Month: June 2022

Mass shootings are not boat accidents

Republicans are so terrified of riling base voters already on low boil that all that Americans can expect from them for the foreseable future is no change whatsoever to the status quo. Nothing that’s an improvement, anyway.

After another weekend of mass shootings, city mayors are sick of having to mop up blood and deal with the political and emotional fallout (New York Times):

Prepping for massacres has become a standard part of leading an American city, a reality that mayors discussed with a mix of anger, fear and matter-of-fact resignation as they gathered over the weekend in Reno, Nev., for a meeting of the United States Conference of Mayors.

The meeting, held in a country raw from killings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Texas, exposed a paradox of American mayoralty: When mass violence happens, mayors are the ones who must deliver the grim details, console their cities and field questions about how the gunman might have been stopped. But while big city mayors often have authority over police departments and social service programs, which can help prevent gun violence, they say they are largely powerless to enact the gun control measures that many of them say would be needed to prevent more tragedies.

“We’re pissed off,” said Mayor Greg Fischer of Louisville, Ky., a Democrat who was among the more than 170 mayors who met in Reno. “We’re working so hard every day to make our cities safe. And there’s actions that could be taken at the federal level, or state level in many of our cases. But for those of us in red states, we’ve almost given up on state action.”

That inaction is not, Plum Line’s Greg Sargent points out, the “exasperating partisan impasse” the Times subhead describes. Nor is it a boat accident. Or a shark attack. It’s Republican irresponsibility and buck-passing.

Republicans in state capitals and in Congress have often blamed Democratic mayors for violence in their cities, arguing that mayors do not support law enforcement enough and are overly focused on guns instead of other issues, like mental health, that can lead to violence.

It’s never the fact that the gun lobby has convinced gun fanatics that every man his own militia is what the framers intended.

It’s never the fact that conservatives are so radicalized and paranoid that many believe personal arsenals are neeeded “to be effective against the government if it becomes tyrannical.”

It’s never the fact that red states keep loosening, not tightening, gun laws.

It’s never the fact that the country is awash in military-style and other firearms.

The domestic arms race continues, as one gun shop owner says AR-15 sales in Georgia have tripled after Uvalde. “The way this president is driving this country, everyone needs to be carrying at this point.” pic.twitter.com/Og3vnM4ydE

— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) June 5, 2022

Melissa Ryan argued over the weekend:

For the Right mass shootings are a feature, not a bug. They don’t care about being called hypocrites or heartless. They don’t care about any data or evidence we could show them. They don’t even care about polling or guns as an election issue. A violent minority of people are willing to sacrifice anything and everything for white supremacy and authoritarianism. Power and control are what motivates them. We have to adjust our tactics accordingly.

Terrorizing Americans is the point for a “violent minority” meaning to keep and hold power undemocratically in country purporting still to be the United States of America. Intimidation and despair are political weapons.

Amanda Marcotte wrote after the school murders in Uvalde, Texas:

That numb feeling you’re experiencing? That exhaustion? That tugging urge to just give up, abandon politics entirely, and just concentrate on your own life? That’s what Republicans want you to feel. That’s why they act this way, to exhaust you. The more that ordinary Americans feel that nothing we say or do can make a difference, the better the political landscape for Republicans.

'No Way To Prevent This,' Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens https://t.co/8NNNNzc1xQ pic.twitter.com/DGFY2fTDCs

— The Onion (@TheOnion) May 25, 2022

Illegitimi non carborundum.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Request a copy of For The Win, 4th Edition, my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us.
If in a position to Play to win in 2022 (see post first), contact tpostsully at gmail dot com.

And shake off the helpless feeling

Fear may be the mind killer but powerlessness immobilizes. Dahlia Lithwick this morning laments that during the pandemic she held herself together by thinking things could not possibly get worse. Then they did.

The assaults on Roe, women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, plus mass shootings and the Republicans’ collective shrug left her feeling near-hopeless (Slate):

As Amanda Marcotte noted last week, once a majority of any population has fundamentally given up on politics, on institutions, on voting and education and protest, you’re in pretty good shape to be rolled by the next wave of Trumpism.

“You may support abortion rights and gun safety laws, but why give over a beautiful Saturday morning to a protest when you believe it will not move the needle? It’s not “selfish” to want to use your free time enjoying your life instead, not when you are starting to believe that political action is a flat-out waste of time,” as she so aptly put it.

Nurturing powerlessness keeps Russians in line.

Nothing fuels that feeling more than the aftermath of another mass shooting, Marcotte continues, “Demoralized is right where Republicans want Americans to be.” Disempower the people, empower the oligarchs.

So why get up every morning and do this? Lithwick offers one answer:

To be hopeful in bad times is not just foolishly romantic. It is based on the fact that human history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness. What we choose to emphasize in this complex history will determine our lives. If we see only the worst, it destroys our capacity to do something. If we remember those times and places–and there are so many–where people have behaved magnificently, this gives us the energy to act, and at least the possibility of sending this spinning top of a world in a different direction. And if we do act, in however small a way, we don’t have to wait for some grand utopian future. The future is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as we think human beings should live, in defiance of all that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory.

Surrendering to helplessness is to let the bastards win. And you can’t win if you don’t show up to play. Sometimes in politics you get run over. But not staying down is how you keep from feeling like roadkill. It’s something.

“[Y]ou can’t make an election into a referendum on an issue if you can’t point to anything winning the election would accomplish,” Josh Marshall writes this morning. Be specific. He offers one idea for how Democrats might win this fall. One. Make protecting Roe the centerpiece of the fall campaigns (New York Times):

Here’s one way to do that: get clear public commitments from every Senate Democrat (and candidate for Senate) not only to vote for the Roe bill in January 2023 but also to change the filibuster rules to ensure that a majority vote would actually pass the bill and send it to the White House for the president’s signature.

It won’t work with Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, but that’s not the point. Identifying the other holdouts is one way to pressure them to get on board. A single focused message could make Manchin and Sinema irrelevant anyway: “Give us the House and two more senators, and we will make Roe law in January 2023.”

No ambiguity, no haggling, no living in Senator Manchin’s head for a year. You give us this, and we’ll give you that. That tells voters exactly what will be delivered with a Democratic win. It also defines what constitutes a win: control of the House and two more Senate seats.

The campaign message is clear: If you want to protect Roe, give us those majorities. If this is your passion, here’s where to channel that passion. These are the Senate seats we need to hold (in New Hampshire, Arizona, Georgia and Nevada) and here are the ones we need to win (in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and possibly in Ohio, Florida and North Carolina). With those commitments in hand, one question should be on the lips of every Democratic candidate. Will you make a firm commitment to never vote for a federal law banning abortion nationwide?

The last is about turning up the heat on Republicans who will not dare make that commitment. Elections involve drawing contrasts. Do it in black Sharpie.

Effective campaigns are built on connecting the intense beliefs of the electorate — their hopes and fears — directly to the hard mechanics of political power. You’ve got to connect those wires. If you were testing some new electrical contraption, that’s the first thing you’d do: make sure the energy supply is wired to the engine that makes it run. This is no different. Without tying a specific electoral result to a clear commitment to a specific legislative action after the elections, you’re not connecting those wires.

Democracy is in peril. No question. But with Americans numbed by the politics of division, asking Democrats and independents to get off their couches to fight for an abstraction may be asking too much.

Sure, conservatives come out to vote for “freedom,” but like states’ rights that’s long been a dog whistle for keeping Those People in their places. They fought a war to preserve that situation (and lost). “The House and two more senators” unlocks more than defense of Roe. Focus half the poulation’s attention on that rather than the usual checklist of policy proposals.

“We don’t have to wait for some grand utopian future” before resisting, Lithwick reminds readers. Marshall reminds them that they cannot rely on Democratic leaders to unify around defense of Roe. “You don’t need to wait on Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer or President Biden. You can get the ball rolling by calling up your Democratic senator today.”

For those of you lucky enough to have one.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Request a copy of For The Win, 4th Edition, my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us.
If in a position to Play to win in 2022 (see post first), contact tpostsully at gmail dot com.

The right wing is a death cult

This piece by Melissa Ryan is on the money:

For the Right, mass shootings are a feature, not a bug.

I’m tired of dancing around this. Because it’s true of the people in power and the MAGA base that supports them. Mass shootings are a tactic of the Right. Deployed to terrorize Americans. Priming America for authoritarianism. The Right doesn’t stop mass shootings or work to curb gun culture.

I’ve seen the polling showing that most American voters support gun control. But I’ve also seen the local activists and parents on the Right terrorize school boards and local communities for the past couple of years over masks, trans students, and critical race theory. These same folks could easily organize a similar response on gun safety. They choose not to. Because they don’t want it to stop.

America generally doesn’t value human life much these days. Both the Associated Press and the New York Times have covered our country’s indifference to mass death as straight news and questioned if we as a nation value human life at all. These articles acknowledge the reality that there’s no moral outrage or social movement that’s come from these tragic, preventable deaths. The Right chooses to let mass death continue, and frankly, the rest of us haven’t put up as much of a fight as we should.

I’ve known this about America since Sandy Hook. But as a parent, I feel it so much more intensely. Last week parents across the US were reminded, yet again, that there’s no system in place to keep their children or their teachers safe at school. That the best schools can offer are active shooter drills that don’t actually help. That law enforcement won’t enter the building to stop an active shooter loose in an elementary school. That Congress is fully aware of how many mass shootings there are in the US and how other countries don’t have this problem but still does nothing.

So what do we do? We can’t rely on Congress or the Federal government to pass gun safety legislation, but that doesn’t mean we’re powerless. It’s time to take a page out of the Right’s playbook. We need to make the people in power uncomfortable. And we need to cause disruption wherever we can. At school board meetings, in Congressional Districts, and community events where elected officials appear, and yes outside of their homes. With corporations that donate to Right-wing politicians and big money donors generally. When schools resume, we should consider how to cause disruption there as well, everything from targeted protests to walkouts to shutdowns.

These tactics might feel uncomfortable, especially if you’re still clinging to the notion of civility. But what I’m suggesting isn’t that much more radical than tactics laid out in the original Indivisible Guide. If we want common-sense policy changes on guns and school safety, our response to the slaughter of human beings, especially children in schools, needs to be all-encompassing. And it needs to match the intensity that this crisis calls for.

I would just add that this must be a sustained effort, not just a one off until we run after the next crisis. I’m thinking the kids have to be the focus. Walk-outs, sit-ins, all of it. Civil disobedience has to start in the home.

Some big decisions are going to be announced soon. I’m sure you know about the abortion case. Sigh. But there are some other important decisions as well and they could have major implications:

Second Amendment

As the country grapples with gun violence, the justices will decide how broadly they want to rule in a case that could open up a new chapter in constitutional challenges to gun safety laws.

After oral arguments last year, it seemed the conservatives were ready to strike down a New York law — enacted more than a century ago — that places restrictions on carrying a concealed weapon outside the home. Supporters of gun rights have been pushing the court to clarify the scope of the Second Amendment for years. The effort has been led by Thomas who in the past called the Second Amendment a “disfavored right in this court.”

But the entire landscape of the debate has shifted in recent months. Since the justices began deliberating, mass shootings have occurred across the country including a Texas massacre of 19 school children in Texas. While the shootings did not directly implicate the issue of concealed carry, the country as a whole is now debating gun safety laws.

Religious liberty

On top of abortion and gun rights, the court is also considering cases that could allow more religion in public life.

In December, they heard arguments concerning a Maine initiative that excludes some religious schools from a tuition assistance program. The program allows parents living in rural areas with no school district to use vouchers to send their children to public or private schools elsewhere. But it came under challenge when some parents wanted to use the vouchers to send their kids to religious schools.

The court could insist that if a state provides vouchers for public and private education, it cannot exclude schools that teach the curriculum through the lens of faith.

The justices are also grappling with the case of Joe Kennedy, a former Washington state high school football coach at a public school who lost his job for praying at the 50-yard line after games.

Kennedy told CNN that “every American should be able to have faith in public and not be worried about being fired over it.”

“I think it is important to keep our promises — especially to God,” he said.

But the school district said it suspended Kennedy to avoid the appearance that the school was endorsing a particular faith, in violation of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.

The liberal justices on the court — Justices Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor –made clear at oral arguments that they were worried about players feeling coerced by the school to pray.

“I’m going to just sort of suggest,” Kagan began “the idea of why the school can discipline him is that it puts some kind of undue pressure, a kind of coercion, on students to participate in religious activities when they may not wish to, when their religion is different or when they have no religion,” she said.

Immigration

As the political branches spar over immigration, the justices are considering several cases concerning border disputes.

In one case, a group of Republican-led states are seeking to step in and defend a controversial Trump-era immigration policy, a version of which the Biden administration abandoned. The policy — an expansion of the “public charge rule” — has been excised by the Biden administration.

The case does not center on the legality of the rule, but, instead, whether the Biden administration followed proper procedures when it set out to revoke the rule and dismiss pending legal challenges. The Trump policy made it more difficult for immigrants to obtain legal status if they use certain public benefits such as Medicaid, food stamps and housing vouchers. The justices could reinvigorate legal challenges.

In a separate dispute, the justices are grappling with whether the Biden administration can terminate a Trump-era border policy known as “Remain in Mexico.” Lower courts have so far blocked Biden from ending the policy.

Under the unprecedented program launched in 2019, the Department of Homeland Security can send certain-non Mexican citizens who entered the United States back to Mexico — instead of detaining them or releasing them into the United States — while their immigration proceedings played out. Critics call the policy inhumane and say it exposes asylum seekers with credible claims to dangerous and squalid conditions. The case raises questions not only regarding immigration law, but also a president’s control over policy and his diplomatic relationships with neighboring countries.

Climate change

The justices unexpectedly also agreed to decide a case concerning the EPA’s authority to regulate carbon emissions from existing power plants, in a dispute that could cripple the Biden administration’s attempts to slash emissions. It comes at a moment when scientists are sounding alarms about the accelerating pace of global warming.

The court’s decision to step in now concerned environmentalists because there is currently no rule in place. A lower court wiped away a Trump era rule in 2021 and the Biden administration’s EPA is currently working on a new rule.

But the fact that there were enough votes to take up the issue now, struck some as an aggressive grant, signaling the court wants to limit the scope of the EPA’s authority even before a new rule is on the books.

This is only the beginning, folks.

Mayor Pete says it well

This https://t.co/zq198wce5S

— Campos (@thesillyrabbit) June 5, 2022

There was a mass shooting on the streets of Philadelphia last night. Should everyone wear body armor in public? Should we have massive surveillance on our streets, a cop every few feet? Should we put doorways on the sidewalks? What are these people talking about???

Well … they have some talking points:

Stay cool. Run out the clock. Scare some gun nuts while you can. But don’t worry: this moment will be over soon.

That’s the message the Republican Party, Donald Trump, and conservative leaders rapidly coalesced around after a series of mass shootings in recent weeks, including at one at a Texas elementary school. 

Several strategy memos and private communications, prepared for a variety of conservative candidates and organizations, reviewed by Rolling Stone in the days following the Uvalde school massacre were clear: change the topic to literally anything else, and let this news cycle run its course. 

“Ignore guns, talk inflation,” one such memo, written for a top-tier GOP Senate candidate, succinctly reads, citing polling data of voter concerns ahead of the critical 2022 midterm elections. Other documents predictably decried liberal desires for “gun-grabbing” and “gun confiscation,” and made whataboutism-type references to gun violence in Chicago…

But the bulk of the memo, part of the series of RNC “Pundit Prep” that typically lists the party’s weekly political priorities, had a conspicuous omission. It did not include any actual talking points about the latest school massacre in the U.S. — a mass shooting that dominated American media and political conversation, only to be bookended by news of other mass murders carried out with firearms. The email did detail, however, “what you need to know” about “this week’s primary elections,” and listed the RNC’s recommended reading from Fox News, Breitbart, Newsmax, and the Washington Examiner, on such topics as President Joe Biden’s “failed” immigration record.

[…]

“My advice to any Republican candidate would be to not let the moment dictate any political action that may have unintended consequences that leads to widespread gun confiscation,” says Steven Cheung, a political operative advising GOP candidates in 2022 House and Senate races. “Defend the Second Amendment because that’s where the base is, but offer tangible solutions like hardening of schools and more funding for mental health.”

By the way, they won’t vote for money to any of that either.

As Buttigieg says, all this is the definition of insanity, if not the definition of denial.

A little cultural comfort for the mourners of Uvalde:

A bus rolled in off the dusty highway and into the heart of a town mired in sorrow.

Outsiders had sent so much to Uvalde lately: food, flowers, millions of dollars in donations, prayers — gestures, large and small, meant to acknowledge a grief that no one believed they could cure. Like the others, compelled to do something, dozens of mariachi musicians had traveled from San Antonio with the hope that they could deliver a dose of comfort.

In the square that has become an expression of Uvalde’s pain, where 21 crosses were erected to mark the lives stolen by the gunman who stormed into an elementary school, the musicians gathered along the edge of a fountain and started to play, drawing on the aching words of the revered Mexican musician Juan Gabriel.

Tú eres la tristeza de mis ojos
Que lloran en silencio por tu amor

You are the sadness in my eyes
that cry in silence for your love

“They don’t pet you,” Anthony Medrano, one of the performers, said of the lyrics. “They cut you.”

Healing requires honesty, however lacerating, he said. A mariachi performance like this one was meant to be a journey, starting in darkness and climbing closer to the light.

Mariachi music — with its trumpets, strings and serenades — often conjures images of jubilation or romance, its costumed performers playing at quinceañeras, weddings, anniversaries and birthdays. Yet in truth, performers say, the music traces the arc of life, as adept at accompanying the depths of anguish as soaring triumph.

“We as mariachis are there for every part of a person’s life,” Mr. Medrano, who helped coordinate the trip, told the other performers as they hit the road. “We’re called to step up and step in — and help comfort families and help comfort community. That’s what we’re going to do today.”

Mariachi players came from all over south Texas to participate, some as young as 7.

The pull to join the performance was strong. “They look like our children,” Sandra Gonzalez, a violin player, said of the victims. “The faces look familiar.”[…]

[J]ust as Mr. Medrano promised, the music seemed to give those who gathered a respite, even if for just a moment. Mr. San Miguel led some of the musicians in an instrumental rendition of “Amazing Grace.” He remembered the comfort he felt when the song was played at his brother’s funeral last year.

His father, the Grammy Award-winning mariachi performer Juan Ortiz, crooned another song that many in the crowd knew instantly: “Un Dia A La Vez.” The song’s consolation: Healing was not here, and no one knew when it would come. But Uvalde could summon the resilience to move forward.

Un día a la vez, Dios mío
y es lo que pido de ti
dame la fuerza para vivir
un día a la vez

One day at a time, my God,
and that is what I ask of you,
give me the strength to live
one day at a time.

Words of wisdom….

It’s not new

This has been happening for a while, providing a template for how they will inevitably deal with women who have illegal abortions.

The attorney who represented a California woman charged with murder after her stillborn baby tested positive for drugs said cases like her clients’ will “only get worse” amid a national crackdown on reproductive rights. 

Chelsea Becker, who struggled with addiction during her pregnancy, faced murder charges in Kings County after experiencing a stillbirth in 2019, which the DA blamed on her drug use. Though she was unable to raise the $2 million needed to post bail and served 16 months in jail, the charges were ultimately dropped and she was freed in 2021.

Becker’s attorney, Samatha Lee of National Advocates for Pregnant Women, told the San Francisco Chronicle her client’s case — and a similar 2018 case — are part of a growing national trend of criminalizing pregnant people after stillbirth and miscarriage. 

“When that door is opened, then anything someone does or doesn’t do during their pregnancy could be charged similarly,” Lee told the San Francisco Chronicle. “We’re already seeing it, and we expect it to only get worse.”

National Advocates for Pregnant Women has found criminal prosecutions against pregnant people have tripled from 2006 to 2020 compared to cases prosecuted from 1973 to 2005. As the Supreme Court appears poised to overturn Roe v. Wade protections after a draft court opinion was leaked, several states have laws in place to make abortion a criminal offense. 

Becker, who had a second child who was placed into foster care and adopted before her release from jail, has since become an advocate for a California bill that would stop pregnancy loss criminalization. 

“I hope that in the future, no woman will ever be prosecuted for losing a pregnancy,” she wrote in a letter to state lawmakers.

Think about this when you hear them insisting with a straight face that they have no intention of prosecuting women for having abortions. How can they not? They call it muder.

And I didn’t think it was possible

Tom Sullivan sent this to me and wrote:”JFC, we woke up inside a Margaret Atwood novel.”

This is my daughter. She just turned 9.

Here is why I would never allow her to play middle or high school sports if we lived in Ohio…

A few days ago, the Ohio Republicans passed a change to state law that was snuck in at the last minute, under the guise of “protecting” girls sports.

https://search-prod.lis.state.oh.us/solarapi/v1/general_assembly_134/bills/hb151/PH/02/hb151_02_PH?format=pdf

This law allows ANYONE to dispute the sex of an athlete on a school team.

There are no safeguards in place to ensure that this is not used maliciously.

Girls who do not look feminine enough, girls of color, girls who are “too good” are likely to be the biggest targets.

But any girl could be targeted. Maybe someone doesn’t like her parents or maybe someone wants to make sure the opposing team doesn’t have enough eligible players.

So what does a girl have to do to prove she is a girl?

First, the physician has to examine the girl’s external and internal reproductive anatomy.

I have to emphasize that this will impact girls as young as 5th or 6th grade, ~10-11 years old.

A year or two older than my daughter.

Step one to proving your correct sex is female:

A doctor will need to spread open your labia and examine the size of your clitoris. A clitoris that is “too large” could be a sign that you are intersex and not female enough for sports.

Step two to proving your correct sex is female:

A doctor will then insert one or two gloved fingers inside your vagina, while pressing against your abdomen with their other hand, so they can feel your uterus and ovaries.

This will likely be quite painful for these young girls, and extremely traumatic.

There is no medical reason to do a pelvic exam on girls this young, absent any signs of a problem.

This is sexual assault and will traumatize these girls. That is by design.

This part of the exam would probably be covered by insurance, depending on how it is billed. But these next two steps would likely not be covered for most people.

Step three to proving your correct sex is female:

Your blood will be drawn and your testosterone levels measured.

How much testosterone is too much? Unclear.

Does having “high T” give girls an advantage? No, not always. But this bill leaves no room for nuance.

Step four to proving your correct sex is female:

Your blood will also be tested to see if you are XX or XY.

Except not everyone is XX or XY and there are XY women who have no advantage in sports because of the nuances of their genetics, but that won’t matter here 🤷🏻‍♀️

This bill offers protection from retaliation for people who report an athlete they suspect is not truly female. There is no requirements that they make these reports in good faith.

There is no protection for the athletes accused of lying about their sex.

Any athlete who suspects they were “harmed” by an athlete who lied about their sex can sue that school district. If that athlete’s parents are unwilling to have their daughter sexually assaulted, or cannot afford the testing, the district will have to pay $$ to the accuser.

So from an administrative standpoint, you basically have to require that all female athletes do this testing in order to play interscholastic sports.

Otherwise your district is in danger of having to forfeit games and losing litigation if you don’t have this paperwork up front

Interscholastic sports in Ohio will only be accessible to girls whose parents are willing to subject them to sexual assault and very expensive and unnecessary bloodwork.

Congrats to everyone trying to “save” women’s sports from your trans athlete boogeymen.

Is winning the most important part of high school sports?

Because setting aside the incredible trauma and expense caused by this bill, at the end of the day, the message is that winning is what matters the most.

That’s not the lesson I want my daughter to learn from sports.

Originally tweeted by Pole Vault Power (@polevaultpower) on June 5, 2022.

The details of the examination are not spelled out so vividly in the law but I think it’s right. That is very likely what would have to be done to “prove” what they insist upon proving.

These are the same people accusing teachers of being pedophiles and “grooming” their kids. And yet they are the ones obsessed with children’s genitalia. It’s projection. As always.

Taking the NRA and Justice Scalia to school

Adrian Fontes is not only a Democratic candidate for Secretary of State in Arizona and the former Maricopa County Recorder, he is a former U.S. Marine Marksmanship Instructor. He’s got some teaching for 2nd Amendment absolutists.

Any yahoo with a firearm is not a constitutionally authorized militia.

We all know its language by heart:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

But that amendment’s language, Fontes wants you to remind you, came after the U.S. Constitution had already defined the Militia’s place in the new country. Enjoy:

Wow. In 4 minutes, former U.S. Marine Marksmanship Instructor and Arizona Sec. of State candidate @Adrian_Fontes dismantles the right's Second Amendment lies. Watch this till the end. pic.twitter.com/KDesJBUExr

— MeidasTouch (@MeidasTouch) June 1, 2022

Article I, Section 8 is gospel for constitutional absolutists who insist that if it isn’t expressly spelled out in the Constitution (like Space Force), the government has no authority to do it. Here’s some of what it says Congress may do:

To raise and support Armies

But Militias are different. See Clauses 15 and 16:

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

“The Militia, in the context of our Constitution, is enforcing the laws of the Union,” Fontes insists. “They work for the government, not against some tyrannical fantasy government you guys are fetishising against.”

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

“You don’t just get to be a militia on your own,” Fontes says.

Article II, Section 2 spells out the president’s role. The army is not the modern militia; the national guard is:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

Bookmark this for future use, share his tweet, and throw this guy a Scooby snack.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Request a copy of For The Win, 4th Edition, my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us.
If in a position to Play to win in 2022 (see post first), contact tpostsully at gmail dot com.

What time is tonight’s mass shooting scheduled?

What popped up on Twitter first thing this morning came from Susie Madrak in Philadelphia:

At least these men had semi-automatic weapons with which to express their negative emotions and passing moods! https://t.co/tawE6ZQqE6

— Suburban Guerrilla 💙 (@SusieMadrak) June 5, 2022

My neurons fire funny. The first thing that came to mind was, “What time is tonight’s mass shooting scheduled?” The line, as I recall, derives from the last chapter of “Going to Extremes” by Joe McGinniss (1980). Only then it was a campfire joke about encountering a grizzly bear in the northern Brooks Range. They were supposedly rare in the area, the hikers’ guide had assured, yet the group had already had one dangerous close encounter with a sow grizzly and two cubs. They spotted another in the distance moments later.

One would think mass shootings would be as rare in the Lower 48, and you’d be equally as wrong. Going to extremes, indeed.

By the time I Googled, the Philadelphia Inquirer was reporting 14 shot and three dead:

Three people were killed and 11 others wounded in a mass shooting late Saturday night on South Street amid chaos that erupted on legendary blocks that have long been among the region’s most popular gathering places.

“Once it started I didn’t think it was going to stop,” said Joe Smith, 23, who was standing outside the Theater of the Living Arts on South between Third and Fourth Streets, when the shots rang out around 11:30 p.m.

“It was chaos,” said Eric Walsh was closing up the outdoor seating area of O’Neals, a bar near Third and South. He saw a young woman collapse to the ground on the corner.

“People were coming off the street with blood splatters on white sneakers and skinned knees and skinned elbows,” said a visibly shaken Walsh. “We literally just were balling up napkins and wetting them and handing them to people.”

Shooting erupted in a popular dining and shopping area about 11:30 p.m. Details are sketchy, as they are this early in an investigation:

Police have yet to identify the shooters, but confirm there was more than one person shooting into the crowd. Their motive is not known.

An officer fired at one of the shooters, who was still firing a gun into the crowd, said Pace. The shooter dropped the weapon, which Pace said had an extended magazine.

All the better to shoot as many people as swiftly as possible. Stopping to change magazines during a spree shooting is so tedious.

Saturday night in Philadelphia. A mass shooting on 4th & South Street with reports of nearly a dozen people shot. I’m on scene where police have cordoned off the popular weekend strip, a trail of what appears to be blood snaking along the sidewalk in front of a Rita’s Water Ice. pic.twitter.com/mkUoTvgy2I

— Max M. Marin (@MaxMMarin) June 5, 2022

Researchers found in an earlier spate of shootings the marks of social contagion (NPR):

In other words, school shootings and other shootings with four or more deaths spread like a contagion — each shooting tends to spark more shootings.

“So one happens and you see another few happen right after that,” says Jillian Peterson, a criminologist at Hamline University in Minnesota and founder of the nonpartisan think tank, The Violence Project. She wasn’t involved in the Arizona State research but has found similar patterns in her own research.

Towers and her colleagues also found that what set apart shootings that were contagious was the amount of media coverage they received. “In the incidences where there were four or more people killed, and even school shootings, those tended to get national and even international media attention,” says Towers.

She also found that there is a window when a shooting is most likely to lead to more incidents — about two weeks. Towers and her team published their results in 2015.

Couldn’t we just have laughing epidemics or dancing plagues instead?

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Request a copy of For The Win, 4th Edition, my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us.
If in a position to Play to win in 2022 (see post first), contact tpostsully at gmail dot com.