Aurora Shooting Victim ‘Demands A Plan’ From Romney And Obama On Guns

[trailmonkee]

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/10/01/931871/aurora-shooting-victim-demands-a-plan-from-romney-and-obama-on-guns/



President Obama and Mitt Romney will face each other Wednesday in their first presidential debate at University of Denver, just 15 miles from the site of the movie theater shooting in Aurora, Colorado. However, the media’s interest in the largest shooting in the country since Virginia Tech has waned, while both Romney and Obama have backed away from offering any new solutions to deal with the nation’s gun homicide rate, which far outpaces any other developed country in the world.

In an effort to revive the conversation about gun violence, 22-year-old Stephen Barton, who was shot in the face and neck in the Aurora movie theater, appears in an ad that will air in the days leading up to the presidential debate on Wednesday. Barton makes a direct appeal to voters to “demand a plan” from Obama and Romney:

This past summer in a movie theater in Colorado, I was shot. Shot in the face and neck. But I was lucky. In the next four years, 48,000 Americans won’t be so lucky, because they’ll be murdered with guns in the next president’s term, enough to fill over 200 theaters. So when you watch the presidential debates, ask yourself, ‘Who has a plan to stop gun violence?’

[Whovian]

1. I know it's not that popular but responsible gun control should be a part of the campaign.

Recommended.

[hack89]

6. Wouldn't it be wise to see how it would be received in battleground states first?

this election will be won or lost in a handful of states - the hard math of the electoral college means not driving away moderate and Blue Dog Democrats.

[Hoyt]

14. Sure. Let's kick the can down the road further. What will be your excuse after the election?

Let's be honest Those who promote more guns in more places, will never support addressing the issues -- not now, not in the future, no matter what.

The excuses, obfuscation, direct or indirect support of the NRA's gun proliferation strategy (which includes defeating Obama and other good Democrats), etc., will continue after the election.

[hack89]

16. How far down the road will President Romney kick that can? nt

[Hoyt]

17. Hopefully Romney won't be elected. If he is, it will be with the help of those who put guns above

all else, who directly or indirectly support the NRA's efforts to defeat PRESIDENT OBAMA and other good Democrats, etc.

[hack89]

18. It would appear the president sees it differently than you do.

he is a smart man.

[Bonobo]

2. No leadership on gun control is not excusable. How many will it take? nt

[still_one]

3. "demands a plan"? he won't get it from either side /nt

[99Forever]

4. It's never "the right time" ...

.. to discuss about gun violence!

How dare you mention it!


<----- For the clueless.

[hack89]

5. Single payer health care with mental health coverage should be the answer. nt

[Drale]

7. Not necessarily

You can give people to ability to help themselves but you can't make them, especially if they don't even realize there is something wrong. I was horribly depressed and did not realize how bad it was until I started going to therapy because I had a emotional break down.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

9. People should have to get bi-yearly mental health exams for their privilege to carry... nt

[hack89]

11. Proposing blatantly un-Constitutional solutions doesn't really help. nt

[Drale]

12. How is it unconstitutional?

In many states felons can't vote, isn't that more unconstitutional? Take guns our of the hands of mentally ill people is common sense and if the founding fathers would want anything from this country its common sense, something that is severely lacking in todays world.

[hack89]

15. Strict Scrutiny is the judicial standard for civil liberties.

it basically says for a law restricting a civil liberty to be constitutional, it must meet all of the following three standards:

1. There must be a compelling government interest.
2. It must be narrowly tailored to address that goal.
3. It must be the least restrictive means to address that goal.

By no stretch of the imagination is compelling every gun owner to pass a mental exam every six months narrowly tailored or least restrictive.

And there is also the not so minor issue that it won't work - basic economics will take care of that. This will be a financial bonanza for mental health professionals - as long as their patients pass their exams. How long do you think it will take before there is a website telling gun owners which mental health professionals to avoid?

[Drale]

13. I agree personally I think everyone should get a mental health exam once a year

at the same time they get a physical check up. The world would be a much better and less crazy place.

[hack89]

10. I doubt there is a single perfect solution

but unlike many other solutions it would benefit society as a whole beyond the narrow context of mass killings. For example, it most likely would reduce our suicide rate and therefore save many lives.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

8. Obama shouldn't say a damn thing like this until November 7th.

Unless it polls well in the battleground states.

Disclosure: I am pro-gun control.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Shh it is NEVER ok to talk about guns

[aikoaiko]

20. The plan appears to be to enforce existing laws better

The best ideas about reducing gun violence are based on legalizing many illicit drugs and providing better mental health care.

[Missycim]

21. I don't, there shouldn't be a plan

unless its to bring about a federal reperocity carry law. Fix the flawed system where people with mental issues don't get reported to the right people.