The GOP’s House Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) remains in critical condition after getting shot on Weds. but Republicans still support the Second Amendment “rights” of his now deceased angry white male shooter.
Perhaps we should see progress in the fact that Republicans in Congress have finally called one of these guys a “terrorist” — like Dylan Roof and — instead of a “gunman” or “shooter.” Then again, James Hodgkinson was a liberal, anti-Trump, Bernie Sanders supporter: You’ll never hear them saying that about Dylan Roof, Robert Louis Dear, and all the other right-wing terrorists.
But even having one of their own seriously injured hasn’t made GOP lawmakers rethink the Second Amendment one bit. Shortly after Steve Scalise and four others got shot, Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) doubled down on his pro-gun stance.
When ABC asked about his stance on gun control, he declared:
“Not with respect to the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms is to ensure that we always have a Republic […] Our Second Amendment “rights” are “fundamental to our being the greatest nation in world history. So no, I’m not changing my position on any of the rights that we enjoy.”
Of course, some people might use their rights “improperly,” Mo Brooks explains. But that’s no reason to interrupt angry white males’ privilege so they can’t buy guns and murder people in cold blood.
Republicans care more about deranged white men’s “Second Amendment rights” than their fellow citizens’ safety…But they still want more protection for themselves.
Not a single Republican added calls for commonsense gun laws to their usual “thoughts and prayers.” But they still want more protection for themselves. And given the fury of their constituents over the GOP’s health care bill and Donald Trump’s plummeting approval numbers, who can blame them for running scared?
The Washington Post reports:
In the hours after the shooting, Republicans and Democrats alike struggled to reassess their protection and engagement with the public, outside the protective bubble of the Capitol. Some said they should be allowed to carry firearms at all times — even in Washington, a city with strict gun controls. Others pressed top leaders to let them use taxpayer funds to secure their private homes.
While Democrats appear to be the ones more inclined towards spending more on security for their colleagues, Republicans want more leeway to exercise their so-called Second Amendment rights. Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) lamented:
“If this had happened in Georgia, he wouldn’t have gotten too far […] But here, we’re not allowed to carry any weapons here.”
Unlike the nearby states of Virginia and Maryland, Washington, D.C. has strict gun laws. Many Republicans want those laws loosened or to have more security protection.
Loudermilk said perhaps a larger group of lawmakers also should receive security protection, rather than just the top leaders who have a round-the-clock Capitol Police detail.
In other words, if you’re important enough for a security detail or can afford to dabble in firearms and a bulletproof vest, that’s great. But if you’re a child cowering under your desk at a school, a black person who seeks to avoid upsetting cops, or you simply don’t have $500 to spare for a Glock, you’re shit out of luck.
Silly rabbit. Second Amendment “rights” are for white people. No wonder we heard nary a peep from the NRA about licensed concealed carrier Philando Castile’s summary execution by police.
MSNBC’s Joy Reid — who excoriated Republicans for decrying the Steve Scalise shooting after ignoring the shooting of former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.) and the Aurora, Newtown, and Charleston massacres — also tweeted this:
Ironic. Members of congress who routinely vote with the @NRA to allow guns everywhere are moving their offices to courthouses out of fear.
— Joy Reid (@JoyAnnReid) June 15, 2017
Another Republican, Rep. Lou Barletta (R-Penn.) was asked by WILK’s Sue Henry whether there should be fewer town hall meetings “until we agree that we need to be more civil.” And he replied, “I think absolutely, there’s no question.”
Meanwhile, there’s the fact that, as Big Think points out, the Second Amendment does not grant individuals an unlimited right to bear arms. Even the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 narrow 5-4 District of Columbia v. Heller ruling — widely seen as judicial activism by right-wing justices — acknowledges that our government has the right to enact laws to collectively protect us [see pages 54-55].
Rand Paul once tweeted that the Second Amendment exists so we can “shoot at the government when it becomes tyrannical.” Unfortunately, the Republicans are the ones who are being tyrannical, and this tweet hasn’t aged well.
It looks like Rand Paul just deleted his tweet saying guns were for shooting at the government. Sad. pic.twitter.com/vAo1lRmSj6
— Cool Daddy NedSparks (@NedSparks) June 14, 2017