault weapons combined with federal gun trafficking laws that do not exist now and support for law enforcement, will all dramatically save lives in America from preventable gun violence without any inconvenience to law-abiding gun owners.

Sens. Rand Paul, R-Ky., Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Ted Cruz, R-Texas are threatening to filibuster any restrictions on guns, citing the “the American people’s right to bear arm” in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, what is your response to this move?

I cannot understand how any elected official or American can support unrestricted and undetected access to firearms by criminals, the mentally ill as well as domestic and international terrorists, which is currently allowed by US gun policy. For those senators to continue to support unrestricted access to guns without a background check for criminals is criminal, and an indication of their priorities, which is unrestricted access to the gun industry blood money campaign contributions over public health and safety. They are hijacking our democracy in exchange for blood money campaign contributions at the expense of 87 Americans killed everyday by guns. 87 daily including 8 children under 19, that is a Newtown Elementary School massacre every three days in the US.  

Currently, a Republican alternative gun control legislation is in the works, which is supposed to include tougher laws on illegal gun trafficking, straw purchases, and to increase efforts to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill and keep schools safe. How do you feel about this alternative?

It is missing essential pieces. How do you know if someone is mentally ill or criminal unless they have to undergo a background check before they buy a gun? What does making schools safer mean to them?  It means armed vigilantes with assault weapons, including teachers. That does not foster a safe and comfortable learning environment for our children. Of the high profile mass shootings that occurred over the last twenty years, none of those were perpetrated by an adjudicated mentally ill person. Now, we are all capable of mental illness, but the system, the mental health system, protects privacy, and, unless you put all mental health records into a database, including being institutionalized by yourself or family vs the state, which is the current requirement for the mental health record to be included. Unless you run a background check on all gun purchases what’s the point? Garbage in, garbage out. The uniquely unregulated gunindustry and their NRA lobbyists are opposed to a background check for criminals, but without such a background check there is no sense in any other provision. Further, the common denominator in every high profile mass shooting including Newtown, Aurora, Webster and Columbine are large ammunition magazines and assault style pistols and rifles. These have to be banned to have an impact. Police officers are given thirteen to seventeen rounds in their service weapons, why does congress allow 30 – 100 rounds for criminals and the mentally ill without detection? Eleven children in Newtown escaped a classroom when Lanza had to reload. That is eleven children who are alive today because the shooter had to reload his Bushmaster assault rifle with a 30 round magazine. Adam Lanza shot 154 rounds within 4 minutes! Police officers die when they have to reload with thirteen rounds while criminals fire away with 30 to 100 rounds. Duck hunters are limited to three rounds by federal license to protect the duck population, so why does congress allow 30 -100 round magazines to kill the American population?

Do you think that maybe what is truly needed is to simply keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have access to them (e.g. the mentally ill)  rather than make it tougher for law-abiding citizens to purchase firearms?

I am a law-abiding gun owner and I buy my firearms from Federal gun dealers because I can pass a background check and federally licensed dealers are the only gun sellers required to run a background check. But private gun dealers do not have to run a background check and they sell 40 to 50 percent of all guns in the US. How do you know if someone is mentally ill or prohibited from owning a gun or a convicted criminal if you do not have a background check requirement? It is that simple! Who wants to sell guns to the mentally ill or criminals without a background check or detection? The sad answer to that question is Congress, spineless members of Congress who are owned or intimated by the unregulated and greedy gun industry and their blood money campaign contributions. Whose side are they on?  

What are some of the accomplishments of Stop Handgun Violence in the realm of gun-control?

Massachusetts is an urban, industrial state, and we have the most effective gun laws and the first in the nation consumer protection standards for firearms. Massachusetts has the lowest firearm fatality rate of any urban state and second lowest in the nation behind isolated Hawaii! We have proven the gun industry’s worst nightmare: gun laws work! And we simply require safety training, safe storage, universal background checks,  renewable licensing and consumer protection standards, like an automobile, and we prohibit the sale of ammunition magazines greater than 10 rounds and military style assault weapons. The President has modeled much of his federal legislative proposals after the successful Massachusetts model. And as a gun owner none of that, none of the reasonable restrictions in Massachusetts which have proven to reduce gun injury and death by over 40 percent since 1994, negatively impact me as a law-abiding citizen. Our priority in Massachusetts has been to reduce injury and death without banning guns. Federal policy dictated by the gun industry and their spineless puppets in Congress is to increase gun sales without detection, and to increase gun violence and in particular, high profile mass shootings which increases fear and gun sales. Gun violence in turn increase gun industry profits and blood money contributions back to Congress as payback. There is a spike in gun sales after every high profile mass shooting like Columbine, VA Tech, Aurora and Newtown.  The gun industry is uniquely unregulated. I have a toy gun in my hand that has a red dot at the end of the barrel, that is a federal manufacturing requirement so a police officer knows it is a toy. Real guns have no federal regulations on how they are made or marketed, and unlike toy guns which are regulated, real result in 87 deaths a day and remain unregulated. Further Congress gave absolute immunity to the gun industry so they cannot be sued even for marketing and selling guns directly to criminals and terrorists. Two of the guns used at Columbine were marketed as having a finish resistant to fingerprintings! These guns were also bought at a gun show where no background check was required.

If this legislation does not pass, what will be the next step for Stop Handgun Violence?

Massachusetts will improve in all likelihood its gun laws. Connecticut and Colorado already have, but look at the price they paid before they did it. Every year that goes by that there are no changes to our federal gun policy another 30,000 – 40,000 Americans will die from largely preventable gun violence. So I would hope if this Congress does not change national gun laws, we will change Congress in 2014. Hopefully we will throw the bums out. Eventually we need to hold Congress accountable if they continue to refuse to vote in favor of public safety over their own self-preservation in office. But if we wait until 2014 that will be another 60,000 – 70,000 more dead Americans from preventable gun violence. Since 1980, more Americans have died from guns inside the United States than all US servicemen and women killed in all foreign wars combined!

For more information on Stop Handgun Violence, please visit their page. For more information on gun laws and news, please visit our Gun Laws Page.

Interview with John Rosenthal of Stop Handgun Violence, Newton, Massachusetts

What is an AR-15?

An AR-15 is 5.56mm semi-automatic rifle that is fed by a magazine and uses gas operation to discharge the empty cartridge and reload the new bullet.  There are multiple sizes of the rifle depending on the manufacturer, and there are a number of add-on items that come along with the rifle.  Some of these add-on items are regulated in the United States, and the sale of the rifle is heavily regulated in some states as well. 

The rifle was originally designed for U.S. military for the following reasons:

·         the rifle is lightweight and easy to manufactur

·         the rifle allows for a high velocity round and is easily adapted for other rounds

·         the design allows for a large amount of add-on features

·         fires accurately and reloads quickly because of gas piston system

·         is capable of firing a large magazine

·         the gun comes with a butt stock and a pistol grip for more control

Recent Controversy over AR-15

The gun was used by James Eagan Holmes during the pseudo-commando mass shooting at the Century move theater in Aurora, Colorado on July 20, 2012.  Holmes dressed in tactical clothing and set off tear gas during the midnight screening of the film The Dark Knight Rises.  He killed 12 people and injured 58 more people.  He used Smith & Wesson’s stile of the AR-15 called an M&P15, and he also used a 12-gauge shotgun and Glock 22 handgun. 

Regulation of the AR-15

There is not federal law that controls the use of the rifle.  The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which incorporated the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, banned the manufacturing and importing of the rifle along with other assault rifles, but the ban ended in 2004.  The regulation of the rifle is now left up to the states, and several state regulations are described below:

California

Penal Code section 12276 subdivisions (e) and (f) made it unlawful to sell an AK or AR-15 series rifle after August 16, 2000 in the state of California.  Certain features of the weapon may be removed to declassify it as an assault weapon, but it’s still illegal to sell in California.  It is legal to possess the weapon in California if it was possessed before December 31, 1999 and registered with the state before December 31, 2000.

People who owned the rifle were required to register the weapon with the Department of Justice by January 23, 2001.  It is illegal to pawn the rifle or inherit the rifle in California as well.  Additionally, you cannot leave the assault rifle at a gunsmith unless they hold a California Assault Weapons permit. 

Colorado

In January of 2007, the Denver City Council passed a law that modified the city’s assault weapon ban.  It is legal to own an AR-15 or other assault rifles if they do not contain a magazine with 21 or more rounds. 

Other states have regulations for the assault rifle as well.

Sources: https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regagunfaqs#3

What is a TEC-9?

A TEC-9 (TEC DC-9) is an “assault pistol” that was developed and manufactured Intratec Firearms.   The gun is also known as an AB-10 if it was manufactured after 1994.  The gun has a reputation of being used in numerous mass killings and crimes in the United States because it has a large magazine and is fairly cheap.   Many criminals have converted the fun into a fully automatic weapon.

The weapon serves little purpose to a professional shooter because it’s heavy and its accuracy is unreliable. 

Gun Characteristics

The gun was designed by George Kellgren and manufactured by Intratec.  The original was manufactured up to 1990, and the DC9 was manufactured until 1994. The gun fires 9mm rounds and is semi-automatic and blowback-operated.  The feed systems include a 10, 20, 32, or 50-round magazine, and a 72-round magazine was also made available for the gun as well.  The fun is effective up to 50 meters. 

Mass Killings and the TEC-9

The gun has been used in multiple mass shootings in the United States, and its notorious reputation placed it on the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban.  The gun was involved in the following mass shootings:

101 California Street Shootings

On July 1, 1993, Gian Luigi Ferri, a failed businessman, walked into an office building at 101 California Street.  Ferri had installed hellfire triggers on a pair of TEC-9 pistols to make the nearly automatic, and he killed 8 people and injured six during the shooting.  Ferri eventually committed suicide as he was surrounded by police. 

Columbine High School

On April 20, 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed 13 people and injured 21 people before they committed suicide.  Eric Harris used a 12-guage Savage-Springfield 67H pump-action shotgun along with a Hi-Point 995 Carbine 9 mm carbine.  Dylan used a 9 mm TEC-9 and a 12-guage Stevens 311D double-barreled sawed-off shotgun. 

Legislation Used to Ban the TEC-9

After Patrick Edward Purdy used a Type 56 Assault Rifle to kill five children and wound another 29 children at the Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, California, the state of California passed the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989 that banned certain assault weapons including the TEC-9. 

The handgun and 19 other firearms were also banned in the United Stated in 1994 after the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, but the ban expired in 2004. 

A case was also brought against Intratec after the plaintiff argued the manufacturer was liable for the 101 California Street Shootings.  The case made its way to the Supreme Court in 2001, but the Court concluded Intratec was not responsible for the attack. 

Conclusion

Multiple attempts have been made to control access to assault weapons, but pseudo-commando type shootings are still occurring in the United States.  Some of these shootings are enacted with the use of legal handguns and weapons.  So, how do we stop mass shootings if gun laws in the United States cannot prevent such shootings?  The answer seems to lie in detecting of a pseudo-commando before the crime occurs. 

This month, the Senate blocked a plan for expanded background checks on gun purchases. This plan was supposed to extend background checks to those who purchase their firearms online or at gun gun shows, but failed to receive the 60 votes needed to pass in the Senate, receiving only 54 votes in favor and 46 against. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, arguably one of the fiercest gun control advocates in the Senate, proposed a ban on military-style assault weapons that also failed to pass with only 40 votes in favor and 60 against it.

(More on  News at LAWS.com, contact Adam for interviews “adama@laws.com”)

The background check amendment, which was drafted by Democratic Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Republican Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, was seen by many, including President Obama, as the needed compromise that would help to pass gun-control legislation after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting perpetrated by Adam Lanza that left 20 children and six adults dead. It was hoped that this amendment would offer the compromise needed to pass in the Senate. However, most Republicans and four Democrats from gun-friendly states voted against it.

Gun control and gun rights are certainly contentious issues in our country that continue to divide public opinion. Opponents of the Manchin-Toomey amendment have emphasised that it only served to infringe upon the right to bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment and would do little to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill and criminals. Proponents of the bill say that these types of background checks are vital to saving innocent lives. Every year, 30,000 Americans are killed by guns in homicides, suicides or unintentional shootings.
The Violence Policy Center (VPC) is a national, non-profit organization based in Washington, DC that aims to end the yearly death toll and injury from guns through research, education, collaboration and advocacy. The VPC points to the fact that firearms are the only consumer product not regulated for health and safety by a federal agency. The VPC believes that this exception is what has led the gun industry to be able to increase the lethality of firearms. Applying consumer safety standards to guns, the VPC believes, will greatly reduce gun violence.

The following is an interview with Josh Sugarmann, Executive Director of the VPC, on his thoughts and feelings on the failure of the gun control legislation to pass and the work of the VPC in the realm of gun control.

1.  How do you feel about the defeat of the gun-control legislation in the Senate?

The Senate votes are the latest example of the unique power that the NRA holds over the U.S. Congress.  The battle for effective gun laws will not be won until the vast majority of Americans who want to reduce gun violence make their voices heard:  not just in the wake of the most recent tragedy, but in an ongoing effort that reflects the all-too-high price meted out in gun death and injury each day in our nation.

2. What message would you send to those in the Senate who voted against this legislation?

From the assassination attempt of then-Representative Gabrielle Giffords, to the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, to the movie theatre shooting in Aurora, to the tragedy in Newtown, Americans are demanding action on gun violence to protect their communities.  And while these tragic and horrific events focus the nation’s attention on the issue, each year guns claim more than 31,000 lives in homicides, suicides, and unintentional deaths.  At the same time, states with the most lax gun laws and higher rates of gun ownership have the highest gun death rates–and many of the Senators who voted against the gun bills are from states with the highest rates of gun death [https://www.vpc.org/press/1302gundeath.htm].  In addition, there is a growing awareness that today’s NRA has become nothing less than a trade association for the firearms industry, which contributes tens of millions of dollars to the organization [https://www.vpc.org/press/1104blood.htm].  Just as there will inevitably be future gun tragedies that grip our nation, there will be future votes to stop them.  It is time for our federal policymakers to listen to the majority of the American public that wants effective gun policies that will save lives, not just the gun industry-funded arguments of the NRA.    

3. How do you think the gun-control movement should move forward from this?

Historically, the gun violence debate has been defined, and all too often decided, on the actions of a small, yet vocal, pro-gun base.  Most Americans don’t own guns, and the percentage of American households that do has been shrinking for decades [https://www.vpc.org/press/1104norc.htm].  In the wake of the Newtown mass shooting and the Senate votes, we are seeing a new, engaged, gun violence prevention movement forming:  one that will speak for the majority of Americans who want effective local, state, and federal policies to stop gun violence.  This movement must grow and expand.   With the focus on the Senate votes, less attention has been paid to the successful state measures–for example, assault weapon bans in  Connecticut and New York and a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines in Colorado—that have been passed in the wake of the Newtown tragedy.  State efforts must continue as they will drive federal policy.  Overall, the changing nature of the gun industry itself—an abandonment of traditional sporting arms and an embrace of increasingly lethal military style weaponry at the expense of public safety—must continue to be a focus of our movement’s public education activities.  Most people, if they knew, would be shocked at what the gun industry has become.  

4. What is the next step now for the Violence Policy Center now that this legislation has been blocked in the Senate?

The VPC works to reduce gun injury and death in America by approaching firearms violence from a public health perspective and illustrating the need to hold firearms to the same health and safety standards as other consumer products.  To this end, the VPC:  conducts research on the gun industry, regulatory approaches and firearms violence; develops public policy options and offers analyses of proposals that seek to reduce violence; conducts public education activities through the news media and various organizations; educates opinion leaders and policy makers; supplies technical and policy support to national, state, and local gun violence prevention organizations; and, works to empower and engage organizations not traditionally part of the gun violence debate, but that represent constituencies affected by firearms violence.  The VPC will continue these efforts with the goal of aiding and supporting the growing movement to prevent gun violence.   

5.     What are some of the accomplishments of the Violence Policy Center?

Past VPC policy accomplishments include: identifying, de-funding, and keeping de-funded a multimillion dollar federal program that rearmed thousands of convicted, often violent, felons at taxpayer expense; reducing the number of Type 1 federally licensed gun dealers from a quarter million in 1992 to less than 53,000 today; introducing, through its publication Cease Fire: A Comprehensive Strategy to Reduce Firearms Violence, the concept of comprehensive health and safety regulation of the firearms industry as the most effective approach to reducing firearms violence; first identifying the firearms trafficking threat posed by gun shows; being a leader of the coalition that led to the enactment of the Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban, which bars individuals convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes from possessing firearms; helping craft policies in Massachusetts and California placing firearms under consumer health and safety regulation; and, first exposing the threat posed by 50 caliber sniper rifles, leading to their being banned in California and legislation introduced in other states.

For more information on the Violence Policy Center, please visit their page. For more information on gun laws and news, please visit our Gun Laws Page.

Interviewed with Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center, Washington, DC

On April 17th, the Senate rejected a plan to expand background checks for gun buyers. The plan to extend background checks to gun-show purchases and online purchases failed to get the 60 votes needed to pass in the Senate, receiving only 54 votes in favor and 46 against it. The proposed ban on military style assault weapons also failed to pass.

(More on  News at LAWS.com, contact Adam for interviews “adama@laws.com”)

The background check amendment drafted by Republican Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Democratic Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia was President Obama's best hope to pass gun-control legislation after the massacre of 20 children and six educators at an elementary school in Connecticut. He had hoped that this amendment would offer enough of a compromise so as to pass in the Senate. Most Republicans and four Democrats voted against the amendment.

Gun rights and gun control are certainly contentious issues in the United States that continue to divide public opinion. Opponents of the Manchin-Toomey amendment have emphasised that it only served to infringe upon the right to bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment and would do nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals or mentally ill.

Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership (JFPO) is a non-profit educational civil rights organization that was founded in 1989. Its initial aim was to educate the Jewish community about how Jews had suffered in history when they were disarmed. It welcome and expanded its aims to educate people of all faiths on what it views as potentially dangerous victim disarmament policies.

The following is an interview with Charles Heller, Executive Director of JPFO, on his thoughts and feelings about the failure of the gun-control legislation to pass in the Senate and the work of his organization in the realm of gun rights.

1. How do you feel about the rejection of the Senate of the gun-control legislation?

We think it's a good thing. Criminals have a tendency not to go to legitimate sources for guns. As such, restricting private sales via a prior restraint, strikes us as just a reversion to Jim Crow. If you liked segregation, you will love gun control.

2. What message would you send those in the Senate who supported this legislation?

Go home, and let freedom ring. Help elect someone to replace you who grasps the concept of individual liberty.

3. Do you think that maybe what is truly needed is to simply keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have access to them (e.g. the mentally ill)  rather than make it tougher for law-abiding citizens to purchase firearms?

Yes. Devote all the resources that would be used on prior restraints, and focus them on criminal and insane misuse of arms. Also, be open to the lawful arming of people in sensitive places, such as schools.

4. What are some of the accomplishments of Jews for The Preservation of Firearms Ownership?

We discovered and published the fact that our 1968 "Gun Control Act," was based largely on the 1938 Nazi Weapons Law, and that the work was done to translate that law by our State Department at the behest of Thomas Dodd, a prosecutor at Nuremberg.
We created a movie, "Innocents Betrayed," which shows the history of genocide by government outside of war in the 20th Century. It illustrates that the predicate act in every case was disarmament of the victims.

Our Rabbi, Dovid Bendory, has done a video with us called "The 10 Commandments of Self-Defense," stating the biblical principles as to why gun control is evil.

We have published "The Kosher Gun Laws," showing exactly which gun laws are moral.

We have engaged medical professionals to openly discuss the progression of irrational hatred of guns, and investigate possible cures.

We have produced a DVD called, "The Gang," documenting some of the dishonest acts of the BATFE.

We have published "Dial 911 and Die," written by Arizona Attorney Richard Stevens, documenting the Supreme Court cases which relieve the police of the duty of protecting the individual citizen of the U.S.

We have produced the DVD "No Guns For Negroes," with The Congress of Racial Equality, about the history of violence and suppression of the rights of Blacks.

We have produced the DVD "No Guns For Jews," showing the history of oppression against Jews, via arms control. We have produced several music albums about the Bill of Rights.

We have translated the Bill of Rights into 10 other languages for all the world to adopt.

5. What are some of the future plans for the JPFO?

We plan to continue to publish the facts about gun control, its evils, and lawful methods that can be used to end it.

For more information on Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership, please visit their site. For more information on gun laws and news, please visit our Gun Laws Page.