The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewTed Rall Archive
Why Congress Won't Act on Gun Violence, Climate Change, Impeaching Trump or Anything Else
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I’m from Dayton, so I’m thinking about this today: Why hasn’t Congress done anything to address our national epidemic of mass shootings, namely reviving the assault weapons ban?

People — Democrats and not a few Republicans — ask me that all the time. I bet all left-leaning pundits get that question.

The answer is simple. But it’s not something most people want to hear. It’s the same answer I give to another question I get a lot: Why hasn’t Trump been impeached?

Congress hasn’t gotten off its collective pasty lobbyist-fattened ass because the streets of every major city are not currently filled with millions of pissed off people throwing rocks at store windows who refuse to go home until Congress passes real gun control.

Democratic voters want Trump impeached. But they want it lackadaisically. They don’t want him impeached so badly that millions of demonstrators are willing to fill the streets of every major city day after day, night after night, turning over police cars and setting stuff on fire until Nancy Pelosi begins impeachment hearings.

This is a fun game! You name an issue lots of people care about. I’ll explain why the political class is ignoring it.

For example: What with experts predicting imminent human extinction, 98% of Americans are worried about climate change. (Who are the 2%? Happy to die but too lazy to commit suicide?) So why isn’t the U.S. government doing anything about it? Because — yes, you’ve got it now — the streets of America’s major cities are not choked by millions of citizens up for breaking things and fighting back the cops 24/7 until the politicians do something to increase humanity’s odds of survival.

You may disagree with my answers on the grounds that breaking windows is mean to storeowners, that burning things generates toxic gases, that cops are scary or that it’s more fun to sit home watching TV or playing video games than to run around in the streets dodging tear gas. You can rightly point out that the United States has no organized left-wing political group, much less one on the grassroots level, capable of organizing a mass street movement. You can, even more rightly, point out that we shouldn’t have to take to the streets because it’s Congress’ goddamn job to fix the environment and get rid of our insane president and ban the sale of military-grade guns to inbred derps.

What you cannot argue is that I am wrong.

It is an irrefutable incontrovertible fact that when the nation’s cities are clogged with millions of angry Americans demanding radical change day after night after day after night, who break stuff and refuse to disperse and fight back against the cops and are willing to get beaten up and sometimes killed for their cause, and it’s impossible to carry on business as usual, our worthless public officials will yield to their demands and do what’s right.

Until then, mass shooters will continue to terrorize our public spaces, SUVs will belch greenhouse gases, and Trump will tweet crazy racist BS. Bad things happen because good people don’t force them to stop.

Wishing out loud for other people, like Congress, to do something is worse than worthless. It’s damaging. You’re abdicating your responsibility to act. If you trust in “leaders” whose history shows they can’t be trusted, you’re committing political suicide.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: Democratic Party, Donald Trump, Gun Control 
Hide 23 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Congress hasn’t gotten off its collective pasty lobbyist-fattened ass because the streets of every major city are not currently filled with millions of pissed off people throwing rocks at store windows who refuse to go home until Congress passes real gun control.

    How about this:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. (emphasis added)
    Infringe (Webster)
    1 : to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another infringe a patent
    2 obsolete : defeat, frustrate

    The etymology of infringe (v.)
    mid-15c., enfrangen, “to violate,” from Latin infringere “to damage, break off, break, bruise,” from in- “in” (from PIE root *en “in”) + frangere “to break” (from PIE root *bhreg- “to break”). Meaning “encroach” first recorded c. 1760. Related: Infringed; infringing.

    All of the laws to date are an infringement using the language spoken and commonly understood in 1791, by those who crafted the Amendment. Congress can do jackshit about it. If people want that Amendment repealed they should be lobbying for a Constitutional Convention.

    • Replies: @IvyMike
  2. IvyMike says:

    Given your absolutist read of The Constitution it would be interesting to see the NRA challenge the ban on producing or importing fully automatic weapons for civilian purchase, and the strict licensing requirements to buy an existing fully automatic weapon. If the Supreme Court upheld the law (again) it would point the way to getting rid of semi-automatic long guns. If the law were to be overturned we could have effing machine guns! A pintel mounted M2A1 would really thin out the ranks of shoppers, concert goers, and First Responders.

    • Replies: @Titus
    , @MarkinLA
    , @CarlS
  3. We don’t want Congress to do anything because all they will do is make things worse.

  4. J1234 says:

    But…They don’t want him impeached so badly that millions of demonstrators are willing to fill the streets of every major city day after day, night after night, turning over police cars and setting stuff on fire until Nancy Pelosi begins impeachment hearings.

    Yeah, Ted was out rioting last night all by himself and none of you guys showed up. What gives??

    • Replies: @Oleaginous Outrager
  5. Titus says:

    lol. Absolutist. Your NRA straw man has no bearing on his point. The 2nd Amendment plainly affirms/upholds the citizens’ right to bear arms.

    The shootings are hoaxes anyway..

  6. Go for it. Kill or be killed in the street. Burn the shit hole cities to the ground if you don’t like the results of an election. Just stay the fuck out of Red America.


  7. JeeeWhiz says:

    Demonstrate in the streets 24/7? You must not have been around in the 60’s…
    Remember Vietnam? How long did it take the US to get out of there? It wasn’t because of the demonstrators…

    • Agree: Digital Samizdat
  8. How many reports are there of some gunman attacking a police station?
    How many times has a gunman attacked a military site?

    Could it be that these places aren’t attacked because they are full of people with guns that can thwart any attack by an individual? Could it be that a loonie with a weapon doesn’t want to commit suicide by attacking a place loaded with men and weapons?

    The solution to the crazed gunman problem is arming the general public to any extent the individual wants. And that just so happens to comports with the 2nd Amendment. No more need of the useless police that show up with chalk to outline a body.

    If a mall, business, sports gathering, concert, etc was filled with people carrying weapons, how likely is it that an individual would march in and start firing? Only someone with a death wish intent on suicide would do that and no law can protect anyone from such a person.

    People should be encouraged to carry a weapon to protect themselves because the police certainly can’t protect anyone and numerous court cases have affirmed that the police have NO duty to protect the citizenry. So, what good are they?

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  9. @J1234

    “I told you lot to commit violent felonies in the public eye so I can feel satisfied! WHY ARE YOU NOT DOING IT, YOU LAZY FILTH?!?!?!?!”

  10. Rich says:

    This guy actually believes that 98% of people are “worried” about “climate change”? Are they “worried” it might rain on the company picnic next week, too? These lefties are hilarious. If every gun on earth is banned tomorrow, will Ted and his friends next outlaw fire? In 1987 87 people were murdered at the Happyland social club when an unhinged man lit a fire. If you’re worried about the small possibility of a mass shooter, carry a gun and get trained in self defense, Just like if you think it’s going n to rain, you might consider carrying an umbrella.

  11. Teddie is still a shrieking libtard. I just had to click on this one to check his progress. He’ll be rolling on the floor biting his own ass pretty soon.

  12. ” . . . millions of pissed off people throwing rocks at store windows . . .”

    Aren’t rocks assault weapons?

  13. Biff says:

    It’s simple – the psyops have turned Americans into a flock of sheep.

  14. Maybe millions in the streets every day to the point where day to day life malfunctions & politicians are plainly, publicly, obviously completely useless might open up revolutionary opportunities. Don’t think guns is the best foundation for that.
    As for actual guns — don’t think it really matters now. There’s so many guns that there’s NOTHING the various governments could do to have a tangible affect.
    I mean, even the mere hint of a suggestion that government was going to restrict guns, would see literally millions stocking up on more guns & ammo.
    Sorry, but that boat left years ago.

  15. “What you cannot argue is that I am wrong”

    I won’t even waste my energy picking apart all of your bonkers concepts, however what I can express is that you are a fucking lunatic.

    Look friend I visited several east block countries before the fall of the wall, early seventies, and I can still vividly recall the morgue-like atmosphere of the grey gloomy cities, and the dead eyes of the hopeless citizenry, and then for nitwits such as yourself to be dreaming of such a morbid Marxist future for the US, this simply makes my blood boil, go to hell.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro jazz musician.

  16. “What you cannot argue is that I am wrong”

    Um… Yeah, you are. Totally, completely, horribly wrong.

    If putting on your pussyhat, marching around in a circle, chanting like low IQ children and showing us what democracy looks like were any sort of real threat to power they would simply call in an air strike, have a burnt offering and enjoy the aroma of burning flesh that is so pleasing to their lord.

    You think they’re afraid of stone throwers? We all know how they deal with stone throwers.

    You think these people care if a few cities are burned to the ground? These are the same people who sacrificed 3000 Americans to moloch by demolishing the WTC so they could start wars for a greater Israel that would kill millions more. These are the same people who ordered the total destruction of Fallujah, a city of 300,000 people, apparently in retaliation for the deaths of 4 mercenaries who were strung up from a bridge.

    I seriously think you are underestimating the evil in our midst.

    By the way Ted, the second amendment has nothing to do with our right to hunt fresh delicious squirrels or punch holes in paper targets. There is a very simple reason that the most disarmed places enjoy the most violent crime. Hint: When they criminalize the possession weapons, only criminals will possess weapons. Some clichés really are true.

    After all good thinking people turn in their guns, how long till you demand they do something to outlaw knives?

    Remember Ted, “There is never a reason to carry a knife. Anyone who does will be caught, and they will feel the full force of the law.”

  17. MarkinLA says:

    If the Supreme Court upheld the law (again)

    Actually, SCOTUS has never ruled on the NFA. Miller was sent back to the lower court to get evidence whether the weapon Miller used was suitable for militia use. This ridiculous line of reasoning is typical of the kind of morons we have on the court. The court was grasping at straws for a reason to uphold the NFA but couldn’t come up with anything intelligent given the various statutes concerning the definition of militia so came up with this nonsense about a weapon being suitable for a militia or not. SCOTUS could have said Miller had no standing because he wasn’t a part of a militia, if they wanted to go down that route but that would have flown in the face of statutes that define an “unorganized militia” and the general belief by the vast majority of the public that the 2nd gave every American the right to keep and bear arms without restrictions.

    This was an attempt to say that some weapons are so dangerous or sophisticated that they could only be used by an army and not a militia. However, history (and our CIA) has shown us that a militia can pretty much use any weapon that an army can.

  18. Yeah, protesting works so well for the Gilets Jeune, at least the ones who still have both eyes and all their fingers. Sort of like Occupy. Like a big company that has been sued, Government will just drag, slow walk the procedures and responses until the attention span moves on, and maybe squash the problem ones like Epstein.

  19. Frank Lee says: • Website

    Total bullcrap on toast… “Successful” revolutions have never worked more than as a temporary change of ruling oligarchy. A pile of dead peasants to bury is usually the outcome, and there are no exceptions. Read up on the 2 billion rounds of 40 caliber hollow-points purchased by U.S. law enforcement a few years ago, then ask yourself how long any sizable “revolt” would last…

    Switzerland provides every able bodied citizen a state of the art anti-personnel weapon and formal arms training as part of Swiss citizenship. Everyone is a mandatory State militia member. How many times has Switzerland been invaded or attacked in the last 700 years? Answer: Zero.

    The majority or these shootings are false flag ops… I totally agree with RoatanBill…

  20. anon[396] • Disclaimer says:

    > What with experts predicting imminent human extinction…why isn’t the U.S. government doing anything about it?

    Because the experts like Tim Garrett say there is nothing to do about it. Global warming is unstoppable. And energy conservation doesn’t help.

    Is Global Warming Unstoppable?

  21. CarlS says:

    Recall that the ban on auto weapons was NOT presented to Congress as a gun ban. Rather, it wss sold – and bought by the Congress and the Court – as a law authorizing a tax. A new tax, you know, means money that politicians and law enforcement can grab for other uses. Technically speaking, full-auto weapons are not banned, because that would be unconstitutional. They’re just being taxed out of existence.

    “A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution. The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down a person cannot be compelled ‘to purchase, through a license fee or a license tax, the privilege freely granted by the Constitution.’ ” ~~ MURDOCK V. PENNSYLVANIA 319 US 105 (1942)

    As for what’s-her-name’s (Harris, or Warren, or . . .) current speech about taxing ammo and guns at punishment levels, it too is blatantly unconstitutional.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  22. MarkinLA says:

    The reason why the NFA was structured as a tax was because FDR wanted to get something on the books quickly and he didn’t think he could get an amendment to the Constitution quickly enough. The NFA was in response to all the bank robbery gangs using automatic weapons. 200 dollars to register an automatic weapon when a rifle coulkd probably be had for 10 dollars made it prohibitively expensive for the average guy. Now, the paperwork and local police acceptance is the problem.

    This is similar to the federal laws controlling drugs. That drug prescription hides a taxing scheme just like the NFA.

  23. anonymous1963 [AKA "anon19"] says:

    Probably the same reason nothing gets done on immigration sport.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ted Rall Comments via RSS