PDA

View Full Version : Congresswoman shot in Arizona



Alonzo-ny
January 8th, 2011, 05:06 PM
US congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords shot in Arizona (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12143774)

From BBC

A US congresswoman is in a critical condition after being shot at a public event in Arizona in an attack in which five people were killed.

Democratic Representative Gabrielle Giffords, 40, was shot in the head at close range in front of hundreds of people in Tucson.

A doctor told reporters he was "very optimistic about her recovery".

President Barack Obama said the dead included a nine-year-old girl and a federal judge he named as John Roll.

The Associated Press news agency reported that one of Ms Giffords' political aides was also killed in the shooting.
Continue reading the main story

“It is an indication of the febrile, volatile nature of politics in America that, immediately the news broke, the internet was alive with anger, a dispute between the left and the right”

A man was arrested after the incident. The motive remains unclear.

Several other people received "non-life-threatening" injuries in the shooting.
'Senseless'

Ms Giffords, 40, who represents the eighth district of Arizona in the US House of Representatives, is married to space shuttle astronaut Mark Kelly.

She has served on several congressional committees, including those covering the armed services and foreign affairs.

Jeff Rogers, chairman of the local Democrats, told BBC News that Ms Giffords was "a rising star" in the party with hopes of eventually winning the Arizona Senate seat.

He described her as "a wonderful congresswoman and a wonderful person", adding: "We just can't continue to have this kind of carnage on school campuses and against public officials."

In a statement issued by the White House, President Obama said: "This morning, in an unspeakable tragedy, a number of Americans were shot in Tucson, Arizona, at a constituent meeting with Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.

"And while we are continuing to receive information, we know that some have passed away, and that Representative Giffords is gravely wounded.

"We do not yet have all the answers. What we do know is that such a senseless and terrible act of violence has no place in a free society.

"I ask all Americans to join me and Michelle in keeping Representative Giffords, the victims of this tragedy, and their families in our prayers."

The Speaker of the House or Representatives, John Boehner, said: "I am horrified by the senseless attack on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and members of her staff.

"An attack on one who serves is an attack on all who serve. Acts and threats of violence against public officials have no place in our society. Our prayers are with Congresswoman Giffords, her staff, all who were injured, and their families. This is a sad day for our country."

Fabrizio
January 8th, 2011, 06:57 PM
The victim was on Sarah Palin's famous target list.

I would imagine there is good ground to sue Palin. The victim should press charges.

Americans should not be putting up with this crap.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/ronaldo/sarahpac_0.jpg

ZippyTheChimp
January 8th, 2011, 08:14 PM
On March 25th, Rep Giffords was interviewed on MSNBC concerning vandalism at her office in Tucson.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8P1ff9naCI

JCMAN320
January 8th, 2011, 09:14 PM
God damm right wing nut jobs!

lofter1
January 8th, 2011, 09:20 PM
Apparently the Judge was not a target, but a friend of the Congresswoman who simply happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

John McCarthy Roll (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCarthy_Roll)

Federal Judge Among Victims in Arizona Shooting

NY TIMES (http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2011/01/08/us/AP-US-Congresswoman-Shot-Judge.html?ref=johnroll)
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
January 8, 2011

PHOENIX (AP) — A federal law enforcement official says that a federal judge was fatally shot in the attack on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona.

U.S. Marshal for Arizona David Gonzales confirmed to the Associated Press that U.S. District Judge John Roll died in the attack Saturday.

***

Judge John Roll Dead: Killed In Arizona Shooting

THE HUFFINGTON POST (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/08/judge-john-roll-dead-killed_n_806239.html)
First Posted: 01- 8-11

Federal Judge John Roll was killed during a shooting in Arizona that also involved an attack on U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

U.S. Marshal for Arizona David Gonzales confirmed to the Associated Press that the U.S. District Judge had died. He offered no other details on the shooting.

Arizona Central talked to Gonzales in 2009 after Roll allowed a $32 million civil-rights lawsuit to proceed against a local rancher. The case was filed by illegal immigrants and drew the ire of local talk radio hosts, who "spurred audiences into making threats."



In one afternoon, Roll logged more than 200 phone calls. Callers threatened the judge and his family. They posted personal information about Roll online.

"They said, 'We should kill him. He should be dead,' " Gonzales said.

Both Roll and his wife were given a U.S. Marshals Service protection detail at the time. Roll called the month-long protection experience "unnerving and invasive." According to Arizona Central, authorities identified four men believed to be responsible for the threats, but Roll declined to press charges at the recommendation of the Marshals Service.

stache
January 8th, 2011, 10:34 PM
Hm the Marshals Service needs some new leadership pronto.

ZippyTheChimp
January 9th, 2011, 12:36 AM
Uncle says niece, 'typical' 9-year-old, among victims

by Jim Cross/KTAR, Associated Press (January 8th, 2011 @ 5:45pm)

TUCSON, Ariz. - A 9-year-old girl was among the five who died in a shooting rampage in Tucson Saturday afternoon.

KTAR talked exclusively with her uncle Greg Segalini.

He described her as a "typical" girl who was bright, on student council and who loved ballet.

Segalini said the girl's family went to the event to meet Congresswoman Gabreille Giffords.

"They just went up there because they were having the political rally.

"And the neighbor, who also was shot, thought it would be nice if she brought Christina up to the Safeway, just to you know, just to see it and the next thing you know this happened."

Greg Segalini said his niece's death still hasn't sunk in yet.

"We, of course, didn't anticipate. I mean how do you prepare for something like this?"

He said he believes the little girl was shot in the chest.

"We went down to the hospital and she was dead."

Giffords was shot in the head, but is expected recover.

In all, 19 people were shot with at least five of them being in critical condition.

A federal judge and four others were killed in the rampage that rattled the country and left politicians fearful for their safety.

As of Saturday evening the Arizona sheriff helping investigate the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and others says the gunman may not have acted alone.

Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik said at a news conference in Tucson on Saturday that authorities may have a photo of another suspect.

People familiar with the investigation have identified the suspected gunman being held as 22-year-old Jared Loughner.

"It is a tragedy for Arizona, and a tragedy for our entire country," President Barack Obama declared.

Giffords, 40, is a three-term moderate Democrat who narrowly won re-election in November against a tea party candidate as conservatives across the country sought to throw her from office over her support of the health care law. Her office in Tucson was vandalized in the hours after the House passed the tcoverhaul last March as anger over the law spread across the country.

Police say the shooter was in custody, and was identified by people familiar with the investigation as Jared Loughner, 22. Pima County Sheriff's officials said he used a 9 mm pistol to carry out the shooting spree.

His exact motivation was not clear, but a former classmate described Loughner as a pot-smoking loner who had rambling beliefs about the world. Federal law enforcement officials were poring over versions of a MySpace page that belonged to Jared Loughner and over a YouTube video published weeks ago under an account "Classitup10" and linked to him. The MySpace page, which was removed within minutes of the gunman being identified by officials, included a mysterious "Goodbye friends" message published hours before the shooting and exhorted his friends to "Please don't be mad at me."

In one of several Youtube videos, which featured text against a dark background, Loughner described inventing a new U.S. currency and complained about the illiteracy rate among people living in Giffords' congressional district in Arizona.

"I know who's listening: Government Officials, and the People," Loughner wrote. "Nearly all the people, who don't know this accurate information of a new currency, aren't aware of mind control and brainwash methods. If I have my civil rights, then this message wouldn't have happen (sic)."

U.S. District Judge John Roll was one of the dead. Giffords had worked with him in the past to line up funding to build a new courthouse in Yuma, and Obama hailed him for his nearly 40 years of service as a judge.

Giffords spokesman C.J. Karamargin said three Giffords staffers were shot in the attack. One died, and the other two are expected to survive. Gabe Zimmerman, a former social worker who served as Giffords' director of community outreach, died.

Giffords was first elected to Congress amid a wave of Democratic victories in the 2006 election, and has been mentioned as a possible Senate candidate in 2012 and a gubernatorial prospect in 2014.

Giffords is married to astronaut Mark E. Kelly, who has piloted space shuttles Endeavour and Discovery. The two met in China in 2003 while they were serving on a committee there, and were married in January 2007. Sen. Bill Nelson, chairman of the Senate Commerce Space and Science Subcommittee, said her husband is training to be the next commander of the space shuttle mission slated for April. His brother is currently serving aboard the International Space Station, Nelson said.

Giffords, known as "Gabby," tweeted shortly before the shooting, describing her "Congress on Your Corner" event: "My 1st Congress on Your Corner starts now. Please stop by to let me know what is on your mind or tweet me later."

"It's not surprising that today Gabby was doing what she always does, listening to the hopes and concerns of her neighbors," Obama said. "That is the essence of what our democracy is about."

Giffords has drawn the ire of the right in the last year, especially from politicians like Sarah Palin over her support of the health care bill. It's still not clear if the gunman had the health care debate in mind or was focused on his own unique set of political beliefs as witnessed in the Internet videos.

Law enforcement officials said members of Congress reported 42 cases of threats or violence in the first three months of 2010, nearly three times the 15 cases reported during the same period a year earlier. Nearly all dealt with the health care bill, and Giffords was among the targets.

Giffords' Tucson office was vandalized a few hours after the House voted to approve the health care law in March, with someone either kicking or shooting out a glass door and window. In an interview after the vandalism, Giffords referred to the animosity against her by conservatives. Palin listed Giffords' seat as one of the top "targets" in the midterm elections because of the lawmakers' support for the health care law.

"For example, we're on Sarah Palin's targeted list, but the thing is, that the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that, they have to realize that there are consequences to that action," Giffords said in an interview with MSNBC.

In the hours after the shooting, Palin issued a statement in which she expressed her "sincere condolences" to the family of Giffords and the other victims.

The shooting occurred at a shopping center called La Toscana Village as Giffords met with voters outside a Safeway grocery store.

Alex Villec, 19, a volunteer for the event, told the Arizona Daily Star that the gunman asked to speak to Giffords, but Villec told him to go to the back of the line. The gunman did that, and minutes later he walked toward her.

"He was intent," Villec said. "He was intent when he came back- a pretty stone-cold glance and glare."

"I didn't see his gun, but it was clear who he was going for," he added. "He was going for the congresswoman."

Villec said the shooter walked past tables and toward Giffords, then raised his hand. Villec said he heard gunshots before ducking behind a pillar.

"It was bedlam," he said. "People were getting down on the ground. They were screaming. I just did what I could to keep myself protected."

Villec said he did not see two men tackle the gunman but afterward spoke with one of the men who was next in line to greet Giffords.

Law enforcement officials and reporters from around the country quickly descended on Tucson, the second biggest city in the state and home to the University of Arizona. The scene has been converted into a command post with about a dozen or so emergency vehicles and agents in FBI jackets milling about the location.

Outside Giffords' office on Capitol Hill, a handful of congressional staffers could be seen walking into her office without comment, some with roller bags and one who was in tears. About a half dozen yellow flowers placed by one mourner sat outside the door.

In Loughner's middle-class neighborhood- about a five-minute drive from the scene- sheriff's deputies had much of the street blocked off as curious neighbors asked what was going on. The neighborhood sits just off a bustling Tucson street and is lined with desert landscaping and palm trees.

Neighbors said Loughner kept to himself but that they often saw him walking his dog, almost always wearing a hooded sweat shirt listening to his iPod. Neighbors said Loughner lived with his parents.

"We're getting out of here. We are freaked out," 33-year-old David Cleveland, who lives a few doors down from Loughner's house, told The Associated Press.

Cleveland said he was taking his wife and children, ages 5 and 7, to her parent's home when they heard about the shooting.

"When we heard about it we just got sick to our stomachs," Cleveland said. "We just wanted to hold our kids tight."

High school classmate Grant Wiens, 22, said Loughner seemed to be "floating through life" and "doing his own thing."

"Sometimes religion was brought up or drugs. He smoked pot, I don't know how regularly. And he wasn't too keen on religion from what I could tell," Wiens said.

The shooting comes amid a highly charged political environment that has seen several dangerous threats against lawmakers but nothing that reached the point of actual violence.

A San Francisco man upset with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's support of health care reform pleaded guilty to threatening the Democratic congresswoman and her family, calling her directly on March 25 and threatening to destroy her Northern California home if she voted for health care reform.

In July, a California man known for his anger over left-leaning politics engaged in a shootout with highway patrol officers after planning an attack on the ACLU and another nonprofit group. The man said he wanted to "start a revolution" by killing people at the ACLU and the Tides Foundation.

During his campaign effort to unseat Giffords in November, Republican challenger Jesse Kelly held fundraisers where he urged supporters to help remove Giffords from office by joining him to shoot a fully loaded M-16 rifle. Kelly is a former Marine who served in Iraq and was pictured on his website in military gear holding his automatic weapon and promoting the event.

"I don't see the connection," between the fundraisers featuring weapons and Saturday's shooting, said John Ellinwood, Kelly's spokesman. "I don't know this person, we cannot find any records that he was associated with the campaign in any way. I just don't see the connection.

"Arizona is a state where people are firearms owners- this was just a deranged individual," Ellinwood said.

Giffords is known in her southern Arizona district for her numerous public outreach meetings, which she admitted in an October interview with The Associated Press can sometimes be challenging.

"You know, the crazies on all sides, the people who come out, the planet earth people," she said with a following an appearance with Adm. Mike Mullen in which the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was peppered with bizarre questions from an audience member. "I'm glad this just doesn't happen to me."

___

Associated Press Writers Pauline Arrillaga in Tucson, Jacques Billeaud, Bob Christie and Paul Davenport in Phoenix, and Espo, Matt Apuzzo, Eileen Sullivan, Adam Goldman and Charles Babington in Washington contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2011 Bonneville International

lofter1
January 9th, 2011, 08:59 AM
Report: Giffords Staffer Gabe Zimmerman Among The Dead

TALKING POINTS MEMO (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/report-giffords-staffer-gabe-zimmerman-among-the-dead.php)
Eric Lach
January 8, 2011

Gabe Zimmerman, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' director of community outreach, was one of the people killed after a gunman opened fire at an event in Arizona today, Politico reports (http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0111/Giffords_staffer_Gabe_Zimmerman_among_the_dead.htm l).

Politico adds that Zimmerman was 30 years old, and had worked for Giffords since 2007.

Giffords was shot in the head, and 18 other people were injured, at a "Congress on Your Corner" event in the parking lot of a Safeway in Tucson this morning. There are conflicting reports as to the total number of people killed, but among the confirmed dead are Federal Judge John Roll and a 9-year old girl. One suspect, 22-year-old Jared Loughner, is in custody. Giffords underwent surgery today, and a doctor told the media this afternoon that he was 'very optimistic' about her recovery.

lofter1
January 9th, 2011, 09:09 AM
The remaining three victims (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/08/death-toll-shooting-arizona/):

♦ Dorwan Stoddard, 76, was a pastor of Mountain Ave. Church of Christ in the area.



He performed maintenance work at the church and spent his summers traveling, according to the Arizona Daily Star. Friends said they visited all 50 states and 28 foreign countries during their trips.

Mike Nowak, a minister at the church, told the paper that Stoddard was "a terrific guy, a jack-of-all-trades."

Stoddard was with his wife during the shooting. She was also hit by a bullet, but is expected to survive.

♦ Dorothy Morris, 76, (information pending)

♦ Phyllis Schneck, 79, (information pending)

ablarc
January 9th, 2011, 01:25 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/ronaldo/sarahpac_0.jpg
The workings of a childish mind.

Now become a lethal mind.

Why is the press not all over this?

lofter1
January 9th, 2011, 04:09 PM
The press -- to some degree -- is all over it.

Talking Points Memo has this headline (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/palin-aide-crosshairs-on-target-list-not-actually-gun-sights.php?ref=fpb):

PLAYING DEFENSE? Palin Aide: Crosshairs On Target List Not Actually Gun Sights

Even so, it seems that SarahPac has now removed the map image from their website.

On the web Breitbart is pushing back (http://www.breitbart.com/).

And from Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/09/pima-county-sheriff-sets-debate-price-free-speech/):

Pima County Sheriff Sets Off Debate on Price of Free Speech

Heightened and "vitriolic" political rhetoric is being blamed by some for the kind of violence that landed Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in intensive care following a mass casualty shooting on Saturday, but others say a blame game is hardly appropriate or useful right now.

Pima County, Ariz., Sheriff Clarence Dupnik sparked much of the debate during a press conference Saturday evening in which he blamed talk radio and television for a decline in America.

"I think the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business and what (we) see on TV and how our youngsters are being raised, that this has not become the nice United States of America that most of us grew up in. And I think it's time that we do the soul-searching," the sheriff said.

On Sunday, Dupnik didn't back down.

"I think we're the tombstone of the United States of America," Dupnik said of The Granite State, which a day earlier he called the “Mecca” of hatred and bigotry. "To try to inflame the public on a daily basis 24 hours a day, seven days a week has impact on people, especially who are unbalanced personalities to begin with."

... After news broke Saturday about the shooting, Republican Sarah Palin issued a statement offering "sincere condolences" to Giffords and other victims and said her family was praying for peace and justice.

But on Sunday, ABC reporter Dan Harris interviewed Facebook consumer marketing director Randi Zuckerberg, who said the top question being asked on Facebook is whether Palin is to blame for the violence. During the election season, Palin had written a post that used crosshairs on districts in a visualization congressional districts targeted for Republican takeover. In 2004, Democrats used bullseye targets in a similar appeal.

A Palin aide told USA Today that the sights used on the election map were not meant to represent the sights of a gun, and any suggestion otherwise is the work of political flame-throwers.

"This is a terrible politicization of a tragedy," former Palin aide Rebecca Monsour told the newspaper. "We don't know (the shooter's) motive. It doesn't seem like he was motivated by a political ideology. Craziness is not an ideology." ...

Fabrizio
January 9th, 2011, 04:26 PM
A Palin aide told USA Today that the sights used on the election map were not meant to represent the sights of a gun...

Then what are they supposed to be, friggin peace signs? The gall.

This should be decided in court.

ZippyTheChimp
January 9th, 2011, 05:24 PM
Daniel Hernandez, intern, stays
by Gabrielle Giffords' side

by Jaimee Rose and Mary Jo Pitzl - Jan. 9, 2011 12:01 AM
The Arizona Republic


Daniel Hernandez had been U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' intern for five days when she was shot Saturday outside Tucson.

The junior at the University of Arizona was helping check people in at the "Congress on Your Corner" event when he heard gunfire. He was about 30 feet from the congresswoman. When the shots began, he ran toward them.

"I don't even know if the gunfire had stopped," he said Saturday night as he kept a vigil at the University Medical Center cafeteria, gathered near a TV watching tributes and getting updates.

When the shots began that morning, he saw many people lying on the ground, including a young girl. Some were bleeding. Hernandez said he moved from person to person checking pulses.

"First the neck, then the wrist," he said. One man was already dead. Then he saw Giffords. She had fallen and was lying contorted on the sidewalk. She was bleeding.

Using his hand, Hernandez applied pressure to the entry wound on her forehead. He pulled her into his lap, holding her upright against him so she wouldn't choke on her own blood. Giffords was conscious, but quiet.

Ron Barber, Giffords' district director, was next to her. Hernandez told a bystander how to apply pressure to one of Barber's wounds.

Barber told Hernandez, "Make sure you stay with Gabby. Make sure you help Gabby."

Hernandez used his hand to apply pressure until someone from inside Safeway brought him clean smocks from the meat department. He used them to apply pressure on the entrance wound, unaware there was an exit wound. He never let go of her.

He stayed with Giffords until paramedics arrived. They strapped her to a board and loaded her into an ambulance. Hernandez climbed in with her. On the ride to the hospital, he held her hand. She squeezed his back.

When they arrived at the hospital, Hernandez was soaked in blood. His family brought him clean clothes because the FBI took his for evidence.

He waited at the hospital while she went into surgery. He needed to tell police what had happened. He overheard people walking by talking about how Giffords had died. He also heard this on NPR. Later, he learned she had lived.

"I was ecstatic," he said. "She was one of the people I've looked up to. Knowing she was alive and still fighting was good news. She's definitely a fighter, whether for her own life, or standing up for people in southern Arizona."

The fact that Hernandez was nearby and able to react quickly probably saved Giffords' life, said state Rep. Matt Heinz, D-Tucson, and a hospital physician. He talked to Hernandez at the hospital after the shooting.

Eight hours after the shooting, Hernandez stood with Giffords' friends and staff and told them what had happened. The tall, strong 20-year-old said, "Of course you're afraid, you just kind of have to do what you can."

They hugged and thanked him. Later, he sat with his mom and sisters and told them about his friends and the staffers who had died that day.

"You just have to be calm and collected," he said. "You do no good to anyone if you have a breakdown. . . . It was probably not the best idea to run toward the gunshots, but people needed help."

Copyright © 2011, azcentral.com.

lofter1
January 9th, 2011, 08:34 PM
This should be decided in court.

That's where it might be headed ...

Dem planning bill that would outlaw threatening lawmakers

THE HILL (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/136895-dem-planning-bill-that-would-outlaw-threatening-lawmakers)
By Peter Schroeder
01/09/11

Rep. Robert Brady (D-Pa.) reportedly plans to introduce legislation that would make it a federal crime to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a federal official or member of Congress.

Brady told CNN that he wants federal lawmakers and officials to have the same protections against threat currently provided to the president. His call comes one day after Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) was shot, along with 19 other people, at a public event in Tucson. A suspect is currently in custody.

"The president is a federal official," Brady told CNN in a telephone interview. "You can't do it to him; you should not be able to do it to a congressman, senator or federal judge."

Among the six people killed was Federal Judge John Roll ...

... Critics originally took Palin to task for the apparent use of the crosshairs of guns to identify the districts. The controversy re-ignited Saturday after the shooting, since Giffords's district was included on the map.

Brady singled out the map as the type of rhetoric he opposed.

"You can't put bull's-eyes or crosshairs on a United States congressman or a federal official," he said.

However, a Palin spokeswoman denied Sunday that the image was intended to depict gun sights. Palin offered condolences to the Giffords family and other victims of the shooting on her Facebook page Saturday.

"The rhetoric is just ramped up so negatively, so high, that we have got to shut this down," Brady said.

© 2011 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp.

mariab
January 9th, 2011, 10:21 PM
According to an article on MSN, the little girl's birth date was Sept. 11th, 2001.

Fabrizio
January 10th, 2011, 03:38 AM
It's morning here and while working I'm listening to NBC television's after-the-fact next-day reporting on the shooting.

I find some of the segments creepy: melodious voice-overs, heart tugging music, sound effects... it's all so slick and perfectly packaged... an instant made-for-television movie. For me... there is something about those over-the-top production values that border on bad taste.

---

And I wish in all of this there would be more discussion about the fact that a 22 year old oddball loser is legally able to buy and carry a semiautomatic weapon. It's nuts. I could never live in a place where that is considered normal and perfectly OK.

Ninjahedge
January 10th, 2011, 09:37 AM
I am also a bit confused.

We seem to be focusing on the individuals that have been shot, but not how he gt to the site and how he was able to hit 19. There are almost no guns that have than many bullets in one clip. That sounds to be 2-3 clips.

Also, what was his range? From that many head shots, he had to be close. I have only heard small details about it and how he was stopped. How was he stopped? Is he able to speak at this point (I know I woud have "accidentally" broken some bones while restraining him, and I am sure many others would have done similar if they acted in time)

As for Sara. I hope this harms her, and other politicians militaristic referencing towards violent solutions. Using a target scope as an icon for an "enemy" is a subliminal and not too subtle hint to shoot them. I do not blame them for teh shooting, but this is something that may be able to be addressed now and generally discouraged.

It shows that if you take that position long enough, even if you are only being metaphorical, someone will eventually take you literally. i just hope they still have enough human guilt to appreciate their own contribution to this, even if tehy did not mean it, and offer an unconditional apology rather than denials of any involvement...

I also hope Fox does something similar. One way to gain my respect would be their whole-hearted rejection and refutal of this action despite their own political opinions. Anything less would make me, and hopefully many others, sick.

stache
January 10th, 2011, 09:52 AM
Patricia Maisch, the 61-year-old snowy-haired woman who wrestled a magazine out of the Tuscon shooter's gun after three men (including a 74-year-old retired army colonel) tackled him to the ground. Patricia spoke to reporters outside of her home in Arizona yesterday about how she pulled the magazine out of the gun while Jared Loughner tried to reload.

************************************************** ****

Check ABC for her statement. It's good.

ZippyTheChimp
January 10th, 2011, 10:12 AM
@NH:

The event was outside on the sidewalk.

The gunman had a Glock semiautomatic with a 31 round magazine. He reloaded once, but the second clip jammed.

Gunfire happens fast, and it's not as loud as in the movies. For some, it takes a while to react to what's going on.

Eyewitness accounts here. (http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/01/09/20110109gabrielle-giffords-arizona-shooting-morning.html)

Ninjahedge
January 10th, 2011, 02:34 PM
Sorry Zip, I did not realize he had such a large clip. Most pistols are somewhere between 9 and 13 shots, right?

As for the shots, if nobody noticed him holding a gun out in broad daylight, I would assume that it would take a while to register even after the shots began being fired. People have a natural system of denial for improbable (or impossible in their mind) events that make only the most likely situations and reactions come up. This is so far out of the ordinary, they will just short circuit unless they were either NOT completely "normal", or had a problem filtering things out (guilty).

Kind of like the whole 9-11 thing. Most did not comprehend what was going on until it was too late.... Except for that one plane... :(



31 shots! :eek:

ZippyTheChimp
January 10th, 2011, 03:20 PM
Standard Glock has 17 rounds. There are optional high capacity magazines.

Even justifying the handgun, why would you need so many rounds unless you were contemplating mayhem.

Ninjahedge
January 10th, 2011, 04:05 PM
That is a war-weapon.

There is no need for 31 shots unless your intension is either to kill, or to defend against waves of brain-eating zombies.

Anyone that tries to defend this as something else is probably a zombie.

Daquan13
January 10th, 2011, 04:40 PM
The 9-year-old girl was born on a tragic day, and sadly, her life was cut so short on a tragic day.

She would have been 10 years old come September 11, this year! She wanted to study the gov't and politics. Her dreams are all dashed now because of that sick depraved maniac!!

What a damn shame! I hope that he gets fried!!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

scumonkey
January 10th, 2011, 04:58 PM
http://www.npr.org/2011/01/10/132801364/arizona-gun-laws-among-most-lenient-in-u-s


Arizona Gun Laws Among Most Lenient In U.S.

"In January 2010, Gov. Jan Brewer signed a bill which repealed an Arizona state law that required gun owners to have permits to carry concealed weapons."

""Essentially, there is very little obstacle to purchasing a weapon in the state of Arizona," Grimaldi tells Fresh Air's Terry Gross. "There are laws that require you, federally, to be at least 21 years old to purchase a handgun. But basically state law permits anyone 21 and older to own a firearm and also, to carry it concealed in the state. That's different than many other states, many of which have stricter gun laws.""

Fabrizio
January 10th, 2011, 05:18 PM
This kind of crazy gun ownership free-for-all should be seen as a quality of life issue. It should be seen as something that impacts the States economy in a negative way. Progressive businesses and industry should stay away from investing in Arizona. If nuts are free to carry concealed automatic weapons... do I really want to vacation there, study there, invest there?

Ninjahedge
January 11th, 2011, 08:03 AM
It's Arizona.

Have you been there?

There is not much of a reason for any of those things in the FIRST place! ;)

In all seriousness though, this guy was a grade-A nutbag. If this is not an example of the need for some regulation, I do not know what is.

If any SANE, law abiding citizen can get a gun, I do not see why so many squawk about waiting periods. Geez, didn't ANY of these people grow up in the mail-order days? A month is nothing compared to "6-8 weeks for delivery". :P

TREPYE
January 11th, 2011, 11:00 AM
Climate of Hate
By PAUL KRUGMAN (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/paulkrugman/index.html?inline=nyt-per)

When you heard the terrible news from Arizona, were you completely surprised? Or were you, at some level, expecting something like this atrocity to happen?
Put me in the latter category. I’ve had a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach ever since the final stages of the 2008 (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/not-about-the-financial-crisis/) campaign. I remembered the upsurge in political hatred after Bill Clinton’s election in 1992 — an upsurge that culminated in the Oklahoma City bombing. And you could see, just by watching the crowds at McCain-Palin rallies, that it was ready to happen again. The Department of Homeland Security reached the same conclusion: in April 2009 an internal report (http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf) warned that right-wing extremism was on the rise, with a growing potential for violence.
Conservatives denounced that report. But there has, in fact, been a rising tide of threats and vandalism aimed at elected officials, including both Judge John Roll, who was killed Saturday, and Representative Gabrielle Giffords. One of these days, someone was bound to take it to the next level. And now someone has.
It’s true that the shooter in Arizona appears to have been mentally troubled. But that doesn’t mean that his act can or should be treated as an isolated event, having nothing to do with the national climate.
Last spring Politico.com reported on a surge in threats against members of Congress, which were already up by 300 percent. A number of the people making those threats had a history of mental illness — but something about the current state of America has been causing far more disturbed people than before to act out their illness by threatening, or actually engaging in, political violence.
And there’s not much question what has changed. As Clarence Dupnik, the sheriff responsible for dealing with the Arizona shootings, put it, it’s “the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business.” The vast majority of those who listen to that toxic rhetoric stop short of actual violence, but some, inevitably, cross that line.
It’s important to be clear here about the nature of our sickness. It’s not a general lack of “civility,” the favorite term of pundits who want to wish away fundamental policy disagreements. Politeness may be a virtue, but there’s a big difference between bad manners and calls, explicit or implicit, for violence; insults aren’t the same as incitement.
The point is that there’s room in a democracy for people who ridicule and denounce those who disagree with them; there isn’t any place for eliminationist rhetoric, for suggestions that those on the other side of a debate must be removed from that debate by whatever means necessary.
And it’s the saturation of our political discourse — and especially our airwaves — with eliminationist rhetoric that lies behind the rising tide of violence.
Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: it’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right. It’s hard to imagine a Democratic member of Congress urging constituents to be “armed and dangerous” without being ostracized; but Representative Michele Bachmann, who did just that, is a rising star in the G.O.P.
And there’s a huge contrast in the media. Listen to Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann, and you’ll hear a lot of caustic remarks and mockery aimed at Republicans. But you won’t hear jokes about shooting government officials or beheading a journalist at The Washington Post. Listen to Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly, and you will.
Of course, the likes of Mr. Beck and Mr. O’Reilly are responding to popular demand. Citizens of other democracies may marvel at the American psyche, at the way efforts by mildly liberal presidents to expand health coverage are met with cries of tyranny and talk of armed resistance. Still, that’s what happens whenever a Democrat occupies the White House, and there’s a market for anyone willing to stoke that anger.
But even if hate is what many want to hear, that doesn’t excuse those who pander to that desire. They should be shunned by all decent people.
Unfortunately, that hasn’t been happening: the purveyors of hate have been treated with respect, even deference, by the G.O.P. establishment. As David Frum, the former Bush speechwriter, has put it, “Republicans originally thought that Fox worked for us and now we’re discovering we work for Fox.”
So will the Arizona massacre make our discourse less toxic? It’s really up to G.O.P. leaders. Will they accept the reality of what’s happening to America, and take a stand against eliminationist rhetoric? Or will they try to dismiss the massacre as the mere act of a deranged individual, and go on as before?
If Arizona promotes some real soul-searching, it could prove a turning point. If it doesn’t, Saturday’s atrocity will be just the beginning.




http://up.nytimes.com/?d=0/9/&t=&s=2&ui=25011937&r=http%3a%2f%2fwww%2enytimes%2ecom%2f2011%2f01%2f1 0%2fopinion%2f10krugman%2ehtml%3fsrc%3dme%26ref%3d homepage&u=www%2enytimes%2ecom%2f2011%2f01%2f10%2fopinion%2 f10krugman%2ehtml%3fref%3dhomepage%26src%3dme%26pa gewanted%3dprint http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/clientside/39ff0ed3Q2FzQ51C2LQ25z!Q3B2Q25Q5D9Q3BQ24sQ51!Q25Q7 DgsMGQ3EbCQ51GQ7E2LHHCbmMH1

BBMW
January 11th, 2011, 11:01 AM
Would any regulation short of an outright ban stop him? Yes, he was nuts, but hadn't done anything criminal before and hadn't been judged legally mentally impaired.

I would point out the Colin Ferguson (the LIRR shooter) got the gun he used in California. They have (and had back then) all the regulations you probably want. He was still run through the system, passed, bought the gun, came out here, and shot up a LIRR train.

Fabrizio
January 11th, 2011, 11:30 AM
^ Therefore?

ZippyTheChimp
January 11th, 2011, 12:31 PM
They have (and had back then) all the regulations you probably want.Presumptuous. What were the regulations in 1994? Then we can decide if that is all we want.

Ninjahedge
January 11th, 2011, 01:12 PM
BB, the issue here is, if anyone can GET them, why do so many people object to a background check?

Maybe the problem is not whether or not there should be regulations, but how to get them to work.

There are very few people out there that fear being rejected because of a background check to make sure they are LESS likely to whip it out in public and let loose.

I guess the key here is, how many nut-jobs out there that would have done something similar were prevented from doing just that because they were unable to get a weapon.

Maybe AZ should remove all regulation and see what happens, eh?

Radiohead
January 11th, 2011, 01:50 PM
Climate of Hate
By PAUL KRUGMAN (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/paulkrugman/index.html?inline=nyt-per)

When you heard the terrible news from Arizona, were you completely surprised? Or were you, at some level, expecting something like this atrocity to happen?
Put me in the latter category. I’ve had a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach ever since the final stages of the 2008 (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/not-about-the-financial-crisis/) campaign. I remembered the upsurge in political hatred after Bill Clinton’s election in 1992 — an upsurge that culminated in the Oklahoma City bombing. And you could see, just by watching the crowds at McCain-Palin rallies, that it was ready to happen again. The Department of Homeland Security reached the same conclusion: in April 2009 an internal report (http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf) warned that right-wing extremism was on the rise, with a growing potential for violence.
Conservatives denounced that report. But there has, in fact, been a rising tide of threats and vandalism aimed at elected officials, including both Judge John Roll, who was killed Saturday, and Representative Gabrielle Giffords. One of these days, someone was bound to take it to the next level. And now someone has.
It’s true that the shooter in Arizona appears to have been mentally troubled. But that doesn’t mean that his act can or should be treated as an isolated event, having nothing to do with the national climate.
Last spring Politico.com reported on a surge in threats against members of Congress, which were already up by 300 percent. A number of the people making those threats had a history of mental illness — but something about the current state of America has been causing far more disturbed people than before to act out their illness by threatening, or actually engaging in, political violence.
And there’s not much question what has changed. As Clarence Dupnik, the sheriff responsible for dealing with the Arizona shootings, put it, it’s “the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business.” The vast majority of those who listen to that toxic rhetoric stop short of actual violence, but some, inevitably, cross that line.
It’s important to be clear here about the nature of our sickness. It’s not a general lack of “civility,” the favorite term of pundits who want to wish away fundamental policy disagreements. Politeness may be a virtue, but there’s a big difference between bad manners and calls, explicit or implicit, for violence; insults aren’t the same as incitement.
The point is that there’s room in a democracy for people who ridicule and denounce those who disagree with them; there isn’t any place for eliminationist rhetoric, for suggestions that those on the other side of a debate must be removed from that debate by whatever means necessary.
And it’s the saturation of our political discourse — and especially our airwaves — with eliminationist rhetoric that lies behind the rising tide of violence.
Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: it’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right. It’s hard to imagine a Democratic member of Congress urging constituents to be “armed and dangerous” without being ostracized; but Representative Michele Bachmann, who did just that, is a rising star in the G.O.P.
And there’s a huge contrast in the media. Listen to Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann, and you’ll hear a lot of caustic remarks and mockery aimed at Republicans. But you won’t hear jokes about shooting government officials or beheading a journalist at The Washington Post. Listen to Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly, and you will.
Of course, the likes of Mr. Beck and Mr. O’Reilly are responding to popular demand. Citizens of other democracies may marvel at the American psyche, at the way efforts by mildly liberal presidents to expand health coverage are met with cries of tyranny and talk of armed resistance. Still, that’s what happens whenever a Democrat occupies the White House, and there’s a market for anyone willing to stoke that anger.
But even if hate is what many want to hear, that doesn’t excuse those who pander to that desire. They should be shunned by all decent people.
Unfortunately, that hasn’t been happening: the purveyors of hate have been treated with respect, even deference, by the G.O.P. establishment. As David Frum, the former Bush speechwriter, has put it, “Republicans originally thought that Fox worked for us and now we’re discovering we work for Fox.”
So will the Arizona massacre make our discourse less toxic? It’s really up to G.O.P. leaders. Will they accept the reality of what’s happening to America, and take a stand against eliminationist rhetoric? Or will they try to dismiss the massacre as the mere act of a deranged individual, and go on as before?
If Arizona promotes some real soul-searching, it could prove a turning point. If it doesn’t, Saturday’s atrocity will be just the beginning.




http://up.nytimes.com/?d=0/9/&t=&s=2&ui=25011937&r=http%3a%2f%2fwww%2enytimes%2ecom%2f2011%2f01%2f1 0%2fopinion%2f10krugman%2ehtml%3fsrc%3dme%26ref%3d homepage&u=www%2enytimes%2ecom%2f2011%2f01%2f10%2fopinion%2 f10krugman%2ehtml%3fref%3dhomepage%26src%3dme%26pa gewanted%3dprint http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/clientside/39ff0ed3Q2FzQ51C2LQ25z!Q3B2Q25Q5D9Q3BQ24sQ51!Q25Q7 DgsMGQ3EbCQ51GQ7E2LHHCbmMH1

To be fair, such "eliminationist rhetoric" and imagery has been used by all sides for years, such as a target map from the 1994 DLC website (http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253055&kaid=127&subid=171), and this Joe Mancin ad (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIJORBRpOPM). Even Obama recently said"they bring a knife...we bring a gun". So what. As for Palin, she sounds dumb enough when she just opens her mouth, so there's no need to bring up her silly map. In this case, the shooter was apparently a communist-leaning atheist loon who had a long standing animosity for Gibbons dating from 2007. Pointing fingers at all atheists, communists or in this case right wingers is a convenient red herring in an effort to make a political point. Unfortunately, when there is scarce evidence to suggest the shooter was influenced by anything but the demons in his head and hatred for the congresswoman (who is a moderate to conservative Democrat who was a hawk on border security and a gun-rights advocate), it comes across as in bad taste. Given his position, Krugman should know better.

The gun laws issue is fair game, especially with how to keep them out of the hands of the mentally unstable. Handguns for protection are one thing, but there's no reason why automatic weapons should be legal at all. The "criminals will still get them" argument doesn't make sense, since there is really no reason why a non-criminal should need them for personal protection.

Ninjahedge
January 11th, 2011, 02:03 PM
Um, commie athiest loon? Are yo ugoing McCarthy on us?

You should know as well as the next guy that even crazies get their ideas from somewhere. You do not talk about how you would like to see someone dead in front of a homicidal maniac. Period.

The news has to start responding to this. As for out of context appelations. "They bring a knife, we bring a gun", could you please site this and in what context it was used? Was it saying that the GOP needed to be shot, or was it a little less explicit that the Sarah Palin "lock and load" mentality, or that one guy that actually brought an M16 to a rally to try and prove a point.

Hmm, the GOP has a gathering and protestors are locked in a pen blocks away, but a GOP supporter is allowed to go to a rally with an M16 slung on his shoulder and if anyone protests he shouts "2nd AMENDMENT!!!" ??!?

I don't think Krugman is too off on this. I think he is just sick of seeing it happen. I don't think there is a direct relation to having a Democratic President, as he put it, but I do think there is a leaning between Right-Wing supremicist action (whether in conjunction or completely solo) and political positioning.

It has been very hostile in politics for a while, and combined with a recession, we are looking at a problem.

Now this guy? I think he was definitely influenced by all of this. Someone does not go and shoot everyone at a place, including a 9yo girl, if he is just angry at one woman. This guy took his own delusions and was fed by the buzz.

The real culprits may not be Fox and Friends, they may be poor gun regulations (not loose or tight, just poorly thought out and implimented) and a lack of attention to POSTED threats (seems like we will haul in almost anyone on suspicion of DLing songs, but someone posting about shooting a congresswoman? We don't have time for that!), but that does not remove responsibility from them entirely.

Most events are additive, and a hateful atmosphere is a good base for just about anyone to validate their own acts of aggression.

BBMW
January 11th, 2011, 03:29 PM
This was after the Brady Bill, so the waiting period and criminal background at minimum. And I know Cali went beyond the minimum. Was not as tough as NY.


Presumptuous. What were the regulations in 1994? Then we can decide if that is all we want.

ZippyTheChimp
January 11th, 2011, 04:29 PM
^
Not enough.

At the least, interstate sale of handguns to individuals should be prohibited. Only residents should be able to buy handguns within a state.

BBMW
January 11th, 2011, 04:35 PM
There are a fair number of gun oriented people who think they have an absolute right to buy and keep guns without any government interference. This is out there on the fringe, but there are a lot of them, especially in the west and south.

More are worried that any government regulation will open the door to arbitrary, capricious, and intentional intereference wth gun ownership by law abiding citizens. In point of fact a lot of gun owners out in the "hinderlands" (anything outside of the big cities) look at NYC as an example of gun regulation run amok. In NYC it is theoretically possible to legally buy and carry a gun. However, even if you have no criminal record, and no history of mental illness, it's difficult, long, paperwork intensive, and expensive process to even buy a gun to keep in your property, and essentially impossible to get a carry permit unless you have some specific need/threat (thing having a business that requires you to carry cash or other valuables.) A lot of gun owners think that any level of regulation can easily morph into that.


BB, the issue here is, if anyone can GET them, why do so many people object to a background check?

Maybe the problem is not whether or not there should be regulations, but how to get them to work.

There are very few people out there that fear being rejected because of a background check to make sure they are LESS likely to whip it out in public and let loose.

I guess the key here is, how many nut-jobs out there that would have done something similar were prevented from doing just that because they were unable to get a weapon.

Maybe AZ should remove all regulation and see what happens, eh?

BBMW
January 11th, 2011, 04:37 PM
This is basically what is in place now. You can't legally walk into a gunstore in another state besides your state of residence, and buy a handgun.

If you want to buy a handgun from out of state, it has to be shipped through a licensed dealer in your state.


^
Not enough.

At the least, interstate sale of handguns to individuals should be prohibited. Only residents should be able to buy handguns within a state.

ZippyTheChimp
January 11th, 2011, 04:54 PM
If you want to buy a handgun from out of state, it has to be shipped through a licensed dealer in your state.
That's INTERSTATE sale.

ZippyTheChimp
January 11th, 2011, 05:37 PM
You should know as well as the next guy that even crazies get their ideas from somewhere.

Now this guy? I think he was definitely influenced by all of this. Someone does not go and shoot everyone at a place, including a 9yo girl, if he is just angry at one woman. This guy took his own delusions and was fed by the buzz.I agree with Radiohead.

Every time something horrendous happens, the inevitable headline WHY? In cases like this, investigations are unsatisfying, the most useful purpose being uncovering accomplices. So far, no consistent ideology about the shooter has been established. He was suspended from Pima Community College, with the recommendation that he should not be readmitted until certified by a mental health professional. Another failure of the federal database - he should have been entered and denied a gun purchase.

As for the shooter being influenced by Palin's stupid map or the political climate, what was the political climate that brought John Hinckley, Jodie Foster, and Ronald Reagan into the same orbit?

Sometimes, a person is just crazy.

BBMW
January 11th, 2011, 10:27 PM
The local dealer is doing the background check, and is responsible to see that all local laws are observed. That being the case what's the difference, from a law enforcement basis, between an FFL holding dealer buying the gun from a manufacturer or distributer out of state, and reselling it to you, vs you negotiating a deal with an out of state dealer, but having a local FFL dealer vetting you and doing the paperwork. In either case, you can't get the gun unless you pass muster.


That's INTERSTATE sale.

Ninjahedge
January 12th, 2011, 09:49 AM
And, strait from the horses rear:

Here is a little quote From Rush Limbaugh:



"What Mr. Loughner knows is that he has the full support of a major political party in this country. He's sitting there in jail. He knows what's going on, he knows that...the Democrat party is attempting to find anybody but him to blame. He knows if he plays his cards right, he's just a victim. He's the latest in a never-ending parade of victims brought about by the unfairness of America...this guy clearly understands he's getting all the attention and he understands he's got a political party doing everything it can, plus a local sheriff doing everything that they can to make sure he's not convicted of murder - but something lesser."

ZippyTheChimp
January 12th, 2011, 10:33 AM
The local dealer is doing the background check,You forgot sales through gun shows. And none of this was in effect in 1994.

As long as they don't have criminal records, people with obvious emotional problems don't get put into the database.



Many Mentally Ill Can Buy Guns

Federal Law Prohibits Sales Only to People Declared Unfit by Judge; States Slow to Update Database

By VANESSA O'CONNELL And GARY FIELDS

The Arizona shooting thrusts a spotlight on the difficulty states face keeping guns away from people struggling with mental-health issues.

Since 1968, federal law has prohibited the sale of guns to anyone declared mentally unfit. But first, a court has to decide someone is unfit—a very high standard. Then, the resident's state is supposed to supply the mental-health records to a Federal Bureau of Investigation database, created in 1998 to help carry out background checks of would-be gun buyers.

The trouble is, many states have been slow to submit records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. In a September study, the National Center for State Courts found there should be roughly twice as many mental-health records in the national database as there currently are, based on responses from 42 of 56 states and territories.

Additionally, a mentally ill person who has been banned from buying a weapon can circumvent the system by using an unlicensed dealer at a gun show, in his neighborhood or through classified ads, because no background check is required for such transactions.

The Arizona suspect, Jared Lee Loughner, didn't encounter any obstacles in buying a gun in the state. He was able to walk into a federally licensed gun retailer in November and legally buy the Glock 9mm semiautomatic pistol allegedly used in the attack that killed six people and injured 14 others in Tucson on Saturday.

Campus police at a community college had been notified of Mr. Loughner's disruptive behavior during classes, but he hadn't been under any court-ordered treatment.

A diagnosis mental illness by itself isn't enough to bar a gun purchase, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which enforces gun laws. Voluntary commitments and mental-health assessments don't pass muster, either.

There is "nothing that we could do legally to prevent them from buying a gun if they weren't adjudicated mentally ill or involuntarily committed," according to an ATF official.

In the aftermath of the April 2007 massacre at Virginia Tech University by Seung-Hui Cho, a student who killed 32 people and himself, it emerged that he had been considered dangerous by a Virginia court and ordered into outpatient treatment, but the record was never sent to the background-check system. That omission allowed Mr. Cho to pass background checks on separate occasions.

Ashby Jones looks at the issue of where the trial for Tucson massacre suspect Jared Lee Loughner will be held and whether he will claim insanity?

Congress passed a law after that incident designed to strengthen efforts to keep dangerously mentally ill people from obtaining guns. The law aimed to bolster the background-check system, and to a degree, it has prompted more state filings into the database because there is now a financial incentive for states to do so. But critics say the slow passage of information to the federal level remains a big problem.

According to FBI data, there are 1.1 million people in the database who are prohibited from purchasing a firearm because of their mental-health status. Between November 30, 1998, and Dec. 31, 2010, only 6,103 attempted gun purchases at federally licensed dealers were stopped because of mental-illness prohibitions. That was just 0.74% of all NICS denials.

Over the same period, nearly 600,000 gun purchases were prevented because of criminal records, including misdemeanor crimes and domestic-violence convictions, representing about 73% of the NICS denials. The NICS data don't include sales between private individuals.

Unlike Arizona and most other states, California has specific additional mental-health restrictions on gun ownership, including a law requiring licensed psychotherapists to immediately report the identity of a person who has communicated a serious threat of physical violence.

Several other states, including New Jersey and Illinois, conduct investigations of individuals seeking gun licenses, and require disclosure of certain past mental-health treatment.

In New Jersey, applications for a permit must say whether the applicant is drug-dependent, or has ever been confined to a mental institution or hospital because of a psychiatric condition, according to an analysis by the National Rifle Association, the pro-gun lobby.

In Illinois, applicants are entitled to a state firearm-owner identification card only if they haven't been a patient in a mental hospital in the preceding five years, the NRA said.

So far, there has been little noticeable public debate following the Arizona killing spree about expanding the ranks of people prohibited from gun ownership under federal law because of mental illness.

Some fear that including an expansion of the record-keeping to include people getting treatment for mental-health problems might have a chilling effect on people coming forward for psychological treatment.

"If you move beyond an adjudication, what would the criteria then be?" said Ron Honberg, legal director for the National Alliance on Mental Illness, an organization representing individuals with mental illnesses and their families.

"To single out mental illness, and single out all people with mental illness, it's a slippery slope," Mr. Honberg said, noting that the overwhelming majority of people with mental illness are not violent.

Write to Vanessa O'Connell at vanessa.o'connell@wsj.com and Gary Fields at gary.fields@wsj.com


Copyright 2010 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

BBMW
January 12th, 2011, 10:44 AM
The Brady Act went into effect February 28, 1994, I don't know if Ferguson bought his gun before or after that. Neither Ferguson nor Laughner bought their guns at gun shows. Both bought them from dealers, and at least Laughner, and most likely Ferguson had to pass background checks, and did.


You forgot sales through gun shows. And none of this was in effect in 1994.

As long as they don't have criminal records, people with obvious emotional problems don't get put into the database.



Many Mentally Ill Can Buy Guns

Federal Law Prohibits Sales Only to People Declared Unfit by Judge; States Slow to Update Database

By VANESSA O'CONNELL And GARY FIELDS

The Arizona shooting thrusts a spotlight on the difficulty states face keeping guns away from people struggling with mental-health issues.

Since 1968, federal law has prohibited the sale of guns to anyone declared mentally unfit. But first, a court has to decide someone is unfit—a very high standard. Then, the resident's state is supposed to supply the mental-health records to a Federal Bureau of Investigation database, created in 1998 to help carry out background checks of would-be gun buyers.

The trouble is, many states have been slow to submit records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. In a September study, the National Center for State Courts found there should be roughly twice as many mental-health records in the national database as there currently are, based on responses from 42 of 56 states and territories.

Additionally, a mentally ill person who has been banned from buying a weapon can circumvent the system by using an unlicensed dealer at a gun show, in his neighborhood or through classified ads, because no background check is required for such transactions.

The Arizona suspect, Jared Lee Loughner, didn't encounter any obstacles in buying a gun in the state. He was able to walk into a federally licensed gun retailer in November and legally buy the Glock 9mm semiautomatic pistol allegedly used in the attack that killed six people and injured 14 others in Tucson on Saturday.

Campus police at a community college had been notified of Mr. Loughner's disruptive behavior during classes, but he hadn't been under any court-ordered treatment.

A diagnosis mental illness by itself isn't enough to bar a gun purchase, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which enforces gun laws. Voluntary commitments and mental-health assessments don't pass muster, either.

There is "nothing that we could do legally to prevent them from buying a gun if they weren't adjudicated mentally ill or involuntarily committed," according to an ATF official.

In the aftermath of the April 2007 massacre at Virginia Tech University by Seung-Hui Cho, a student who killed 32 people and himself, it emerged that he had been considered dangerous by a Virginia court and ordered into outpatient treatment, but the record was never sent to the background-check system. That omission allowed Mr. Cho to pass background checks on separate occasions.

Ashby Jones looks at the issue of where the trial for Tucson massacre suspect Jared Lee Loughner will be held and whether he will claim insanity?

Congress passed a law after that incident designed to strengthen efforts to keep dangerously mentally ill people from obtaining guns. The law aimed to bolster the background-check system, and to a degree, it has prompted more state filings into the database because there is now a financial incentive for states to do so. But critics say the slow passage of information to the federal level remains a big problem.

According to FBI data, there are 1.1 million people in the database who are prohibited from purchasing a firearm because of their mental-health status. Between November 30, 1998, and Dec. 31, 2010, only 6,103 attempted gun purchases at federally licensed dealers were stopped because of mental-illness prohibitions. That was just 0.74% of all NICS denials.

Over the same period, nearly 600,000 gun purchases were prevented because of criminal records, including misdemeanor crimes and domestic-violence convictions, representing about 73% of the NICS denials. The NICS data don't include sales between private individuals.

Unlike Arizona and most other states, California has specific additional mental-health restrictions on gun ownership, including a law requiring licensed psychotherapists to immediately report the identity of a person who has communicated a serious threat of physical violence.

Several other states, including New Jersey and Illinois, conduct investigations of individuals seeking gun licenses, and require disclosure of certain past mental-health treatment.

In New Jersey, applications for a permit must say whether the applicant is drug-dependent, or has ever been confined to a mental institution or hospital because of a psychiatric condition, according to an analysis by the National Rifle Association, the pro-gun lobby.

In Illinois, applicants are entitled to a state firearm-owner identification card only if they haven't been a patient in a mental hospital in the preceding five years, the NRA said.

So far, there has been little noticeable public debate following the Arizona killing spree about expanding the ranks of people prohibited from gun ownership under federal law because of mental illness.

Some fear that including an expansion of the record-keeping to include people getting treatment for mental-health problems might have a chilling effect on people coming forward for psychological treatment.

"If you move beyond an adjudication, what would the criteria then be?" said Ron Honberg, legal director for the National Alliance on Mental Illness, an organization representing individuals with mental illnesses and their families.

"To single out mental illness, and single out all people with mental illness, it's a slippery slope," Mr. Honberg said, noting that the overwhelming majority of people with mental illness are not violent.

Write to Vanessa O'Connell at vanessa.o'connell@wsj.com and Gary Fields at gary.fields@wsj.com


Copyright 2010 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

TommyB
January 12th, 2011, 11:15 AM
I agree with Radiohead.

Every time something horrendous happens, the inevitable headline WHY? In cases like this, investigations are unsatisfying, the most useful purpose being uncovering accomplices. So far, no consistent ideology about the shooter has been established. He was suspended from Pima Community College, with the recommendation that he should not be readmitted until certified by a mental health professional. Another failure of the federal database - he should have been entered and denied a gun purchase.

As for the shooter being influenced by Palin's stupid map or the political climate, what was the political climate that brought John Hinckley, Jodie Foster, and Ronald Reagan into the same orbit?

Sometimes, a person is just crazy.

Thank you Zippy, that is the most intelligent statement I have heard all week. The statements from BOTH sides of the political spectrum are unbelievable and outrageous. It sound like many people knew he was crazy but didn't know how to deal with him. Gone are the days when you could just have someone commit ed. We worry about to many small crimes and find to many excuses for the large ones.

ZippyTheChimp
January 12th, 2011, 11:41 AM
The Brady Act went into effect February 28, 1994, I don't know if Ferguson bought his gun before or after that.Since you brought up Ferguson, I think it would be easy for you to figure out the answer.


Neither Ferguson nor Laughner bought their guns at gun shows.Ferguson simply bought his gun in California. You stated that "all the gun regulations we want" were in place. You made Ferguson relevant to this discussion.


and at least Laughner, and most likely Ferguson had to pass background checks, and did.Again as to the relevance of Ferguson, he would not have been able to purchase the gun in New York.

As for Laughtner, "all the gun regulations we want" is a matter of opinion, for background checks were inadequate.

Point being in all this, you seem to think we all should be satisfied that present regulations are sufficient.

BBMW
January 12th, 2011, 12:02 PM
No, I think the current regulations are pretty much a waste of time, and don't prevent anything. I think any regulations they'd be likely to pass would fall into the same category. The only people prevented from getting guns under the current laws in place pretty much anywhere in the country are law abiding citizens who follow the laws. The crazies and criminals will simply ignore the laws and do whatever they want till they get caught and, maybe, get thrown in jail. And when they get out, they just start over. No law, up to an including a (utterly politically non-viable) national bas, would stop that.

Ninjahedge
January 12th, 2011, 12:43 PM
BBMW....


Over the same period, nearly 600,000 gun purchases were prevented because of criminal records, including misdemeanor crimes and domestic-violence convictions, representing about 73% of the NICS denials. The NICS data don't include sales between private individuals.

Here's the thing.

How many of those 600,000 blocked sales would have, if they had been allowed, resulted in the injury or death of another person? It is easy to see where a system fails in a case like this. Someone gets killed. But to see where it succeeds, nobody getting killed, is difficult and very subjective.


Now, as was started in the article, the inclusion of voluntary mental help into the equation is difficult, as it should not matter if a genuine crazy person is only forbidden if committed, not voluntary. But maybe the system needs to hinge on recommended care. If someone is RECOMMENDED to seek help, and does not, then they are subject to the same restrictions they are if they are committed, or if they go for help and they sound the alarm.

IOW, if you get written up X times by "reliable" references, you either seek help or thnigs that would threaten the health of others around you will be forbidden to you....

Will this be abused? Probably. But we can't just keep screaming the "2nd" and having things like this happen.... We are no longer a civilian army, we no longer have the ability to stand against even our own internal armies. The original intent has evaporated. To keep crying for the right to not only bear arms, but ones whose only purpose is to kill many people quickly and easily......

Making it this easy for anybody to get a firearm means that there will always be a few that "ruin it for everybody".


BTW, where were all the other gun owners that were packing that could have defended everybody there? Was a single retaliatory shot fired? Could it be fired in the time it took place?

lofter1
January 12th, 2011, 01:26 PM
... I think the current regulations are pretty much a waste of time, and don't prevent anything.



Certain regulations would have prevented Loughner from purchasing a 30 round magazine with such ease. That alone might have cut the death toll in half.

ZippyTheChimp
January 12th, 2011, 02:17 PM
The only people prevented from getting guns under the current laws in place pretty much anywhere in the country are law abiding citizens who follow the laws.I've said this to you before. Everyone is a law-abiding-citizen until they are convicted of a crime.


The crazies and criminals will simply ignore the laws and do whatever they want till they get caught and, maybe, get thrown in jail. And when they get out, they just start over.You try to paint a picture that law-abiding-citizens are defenseless and at the mercy of criminals.

This also happens in other countries. Criminals get released from prison and commit more crimes. Yet their homicide rates are much lower than the US. And, ironically, the US has the highest incarceration rate (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/67/Prisoner_population_rate_UN_HDR_2007_2008.PNG) in the world.

At some point, the question has to be asked: What are we trying to accomplish?

Ninjahedge
January 12th, 2011, 02:29 PM
We are creating JOBS Zip!!!!


C'mahn!!!!!! :rolleyes:

ZippyTheChimp
January 12th, 2011, 03:10 PM
Thank you Zippy, that is the most intelligent statement I have heard all week. The statements from BOTH sides of the political spectrum are unbelievable and outrageous. It sound like many people knew he was crazy but didn't know how to deal with him. Gone are the days when you could just have someone commit ed. We worry about to many small crimes and find to many excuses for the large ones.Thanks for the compliment, but maybe I should have added this:

Just because no connection is shown between the map and Loughner doesn't mean there couldn't have been. As such, coming from a national political figure, the image is inappropriate - creepy that names were used instead if districts. It changes the dialog from winning a seat in order to reverse a policy to punishing an individual for supporting that policy.

The irony is that Palin is being stereotyped and demonized, the same thing she did throughout the 2008 campaign. Her aides recently offered an after-the-fact explanation that the map crosshairs really represented a surveyor scope. Can anyone believe that Palin sat down with her web designer and said that she wanted to be represented as a surveyor? "Here I am America, expertly surveying the political landscape."

The second irony is that Palin's carefully crafted image as an outdoorsy mom has also been eroding. I never watched her Alaska reality show, but came across criticism by hunters who tuned in, saying that what comes across is someone unfamiliar with rifles and hunting - things like putting your finger on the trigger when handed a rifle, which you should only do when you're ready to fire; not sighting-in the scope before going out. Or not owning your own rifle or knowing what ammo it takes.

No second season is planned.

The third irony - for me at least - is that the shooting took place in Arizona. No matter what positives McCain has accomplished in his career, it's all wiped out by his foisting this phony on the American people in a desperate attempt to win an election.

Now we're stuck with her. She'll either self-destruct and flame out (hopefully), or become president (God help us all), or settle in as a creampuff political pundit until her looks fade.

Ninjahedge
January 12th, 2011, 04:32 PM
That seems to be more in line with what I was thinking.

Whether or not it had anything to do with the shooting, leaving it up after the fact is cold.

You and a friend may be fine razzing each other with Mom jokes, but you certainly do not do it after she dies. It isn't the joke itself, but the context it now represents.

Fabrizio
January 12th, 2011, 05:08 PM
Do see Sarah Palin's video statement about the shooting.

You get to see her new pink (rather than red) lipstick and hear her new slow and carefully enunciated "Presidential" speaking voice. It sounds like they set a pendulum in front of her at rehearsals.

Ninjahedge
January 12th, 2011, 05:22 PM
No quirky "you betcha" head tilts?

Daquan13
January 12th, 2011, 05:34 PM
I say let this piece of scum die a long slow painful death.

Kill him, bring back, then kill him then bring him back once more and finally, kill him and put him UNDER the prison instead of in it!!

Fabrizio
January 12th, 2011, 05:41 PM
But if he raises again on the 3rd day?

What are we gonna do then?

Daquan13
January 12th, 2011, 11:12 PM
If he gets life, he's as good as dead anyway.

Immates don't like to hear about innocent people being murdered, especially children! Among the victims whom he maimed and killed, an innocent little girl was also one of them.

Look what happened to Father Geoghan and Jeffery Daulmer.

Radiohead
January 13th, 2011, 12:39 AM
Um, commie athiest loon? Are yo ugoing McCarthy on us?



Sorry, I didn't mean to disrespect someone who killed 6 people by calling them a loon. So sorry about that :rolleyes:

BTW Ninja, didja listen to Obama tonight? Maybe you should.

Merry
January 13th, 2011, 01:19 AM
I say let this piece of scum die a long slow painful death.

Kill him, bring back, then kill him then bring him back once more and finally, kill him and put him UNDER the prison instead of in it!!

That rant puts you at the same level as Loughner, Daquan13 :rolleyes:.

Ninjahedge
January 13th, 2011, 07:57 AM
Sorry, I didn't mean to disrespect someone who killed 6 people by calling them a loon. So sorry about that :rolleyes:

BTW Ninja, didja listen to Obama tonight? Maybe you should.

Again, you are convoluting all the stereotypical conservative demonizations into a person who is simply a crazy man.

I am quite aware of what happened and very angry at the ease in which it was accomplished. I am equally angerd by those politicians and pundits that seem to think they need to somehow exhonerate themselves from any blame rather than focusing on the tragedy itself. ("Those aren't crosshairs!").

I heard a bit of the memorial, and I was kind of mixed on the emotions. I do believe that the people that helped should be honored, but hearing people whoop and cheer when the people who were being applauded were near tears (example: that 20yo aid to the Congresswoman) felt at odds. This was not a rally...


But that is me. I kind of feel a memorial should be in memory of the dead or injured and consoling those that have lost... :( I see the merit in trying to site those that showed presence in a disaster and helped those that needed help, but still.......



BTW Fab, I think your reference passed right over........

Merry
January 13th, 2011, 08:35 AM
btw fab, i think your reference passed right over........

lol!

Daquan13
January 14th, 2011, 07:11 AM
Does anyone know whether a memorial will be built there for the victims who were murdered?

Ninjahedge
January 14th, 2011, 08:33 AM
In all honesty, I hope not.

We are building far too many remembrances and not doing things that would actually change the situation so no more would be needed.


Are our memories so bad we need to build something physical in order to remember them?


A simple plaque embedded in the walk would be enough. Something that would bookmark the sad day, but nothing that commemorate a crazy mans success.

stache
January 14th, 2011, 09:54 AM
^ Agree. I can't see a memorial in a strip mall.

mariab
January 16th, 2011, 08:56 PM
Giffords' condition upgraded to serious

Hospital says the congresswoman is breathing without a ventilator


NBC, msnbc.com and news services
updated 1 hour 5 minutes ago 2011-01-17T00:17:44

TUCSON, Ariz. — The condition of a U.S. congresswoman wounded in a Jan. 8 assasination attempt improved to serious Sunday after procedures to remove a ventilator were successful.
Doctors decided to upgrade Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' condition from critical because the tracheotomy done a day earlier went well, and Giffords was breathing on her own, hospital spokeswoman Katie Riley said.
Though Giffords had been breathing on her own since she was shot in the head Jan. 8, doctors had left the breathing tube in as a precaution. A feeding tube was also put in to provide nutrition. Those procedures are not out of the ordinary for brain-injured patients. Giffords' doctors have said they should be able to evaluate her ability to speak once the breathing tube is out.
"Her recovery continues as planned," the hospital said in a statement.
Giffords, who was wounded in last weekend's attack that killed six people, remains in critical condition at University Medical Center. Investigator say Giffords, among 13 people wounded, was the primary target of alleged shooter Jared Loughner.
Her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly, has remained by her bedside.
One patient was discharged Saturday while two others remain in good condition.

More subtle changes
On Friday, neurosurgeon Dr. Michael Lemole said doctors are "actually confident" about the progress she's making in her recovery.
Trauma chief Dr. Peter Rhee told MSNBC cable Friday that Giffords' recovery is "on schedule."
"She is progressing normally without any complications or setbacks. She’s progressing at a good speed for this time period. Even overnight, she’s made significant progress," Rhee said.
Story: As shock subsides, pain sets in for Ariz. victims (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41105445/ns/us_news-life/)Giffords has been sitting up, dangling her legs on the edge of the hospital bed and moving her limbs in response to commands. But moving forward, Rhee expects changes to be less dramatic than they've been this week. "We’ll see a lot of things in the next two months," the surgeon said on MSNBC cable Friday. "Then the changes will be more subtle for the next year ... and after that.”
Lemole, said after days of pushing for caution, "We're wise to acknowledge miracles."
Story: Bullet to the head can be overcome, survivors say (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41046340/ns/health-health_care/?ns=health-health_care)

The difference between life and death
The path of the bullet that struck Giffords' brain, quick and quality medical care, and luck meant the difference between life and death, according to her doctors and brain experts.
Doctors think the bullet pierced the front of Giffords' head and exited the back, slicing the left side of the brain, which controls speech abilities and muscles on the right side of the body.
http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/ArtAndPhoto-Fronts/USNEWS/Graphics/AP_BRAIN_DAMAGE.grid-6x2.gif



Had the bullet damaged both sides of the brain or struck the brain stem, which connects to the spinal cord, the outcome would likely be worse — extensive permanent damage, vegetative state or death.
When Giffords arrived at the hospital, doctors first checked to make sure she didn't have any other injuries. They took a brain scan and wheeled her to the operating room in a swift 38 minutes.
The same attack in the desert many miles away from a trauma center may have led to a different ending.
It's still too early to tell the extent of damage Giffords suffered, but experts say it's rare for people with gunshot wounds to the head to regain all of their abilities. Damage to the left side of the brain can result in memory loss, difficulty reading and hand-eye coordination problems."Her full-time job now for the next year is working on her recovery and rebuilding her life around her disability whatever it may be," said Dr. Stephan Mayer, professor of clinical neurology at Columbia University Medical Center in New York, who has no role in Giffords' care.
About 1.7 million people in the United States suffer traumatic brain injuries every year, with about 20 percent of them caused by violence, including gunshots. About 52,000 people die as a result of their injuries and about 275,000 are hospitalized, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Of the deaths caused by traumatic brain injury, perhaps 35 percent to 40 percent are attributed to gunshots.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41104863/ns/health-womens_health


Can't remember anything like this. Shot straight thru the brain & so far, so good. Fingers crossed. In this case living well really is the best revenge.

ZippyTheChimp
April 11th, 2011, 01:51 PM
Gabby Giffords Doesn't Know She's a Senate Front-Runner

By Alex Eichler 09:35 AM ET

Representative Gabrielle Giffords was shot through the head at point-blank range in January, but if you're just going by the headlines, it probably seems like she's bouncing back quickly. There have been a slew of stories about her unexpectedly fast recovery (http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2011/01/let-s-maybe-ease-up-on-the-gabby-giffords-coverage/17944/), and a lot of chatter about Giffords being a contender for John Kyl's Senate seat in 2012. Arizona Democrats seem ready to throw every available party resource at Giffords the moment she expresses an interest in that race, and The New York Times pointed out last month (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/us/politics/31giffords.html?_r=3&hp) that the campaign spots essentially write themselves.

But an article in the latest issue of Newsweek (http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-04-10/gabrielle-giffords-recovery-details-3-months-after-arizona-shooting/#) by former New Yorker staff writer Peter Boyer suggests that Giffords's recovery hasn't progressed as far as the public may believe, and that the plans for Giffords to return to Congress are mostly dreams and wishes at this point. Here's some of what we learn from Boyer's piece:

Giffords "does not even know that she is considered a possible candidate" for Kyl's Senate seat. While most everyone agrees that Giffords is incredibly popular and could win any race she chose to enter, she doesn't realize her staff has Senatorial ambitions for her. "We haven't discussed any Senate race with her," said Giffords's husband, Mark Kelly. "And I have no plans to do that for some time. She's focused on her recovery."

For a long time, Giffords didn't know she'd been shot. "In the early weeks of her recovery, Giffords apparently believed that she'd been involved in an auto accident," writes Boyer. Her family and friends avoided telling her about the shooting until "a few weeks ago." According to Boyer, she "still doesn't know ... that among the dead were a 9-year-old girl, her beloved young staffer, Gabe Zimmerman, and her friend, federal Judge John Roll." Pia Carusone, Giffords's chief of staff, says that Giffords is "not able to speak at the level she wants to yet ... So telling her something as tragic as this, without her being to formulate the exact, complex followup questions she wants to, is not fair."

She still has a long road to recovery. "Giffords speaks haltingly, stringing together three- or four-word responses to questions, and is beginning to formulate entire sentences," writes Boyer. He quotes the neurosurgeon Dong Kim, who says that Giffords has shown "much faster recovery than the average patient," but adds that "if somebody has a severe brain injury, are they ever going to be like they were before? The answer is no. They are never going to be the exact same person."

Right now, Giffords's staff is basically doing her job in Congress. After the shooting, "an entity called 'the office of Gabrielle Giffords' ... effectively became the representative for the Eighth District of Arizona," writes Boyer. And it's a potent force. An Arizona Democrat named Rodney Glassman has talked about running for Kyl's Senate seat, but says he'll immediately step out of the way and "turn over his contribution list and infrastructure" to Giffords if she enters the race--even though, as Boyer's article makes clear, we're a long way from that point yet.


Copyright © 2011 by The Atlantic Monthly Group

mariab
June 12th, 2011, 09:27 AM
First photos of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords show congresswoman as she recovers from gun shot to head

By Michael Sheridan (http://www.nydailynews.com/authors/Michael%20Sheridan)
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Sunday, June 12th 2011, 8:16 AM

http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2011/06/13/alg_giffords.jpg
Photo of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords - seen here with unidentified woman - taken at TIRR Memorial Hermann Hospital, the day after the launch of Endeavour

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Gabrielle+Giffords) is all smiles in a pair of photos that were released Sunday, the first to show the Congresswoman since she was shot in the head in January.
The photos, posted to her Facebook (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Facebook+Inc.) page, show the politician with cropped hair and glasses. One features her with another, unidentified woman. The other is of her alone.
Giffords has been in a Houston (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Houston+(Texas)) rehab facility since two weeks after the Jan. 8 shooting. Six people were killed and 13 were injured, including Giffords.
Since the incident, she was seen only briefly and from a distance boarding a plane in April. She made the trek to watch her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Mark+Kelly), launch into space aboard the space shuttle Endeavour (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Space+Shuttle+Endeavour).
On Thursday, Pia Carusone (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Pia+Carusone), Giffords' chief of staff suggested the congresswoman was nearly ready to release a photo.
"This is a one-step-at-a-time process," she told the Arizona Republic (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/The+Arizona+Republic). "It has been a difficult and busy time with everything. Every week, there is something new."
Carusone said the recovery process has been difficult for Giffords.
"She's living. She's alive. But if she were to plateau today, and this was as far as she gets, it would not be nearly the quality of life she had before," she told the newspaper.
Since the shooting, Giffords has made remarkable strides, requesting her favorite foods, singing her favorite songs, and relearning how to walk and talk, although she struggles to string sentences together.
Jared Lee Loughner (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Jared+Loughner), 22, has pleaded not guilty to charges stemming from her shooting and is being held at a Missouri (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Missouri) facility. A judge declared him incompetent to stand trial, but prosecutors hope his competency can be restored so he can answer for the charges.
http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2011/06/13/amd_giffords.jpg

With News Wire Services
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/06/12/2011-06-12_first_photos_of_rep_gabrielle_giffords_show_con gresswoman_as_she_recovers_from_g.html

DUMBRo
June 13th, 2011, 07:09 PM
Amazed at how good she looks. And this was before a new partial skull implant was successfully put in place. Go Gabby!

stache
June 13th, 2011, 10:14 PM
Poor lady, I only wish her the best.

KenNYC
June 15th, 2011, 06:16 PM
Does anyone know whether a memorial will be built there for the victims who were murdered?

The only memorial that would mean anything these days would be repealing the 2nd amendment. And we all know that's not going to happen.

ZippyTheChimp
June 15th, 2011, 06:24 PM
http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2011/06/13/amd_giffords.jpg

When you're smiling.
When you're smiling.
The whole world smiles with you.

MidtownGuy
June 15th, 2011, 11:11 PM
God bless her. I'm so glad she is doing well and able to smile.

Fabrizio
July 3rd, 2011, 08:59 AM
Nothing was learned over this woman's shooting? What's going on here?

The front page of today's NYTimes feautures this story:

More states are allowing people who lost their gun rights due to mental health issues to have them restored.
Some With Histories of Mental Illness Petition to Get Their Gun Rights Back

The article is 7 pages long ...I'm only posting a few paragraphs:

PULASKI, Va. — In May 2009, Sam French hit bottom, once again. A relative found him face down in his carport “talking gibberish,” according to court records. He later told medical personnel that he had been conversing with a bear in his backyard and hearing voices. His family figured he had gone off his medication for bipolar disorder, and a judge ordered him involuntarily committed — the fourth time in five years he had been hospitalized by court order.
When Mr. French’s daughter discovered that her father’s commitment meant it was illegal for him to have firearms, she and her husband removed his cache of 15 long guns and three handguns, and kept them after Mr. French was released in January 2010 on a new regime of mood-stabilizing drugs.

Ten months later, he appeared in General District Court — the body that handles small claims and traffic infractions — to ask a judge to restore his gun rights. After a brief hearing, in which Mr. French’s lengthy history of relapses never came up, he walked out with an order reinstating his right to possess firearms. The next day, Mr. French retrieved his guns. “The judge didn’t ask me a whole lot,” said Mr. French, now 62. “He just said: ‘How was I doing? Was I taking my medicine like I was supposed to?’ I said, ‘Yes, sir.’ ”

Across the country, states are increasingly allowing people like Mr. French, who lost their firearm rights because of mental illness, to petition to have them restored. A handful of states have had such restoration laws on their books for some time, but with little notice, more than 20 states have passed similar measures since 2008. This surge can be traced to a law passed by Congress after the 2007 massacre at Virginia Tech that was actually meant to make it harder for people with mental illness to get guns. As a condition of its support for the measure, the National Rifle Association extracted a concession: the inclusion of a mechanism for restoring firearms rights to those who lost them for mental health reasons.

The intent of these state laws is to enable people to regain the right to buy and possess firearms if it is determined that they are not a threat to public safety. But an examination of restoration procedures across the country, along with dozens of cases, shows that the process for making that determination is governed in many places by vague standards and few specific requirements.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/us/03guns.html?hp

Ninjahedge
July 3rd, 2011, 11:13 AM
The only thing that will convince people otherwise is if someone gets killed.

lofter1
July 3rd, 2011, 11:35 AM
Again.

eddhead
July 3rd, 2011, 01:38 PM
Its enough to make you sick. Really, just incredible.

MidtownGuy
July 3rd, 2011, 03:43 PM
What a disaster.

Ninjahedge
July 5th, 2011, 08:55 AM
Well, you know you can always start a program where you ship, for free, a bunch of mental institution releases over to the neighborhoods where these politicians live.

The tricky thing is dividing up the ammo equally.....

mariab
August 1st, 2011, 09:54 PM
Giffords in House for first time since shooting
Lawmaker who was seriously injured in Tucson shooting returns to Congress to vote yes

Hit link at bottom to see video

Hhttp://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/g-cvr-110801-giffords-5p.grid-6x2.jpg
NBC News Rep. Gabrielle Giffords returns to Washington for the first time Monday to vote on the debt deal.

msnbc.com staff and news service reports
updated 33 minutes ago 2011-08-02T01:10:16

WASHINGTON (http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&where1=WASHINGTON&sty=h&form=msdate) — Rep. Gabrielle Giffords returned to the House for the first time since she was shot last January, making a dramatic entrance Monday night during a crucial debt vote and drawing loud applause and cheers from surprised colleagues.
As lawmakers stood on the floor, staring up at the vote board, Giffords slowly made her way through an entrance on the Democratic side of the chamber. Applause built and rolled like a wave through the House as lawmakers realized that their colleague had returned.
On Jan. 8, Giffords, D-Ariz., was shot in the head in the parking lot of a Tucson grocery store while meeting with constituents. Six people were killed and 13 others, including Giffords, were wounded. The man charged in the shooting, Jared Lee Loughner, has pleaded not guilty to 49 charges
On the House floor, Giffords, wearing glasses, her hair darker and cut short since surgery, hugged and kissed fellow lawmakers. As time ticked off on the vote, Democrats and Republicans made their way toward her.
She cast her first vote — for the debt-limit bill — and left the Capitol.
“I have closely followed the debate over our debt ceiling and have been deeply disappointed at what’s going on in Washington,” Giffords said in a statement released by her congressional office. “After weeks of failed debate in Washington, I was pleased to see a solution to this crisis emerge. I strongly believe that crossing the aisle for the good of the American people is more important than party politics. I had to be here for this vote. I could not take the chance that my absence could crash our economy.”
According to her office, Giffords decided to support the bipartisan bill due to the current state of the U.S. economy. Giffords previously did not support debt limit increases in December 2009 and February 2010.
"It means so much to our country ... to witness the return of our colleague who is the personification of courage, of sincerity, of admiration throughout the country," Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California told the House.
Giffords has been undergoing outpatient therapy in Houston since her release from the hospital in June.
"The reaction in the chamber was the most enthusiastic, exuberant, exhilarating ..we were all crying," said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz. "You know, we just knew she would make a triumphant return. We knew her and predicted it would happen...This the first of many votes she's going to cast."
Schultz, chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, said she had been in contact with Giffords' husband since yesterday about the possibility of Giffords returning to Washington to vote.
"I had tears of joy seeing Gabby on the floor tonight where she belongs," said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand in a statement. "Gabby is a fighter and I always knew this day would come. She continues to inspire the nation with her strength and courage."
Loughner was sent to a federal prison facility in Springfield, Mo., after a federal judge concluded he was mentally incompetent to stand trial.
Before Giffords' appearance today in the House, the public has seen little of the congresswoman. Two photos of a smiling Giffords were released in June by her office, her hair shorn short but few other telling signs of her gunshot wound to the head.
The public also got a glimpse of Giffords April 27 as she boarded a plane to Florida to watch her astronaut husband launch into space. The grainy footage, taken from afar, showed Giffords slowly but purposefully walk up the airplane's stairs.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43979047/ns/politics-capitol_hill/t/giffords-house-first-time-shooting/?gt1=43001

mariab
November 11th, 2011, 09:24 PM
She looks & sounds really good. In the video (you'll have to hit the link since I couldn't transfer it) there are only a few brief snippets of the actual interview, which will air Mon the 14th @ 10PM EST on ABC with Diane Sawyer.

VIDEO: Gabrielle Giffords speaks in first TV interview since being shot by accused gunman Jared Loughner

In the interview, set to air Monday, Giffords reportedly discusses what she remembers about the shooting and if she thinks she'll run for Congress again

BY Aliyah Shahid (http://www.nydailynews.com/authors?author=Aliyah Shahid)
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Originally Published: Friday, November 11 2011, 8:53 AM
Updated: Friday, November 11 2011, 8:53 AM


http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.976119.1321021237!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_485/image.jpg /ABCNews
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in her first television interview since she was shot in the head 10 months ago, sits next to her husband Mark Kelly.


Rep. Gabrielle Giffords has made such an astonishing recovery since being shot in the head that she can now speak clearly.
In her first television interview since the attack, set to air Monday, the 41-year-old Arizona congresswoman sits beaming next to her astronaut husband Mark Kelly as she chats with ABC News' Diane Sawyer.
When asked how she's doing, Giffords responds "pretty good" in a preview posted online.
Giffords' brown hair has grown out since it had to be shaved earlier this summer for surgery on her skull. She wears glasses and a lime green shirt adorned with gold buttons as she holds her husband's hand and speaks and moves confidently.
Sawyer asks the Democrat if her recovery has been painful, to which she responds, "No. It's difficult."
A video montage shows the lawmaker in the hospital with stiches visible across her bare scalp. Other clips show Giffords lying in her hospital bed smiling and waving, going through physical therapy, walking with the help of a shopping cart and listening to music.
Giffords was shot in January by disturbed gunman Jared Loughner, who opened fire on her with a Glock 19 outside an event in Tucson. The shooting spree left six dead and 13 injured.
"I think Gabby has a message now that exceeds the political one," says her mother, Gloria Giffords.
In the interview, Giffords reportedly discusses what she remembers about the shooting and if she thinks she'll run for Congress again.

SEE THE VIDEO:
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/video-gabrielle-giffords-speaks-tv-interview-shot-accused-gunman-jared-loughner-article-1.976121#ixzz1dSCkfsbr

eddhead
August 7th, 2012, 03:59 PM
This seems like it took place much longer than a year ago, at least to me.






August 7, 2012

Loughner Pleads Guilty in 2011 Tucson ShootingsBy FERNANDA SANTOS (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/fernanda_santos/index.html)TUCSON — Jared L. Loughner (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/l/jared_lee_loughner/index.html?inline=nyt-per) pleaded guilty on Tuesday to carrying out a shooting rampage here last year that left six people dead and 13 others wounded, including Gabrielle Giffords (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/gabrielle_giffords/index.html), then a member of the House of Representatives. In exchange, the government has agreed not to seek the death penalty.
In the hearing in Federal District Court, Judge Larry A. Burns found Mr. Loughner mentally compentent to admit to the crimes.

Under the terms of the deal brokered by his defense team and the prosecution, he will spend the rest of his life in prison. The deal also means that victims’ relatives and the shooting’s survivors will not have to endure the prospect of sitting through a lengthy trial of uncertain outcome.

In a statement, Ms. Giffords’s husband, Mark E. Kelly, said they had been in contact with the United States attorney’s office as the negotiations over Mr. Loughner’s plea evolved.

“The pain and loss” caused by the rampage “are incalculable,” Mr. Kelly said. “Avoiding a trial will allow us — and we hope the whole Southern Arizona community — to continue with our recovery and move forward with our lives.”

The volatility of Mr. Loughner’s mental state was a deciding factor in the agreement. On May 25, 2011, he delivered an angry, incoherent rant in court just before Judge Burns ruled him incompetent to stand trial (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/26/us/26loughner.html), halting the legal proceedings. Several months later, Mr. Loughner returned to court and sat for seven hours, silent and expressionless, seemingly under the effect of the psychotropic drugs he had been compelled to take.

For prosecutors, pushing for a trial carried clear risks, legal experts said. Mr. Loughner could have exploded at any moment, or jurors could have been swayed by the defense’s arguments and found him not guilty by reason of insanity.

Mr. Loughner faced 49 criminal charges, including first-degree murder, in the shootings on Jan. 8, 2011, (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/us/politics/09giffords.html) outside a supermarket where Ms. Giffords was meeting with constituents. A 9-year-old girl, Christina-Taylor Green, and a federal judge, John Roll, were among the people killed.

Mr. Loughner arrived here on Monday from a psychiatric hospital in Springfield, Mo. — where he has been held for more than a year — and spent the night at a medium-security federal prison before his hearing on Tuesday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/us/loughner-pleads-guilty-in-2011-tucson-shootings.html?hp&pagewanted=print

mariab
August 8th, 2012, 04:37 PM
I'm surprised & relieved he pleaded guilty. The families avoid a long drawn out trial with a possibility of temporary insanity, not to mention having to watch his courtroom bs. Now they can try to get on with the rest of their lives. Saw a pic posted the other day of Gabby at the summit of a mountain in the French Alps. Perfect metaphor.

ZippyTheChimp
September 6th, 2012, 11:17 PM
Gabrielle Giffords at the DNC Convention


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbFMHZprAmA

TREPYE
September 7th, 2012, 12:24 PM
^ :)

I hope that the NRA folks were watching and perhaps maybe even felt a modicum of discomfort in watching her limp on/off the stage and hold her hand up.

eddhead
September 7th, 2012, 01:02 PM
Me too, but I doubt it.