Mediaboss Marketing

As of Friday, six people had been arrested in Saturdays birthday party shooting in Dadeville which killed four and injured at least 32. On Tuesday, Alabama lawmakers held a moment of silence for the victims. When reacting to the shooting, Republicans and Democrats had very different responses.

Democrats are talking about guns and gun control. Republicans are talking more about crime, said Todd Stacy, host of Capitol Journal on Alabama Public Television.

Stacy discussed that and other actions in the legislature this week.

During an already scheduled meeting of the Legislative Black Caucus in Birmingham, three members of the group held a press conference to respond to the shooting.

Some of it was specific. A lot of it was not specific, Stacy said. You hear the phrase, We need to do something.

Democratic Sen. Marika Coleman of Pleasant Grove spoke about her red flag law which shes introduced in several legislative sessions. Such laws establish a legal process to remove guns from people who are deemed to be a threat to themselves or others. Democrats also promoted an assault weapons ban.

Stacy said as details about the Dadeville shooting dripped out, it became clear this was not a lone gunman with a high-powered firearm and the traditional Democratic proposals would not have prevented the incident.

Republicans are talking about bills to strengthen crime penalties, sentencing, going after illegal guns. Stacy said. Theres a gang violence bill that the Senate Judiciary Committee passed this week.

Some policies, such as red flag laws, do find broad support but can get blocked in conservative legislatures around the country. Stacy said thats not always the case and points to Florida, which is trending further to the right, but passed a such a law in the wake of the Parkland school shooting.

When I talk to Republican lawmakers and prosecutors, they say they arent necessarily opposed to the concept. But they all say the devils in the details, Stacy said. You do have some Second Amendment issues. You have some Fourth Amendment issues. If you took a blind poll of folks in the legislature, I bet it would be pretty popular. But yes, whenever youre talking about guns, Republicans get very touchy about it. Thats just a political reality.

A package of four economic incentive bills dubbed the game plan by Gov. Kay Ivey is now law. Ivey signed the bills during a Thursday afternoon ceremony. The programs would have expired if lawmakers didnt reauthorize the package. Stacy said that forced lawmakers to update and reconsider the incentives.

The centerpiece of the package is a bill that reauthorizes and expands the Alabama Jobs Act and gives tax credits for capital investments and payroll rebates for job creation. The program is the states primary economic recruitment tool.

The legislation authorizes the program for another five years and incrementally increases the cap on incentives from $350 million for 2022 to $475 million for 2027. It would also establish a new $10 million in incentives for tourism projects such as amusement parks, resorts, water parks and aquariums.

The package includes incentives for tech startups, particularly for minority owners and those in rural areas and incorporates a transparency provision.

That would require that every incentive that is used for a project be posted online for everybody to see. Thats certainly something new in the economic development realm, Stacy said.

Ivey signed a bill into law Tuesday which requires hospitals and nursing homes to allow certain in-person visits, even during a pandemic.

This is obviously a remnant of COVID as so many people were frustrated with the hospital and nursing home policies that kept loved ones from being able to visit and be with their loved ones, in some cases while they were dying, Stacy said.

Under the law, patients would designate an essential caregiver who would be allowed two hours of daily visitation. It would also require facilities to allow visitation for end-of-life situations, childbirth, pediatric patients and when patients need additional support for things like making major decisions or help with eating and drinking.

Stacy said the bill was developed in consultation with the healthcare industry.

Theyre on board with it, with the understanding that if the federal government says no visitation, theyre going to have to follow the federal government, Stacy said.

Wednesday night brought the return of a tradition to Montgomery the legislative softball game.

House members took on the Senate while appellate judges served as umpires. For the second year in a row, the Senate came out on top.

It was a great time raising money for tornado victims in Selma, Stacy said. Theres a lot of arguing that goes on in the statehouse, a lot of back-and-forth, a lot of serious topics, so its kind of nice to be able to blow off steam down at the ballpark.

Alabama House OKs ban on trans athletes at the college level

House committee approves bill making it a felony to help someone fill out an absentee ballot

Retired congressman returns to Montgomery to lobby for Second Chance legislation

House passes bill ending failing school designation

Includes reporting from the Associated Press

See original here:
Republicans and Democrats split over response to Sweet 16 party shooting - WBHM

2024 presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy angered "CNN This Morning" host Don Lemon during a debate on gun rights for Black Americans while on-air.

Duting the heated exchange, Lemon took offense to Ramaswamys statements at an NRA conference last week about Democrats in the South instituting gun laws to prevent African Americans from protecting their newfound rights in the post-Civil War era.

Lemon reduced Ramaswamys point to a declaration that the Civil War was fought merely to give Black people gun rights and berated him for it, telling him the statement "insulted" him as a Black American.

DON LEMON'S PATHETIC APOLOGY FOR SEXIST REMARKS SPARKS EVEN MORE FURY INSIDE CNN: F-----G A--HOLE

CNNs Don Lemon and 2024 presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy debate the Civil War and Second Amendment. (Screenshot/CNN)

The CNN host further told Ramaswamy that he had no right to talk about the experience of Black people in America because hes not Black.

Ramaswamy pushed back and insisted that Lemon was misunderstanding his point. He also argued that both men should be able to talk about the issue regardless of their skin color.

During the heated crosstalk, Lemon also snapped at his producers who were apparently distracting him over his earpiece.

The intense live debate came after the hosts played a moment from Ramaswamys speech to the NRA in Indianapolis. During the clip, the businessman and presidential candidate addressed the crowd, saying, "I want you to raise your hand if you know when the first anti-gun laws were passed in this country. Raise your hand if you do. 1865."

He continued, saying, "We fought a civil war in this country to give Black Americans the equal protection under the law that we failed to secure them in 1776. But then you wanna know what happened? Southern states passed anti-gun laws that stopped Black people from owning guns. The Democrat Party, then as in now, wanted to put them back in chains."

After clarifying to co-host Poppy Harlow that he meant that modern Democratic Party policies (he mentioned former President Lyndon B. Johnsons "Great Society") are bad for African Americans much like those post-Civil War gun laws, Lemon stepped in, voicing some major disagreement with Ramaswamys statement.

He cut in, saying, "I dont really see what one has to do with the other and using the Civil War to talk about Black Americans that war was not fought for Black people to have guns."

Ramaswamy clarified his stance, saying, "That war was fought for Black people to have freedoms in this country. Actually, thats why the Civil War was fought."

"Actually, a funny fact is Black people did not get to enjoy the other freedoms until their Second Amendment rights were secured," he said.

Lemon interjected again, "But Black people still arent allowed to enjoy the freedoms as well in this country."

Ramaswamy dismissed that claim outright, declaring, "I disagree with you on that Don I think youre doing a disservice to this country by failing to recognize the fact that we have equality before the laws here."

DON LEMON SPOTTED ON THE BEACH AFTER PHONING IN APOLOGY TO CNN COLLEAGUES OVER SEXIST NIKKI HALEY COMMENTS

Republican presidential candidate and businessman Vivek Ramaswamy speaks to the Merrimack County Republicans at an event in Manchester, New Hampshire on April 13, 2023. (Paul Steinhauser)

Getting a little flustered, Lemon tried to shut down Ramaswamy by claiming he doesnt have the requisite skin color to make such a statement. The anchor replied, "Well, OK. When you are in Black skin and you live in this country, then you can disagree with me."

The candidate shot back, saying, "Don, I think we have to be able to talk about these issues in the open regardless of the color of our skin."

"I think for you to compare 1865 and 1964 I think its insulting to Black people. Its insulting to me as an African American. I dont want to sit here and argue with you because its infuriating for you to put those things together," Lemon said.

He then declared, "Its not right, your telling of history is wrong." Ramaswamy protested, asking what exactly was wrong, to which Lemon replied, "Youre making people think that the Civil War was fought only for Black people to get guns."

Lemon called Ramaswamys talking points "reductive," while the guest shot back that the hosts interpretation of the NRA speech was "reductive and actually insulting."

As Ramaswamy continued, Lemon scolded his producers, who were apparently distracting him on his earpiece during the debate. He snapped, "Hang on, please. I cannot keep a thought if you guys are talking in my ear."

The debate continued for another minute or so before Lemon concluded, "The fact that I find insulting is that you are sitting here telling an African American about the rights and what you find insulting about the way I live, the skin I live in every day. And I know the freedoms that Black people dont have in this country, and that Black people do have."

Ramaswamy protested, stating, "I think we should be able to express our views regardless of the color of our skin. We should have this debate without me regarding you as a Black man."

CNN's Don Lemon. (CNN This Morning)

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"I think its insulting that youre sitting here whatever ethnicity you are splaining to me about what its like to be Black in America. Im sorry," Lemon said.

The candidate responded, "Im an Indian American, and Im proud of it."

Originally posted here:
Vivek Ramaswamy angers Don Lemon in debate over civil war, Second Amendment: 'It's infuriating' - Fox News

We must take stock of the landscape and acknowledge an irrefutable reality: There are millions of Americans for whom avoidable deathswhether from guns or a pandemic for which a no-cost, life-preserving vaccine is availableare acceptable, and too many of these millions vote Republican. There are Republicans with whom I once socialized who have acknowledged this to me privately. These are highly educated and highly credentialed people, who work in industries that are far more regulated than the firearm industry. They still believe a Republican is always preferable to a Democrat. This is what political traumatization wreaks: You learn to accept needless death and become indifferent to, if not defend, politically motivated violence, whether its an insurrection at the Capitol or a punch-up at a school board meeting.

We can trace the damage to four words in the Second Amendment: Shall not be infringed. It is these four words that have turned so many of our schools, our banks, our places of worship, our malls, our movie theaters, our workplaces, our Fourth of July parades, our bars and nightclubs, ourreally, just fill in the blankinto blood-splattered abattoirs.

This is where the plot is lost, over four words that denude the Second Amendment of any modern-day contextual value and meaning. Four words useful only in a cloddish defense of guns as instruments in a holy war against imaginary boogeymen: pedophiles, sycophants of Satan, Communist plants, and covert Islamic agitants born in Kenya. Shall not be infringed, because the culture war will yield a new phantasmic threat tomorrow, against whom the GOPs traumatized foot soldiers must stand their ground.

Read the rest here:
I Carry a Firearm Every Day. Yes, the Second Amendment Is Killing Us - The New Republic

Former U.S. Rep. Adam Kinzinger, who served Illinois 11th Congressional District and later the 16th from 2011 to early this year, is one of the Republican Partys most significant truth tellers. Kinzinger is now a political commentator. In his blistering farewell address to Congress in December, Kinzinger said: Where Republicans once believed that limited government meant lower taxes and more autonomy, today, limited government means inciting violence against government officials.

On Monday night, Kinzinger spoke in Chicago at a meeting organized by The Joyce Foundation. In a session moderated by a former Tribune reporter, White House official and Democratic strategist, David Axelrod, the former congressman spoke alongside Tim Heaphy, the chief counsel and lead investigator for the Jan. 6 House committee.

This was a left-leaning audience, receptive to sharp criticism of the Republican right and far friendlier to Kinzinger than many members of his own party. But something Kinzinger said at the Arts Club caught our attention after the conversation turned to recent school shootings.

Second Amendment people, Kinzinger said, should be on the front line of gun control.

In essence, Kinzinger was saying, the people who are interested in guns, and most likely to own them, actually know far more about what works and what does not in the matter of gun control than those who have no such knowledge. And as experts on guns, he said, they are thus morally obligated to use that expertise to solve what is clearly a crisis, given all the recent examples of emotionally troubled people acquiring powerful weaponry and using them to take innocent lives, often of children.

U.S. Rep. Adam Kinzinger attends a gun violence hearing on Oct. 3, 2019, at Kennedy King College in Chicago. (Antonio Perez / Chicago Tribune)

Many of them already know this, he implied, at least deep down, and are possibly just waiting to be asked in the right way.

Therefore, rather than seeing fervent supporters of the Second Amendment as the opposition to be defeated, he suggested, those who want to see sensible regulations on gun ownership, such as background checks, age restrictions and red flag laws, should see Second Amendment people as potential experts and allies. They know guns better than those who merely despise them.

Kinzinger was engaged in realpolitik here, noting that the constitutional protection for personal ownership of guns is unlikely to go away in our lifetimes. Better, then, to find common ground when it comes to the kinds of reform for which weve advocated here often.

Kinzinger is not the only person who has suggested that Americans try harder to find common ground in the interests of common-sense solutions. At a recent meeting in Austin, Texas, organized by the American Press Institute, a young nonprofit called The Flip Side spoke of its mission to help bridge the gap between liberals and conservatives, telling assembled opinion journalists from major newspapers that the use of less partisan language and tonality has proved to be a far more effective generator of meaningful common-sense change than rhetorical demonization.

We could not agree more. And gun control is not the only issue to which that applies, but its surely the biggest emergency.

Join the discussion on Twitter @chitribopinions and on Facebook.

Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.

More:
Editorial: Why 'Second Amendment people' should be at the forefront of gun control solutions - Chicago Tribune

By Mark Johnson

Updated: April 16, 2023 Published: April 16, 2023

FILE - Light illuminates part of the Supreme Court building at dusk on Capitol Hill in Washington, Nov. 16, 2022. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky, File)

Growing concerns among people throughout the United States in response to increasing numbers of mass shootings and high rates of other firearm-related deaths and injuries has intensified debates about the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Many firearm owners have expressed concerns about preserving their Second Amendment rights.

Repealing the Second Amendment or any constitutional amendment would be extremely difficult. It would require a two-thirds vote of the U.S. House and Senate and ratification by three-fourths of the states. That could not happen any time soon, if ever.

So, what options do firearm safety advocates have for passing gun reform laws?

A U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June 2008 provides some guidance on this issue. In the District of Columbia vs. Heller decision, the Court affirmed an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia. This 5-4 majority decision was written by the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

However, Section 2 of this decision included the following statements. Like most rights, the Second Amendment rights are not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Courts opinion should not be to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carry of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and public buildings, or laws imposing conditions on qualifications of commercial sale of arms. Millers holding (United States vs Miller decision 1939) that sorts of weapons protected are those in common use of the time finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.

It appears that the Heller Supreme Court decision affirmed the individual right to possess firearms, but left open the possibilities of federal, state or local laws to promote firearm safety without violating the Second Amendment.

Mark S. Johnson retired from a career in public health and health service administration. He lives in Juneau and has lived in Alaska for 45 years.

The views expressed here are the writers and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.

View post:
OPINION: Interpreting the Second Amendment - Anchorage Daily News