Mediaboss Marketing

Several college professors took advantage of Wednesdays shooting of House Majority Whip Steve Scalise to mock his support for gun ownership and the Second Amendment.

Daniel Blair, a physics professor from Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., tweeted that he hopes Scalise will rethink his A+ rating from the National Rifle Association (NRA) following the shooting.

"My tweet was a gut reaction and pretty insensitive. I'm sorry I posted it."

I wonder if #SteveScalise will rethink his A+ NRA rating. #thoughtsandprayers do nothing, Blair tweeted.

Blair eventually expressed remorse for the tweet, telling Campus Reform in an email Friday that it was a gut reaction that he now regrets.

I think what happened to the Representative was a terrible and reprehensible act, he explained. My tweet was a gut reaction and pretty insensitive. I'm sorry I posted it.

Similarly, Merve Emre, an assistant professor at McGill University in Quebec, retweeted a post offering thoughts and prayers for the GOP lawmaker before snidely remarking that Scalise accepted $18,500 from the NRA and wants more guns on the streets.

Karl Qualls, a History professor at Dickinson College in Pennsylvania, contended that the incident was a direct result of easy access to guns and little regulation, even throwing the shooters race into the mix for good measure.

Another angry white man w easy access to guns (and state w almost no reg). Gabby Giffords, Steve Scalise. It isnt politics; Its guns, he wrote, referencing the shooting of former Democratic Rep. Gabby Giffords.

In a follow-up tweet, Qualls said that although he doesnt condone the shooting, he is wondering whether it is too much to ask our legislators to AT LEAST work 9-5. Especially since no real legislation passed this term.

[RELATED: Anti-gun prof calls for shooting up NRA, ensuring no survivors]

When contacted by Campus Reform, Qualls said that he tweeted as a concerned citizen, not a professor.

I think all citizens can agree that we would like to see our elected officials do something (tax or healthcare reform, a budget, rational gun reform....anything), he told Campus Reform. Not a single piece of legislation has passed Congress and made it to the president's pen. Both parties need to do their jobs on a daily basis like the citizens they represent. That is why we send them to DC.

Meanwhile, Robin Morris, a professor from Agnes Scott College, tweeted that she wishes Steve Scalise a full recoveryexcept for the part of him that thinks a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun.

In an email to Campus Reform, Morris explained that she hopes the Republican lawmaker will revisit his beliefs on gun control, adding that she was saddened, but not shocked by the shooting.

My tweet regarding Rep. Scalise meant to express that I hope he recovers fully, and that he will revisit his beliefs on gun control as so many of us who have been touched by gun violence have done, she explained, while noting that she herself has lost two friends to gun violence and even witnessed a shooting when she was a teenager.

[RELATED: College rejects gun club because NRA opposes gun control]

Morris went on to explain that while she is not anti-gun, she is pro-gun sense, saying she believes that people have a right to guns for hunting and for protectionwith proper background checks, licensing, and training.

Notably, Morris later deleted one of her tweets in which she claimed that the shooter was still alive because of his race.

Well we already knew it was a white guy who did the shooting. They got him into custody instead of killing him, the tweet read, with Morris telling Campus Reform that she made the mistake historians hate to doI tweeted without enough evidence.

I have deleted that tweet. It was also insensitive to the family of James Hodgkinson who are experiencing their own grief, I am sure on many levels, today. I pray for all the families, she added.

While several professors used Wednesdays shooting as an opportunity to advocate for gun legislation, there was one professor, Mike Plugh, who did not, instead tweeting that as a radical leftist college professor, I feel its important to hope that Steve Scalise gets a standing ovation if/when he returns for work.

Plugh explained to Campus Reform that while he is not necessarily "against" professors speaking out on issues "when the situation is hot," he would opt to discuss such issues with his students "in a closed classroom setting."

"I think some people feel strongly about gun violence and gun control and feel that it's important to discuss it when the situation is hot. I'm not against that at all. I think uncomfortable times are important times for discourse too," he stated. "I would probably talk to my own students, in a closed classroom setting, about the tragedy of the event and raise questions about policy priorities, political lobbying, and cultural values."

Campus Reform also reached out to Emre, but did not receive a responsein time for publication.

Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @spaduhhh

Visit link:
Profs mock Scalise support for Second Amendment after shooting - Campus Reform

NewsBusters (blog)

WATCH: The View Lies About the Second Amendment, Wishes We ... NewsBusters (blog) The View, ABC's morning talk program that elevated Raven-Symone to political punditry, engaged in one of its more oafish rants Thursday on one of the many ... and more »

Go here to see the original:
WATCH: The View Lies About the Second Amendment, Wishes We ... - NewsBusters (blog)

Thomas Gallatin Jun. 15, 2017

Inevitably and almost immediately after crazed leftist James T. Hodgkinson shot and wounded five, including Republican Rep. Steve Scalise, as they practiced for a baseball game, gun control came up. A reporter asked Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL), who had just survived the harrowing attack, Congressman, does this change your views on the gun situation in America? Yep, leftists are once again exploiting an atrocity to trot out the tired, flawed guns are the problem anti-Second Amendment narrative. But Brooks didnt take the bait. In fact, he tactfully and expertly exposed the flaw in the argument against the right to bear arms. Brooks responded:

Not with respect to the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment right to bear arms is to ensure that we always have a republic. And as with any constitutional provision in the Bill of Rights, there are adverse aspects to each of those rights that we enjoy as people. And what we just saw here is one of the bad side effects of someone not exercising those rights properly. But were not going to get rid of freedom of speech because some people say some really ugly things that hurt other peoples feelings. Were not going to get rid of Fourth Amendment search and seizure rights because it allows some criminals to go free who should be behind bars. These rights are there to protect Americans, and while each of them has a negative aspect to them, they are fundamental to our being the greatest nation in world history. So no, Im not changing my position on any of the rights we enjoy as Americans. With respect to this particular shooter, Id really like to know more about him whether he was an ex-felon, by way of example, who should not have had possession of a firearm Id like to know other things about his background before I pass judgement.

If anything, this latest attack proves to illustrate just how important and essential the Second Amendment is to protecting American Liberty. Imagine if the Capitol Police detail had not been there, the carnage and death toll would have been significant, due to the fact that all the congressmen were unarmed. How many Americans have their own police detail following them around offering protection? The obvious answer also points to the foundational purpose of the Second Amendment. See here where Mark Alexander has written extensively on the Second Amendment.

But statists like Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe seem to care little for protecting Americans rights and liberties. Rather he takes this latest horror as an opportunity to find fault and blame American Liberty for the crime rather than the crazed individual. Less than an hour after the attack McAuliffe said, This is not what today is about but there are too many guns on the street. Its not just about politicians, we worry about all of our citizens. Gov. McAuliffe is in need of a history lesson. As Benjamin Franklin stated, They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. And it was James Madison who wrote, The ultimate authority resides in the people alone. The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition. Thankfully, Rep. Brooks understands and embraces these truths.

See the article here:
An Outstanding Post-Attack Defense of the Second Amendment - Patriot Post

BY: David Rutz June 15, 2017 12:21 pm

The liberal hosts of "The View" were well-armed with dubious talking points about gun control and the Second Amendment during a fierce debate Thursday in the wake of Wednesday's shooting that left House Majority Steve Scalise (R., La.) and four others wounded.

Host Sunny Hostin said "more guns is not the answer." Fellow host Joy Behar boasted of living in New York State with its strict gun laws, claiming that she would be afraid to live in an open-carry state and would never take public transportation.

"I'd be afraid that some guy on the subway would have a fit, just go mad because he was upset somebody took his seat and shoot somebody else," she said, not noting that the exact same thing could happen in New York.

Non-liberal hostJedediah Bila countered, however, saying she felt safe in states like Arizona and Texas.

"I'm not worried about law-abiding citizens carrying guns," Bila said. "They don't make me nervous."

Host Whoopi Goldberg cut over Bila to ask her if she had been around "afraid people with guns."

"I have," Bila said.

"I don't believe you, Jed. I don't believe you," Goldberg said.

"I'm a conservative! They're a very pro-gun, pro-Second Amendment [group]," Bila said, laughing.

Goldberg said that when assailants start shooting, people run, and the police may not know how to shoot if there were multiple people carrying guns. She did not point out that citizens bearing arms may be able to defend themselves against an attacker before the police arrived.

"The problem is, if the Capitol Police weren't there there would have been a massacre there," Bila said.

Told that's "their job," Bila was incredulous.

"If you live in a society where only the police have guns, that's called a police state," she said. "That is not the United States of America."

Goldberg then offered a dubious examination of the Second Amendment.

"The Second Amendment is about a militia," she said. "That's what it says."

It actually says more than that. Its full text reads, "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."

"It's the right to bear arms, to protect yourself and your family," Bila said.

Hostin said quietly that being able to defend one's self and family was "not what the Second Amendment is about."

See the original post:
'The View' Explodes Over Second Amendment Debate, Goldberg Says 'It's About a Militia' - Washington Free Beacon

A year ago, Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives staged a sit-in demanding a vote on federal gun-safety bills following the shootings at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando. The National Rifle Associations lobbying was largely blamed for no vote happening. But looking deeper, the Second Amendment, with the unique American individualism wrapped around it, underlies all. It is Americas fundamental gun problem.

As Michael Waldman at the Brennan Center for Justice suggests in Politico Magazine, the NRAs construing of the Second Amendment as an unconditional right to own and carry guns (a right beyond actual constitutional law in Supreme Court rulings) is why it thrives and has clout.

Without clout derived from Second Amendment hyperbole, we might not have, for instance, stand your ground laws in more than 20 states starting with Florida in 2005, laws that professors Cheng Cheng and Mark Hoekstra report in the Journal of Human Resources do not deter crime and are associated with more killing.

Pockets of America were waiting for the NRAs Second Amendment fertilizer.

For many gun advocates, the gun is an important aspect of ones identity and self-worth, a symbol of power and prowess in their cultural groups. Dan Kahan at Yale University with co-investigators studied gun-safety perceptions and wrote in the Journal of Empirical Legal Studies how those most likely to see guns as safest of all were the persons who need guns the most in order to occupy social roles and display individual virtues within their cultural communities.

Or, as the essayist Alec Wilkinson writes more starkly on The New Yorkers website, although the (gun) issue is treated as a right and a matter of democracy underlying all is that a gun is the most powerful device there is to accessorize the ego.

A gun owner carrying his semiautomatic long rifle into a family department store, like Target, in a state permitting such if asked why will likely say because it is his right. He is unlikely to reveal the self-gratification gained from demonstrating the prowess and power of his identity, gained from using the gun to accessorize the ego. The Second Amendment here is convenient clothing to cover deeper unspoken needs, needs that go beyond the understandable pleasures and functions of typical hunting, for instance.

Australia is often mentioned as an example of nationwide gun-safety legislation reducing gun violence. Following the 1996 massacre of 35 people in Port Arthur, Australia, the government swiftly passed substantial gun-safety legislation. And as Professors Simon Chapman, Philip Alpers and Michael Jones wrote in JAMAs June 2016 issue, (F)rom 1979-1996 (before gun law reforms), 13 fatal mass shootings occurred in Australia, whereas from 1997 through May 2016 (after gun-law reforms), no fatal mass shootings occurred.

But Australia also has nothing akin to the Second Amendment.

Anthropologist Abigail Kohn studied gun owners in the U.S. and Australia who were engaged in sport shooting. She describes in the Journal of Firearms and Public Policy (2004) how it is immediately apparent when speaking to American shooters that they find it impossible to separate their gun ownership, even their interest in sport shooting, from a particular moral discourse around self, home, family, and national identity.

And thus, American shooters are hostile to gun control because just as guns represent freedom, independence the best of American core values gun control represents trampling on those core values.

In contrast, the Australians view guns as inseparable from shooting sports. And perhaps most importantly, Australian shooters believe that attending to gun laws, respecting the concept of gun laws, is a crucial part of being a good shooter; this is the essence of civic duty that Australian shooters conflate with being a good Australian. While the Australian shooters thought some gun-safety policies were useless and stupid, they thought that overall gun-safety measures were a legitimate means by which the government can control the potential violence that guns can do.

Unlike Australia (itself an individualist-oriented country), America has the Second Amendment. And that amendment has fostered a unique individualism around the gun, an individualism perpetrating more harm than safety.

Maybe someday the Second Amendment will no longer reign as a prop serving other purposes and, thus, substantive federal gun-safety legislation happens. But as Professor Charles Collier wrote in Dissent Magazine: Unlimited gun violence is, for the foreseeable future, our (Americas) fate and our doom (and, in a sense, our punishment for (Second Amendment) rights-based hubris).

The Second Amendment, today, is a song of many distorted verses. A song of a uniquely American tragedy.

Fred Decker is a sociologist in Bowie, Md., with a background in health and social policy research. He wrote this for the Orlando Sentinel.

See the rest here:
Second Amendment: An American tragedy - Arizona Daily Sun