Category: Gun Control

TURNED OFF BY TRUMP, CORPORATE AMERICA TRIES TO GOVERN ITSELF

Something quite bizarre and remarkable is happening to American capitalism. Our economic system has long been predicated on the laissez faire sacrament of tethering commerce only to what Adam Smith called the “invisible hand” of the market.  Roughly translated, that means those who own the means of production should be allowed to suck up all the profits they can, unencumbered by any duty to their workers, customers or communities.

However, as a dystopic sign of chronic congressional constipation, together with the companion malady of massive Trumpian deregulation, some corporate titans are taking unheard of steps to self-regulate for a broader public good, even if it means loss of revenue.  Milton Friedman must be spinning in his grave.  

To be sure, as incredible as this shift appears, so far its scope is relatively small and limited.  It is not likely to win Hosannas from Democratic Socialists anytime soon. Yet, Its significance lies in the profundity of its message, namely that the federal government has grown so dysfunctional that some major corporate entities are taking a stab at public policy governance. 

What makes the role reversal even more bizarre is that the Trump administration and Republican lawmakers have responded to this corporate usurpation of policy making by acting like lobbyists in an effort to influence the outcome of corporate legislating. It’s as if the regulators and the regulated simply switched places but carried on the old dance.

Take the issue of guns for example.  As of the first of this month, there have been 283 mass shootings in the U.S. this year. Yet, Congress has not passed any substantive gun control legislation in more than a generation.  Many business leaders are attempting to fill that regulatory void.  Walmart, on the heels of the murder of 22 customers in its El Paso store, banned the sale of assault weapons, hand guns and most ammunition in all of its locations. Dick’s Sporting Goods took similar action a year earlier. Responding to the school massacre in Parkland, Florida, Dick’s pulled all assault-style rifles and high capacity magazines from its stores at an annual revenue loss of $150 million.  

The giant e-commerce software company, Salesforce.com, stopped doing business with clients that sell military-style weapons.  A number of banks, including Citigroup and Bank of America, adopted prohibitions against lending money to gun dealers who sell assault rifles, and required them to submit background checks on all other gun buyers. BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, set up a new line of investment funds that exclude gun manufacturers and retailers.

Amazingly, these sensible gun regulations – stuff that Congress has been unable to legislate – have managed to push Republican officials into action mode. Unfortunately, the action is aimed at maintaining the sacred status of gun sales.  Yes, the party of free enterprise has suddenly turned to its former arch enemy of regulation as a cudgel to protect the free flow of assault weapons. Republican senators, led by Louisiana’s John Kennedy, are pushing legislation that would prohibit banks from “discriminating” against gun buyers.  Kennedy has also asked federal agencies to stop lending institutions from effectively restricting gun sales by adopting their own regulations.

Some of the Republican lobbying techniques against this new self-regulation by businesses trying to reduce gun violence have been even more Draconian.  The country’s biggest credit card issuers, led by Citigroup, decided to take steps that would either restrict or monitor gun sales purchased with a credit card.  This was not without precedent. Smaller companies like PayPal, Stripe, Square and Apple Pay already had explicit policies against transacting online sales of guns and related merchandise.  If big banks took a similar move, it could inflict a substantial dent in gun trafficking.

As reported on a recent episode of the New York Times’ The Daily podcast, senior bank executives went into a meeting with officials from the Security Exchange Commission, ostensibly about some unrelated and arcane financial reporting regulations.  During that session, however, an SEC commissioner made it very clear that the agency would not take kindly to any bank that came out against guns.  That shut down the gun sales credit card gambit, at least temporarily.

 This new corporate resolve to look for ways to push back on a combination of paralysis in some areas, and excessive deregulation in others, has surfaced in a number of other ways.  For example, the Trump administration’s move to roll back rules on methane-emissions was initially seen as a boon for big oil companies. Quite the contrary, most of those corporations – including Exxon Mobil, BP and Shell – were critical of Trump’s move and have said they will stick with the stricter Obama limits out of a desire to be seen as supportive of climate change remedies.

Meanwhile, automakers are balking at Trump’s plan to give them relief from Obama-era rules on fuel efficiency standards.  Here again, the president thought he was doing the companies a favor by rolling back environmental regulations.  But Ford, BMW, Volkswagen and Honda have said they will adopt standards slightly reduced from the Obama rules but much stricter than those Trump is trying to enact.  Other car manufacturers appear headed in the same direction, away from the president’s huge reduction in fuel efficiency rules.  

Mostly, this has to do with California and other states whose fuel standards exceed those pushed by Trump.  But they are also sensitive about being seen as ignoring environmental concerns, a stigma that has never kept the Donald from getting a good night’s sleep.   As a result, Trump is now threatening to hit car companies with anti-trust charges on the basis that they have conspired against him to make cars that don’t pollute enough.  He is also talking about prohibiting states from having stricter environmental standards.

Clearly, the GOP, once the party of big business and states’ rights, has morphed into a demented and unrecognizable entity. It is taking rights away from states, and it is beating up on God-fearing capitalists for trying to do what the government has failed miserably at: making this country a better place.  If this is what MAGA means, someone with a red hat needs to file a consumer fraud complaint. 

SEARCHING FOR DUE PROCESS AT THE ALTAR OF GUN WORSHIP

In an odd rhetorical twist, our latest national conversation on guns has embraced an unlikely term: due process. After all, guns are the antithesis of due process. They kill instantly and indiscriminately, not on accepted rules of justice, but on the capricious basis of a sight line. Yet, some of the suggestions aimed at reversing the growing phenomena of mass shootings raise critical due process concerns – on both sides of the gun control divide.

Take poor Donald Trump, for example. In a rare and short-lived moment of sensibility, he suggested that we might want to think about relieving dangerous people of their guns before giving them due process. His acolytes at the NRA and Fox News went apoplectic. To them, the president sounded very much like Lewis Carroll’s Queen of Hearts in the infamous case of a tart-stealing Knave. So eager was her Highness to have the suspect beheaded, she called for a reordering of jurisprudence: “First the sentence, then the verdict.”

In fairness, that’s not exactly what Trump had in mind last week when he opined that, in the case of deeply disturbed people, we should “take the guns first, (and) go through due process second.” The concept seems eminently reasonable. If the issue before the court is whether a gun owner is a raving lunatic filled with homicidal rage, you don’t want him fiddling with his AR-15 semi-automatic on the witness stand while a judge determines if he is dangerous. Yet the reaction from the well-armed right was predictable. They have long been programmed to go into immediate convulsions upon hearing the words “take the guns”. This crowd’s favorite slogan has long been: “I’ll give you my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.” They don’t take kindly to talk of gun taking.

The concept of due process has been around a lot longer than guns and dates back to early English common law. It was codified in the Magna Carta in 1215, and our founders later did a cut-and-paste, inserting those words into both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution. Although the nitty-gritty of what constitutes due process is an ongoing judicial work in progress, the basic notion is that government can’t take people’s life, liberty or property without going through a fair and just judicial process.

To the NRA, the only due process that should ever separate a guy and his gun is an involuntary commitment to a mental institution or an adjudication of being a “mental defective”. That standard would have kept 97 percent of recent mass shooters legally armed and ready to fire. The well-heeled gun lobby claims to have pulled Trump back from his momentary lucidity that gave rise to the concept of take-the-guns-first-and then-have-a-hearing. Fox News labeled the idea as “un-American as imaginable”.

Quite the contrary, Trump’s suggestion was deeply seeped in American due process tradition. For example, police can detain suspects on the “reasonable suspicion” that they committed a crime. They then go before a judge within a reasonable time period and the state must show “probable cause” to hold them for trial. Finally, in order to trigger a prison sentence, the state needs a conviction that comes only by proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s the same sequential approach Trump was talking about before he was reined in by his NRA handlers. There was ample evidence that the 19-year-old man charged in the recent Florida shooting was deeply distressed, armed with assault rifles and threatening to shoot up a school. Those facts should have been sufficient to temporarily confiscate his guns, pending a due process hearing on the question of his dangerousness.

In fact, that is precisely what happens right now in five states – California, Connecticut, Indiana, Washington and Oregon – that have adopted so-called “red-flag” laws. Based on evidence from friends, family or police of a credible threat, a judge can order the temporary confiscation of a person’s guns, pending a future hearing on the issue. Studies have shown that those laws have resulted in a significant reduction in gun homicides and suicides.

Trump came up with another brain storm on the gun issue last week, and this one would blow the entire concept of due process to smithereens. Waxing nostalgic about nineteenth century insane asylums, the president suggested this might be a way to lock up potential shooters when there is no evidence to support apprehension. “You know,” said Trump, “in the old days we had mental institutions. We had a lot of them. And you could nab somebody like this (the Florida shooter), because they knew something was off. (Then) he’s off the streets.”

Trump’s memory of the days when you could “nab” undesirables and toss them into the loony bin represents one of the more inglorious chapters of this country’s history. Based on a belief that mental illness could be dealt with only by locking people up, hundreds of thousands of Americans were confined to these draconian dungeons with little or no due process, many because they just seemed to be different. Once locked up, they were constantly sedated and, in many cases, surgically lobotomized. Prodded largely by rapid advances in mental health treatment, the Supreme Court ruled in 1975, that people could be involuntarily committed to mental hospitals only upon proving to a judge that they are a danger to themselves or others.

Even if the law changed, it’s hard to imagine building enough insane asylums to house all of the angry, socially awkward young men who have guns and talk about killing people. Recent reports indicate that the internet is filled with hundreds of group chats involving thousands of mostly young males who venerate school shooters and fantasize about joining their ranks. While carting them all off to a mental hospital and sedating them until their fiftieth birthday might reduce mass shootings, it totally destroys any semblance of due process.

There is a better solution: take their guns. After all, those students they are yammering about killing are also entitled to due process. Maybe one day, when the Congress and the White House are no longer owned by the NRA, we can finally get around to protecting that right to life, free from weekly mass shootings.

TRUMP’S EDUCATION PLAN: TEACHERS WITH GUNS

Until last week, Donald Trump had been the first president in modern history not to have an education policy. But no longer are America’s public schools a blank slate in the White House’s policy shop. The Donald has a plan, and he’s mighty pumped about it. He wants to give teachers guns and train them to shoot. Welcome to the 2018 edition of education reform: No Glock Left Behind.

As a nation mourned the shooting deaths of 17 students and faculty at a Florida high school, our self-absorbed reality star president maneuvered himself into the spotlight. Survivors of the massacre, along with some of the victim’s family members, were summoned to the White House for a “listening session”. There, with the cameras rolling, Trump clung to a note card reminding him to offer an empathetic “I hear you” after his guests laid bare their raw emotions of profound loss.

And when it was all over, our leader of the free world had been majestically infused with the wisdom that would forever stop school shootings: a well-armed faculty. He had not sounded so bubbly and manic since he described his mating rituals on that “Access Hollywood” tape. “We have to harden these schools, not soften them,” Trump said. He then constructed a truly original simile: “A gun-free zone to a killer. . . that’s like going for the ice cream. These people are cowards. They’re not going to walk into a school if 20 percent of the teachers have guns – it may be 10 percent or may be 40 percent. And what I’d recommend doing is the people that carry, we give them a bonus. We give them a little bit of a bonus.”

There you have it: Trumpian education policy. At long last, underpaid and under-appreciated public school teachers would no longer have to worry about teaching to the test in order to capture merit pay. They just have to pack heat and pick up their loaded gun bonus.

Many astute political observers have dismissed this call to arms for teachers as just another crazy flight of fancy from a president totally void of serious policy chops. Others have gone so far as to suggest it’s an intentional diversion designed to deflect a renewed push for gun control, to buy time until the anti-gun fervor cools. Maybe. Yet, it’s not hard to see the arming of educators as the absurd-but-understandable result of a decades’ long practice of expecting our public schools to somehow magically solve every societal ill. It’s an American obsession that has never worked, and has, in fact, repeatedly impaired the delivery of quality education.

Take race, for example. The tumultuous civil rights struggles of the 1960s eventually, through judicial and congressional actions, created a more just society, at least on paper. Yet, the rigidity of segregation was not about to go quietly into that good night. So we moved kids from one neighborhood school to another. Public schools became the national laboratory for the dismantling of segregation and the racism that created it. Black students were bused into white neighborhood schools, and vice versa, albeit more vice than versa. Learning was trumped by transportation. The result? The enormous achievement gap between black and white students of the 1960s has narrowed only slightly over 50 years. It was wrong, noted the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell in 1973, to turn the attention of communities “from the paramount goal of quality education to a perennially divisive debate over who is to be transported where.” A North Carolina NAACP official at the time put it even more succinctly: “My daughter does not need to sit beside a white person to learn.”

Unfortunately, we didn’t learn our lesson back then. There has not been a major social problem that we haven’t schlepped to the front door of the public school house. Take poverty for example. More than half of public school students come from low-income families. Here’s what a New Mexico Kindergarten teacher told the Washington Post her day was like: “When they come in my door in the morning, the first thing I do is an inventory of immediate needs: Did you eat? Are you clean?” She cleans them up with bathroom wipes and toothbrushes. At her own expense, she stocks a drawer with clean socks, underwear, pants and shoes. She is the face of anti-poverty policy to those children, but is left with precious little time to teach.

Once upon a very long time ago, teachers had control over their teaching. They used their skills and experience to map out a learning strategy for their students. Not anymore. As Stanford University Education Professor Larry Cuban noted, “policy elites” at the local, state and federal level have taken over by mandating schools to solve an array of social, economic and political problems. Policy makers, Cuban says, have not hesitated to foist upon classroom teachers such issues as: alcoholism and drug addiction, tobacco use, teenage pregnancy, AIDS prevention, automobile accident reduction, environmental protection and test-driven accountability for producing graduates who can help companies make even more money in the global market place.

A recent study of 30,000 classroom teachers reported that 89 percent said they were “strongly enthusiastic” when they began teaching, but just 15 percent felt the same way today. No wonder many areas of the country are experiencing a teacher shortage. There has been a huge exodus from the profession in recent years. With all the mandates and expectations thrust upon them, teachers have precious little time to do that one thing that drew them into this line of work: teach.

And now the president of the United States wants to turn them into gunslingers. It’s a fitting parody on this society’s long degrading march to dismantle the essence of what it means to be a teacher. Unfortunately, Donald Trump is no satirist. To borrow his phrasing, he’s a “sicko” with “demented” thoughts.

MENTAL ILLNESS IS DRIVING OUR GUN CULTURE

Donald Trump is right: Our country’s epidemic of gun violence is, first and foremost, a mental health problem. The president and his Republican sycophants are nuts. They are in an ideologically-induced fugue state, so far removed from reality that sacrificing the lives of children is but a mere normal and necessary function of gun idolatry.

The nation’s latest fuselage of assault rifle bullets had just terrorized a Parkland, Florida school, leaving 17 dead. As the bodies were being cleared from the locker-laced hallways of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, the NRA’s hypnotized Republican automatons were right on script. The word “gun” stricken from their vocabulary, suddenly the party of just-say-no to health care couldn’t stop talking about the need to treat mental illness.

“So many signs that the Florida shooter was mentally disturbed,” said Trump.

“This individual appears to have significant issues with mental illness,” said Senator Ted Cruz.

Florida’s Republican Gov. Rick Scott talked about the need to care for the “mentally ill”.

Trump’s Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar II promised that the administration will be “laser-focused on getting Americans with mental illness the help they need.”

Gentlemen, heal yourselves!

The real insanity facing this country is the lethal delusion of elected leaders that we can go right on making guns more accessible than drinking water without, on a daily basis, having to bury school children, concert-goers and other innocents. The Florida massacre was the 30th mass shooting in a year not even two months old. There were 345 such shootings in 2017. While many countries have a mental illness rate far in excess of that for the United States, no other nation comes close to us in terms of the number of guns or mass shootings.

“Insanity,” goes the old quote of disputed origin, “is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” In this case, It’s a cliché that speaks truth to power. Republicans mourn and grieve over the victims of the latest shooting spree, mumble their mantra about not blaming the guns, and keep doing nothing to restrict their availability. And then wait a day or so for the next mass killing, rinse and repeat. Think that’s insane? It’s just the tip of the GOP’s mental disturbance iceberg when it comes to this issue.

For example:

MISSOURI state Rep. Mike Leara introduced a bill last month that would make it a felony for any of his fellow lawmakers to propose legislation that would restrict an individual’s right to buy, carry and shoot guns.

FEDERAL law prohibits the sale of a handgun to people under 21, but it allows 18-year-olds – like the Parkland shooter – to buy semiautomatic assault rifles.

VIRGINIA Republican legislators recently killed a bill that would have required a minor to get parental permission before keeping guns in their home. They also buried a measure that would have required licensed child-care facilities to keep guns locked up while children were being cared for.

FLORIDA passed a law, later struck down in federal court, prohibiting physicians from talking to their patients about guns.

GEORGIA is home to numerous local ordinances requiring every home to be armed with at least one gun.

MONTANA voters approved a referendum giving local police authority to arrest any FBI agent who attempted to enforce one of the few meager federal gun regulations.

SOUTH DAKOTA allows all teachers, Kindergarten through grad school, to carry loaded guns in the classroom.

This is the real story of mental health and guns. Somewhere along the way, sanity was totally eliminated from what once was a healthy give-and-take on gun issues. Assault rifles have become more sacred than the lives of our children. It doesn’t get much crazier than that. The president’s sudden interest in reducing gun violence through mental health and school safety initiatives is a sad, cynical, transparent deflection from dealing with the only public policy issue that matters here: gun control. Just a year ago, Trump signed a bill that repealed an Obama era initiative that made it more difficult for people receiving Social Security disability for serious mental illness to buy guns. As he told the NRA last fall, “You came through for me, and I am going to come through for you.”

Two days before the Florida shooting, Trump submitted a budget request to Congress that called for a $25 million reduction in funds for national school safety programs, and for elimination of a $400 million grant program designed to help schools prevent bullying or provide mental health assistance.

The president routinely decries our “open borders” as a source of the “. . .loss of many innocent lives.” “This American carnage,” he said at his inauguration, “stops right here and stops right now.” Of course, it didn’t. Murders committed by illegal immigrants are a drop in the bucket compared to those carried out by American white men using semiautomatic assault weapons. The president doesn’t lift a finger to stop that kind of carnage. That’s not what coming through for the NRA is all about.

The noxious absolutism of Second Amendment gun worship is pathologically insane. Our Bill of Rights is a masterful document, but unlike Moses’ Commandments, the protections are not absolute. Speech is free, as they say, but you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater. Why should the right to bear arms mean carte blanche access to rapid-fire military assault weapons? As every other industrialized country has recognized, there is a need to balance the rights of gun enthusiasts with legitimate concerns for public safety. A society that puts a gun collector’s right to stockpile AR-15 rifles above the lives of school children is, well, mentally ill.