Wondering how more than 200 U.S. mayors failed to convince Congress to repeal the Tiahrt amendment restricting access to gun-trace data?
“Right issue, wrong approach,” Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., told the New York Sun, characterizing New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s lobbying as threatening. “I think the mayor, every so often, forgets that we live . . . in a legislative world.”
Meanwhile, the Rev. Jesse Jackson opined in the Chicago Sun-Times (referring to “Tom Tiahrt”) that “both Democrats and Republicans are terrorized by the gun lobby.” The New York Times editorialized: “Leadership of Congress has shifted to the Democrats, but the National Rifle Association’s power to block sensible steps to curb gun violence endures.”
And in an editorial “Dodging a bullet” (that referred to “Ted Tiahrt”), the Colorado Springs Gazette argued that gun-trace data already is available to local law enforcement agencies: “Current law gives them the access they need to be able to link firearms used in different crimes, so the gun-controllers’ claim that the amendment cripples that ability doesn’t hold water.”
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/24
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/24
- LonnythePlumber on Goldman Sachs ‘apology’ hollow
- LonnythePlumber on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- XXX on Open thread 11/24
- Monkeyhawk on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- DavidB on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- Monkeyhawk on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
44 Comments
Thanks Rhonda for the diplomatic spread of news information and stories. This wide array of journalism gives interesting perspective on a muddled news story.
I don’t own any guns other than “heirlooms” that I inherited from my Grandfather. I am not sure if they even work.
What I can say is that after investigating this myself and after reading some enlightening posts from informed readers is that the Bloomberg disinformation machine was hard at work.
What I found is that Bloomberg was being disingenuous almost to the point of outright lying about the reasons why the gun bill should be overturned.
His so-called support of Police Chiefs was brought to the fore of reality by one poster who stated that Police Chiefs are politically appointed and that Mayors of cities are usually in that process. It is not a wonder then, that the Police Chiefs supported the Bloomberg position.
As one local attorney pointed out, Police Chiefs and agencies already have access to the data and the he, the attorney had gotten information from the database used in case preparation.
So, it seems there are no restrictions barring Police agencies to acquire and use the gun data held by the BATF for investigative reasons and for prosecutions.
Perhaps Bloomberg’s heart was in the right position, but his mind let him astray when he used disingenuous brokering and outright dishonest misrepresentations about what the law did and didn’t do.
This is no longer acceptable in today’s computerized access to information. The average citizen can find out the truth on matters on most everything.
Using political spin, omission and deceit to promote a position is no longer acceptable in this age of information.
Wise up Mr. Bloomberg, tactics of the politically extinct do not work anymore and people will call you out on the carpet for doing so.
This of course applies to both sides of the aisle that Politicians should broker their positions honestly without exception.
NOT ONCE – Has the Wichita Eagle provided a summary of the actual Tiahrt Amendment. It’s only 4 pages. Since you are against it, can you even quote specific sections of the Tiarht Amendment itselt that you oppose?
Nope. Instead you simply regurgitate whatever is in other newspapers right off the newswires.
You know, you might as well read just the OTHER Newspapers Directly! Nothing new at the Eagle.
Yes GMC70, I do get tired of the BS on gun control and the incessant, repetitive propaganda and lies the Wichita Eagle and most of the Free Press writes to attack the 2nd Amendment.
But as long as there are a few people like us who will be just as determined to defend the US Constitution, there is still hope to keep America free. Most people in this country take freedom for granted and can’t see what it takes to maintain the freedom that was gained through the sacrifice of those who gave their lives for this cause.
So, every time the Eagle or others, writes an article attacking the Constitution, I feel even more compelled to fight for Freedom, then they are to fight against it.
To those who have already read the Tiahrt Amendment, I apologize for the repetition. To those who cannot or care not to read the Tiahrt Amendment, yet criticize it anyway, I post the link below for your benefit.
Please note the Tiahrt Amendment is a 4-page document that requires a 6th grade reading level to comprehend. Though even the illegal immigrant janitor at the Wichita Eagle can read this document, I’m not sure all of the editors and writers of the Eagle can read and understand this document. (Even most posters on this blog should be able to read it, with a couple of exceptions I’m sure):
Even though this link is for the present law, and not the latest version from the House committee with the “clarifying language”, it is very clear from even the original law, that police can access gun trace data to investigate a specific crime.
For those who want to peruse gun purchase records for any other reason (like a Bloomberg witch hunt), that witch hunt is not allowed per both the Tiahrt amendment AND the 39 year-old Gun Control Act of 1968.
1)The Tiahrt amendment.http://www.house.gov/tiahrt/communications/press_releases/2007/Tiahrt_gun_amd/TIAHRT_amendment_2.pdf2)The Gun Control Act of 1968http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/gca.htm
From the Eagle: “The votes were a victory for the National Rifle Association and came despite the Democratic takeover of Congress in January.”
The NRA is truly non-partisan. It doesn’t care if someone is Democrat or Republican.
The NRA simply advocates those who support and defend the United States Constitution, including the 2nd Amendment.
If you bother to research the
http://www.nra.org
then you would find recommendations for both Republicans and Democrats.
The NRA can be your best political friend, or your worst political enemy, depending on whether your ACTIONS support the 2nd Amendment or Not.
It’s rare to see a truly non-partisan organization that stands-up for it’s beliefs and beliefs of its members – that IS the NRA.
(Oh, and WE VOTE!)
Also from the Eagle: “The mayors say gun tracing data helps police departments determine the source of illegal guns, who buys them and how they are distributed.
Almost three-fifths of guns used in crimes are sold by just 1 percent of gun dealers, who forge relationship with gun traffickers making multiple purchases.”
This statement cannot be supported, yet is presented by the Eagle as fact. 60% of guns used in crimes are sold by 1% of gun dealers? Bull. Cite your source.
Sloppy reporting guys or just your anti-2nd Amendment agenda?
Last Eagle comment: “But Obey lashed out at both the NRA, which failed to endorse him in his most recent race despite his pro-gun rights record, and Bloomberg. He said the mayor’s representatives met with his staff and threatened to run television ads attacking him.”
An example of a Bloomberg tactic. Using his Billion Dollar bank account, Bloomberg attempts to scare and intimidate people to support his cause.
Many of you have seen some Bloomberg attack ads against Tiahrt. How many threats were made by Bloomberg to force these Mayors to join his gun-ban club?
Some good ole investigative journalism (as opposed to regurgitation) might be able to answer that question.
Dig down deep, interview these mayors to find out just exactly why (and since when?) do they support Bloomberg. Ask the mayors if they were threatened with attack ads.
Hmmmmmm…….
Almost three-fifths of guns used in crimes are sold by just 1 percent of gun dealers, who forge relationship with gun traffickers making multiple purchases.”
My comment has nothing to do with guns. These facts are just becoming ridiculous. Three fifths of one per cent who makes this shit up? Every issue seems to be the same a few bad apples spoil the bunch ect ect.
Kansas Max
Good posts. I’m glad you have the patience.
Too bad the Eagle is so obtuse.Do they have any journalists left there? All the seem to be able to do is cut/paste from the news services.
I am not against guns but I want everyone who has a gun to be responsible with what happen with their gun. That is, even if the gun is taken by a small child and shoots himself or another child.
The gun owner then should be held legally responsible and charged as an accessory to a crime. I don’t see that happening.
What is Todd’s (Ted or Tom) position on this issue? What is Todd’s position on safety mechanisms for guns?
All I know about Todd is that he wants guns no matter what and he wants the gun manufacturers to be held not accountable for their products.
But what Tiarht doing to keep guns out of the hands of the criminals, gangs and the mentally unstable? If he put in as much effort to these issues as he does to anyone owning any type of gun a person wants, then he might be doing something valuable.
Toddly’s irresponsible legislation is not needed and in deed hurts law enforcements’ efforts to track the worst of criminals. It does nothing to protect the average gun-owner, and handcuffs LONG-standing law enforcement practices that were working fine. The NRA has become a political strongarm for the gun manufacturers, and does NOT represent the interests of gun owners. Ti-heartless needs to get a life, and a brain!
Fed up
Republican association? Then why did they endorse 18 Democrats in Kansas’ 2006 elections?
You really don’t know much do you.
Fred
Gun makers are held accountable for their products. If they make a defective product they can be sued just like any other product manufacturer. So what are you talking about?
And just what safety mechanisms are you talking about?
And gun owners can be charged criminally and sued civilly for misuse of guns that they own. So what are you talking about?
Examples please?
Fed Up, were you able to READ THE TIAHRT AMENDMENT?
If so, please tell us HOW the Tiahrt Amendment would hurt law enforcement efforts.
If you are able, please also cite the section of the Amendment which is harmful.
If Tiahrt wants it, it’s bad.
All you need to know . . .
and he wants the gun manufacturers to be held not accountable for their products.Posted by: fred | July 19, 2007 at 08:50 AM
Why should the manufacturer be held responsible for a purchaser’s irresponsibility.
Should GM be held accountable because someone ran a red light and killed a family of three? Aren’t there far more vehicle deaths in this country as opposed to gun related deaths?
Capn
Sometimes you as mindless as the folks at the Eagle.
you as (that sounds bright) s/b you are as
What? The Eagle is all a-twitter because Congress can actually read the law? And when they do so, they decided that Bloomberg’s a liar?
Color me shocked.
Of course, the Eagle’s been on this BS bandwagon like stink on . . well you know what. Did they inform you that Wichita’s own Chief Williams did NOT endorse the change to the amendment, per his own letter to the Eagle? No. Did they tell you that the language of the amendment permitted EXACTLY what Bloomberg, and the Eagle, claimed it barred? No. Etc., etc.
And the Eagle has the gall to cry over “good journalism” and its contribution to democracy on the WSJ thread. Give me a break.
Max has said it all; I don’t need to say much else. Now perhaps, FINALLY, we can put this non-issue to bed.
“If Tiahrt wants it, it’s bad.
All you need to know . . . ”
LOL, typical.
Thanks GMC, another day another battle.
Thanks GMC, another day another battle.
Sorry for the double post.
The name of this Blog thread should read:
“TIAHRT BESTS RHONDA AND THE WE EDITORS ON GUN DATA”
The name of this Blog thread should read:
“TIAHRT BESTS RHONDA AND THE WE EDITORS ON GUN DATA”
Tiahrt critical votes…
Firearms Manufacturers Protection bill Y
72 Hour Background Check Amendment N
24 Hour Background Check Amendment Y
Mandatory Gun Show Background Check Act N
Gun Ban Repeal Act of 1995 Y
Voting like that will win him gun lobby rewards.
Society is harmed, so what.
Gun manufactures make too many guns that are overly dangerous to use on American streets. They are dumped on the street because their no record of bulk sales from dealers.
Crime guns don’t travel too far from where they are purchased.
Guns not used for hunting, but for war.
2nd Amendment cranks want guns in all hands regardless person is responsible enough to use it.
They don’t want registration and devalue the license process.
Any attempt to stem flow of guns to criminal hands, NRA jumps up and lobby’s hard.
Defending the gun manufacturing first at expense of the general public.
Estimated 15,000 die every year from murder but triple that amount of people are injured from gun fire.
Worst statistics in the world.
Every innocent death by guns the 2nd Amendment cranks should feel it.
The NRA has corrupted politicians on both sides to weaken the ATF.
With data showing bad gun dealers with shotty records, ATF is slow to shut them down.
When gun dealers don’t ask leading questions of buyers to see if they are crazy, bent, in a hating mood, guns are likely to be used in crimes soon after.
Nuts can pass the background check. Not all gun sales go through back ground check.
There is no record of guns transferred between people, because its a small tool, something like a toaster or blender.
Gun without bullets is nothing dangerous, they infer.
It’s too much paperwork that could potentially save a shooting victims life.
Some people sell a gun and don’t care where it goes.
It’s like selling a car? No one sells a car on purpose to a bad driver who will kill others in car accident.
People who sell cars to others without a drivers license. There should be a transfer of title but some cars are sold with no titles at all.
People sell cars irresponsibly because someone never titled the car properly.
There is no transfer of title in guns and irresponsibility happens in those private transactions.
There is no record of ownership like a car title.
Mrage,
Is it possible….
That perhaps….
Just maybe….
You could….
Form…
An….
Actual….
Coherent….
Point….
Without….
So many….
Sentences….
Randomly….
Saying….
Things….
In….
A….
Very….
Very….
Very….
Very….
Very….
Very….
Silly….
One Line…..
Approach?
Nathan,
Take every word I wrote and craft it in your way of writing.
Your more silly responding that way.
Mrage:
Nathan’s exactly right.
On the other hand, one liners are useful for bumper stickers. :)
A little less weed might help your writing too Mrage.
Have a great day!
tiahrt is a tool for big money.
“The NRA is truly non-partisan. It doesn’t care if someone is Democrat or Republican.”
that’s true they, like most companies will buy off both parties.
and they don’t care if it is bad for the country, that’s not a question they ask.
Bloomberg the billionaire is not big money exile? :)
If Tiahrt care about his children as much as he does guns he might still have a son.
Jim,
That’s totally unnecessary BS!
Still not one specific citation from the Tiahrt Amendment by those who criticize it.
Just a bunch of sheep who believe the lies they read in the paper, and they can’t even read a 4 page law.
Ingorance is bliss for them, they never have to think on their own.
“and they don’t care if it is bad for the country, that’s not a question they ask.”
That assumes, exile, that the position opposite the NRA’s is “bad for the country.”
Millions of gun owners belive it isn’t; and that, in fact, the NRA’s position is entirely consistent with the our historical traditions, the public good, and most importantly, the Constitution. I’d agree with them.
correction of above: – That assumes, exile, the position OF the NRA (not it’s opposite) is “bad for the country.”
Think before I hit enter!!!! DUH!
Max,
You drink a lot of questionable kool- aid to believe your a defender of anything but opinion.
The 2nd Amendment is not law of this land without societal guidance.
The Tiahrt Amendment is a moment of time, the legislation will change eventually.
It does nothing to reduce guns on the streets in the most irresponsible hands.
The NRA lobby is a shill organization wanting membership fees to corrupt politicians and weaken laws.
Mrage,
Can you tell us what place on a scale of 1-100 of the top lobbying bodies does the NRA fall?
It seems that everyone who doesn’t like the NRA is under the assumption that they are some huge powerhouse above all others.
So, where do you think the NRA falls?
Nathan,
Google could answer that question.
Myself guessing… the NRA has been around a long time.
So older the lobby, less people they need introducing themselves to politicians.
Maybe a NRA card is placed in the welcoming basket for new politicians.
Depends if the NRA helped that politician into office too. Maybe they lobby more in state legislators than D.C.
I’ll say they are number 20.
Not the largest lobby at all affecting Congress. They are well known and easy to understand.
They are overbearing and heavy when gun legislation happens.
Considering how Cheney invited Energy groups to the White House for talks before legislation happened, Congress surely has politicians who call the NRA before they vote for legislation.
Some in Congress wine and dine the NRA, not the other way around.
Mrage,
The NRA believes in sensible legislation which targets the criminals who abuse guns, not the guns themselves.
Do you think criminals should get away or not be punished for thier actions or are you more concerned about getting rid of all guns?
Nathan,
I want reduced manufacturing, not the end of all guns.
I don’t mind revolver handguns. I don’t like larger clips more than 10 shots.
Guns made for war don’t belong on our streets. Why create and own semi-auto rifles? People help criminals get those weapons.
I hate irresponsible uses with guns even when death doesn’t happen. A friend left his loaded .45 on top of a counter top microwave with young kids running around the house. It didn’t have a trigger lock.
Same guy who tried to teach his 8 year old son to shoot a M-16 until I yelled at him. The image of that was horrible.
I don’t like criminals with guns and innocents get killed.
Something in the gun economics process is allowing too many guns falling in the wrong hands.
People who support gun rights shouldn’t believe confiscation is going to happen.
Society does have a right to try and limit certain guns from being created. Support legislation some guns banned from being sold legally.
Transfers of those guns between people would be illegal.
I can respect shotguns and hunting rifles, I don’t have to believe in the NRA.
The NRA is too militia minded to me. Groups who hate the White House or Congress, IRS and rest of the federal alphabet agencies they arm themselves first.
Some part of the NRA supports crank militias to be armed. Police can’t trace bulk sales or keep registry of guns bought. Criminal minded can pass the background check.
Mrage, I suggest you join the NRA and participate in their “Refuse to be a Victim” program.
More info can be found at:
http://www.nra.org
“I want reduced manufacturing, not the end of all guns.”
What exactly is reduced manufacturing?
“I don’t mind revolver handguns. I don’t like larger clips more than 10 shots.”
Why 10? What makes that the magic number? What does that have to do with criminals?
Criminals are not going to follow the law anyhow. The only people without more than 10 rounds will be the law abiding people.
“Guns made for war don’t belong on our streets.”
I have been on the streets for some time now and have yet to see guns made for war out there. This is pure Anit-gun psyco babel.
“Why create and own semi-auto rifles?”
Why own a Jet Ski?
“People help criminals get those weapons.”
Then punish the people. Criminals are going to get the weapons either way.”I hate irresponsible uses with guns even when death doesn’t happen. A friend left his loaded .45 on top of a counter top microwave with young kids running around the house. It didn’t have a trigger lock.”
So what law will you pass to stop stupidty?
It is not the guns fault it was left out.
“Same guy who tried to teach his 8 year old son to shoot a M-16 until I yelled at him. The image of that was horrible.”
Is this about your feelings of what it looks like now?
There is nothing wrong with teaching your son responsible safety and marksmanship.
I was taught how to shoot at around that age.
So what?
Is there some magical age that teaching kids about marksmanship is ok?
“I don’t like criminals with guns and innocents get killed.”
Who does?
“Something in the gun economics process is allowing too many guns falling in the wrong hands.”
And the solution is? Punish the criminals.
“People who support gun rights shouldn’t believe confiscation is going to happen.”
Yeah, I think Hitler and Stalin would be proud of that statement.
Look at places like California, Austrailia, UK, and many other countries. You actually are going to sit here and say we shouldn’t worry about confiscation?
So far you seem to only support revolvers. So, what are you going to do to get rid of what we already have if not confiscation?
“Society does have a right to try and limit certain guns from being created. Support legislation some guns banned from being sold legally.”
And according to your feelings that would be everything but a revolver.
Nathan,
>What exactly is reduced manufacturing?
Less variety of guns being manufactured.
>Why 10 (shots)? What makes that the magic number? What does that have to do with criminals?
It has to do with guns manufactured and sold. It would be illegal to sell larger capacity clips and parts.
Criminals will own larger clip guns for decades, but eventually the gun market control what guns criminals use.
Aren’t you a trained marksmen, dropping criminals with 10 shots is possible.
Criminals spray gun fire from larger capacity clips and hit innocent people. The gun market can reduce size of clip over time.
>I have been on the streets for some time now and have yet to see guns made for war out there. This is pure Anit-gun psyco babel.
You see every gun the police picks up? Semi-auto rifles are made for war and those are most streets.
>Punish the criminals.
Be honest with yourself, has the NRA hindered ATF from doing investigations?
Why is bad record keeping and illegal sales of guns only misdemeanors? Some gun stores have thefts and they don’t know it for months.
It’s documented for a couple of years ATF didn’t shut down any gun dealer but found a lot of problems. Spent a lot of money on investigations and manpower hours.
>So what law will you pass to stop stupidty?
Enforce laws and more suggestions guns at home should have trigger locks especially if within reach of children.
Why wasn’t someone who had NRA guidance growing up so irresponsible with guns at home?
>There is nothing wrong with teaching your son responsible safety and marksmanship.
I’d rather they play sports. Sports deaths happen on playing fields but more rare than accidental shooting in homes.
Kids are injured in sports, what’s the number kids injured by gunfire?
What’s more traumatic? Sports athletes overcome injury if they can help it. Kids traumatized by gun fire will never forget.
Its shocking to be shot.
>Look at places like California, Austrailia, UK, and many other countries. You actually are going to sit here and say we shouldn’t worry about confiscation?
Do tell, what happened in California that worried you about gun confiscation?
ATF doing their job scares you? Was the FBI involved?
I don’t fear it. I don’t sense a potential “kingdom” could happen in D.C. I don’t fear military actions against citizens will happen. Martial law isn’t happening anytime soon unless large natural disasters happen.
For what reason would the Fed turn against American people.
I sleep well without being paranoid.
>So far you seem to only support revolvers. So, what are you going to do to get rid of what we already have if not confiscation?
Gun dealers would be compensated, but confiscation of certain weapons for sale could happen.
Society has a right to try and limit certain guns from being sold.
They serve no hunting purpose. Self defense can be done with other weapons that would still be for sale.
The UZI, AR-15, M-16, AK, and all the rest aren’t worth having on American streets. Not worth having collectors buying them, criminals desire those weapons as well.
The general public shouldn’t hear those weapons being shot on our streets. Banned from import. Banned from being manufactured.
Banned from being sold online or at gun shows.
America could control guns and reduce the variety of weapons if politicians really wanted it. We have corrupt politicians affected by the gun lobby.