H/T Bearing Arms.
The author asks this question of Tim Kaine,Why are you so dishonest, Senator?
The short answer is Tim Kaine is a DemocRat.
The author also disrespects the Grinch by saying Kaine smile like him.
I will use the Grinch’s picture but Tim’s.
Now that we know Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is the subject of at least five separate FBI investigations relating to national security, possible violations of federal record-keeping laws, obstruction of justice, and influence-peddling for profit, her relatively unvetted running mate, Virginia Senator Tim Kaine, is suddenly someone in need of vetting.
After all, if Clinton is convicted by any of the FBI investigations in Little Rock, Los Angeles, New York or the two separate investigations in the District of Columbia, the creepy senator with the Grinch’s smile will be our default President if Clinton is elected and then forced from office.
Kaine’s op-ed, Gun Violence Is a Public-Health Crisis, strongly suggests that while he’s very good at echoing his master’s radical rhetoric, he knows very little about the actual role of firearms in American society.
Let’s take a look at Kaine’s claims.
In every elected office I have held over the past 20 years, gun violence has been a serious issue. When I was mayor of Richmond, Virginia, our city had one of the highest homicide rates in the country. When I was governor, our commonwealth experienced the worst campus shooting in U.S. history. And as I serve in the U.S. Senate and our country falls victim to one mass shooting after another, Congress has yet to pass any commonsense gun safety legislation. Like many Americans, I own a gun and am a proud supporter of the Second Amendment, yet my experiences have shown me that supporting the right to bear arms should never stop us from ensuring our communities are as safe as possible.
Senator Kaine has certainly mastered the art of creative rhetoric, if not facts.
Mass Shootings have historically defined by the FBI as the killing of four or more people selected indiscriminately, not including the perpetrator with no cooling off period. Often, the definition was further constrained by excluding gang violence. Congress broadened the definition in 2013 by dropping the number of victims to three in 2013, and no long excluded gang shootings. Because of this redefining of the term, the number of mass shootings increased even though the number of incidents that the public would recognize as a mass shooting stayed the same.
Noting that there is a great deal of money to be made in selling fear, mainstream media outlets and the the Democrat Party completely abandoned reason in 2014-15, and began using the self-avowed anti-gun Mass Shooting Tracker web site as their source of mass shooting data. The definition there is even more loose, requiring just four people to be shot, including the suspect.
The statistical effect of changing the terms has been dramatic as it has been dishonest. The grotesque and intentional over-inflation of mass shootings even caused the editor of radically left-wing Mother Jones, MArk Folman, to turn up his nose in disgust last year.
Take a moment to consider what type of violent event that headline just brought to mind. The places and horrifying attacks you likely recalled surface instantly for most of us when we see or hear the term “mass shooting”—Columbine and Virginia Tech. Aurora and Sandy Hook. Charleston and San Bernardino.
Even as these mass shootings have grown more frequent and loom large in our consciousness, they are a tiny fraction of America’s gun violence and remain relatively rare. Yet manynews outlets keep declaring that there have been upwards of “355 mass shootings this year” or “more than one mass shooting per day.” Many gun control advocates say the same.
This wildly inflated statistic isn’t just misleading the public—it’s stirring undue fear and may be encouraging bad policies.
In fact, there have been four mass shootings this year. Or, if you count using the federal government’s current criteria—three or more victims killed in an indiscriminate public rampage—there have been six mass shootings this year.
Tim Kaine, like Hillary Clinton, is lying to you about mass shootings.
Tim Kaine, like Hillary Clinton, is also lying to you about “gun violence.”
In fact, “gun violence” doesn’t even exist. Gang violence does.
Some call it “gun violence,” a definition greatly appreciated by Democratic politicians like those at City Hall. They can point to guns and take that voter anger over homicide numbers and channel it into a safe space.
But there are plenty of guns in the suburbs, and suburbanites aren’t slaughtering each other.
It’s the gang wars.
Politicians know that the gangs are reason for the deaths. Calling it “gun violence” is much safer, especially in wards where gangs often provide political muscle.
Kaine is not more honest when he speaks of the gun control efforts he pushed while Virginia’s governor.
I also worked to make improvements to our background check system, issuing an executive order to ensure that those declared mentally ill and dangerous would be entered into a national database and barred from purchasing weapons. Unfortunately, efforts to close the gun show loophole—which allows anyone, including felons, potential terrorists, and domestic abusers, to purchase weapons without any background check—were undermined in the Virginia legislature, largely under pressure from the National Rifle Association.
The ‘gun show loophole” is of course fictional. Gun dealers must perform a NICS background check for every firearm they sell, regardless of where they sell it, whether that is in a brick-and-mortar gun shop, a small business operated out of the home, or at a gun show. It’s also well-worth nothing that the additional gun control Kaine pushed while governor did absolutely nothing to stop the Washington Navy Yard mass shooter, who passed Kaine’s heightened background checks and still obtained a firearm and murdered 12 before he was gunned down.
But Kaine isn’t close to being done with being dishonest.
More recently, in December 2015, the Senate failed to stand up to the NRA and rejected another commonsense bipartisan measure that would have made it illegal for people on the no-fly list to be prohibited from purchasing weapons. If someone has been deemed too dangerous to be allowed on an airplane, why should they be permitted to purchase a firearm?
If Senator Kaine was capable of being honest—and we’re seeing very little evidence that he is capable of being honest—he would admit that Senate Democrats weren’t just attempting to restrict the rights of those on the “no fly” list, but those on the much much broader and completely arbitrary terror watch list, where bureaucrats can rob you of your rights without any evidence at all, and sometimes merely to meet quotas.
We’re now discovering that the “terrorist” watch lists these Bolshevik Democrats wanted to use to seize power are to a large degree completely arbitrary, and at least one federal law enforcement branch just adds people to the terror watch lists to meet government quotas.
You could be on a secret government database or watch list for simply taking a picture on an airplane. Some federal air marshals say they’re reporting your actions to meet a quota, even though some top officials deny it.
The air marshals, whose identities are being concealed, told 7NEWS that they’re required to submit at least one report a month. If they don’t, there’s no raise, no bonus, no awards and no special assignments.
“Innocent passengers are being entered into an international intelligence database as suspicious persons, acting in a suspicious manner on an aircraft … and they did nothing wrong,” said one federal air marshal.
These unknowing passengers who are doing nothing wrong are landing in a secret government document called a Surveillance Detection Report, or SDR. Air marshals told 7NEWS that managers in Las Vegas created and continue to maintain this potentially dangerous quota system.
“Do these reports have real life impacts on the people who are identified as potential terrorists?” 7NEWS Investigator Tony Kovaleski asked.
“Absolutely,” a federal air marshal replied.
Democrats have spent the weeks following the deadliest Islamic terror attack since 9/11 proving that they are among of the most immoral and shameless people in the world.
They started by attempting to shift the blame for the attack from a single Islamic terrorist who conducted it, or even radical Islam the ideology, to try and pin the blame on the National Rifle Association, the firearms industry, and the more than 120+ million law-abiding Americans who own guns.
They all did it, from President Obama, to Vice President Joe Biden, to presumptive Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton, Democrats in both houses of Congress, to empty-headed Hollywood liberals, to the Stepin Fetchit news media, to know-nothing university Marxists.
They called for bans on common firearms. Some called for repealing the Second Amendment entirely, and even openly opined about gun confiscation (without volunteering to try it themselves, of course).
They staged a “sit-in” for the sole purpose of fund-raising off the deaths of 49 people.
As deplorable and disgusting as all of that is, arguably their worst offense is the attempt to ram through legislation that would deny the right to anyone on a the so called “terror watch list” (actually one of several databases) to buy firearms, even though the lists contain nearly 700,000 names and 40% of the people on the lists are not being investigated and have no known ties to any terror group.
House and Senate Democrats simply hoped to use fear stoked during this Islamic terror attack to gut the 2nd, 5th, and 14th Amendment rights of Americans and give themselves more power and set a precedent to use Soviet-style secret lists to control and silence their political opponents.
That’s a lovely Constitution you have there, America. It would be a shame if something… happened it it.
But Kaine isn’t done yet.
We have to make a decision about what matters to us. When gun deaths in Virginia outnumber automobile deaths, we have to treat this like the public health crisis it is. Will we have the courage to stand up to a gun lobby that no longer represents the views of American gun owners but instead represents the gun manufacturers?
Here in reality, we know that both criminal and accidental deaths with firearms are at or near all time historical lows, even as firearms ownership is more widespread than over.
A couple of new studies reveal the gun-control hypesters’ worst nightmare…more people are buying firearms, while firearm-related homicides and suicides are steadily diminishing. What crackpots came up with these conclusions? One set of statistics was compiled by the U.S. Department of Justice. The other was reported by the Pew Research Center.
According to DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. gun-related homicides dropped 39 percent over the course of 18 years, from 18,253 during 1993, to 11,101 in 2011. During the same period, non-fatal firearm crimes decreased even more, a whopping 69 percent. The majority of those declines in both categories occurred during the first 10 years of that time frame. Firearm homicides declined from 1993 to 1999, rose through 2006, and then declined again through 2011. Non-fatal firearm violence declined from 1993 through 2004, then fluctuated in the mid-to-late 2000s.
We’re quite thrilled that automobile safety has improved to the point that they’re nearly as safe as firearms, Senator. It’s wonderful that Chevy and Honda are finally taking fewer lives than Glock and Colt.
The fact remains that most of firearms fatalities you’re using in your dishonest comparison are not accidents (there are far more car accidents than gun crimes), nor are they criminal acts (which are on a multi-decade decline from when the last time a Clinton was president). The vast majority of firearms deaths in the United States—roughly two-thirds—are suicides. Those are acts of self-harm, not criminal violence.
Why are you so dishonest, Senator?
read more