Gabrielle Giffords and husband launch anti-gun violence site

[Penny Lane 8,159]

(CNN) -- Former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly launched a website aimed at curbing gun violence Tuesday, the second anniversary of the mass shooting in Arizona that left her critically wounded.

"Two years ago, a mentally ill young man shot me in the head, killed six of my constituents, and wounded 12 others," Giffords wrote on the website. "Since that terrible day, America has seen 11 more mass shootings -- but no response from Congress to prevent gun violence."

The website, titled "Americans for Responsible Solutions", also features an opinion article that the couple penned, which was published by USA Today Tuesday.

"Americans for Responsible Solutions, which we are launching today, will invite people from around the country to join a national conversation about gun violence prevention, will raise the funds necessary to balance the influence of the gun lobby," the article said.

The move comes after Giffords and Kelly last week visited families mourning in Newtown, Connecticut, after December's mass shooting. A gunman killed 27 people, most of them young children, and himself in a spate of violence that stunned the nation and ignited a national debate about guns.

During the trip to Newtown, the couple met with local and state leaders to discuss gun control legislation, mental health identification and treatment.

Giffords retired from Congress last year to focus on her recovery after she was shot in the head in January 2011.

She was one of 19 people shot at a political event at a shopping plaza in Tucson, Arizona, and spent months relearning how to speak and walk. Six people died in the encounter, including a 9-year-old girl and a federal judge.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/08/us/giffords-website/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Edited January 8, 2013 by Evylin

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

(CNN) -- Former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly launched a website aimed at curbing gun violence Tuesday, the second anniversary of the mass shooting in Arizona that left her critically wounded.

"Two years ago, a mentally ill young man shot me in the head, killed six of my constituents, and wounded 12 others," Giffords wrote on the website. "Since that terrible day, America has seen 11 more mass shootings -- but no response from Congress to prevent gun violence."

The website, titled "Americans for Responsible Solutions", also features an opinion article that the couple penned, which was published by USA Today Tuesday.

"Americans for Responsible Solutions, which we are launching today, will invite people from around the country to join a national conversation about gun violence prevention, will raise the funds necessary to balance the influence of the gun lobby," the article said.

The move comes after Giffords and Kelly last week visited families mourning in Newtown, Connecticut, after December's mass shooting. A gunman killed 27 people, most of them young children, and himself in a spate of violence that stunned the nation and ignited a national debate about guns.

During the trip to Newtown, the couple met with local and state leaders to discuss gun control legislation, mental health identification and treatment.

Giffords retired from Congress last year to focus on her recovery after she was shot in the head in January 2011.

She was one of 19 people shot at a political event at a shopping plaza in Tucson, Arizona, and spent months relearning how to speak and walk. Six people died in the encounter, including a 9-year-old girl and a federal judge.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/08/us/giffords-website/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Good read Ev, but I don't think people are ready to tinker with the 2nd Amendment. I wish there was a way to do this.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Good read Ev, but I don't think people are ready to tinker with the 2nd Amendment. I wish there was a way to do this.

It's just interesting to hear from someone who was a victim of one of these incidents and lived through her injuries to talk about it. Her story is amazing.

What's unfortunate is that people seem to think that because it's in the constitution, there can't be rules and regulations that go along with it. They're clinging to their guns, thinking the big bad government is going to try and take them away and I've yet to hear that be a plan laid out by ANYONE. It's all fear and paranoia talking, not logic.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

http://news.yahoo.com/former-lawmaker-giffords-launches-gun-control-initiative-142246421.html

By Susan Heavey | Reuters – 5 hrs ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Former Representative Gabrielle Giffords, who was severely wounded two years ago in an Arizona shooting, is launching a group aimed at curbing gun violence and raising enough money to challenge the well-funded gun lobby.

Giffords, starting the effort called Americans for Responsible Solutions with her husband former astronaut Mark Kelly, told ABC News that Congress must do more to prevent gun violence.

The two are gun owners, but in the wake of a string of recent mass shootings, they said more must be done to push common-sense efforts to reduce such violence.

"Enough," Giffords, who was shot in the head while meeting with constituents in Tucson, Arizona, told ABC in an interview aired on Tuesday.

The initiative aims to "encourage elected officials to stand up for solutions to prevent gun violence and protect responsible gun ownership," the group said on its website, americansforresponsiblesolutions.org.

It will push for background checks for private gun sales and look at ways to better address mental illness, among other efforts, Kelly told ABC.

Gifford's group is set to take on the National Rifle Association, which in 2011 spent over eleven times more on lobbying than all gun control lobbyists combined.

Her group has set up a political action committee for donations to "raise the funds necessary to balance the influence of the gun lobby," it said on its website.

"Until now, the gun lobby's political contributions, advertising and lobbying have dwarfed spending from anti-gun violence groups. No longer," Giffords wrote in an opinion piece published Tuesday in USA Today

She added: "winning even the most common-sense reforms will require a fight ... Achieving reforms to reduce gun violence and prevent mass shootings will mean matching gun lobbyists in their reach and resources."

The announcement comes just days after Giffords visited Newtown, Connecticut, and met with families of the victims of last month's Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in which 20 children and six teachers were killed.

Giffords also recently met with New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who heads his own mayors' initiative that is also pushing for what he calls "reasonable" gun controls.

In the wake of the December 14 Connecticut shooting, President Barack Obama has pledged to take swift action to reduce gun violence and has tapped a task force due to report later this month with possible measures.

The task force, led by Vice President Joe Biden, is reportedly weighing action beyond reinstating a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines to include universal background checks and a national gun sales database, among other steps.

The wave of shootings and the threat of tighter gun restrictions has spurred intense reaction on both sides.

Consumer demand for guns appears to have soared in recent weeks, according to FBI data.

Gun control supporters worry that other looming issues such as the nation's debt crisis could hamper efforts in Congress to push through new legislation.

Bloomberg's group launched its own new ad on Tuesday with the mother of child who was killed in the Arizona shooting.

Edited January 8, 2013 by Bad_Daddy

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

you're late to the party...

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/408123-gabrielle-giffords-and-husband-launch-anti-gun-violence-site/

[Darnell 8,478]

Now this is the PAC that's gonna get big enough to line the pockets of the Congressmen to get bills up for vote.

It's about time!

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Imagine that, gun owners who are willing to have a rational discussion without crying that someone might take away their guns.

[JohnR! 5,495]

Imagine that, gun owners who are willing to have a rational discussion without crying that someone might take away their guns.

Those are the people we need to spear the discussion and the effort, if we are to get somewhere.

[natty bumppo 297]

Imagine that, gun owners who are willing to have a rational discussion without crying that someone might take away their guns.

rational discussion. enforce existing laws first. no more plea away ...

if existing laws aren't enforced, what will happen with new ones?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Imagine that, gun owners who are willing to have a rational discussion without crying that someone might take away their guns.

Problem is this Evylin. Thus far, there are three elements proposed and only one can be considered rational by both sides.

1. Limiting Access, the notion of requiring PPTs at FFLs for all purchases including gun shows etc. ~ probably has support from the majority of the population as well as my support. So thats something rational to the majority.

2. Limiting types of Firearms, the notion that a percentage of firearms represent a greater risk to health and safety ~ once the mechanics of the firearms are understood the only way to do this is to ban roughly 80% of firearms. Thats something that a majority won't abide by and does not seem rational to the majority.

3. Increasing Firearms in the hand of responsible adults, the notion that armed citizens can deter ~ does not have support of the majority, lacks solid evidence that it works with maybe a few examples that could use more study such as Chicago DC etc. This does not seem rational to the majority.

So a bit like the fiscal cliff, all parties should agree on the point that makes sense to all parties and move forward with other elements of violence such as mental health etc. I can see elements where both parties see each other as irrational...we aren't going to make progress there.

Edited January 8, 2013 by Usui Takumi

[Penny Lane 8,159]

I can see elements where both parties see each other as irrational...we aren't going to make progress there.

Absolutely.

[natty bumppo 297]

Problem is this Evylin. Thus far, there are three elements proposed and only one can be considered rational by both sides.

1. Limiting Access, the notion of requiring PPTs at FFLs for all purchases including gun shows etc. ~ robably has support from the majority of the population as well as my support. So thats something rational to the majority.

who retains records of the transaction?

if record retained ... why? it's ppt and all the ffl does is validate it's an approved person.

what is the transaction cost? or is it ... whatever the ffl wants to charge?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

who retains records of the transaction?

if record retained ... why? it's ppt and all the ffl does is validate it's an approved person.

what is the transaction cost? or is it ... whatever the ffl wants to charge?

I'm actually not sure if in the states its required if the transaction needs to be recorded. It would make sense to just record it in the FFL bound book and a penal code would be created limiting fees by a certain amount. Currently here its 10USD per firearm.

Edited January 8, 2013 by Usui Takumi

[Harsh_77 718]

It's just interesting to hear from someone who was a victim of one of these incidents and lived through her injuries to talk about it. Her story is amazing.

What's unfortunate is that people seem to think that because it's in the constitution, there can't be rules and regulations that go along with it. They're clinging to their guns, thinking the big bad government is going to try and take them away and I've yet to hear that be a plan laid out by ANYONE. It's all fear and paranoia talking, not logic.

After this there has been incidents where a CCW holder has saved lives, my question is why does the anti gun and gun control lobby forget to mention that?

NY supposedly one of the city with strict gun control… Bloomberg does not want any civilian to have gun, yet 3 officers were shot by criminals (criminals will obtain the gun no matter how strict the regulation is, it’s the law abiding citizen who would be left to defend themselves against these guns.)

Chicago one of the another city with strict gun control and CCW was not legal until few weeks back has the highest crime rate.

Congressman from Chicago does not want the citizens to own the gun yet he himself has the CCW, was recently stopped at TSA checkpoint for carrying a loaded weapon thru checkpoint.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

After this there has been incidents where a CCW holder has saved lives, my question is why does the anti gun and gun control lobby forget to mention that?

Who is trying to take away the guns from the legal, responsible gun owners that conceal and carry? Anyone? No.