It’s been nearly three months since our country began dealing with the horrific shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary. Six and seven year olds who dreamed of being football quarterbacks, doctors and dancers died because an assault weapon ended up in the wrong hands.
But unfortunately, the Newtown tragedy doesn’t tell the whole nightmare. In America, 56 children die a week from gun violence. That’s nearly three Newtowns every single week.
Massachusetts voters know we need action on gun violence in this country.
If elected, I’ll go to the Senate ready to pass stronger gun laws.
I believe that starts with a ban on assault weapons. Assault weapons are for combat, not our communities. I want these guns off our streets.
We need to stop the flow of high magazine clips, like the ones used in Aurora and Newtown.
We need background checks on all gun sales, including private sales and purchases made at gun shows.
We need to lift the ban on gun violence data. Right now, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms isn’t able to share data with local law enforcement on who buys a gun, where and when they bought it. That’s information that could help solve crimes. And, when individuals buy guns, their background check record is destroyed within 24 hours. That doesn’t make sense. A search on Google lasts longer than the records we keep on weapons. That needs to change.
Those are the policies I’ll push for in the Senate. And to do it, I’ll stand up to special interest groups like the National Rifle Association.
We’ve passed common-sense gun laws before. In 1994, I worked with President Clinton to stop millions of military-style, semi-automatic weapons that were coming from China into our cities and neighborhoods. Moving forward, with strong leadership in the Senate, we can pass common-sense gun laws again.
In this campaign, I’m focused on the issues that matter to Massachusetts. And I want people to know exactly where I stand. That’s why I’ve released this television ad. And that’s why this past weekend, our campaign knocked on 15,000 doors throughout the Commonwealth to spread the message.
If you believe, like I do, that we need to take bold action on gun legislation, I hope you’ll join me in this campaign and cause to prevent gun violence in this country.
Assault rifles and TSA rules are extremely low on the list I want to hear my elected representatives in Congress talk about.
If I were to take a walk through Malden Square and asked people what their needs and wants are from Washington I doubt that guns and pocket knives at airports will even appear on their radar.
And yes I am aware of the recent spike of gun related crimes in Malden.
Can I expect to see postings by you on BMG on matters concerning jobs, the economy, transportation, jobs, economy,
older workers and seniors not able to afford what they planned for.
Helping working folks. Higher education costs and financing,
What about tax breaks for the rich? Like interest deductions on home loans. (if u own a home u must be rich, right?)
So c’mon Congressman. Give me something .
Current practices are working so well, after all, and addressing gun violence would mean we couldn’t possibly address any other problems.
So we are doing nothing about education, economy, infrastructure, transportation, jobs and much more
I mean the Congressman did not mention those issues in this post. Only gun control.
Hmmmm, I am really confused.
Kirth, are you saying Markey is a one issue candidate? Guns and only guns.
Or perhaps a two issue candidate, guns and pocket knives.
Why no, fka-ernie, I’m not saying that. It must be somebody else saying that. I’m also not the one saying gun violence is very low on my list of priorities, and pretending that dealing with it somehow means that higher-priority issues can’t also be dealt with.
and considering the limited posts and issues Markey has blogged about on here it seems strange that he is focusing on this right now right here.
I’m not sure Eddie has much depth to him. He’s good at keeping it simple stupid, cable TV, assault guns, pocket knives. And also following what others in his delegation have done over the years
ever been a victim of gun violence? What about lost a job or couldn’t afford college or working two jobs and can’t keep up or serious mental health issues leading to homelessness, or in one of the two needless wars, or lost someone in the wars, in bankruptcy, have their house foreclosed, limited on employment options because of inadequate transportation options.
What about the deficit which is hurting our standard of living. What about the increasing gap between rich and poor and the consequences of that.
Really kirth, you should get out more and find out whats going on in people’s lives and not live by episodic events broadcast on cable news networks.
I’m too old to have participated in the Bush Crusades, but I went to the preceding Southeast Asian party, thanks. Et tu?
Several of your other questions could be answered with a ‘yes,’ but you aren’t my friend, so you don’t get to find out which ones.
hat’s my point.
I don’t see it. I’m not a gun guy. I just don’t see it.
Now if I had a relative killed by one I am sure I would be emotional about, similar to drunk driving.
But this issue should not be driving a Massachusetts U.S. Senate Race. Yet Congressman Markey seems to be insisting on it.
Did I say gun violence was my #1 issue? No, I didn’t say that either. I’m afraid the mind-reading thing is just not working out for you. Better stick with what you know, whatever that is. Or you could – what’s that phrase, again? oh, yes – get out more, and talk to some people who’ve been shot or lost someone to a bullet.
I do appreciate Rep. Markey’s speaking out on the issue, and do not for a minute think it’s the only thing he’s thinking about.
My grandpa was killed by an unregistered handgun, for those of us who have been permanently scarred by tragedy, this is an incredibly important issue to us. One I might add NONE of the other candidates in either primary is bringing up. Secondly I just lost my job, and if you had a brain you’d look at Markey’s website and see all these other issues addressed. He voted for the JOBS Act and tried to shepherd it through an unproductive Congress. You can take your ax and grind it somewhere else.
I’ll grind it here.
Well i do not want to look at Markey’s website or any other candidates’.
Let them bring there campaign to me.
Like when I cliicked on BMG today I saw Markey coming to me.
He had a post which was in my face so i could not avoid seeing the headline.
I then perused and realized he chose this “touch” to tell me, and what I believe is true about a majority of MA voters, about an issue i have very little interest in.
So I’m really complaining about Markey’s shitty issues campaign.
BTW dude, calling someone an asshole because it was what your grandfather dies of is pretty lame my friend. It’s like you’ve been waiting your whole life to call someone out using it.
Like vietnam vets who scream “You weren’t there man! You wren’t there!”
Get over yourself John
Um, eb3, a candidate putting up an easily searchable website listing their policy positions, accomplishments, biography, etc. is one significant form of them “bringing their campaign to you.” Yes, you have to go to the trouble of clicking on a link or typing their name in a web browser, slapping on a “.org” and clicking the Enter key. But that really shouldn’t be too onerous. How spoon-fed do you need it?
Yes, but he didn’t mention any of the issues in the post he chose to write and have it placed prominently on a blog that people read.
You are relying on people to be pro-active and search out Markey’s positions.
That’s dumb campaigning matheiman.
I don’t follow what the first sentence in your response means; but, you being too personally lazy to look on a candidate’s website for information you purport to be curious about doesn’t mean I’ve made your point. It just means you’re lazy.
I’m not “relying on people to be pro-active.” I’m not talking about people in general at all – I’m responding directly to you personally throwing a bit of a tantrum (“Well i do not want to look at Markey’s website or any other candidates’. Let them bring there campaign to me.”) because you need to be spoon-fed information rather than suffering the indignity of expending the minimal effort to visit a candidate’s website. I don’t get that.
And I’ll stop calling one, and no its not a trivial issue to those of us that have been affected. In my current city of Chicago we have lost over 580 people to violent gun crimes, the vast majority of them are children. I don’t know where you live, you try to have a ‘man of the people schtick’ but my guess is a comfortable lilly white suburb. And look at Sandy Hook-even those areas are not safe. So its incredibly important that we limit handgun violence, and Ed Markey is a leader on that, Lynch has no position but used to be an opponent. Also if you don’t check the website and aren’t familiar with the candidate you are bashing than you are just an incredibly ignorant and lazy voter. Maybe thats why you read the tea leaves so poorly on Brown getting stomped by Warren.
But yeah insult my dead grandpa and vietnam vets, I am sure it will win you more friends to your cause. Stick with the Bulger stuff, you actually know what you are talking about there.
kids killing kids.
Chicago style
Much different. The way to stop that is not through gun laws because thats a finger in the dyke.
Usually these can be handled internally. Like Boston in the late 80s early 1990s.
L.A. years ago.
The problem is the kids in this particular neighborhood are killing each other over kid stuff, for the most part.
And calling everything a gang problem is a joke.
Two kinds of gangs. Organized that make money selling drugs. They were what drove the scene in Boston in the late 80s.
It’s totally changed now. No big money being made in the streets.
The second kind of gang are just kids being kids and guns are fashionable.
The gangs are loose.
Not the days of Intervale and Castlegate, my favorite Strathcona. Not to mention Frankin Field, not to be confused with Frankin Hill.
These were real big money gangs back in the day killing of turf and business.
Not sure exactly what the problem is in Chicago, but funny how these are isolated in a country as big as the U.S.
Stop digging and go back to telling us about gossip from 40 years ago.
But I can’t tell which comments you are referring to. String too long.
I hope you don’t mean I lost the argument because a grandfather was killed by a handgun.
First, gun safety has become a major, major issue for voters after the recent string of massacres. Assault weapons gunning down first graders in an idyllic suburban town one fine morning scares people. They don’t want it any more than they want hijacked airplanes smacking into office buildings. The NRA has become an advocate for child murder in the minds of tens of millions of Americans, and gun owners who won’t accept common sense regulations are now seen as a threat to children. Second, whatever one’s views about gun safety, Markey can talk about that and other things too, and has been. Fulminating and resorting to personal insults when these fallacies were drily pointed out made you look petty and ridiculous. Game over. Since, as you know, I have the highest respect, in general, for your commentary and contributions I was trying to be helpful. I do admit the crack about “40 year old gossip” was unkind, and as an admirer of your work, and fellow historian, I apologize for it as unworthy and retract it.
But he doesn’t Bob. Unl;ess of course you are a Markey groupie and are aware of all his pronouncements.
But all I know is what I read on here, the newspapers, and his television ads.
He is all about guns. he is choosing to showcase that issue above all others.
I think that’s a mistake.
Sure people don’t want gun massacres. Duh?
Do you really think Ed Markey is the answer?
he seems to to want to run his campaign telling people he is.
Game over? Me look ridiculous?
I love all the solutions to gun violence which are not based in reality.
But again, as a voter who, like the vast majority of voters, does not research candidates beyond what they read in paper and see on TV including commercials.
Bob, my arguments are campaign related. Not the issue. You pull at heart strings and prey on exasperated parental worries and insecurities by citing the tragedies hoping to stir up emotions for votes not based on intelligent reasoning.
Markey has many other issues to put in the forefront of his campaign.
He chose this one and I think it won’t drive the votes he thinks they will.
Come on Bob, step back and take a look at this like you were being paid by Ed Markey to consult.
Do you really think gun control will drive votes in East Boston, Worcester, Somerville, Sudbury and Weston?
Get real people.
Yet no real solutions, just bitching and moaning.
I think Ed Markey crush Steve Lynch in Somerville. I think his statements on gun control will add to his margin of victory.
I can’t speak to the other communities you enumerate.
The gun issue is really important. Menino thinks so too, and he’s right. And it’s a federal problem – can’t be solved state-by-state like Scott Brown tried to convince us it could. So Congress has to act.
Also, just because that’s what Markey chose to post about on BMG today hardly means he’s a one-issue candidate. Not sure where you’re getting that idea.
On Jobs
What has Lynchie done? What have you done?
I’m in campaign mode here David. I’d be going ballistic if I was part of that campaign and this is what they are throwing out there.
I only know what Eddie goes out of his way to tell me.
For the past 37 years all I’ve heard was cable tv and little daylight savings time coming from him. Plus the local federal grants.
Now I hear guns and pocketknives.
He and his campaign have made these decisions. This is how they want to show him.
I’m saying big mistake. I know he’s not one issue, so shame on his campaign for this crap here.
Really, criticize the play call. You’re telling me he has a better game. Well blame him for not showcasing it.
… Ernie is right that gun deaths primarily involve handguns, and his brief synopsis of gang-banger history is accurate.
Whatever Mayor Menino feels about the issue, urban gun violence won’t get solved at the federal level, at least not this year. Frankly it won’t matter what the Senate does: Too many Republicans and pro-gun Democrats in the House. In Western Pennsylvania, for example, any Democratic Congressman supporting gun control measures (possibly excepting gun show and mental health background checks) would be voted out of office.
And Sandy Hook did not appreciably change public opinion about gun control in the long run. A good source for objective polling data on the issue is here.
That said over-the-top rhetoric (on all sides) to see who has the biggest cojones gets a little tiresome after a while.
Can we keep personalities out of this?
Sorry Paul. That’s my thing. I know no other way.
You don’t think people in Malden Square care about gun control?
I guess you don’t care about the businessman who was shot dead in Malden Square the other day?
And I guess you weren’t at the Markey kickoff at the Malden Y, where the biggest applause line of the day was Markey’s call for gun control. It surprised me, but it’s true. Ask anyone who was paying attention — or not just repeating some other campaign’s talking points.
Ernie only cares about himself, gun crimes happen to ‘someone else’. He is a true constituency of one, and will only vote for people that cater to him personally. Maybe if I ran on a platform of putting EB3 on court TV to discuss the Bulger case, eliminated his need to pay any taxes, and allowed him to have all the guns he wants he’d vote for me, otherwise its a lot more fun to criticize from the sidelines.
First, that killing was not in Malden Square, far from it. Second it was not a random shooting so the old ladies that walk by there everyday can continue to do so without any fear.
As for the cheers for Markey at the Malden Y announcement I have to laugh. The small percentage of Maldenites in the room that day were local politicians and the few friends Markey has from the old days that still live there.
The rest were the refugees from Kate’s Christmas Party. The people that take their orders unconditionally from the Dem party.
I don’t take orders unconditionally from anyone.
Thanks for proving my point. Few Maldenites at the Markey announcent. Mostly the same ole faces of activists like you Fenway
So now that that dumb standard is washed, can we have a policy discussion on whether guns kill people in the US?
and as eb3 knows, the refugees were ordered (a priori) to exert their most exuberant applause for Markey’s call for gun control
eb3, brotherman, are you off your meds? Overtired? Stressed about the white smoke? Take a chill, hombre.
the Markey announcemet was full of Dem activists a very few locals as was suggested. No secret that activists have been strident of late on gun control.
So again, Markey is preaching gun issues to his choir. I’m not sure how that attracts the many other voters he needs.
My point is not about gun control it’s about the Market campaign. Makes no difference whether I support or oppose gun control. It’s the decisions being made by the Markey camp on their limited and valued face time with voters.
As someone who prides himself on calling out bullshit you do a very poor job covering your tracks when you spread your own.
So let me get this straight. You don’t care about climate change or guns because of your ‘average joe man of the people’ schtick. Fine. But you don’t like Markey because he has ‘only’ posted here three times about issues you don’t care about. And as a ‘man of the people average joe’ you can’t bother to look up his website, in spite of the fact that you have doubtless spent countless hours roving through documents to make your commentaries on the Bulger case. Clearly you have the free time to make basic informed decisions about the political process by posting on a political blog, which as far as i know is all you do for a living.
Yet you are ready to anoint Downing and now Lynch who have never posted here, never presented any issues to the public in any capacity so far, and have in Downings case no record to stand on and in Lynch’s case a very troubled one. So admit it, either Ed Markey killed your dog and shat on its corpse or something that makes you just dislike him and thats why you are grinding this ax. Its not principle, as you said above its personality, so for whatever reason the schtick is to be counter intuitive and troll against all those ‘lefties’ who aren’t ‘real men of the people’ by backing Lynch. You think it makes you original but its the same trick your nemesis Howie Carr plays everyday on the radio from 3-6.
A lot of people in Newtown CT might have had the same attitude earlier this year.
They don’t any more.
Gun safety is a critical issue for keeping children safe in this country. Assault weapons should obviously be illegal for private ownership, just like machine guns and hand grenades.
Mortgage interest deductions are also important, but there is no reason to attack the Congressman for trying to keep people safe.
The congressman chooses to talk about gun control and not talk about the move to end mortgage deductions.
Politics is local my friends. Gun control just doesn’t have the pizazz with MA voters like you think it does. IMHO
…but in a probable low-turnout Special, it does bring out the worker bees.
As economic populism does for a lot of folks who support Lynch.
If we’re lucky, we might just have a good dialogue between the culturally blue-collar populists and the upper middle-class progressives after the Primary.
One can hope, anyway…
I think you’re wrong, but people can disagree.
🙂
Have a great evening, Ernie and BMGers everywhere.