Bush’s and Congress’ Corruption Endangers Our Lives and Killed an Honors Student
The following is a piece by former Justice Dept. US Attorney Ronald S. Safer who led the federal law enforcement fight against street gangs in Chicago.
We are focused these days, and rightly so, on public officials whose self-serving acts of corruption victimize American citizens. All well and good--provided we don't lose sight of an equally insidious, equally intractable, equally endemic form of corruption: the corruption that killed Starkesia Reed, a 14-year-old freshman honor student at Chicago's Harper High School. You've read about Starkesia. She was struck down by a stray bullet from a high-powered assault weapon last Friday morning as she stood in the sanctity of her own home.
I don't absolve the killer who fired the weapon. I think I earned my anti-street-crime bona fides as a federal prosecutor. But the killer had a big assist from Congress and our president. In 2004, those so-called public servants let lapse the federal law that banned assault weapons like the one that evidently killed Starkesia. Tuesday's Tribune reported that law enforcement sources have concluded that the shooter sprayed 29 rounds, hitting seven other houses on the stretch of South Honore Street where Starkesia lived.It is now lawful for companies to manufacture, sell and distribute these weapons. And it is lawful for a person to buy an assault weapon if he or she is not a felon.
Why did the president and Congress allow these weapons to again fill our streets?
Not because the law banning assault weapons was unpopular; poll after poll shows that the public favors gun control, particularly a ban on assault weapons.
Not because lawmakers and the president wanted to support law enforcement; most police unions and law enforcement organizations that spoke to the issue in 2004 favored renewing the ban. That made sense. Officers and agents are tired of being outgunned by criminals.
Not to protect the rights of hunters. I know of no deer or duck hunters who use assault rifles.
Not to allow people to protect their homes. It is the rare homeowner who goes to bed with an Uzi under his pillow.
And, most chilling, not because they didn't know that Starkesia Reed would have her precious life taken by one such weapon. They knew.
They did not know her lyrical name and they did not know the date: March 3, 2006. But they knew that legions of innocent children have been cut down in the crossfire of drive-by shootings.
Those drive-bys are precisely what these semi-automatic weapons--many of them convertible to automatic--are designed to execute. They're efficient, capable of quickly spraying a broad area with lethal bullets. Anyone in that area--an intended victim or a bystander like Starkesia--risks extermination.
Our elected officials in Washington, D.C., knew. They had to know. And they let it happen. Why?
Corruption. They weren't bribed by a gang. This corruption is more subtle. They were corrupted by fear. The National Rifle Association opposed the ban on assault weapons--just as it indiscriminately opposes any legislation to ban ammunition such as armor-piercing bullets that are designed to penetrate the supposedly bulletproof vests of law enforcement officers.
What do NRA leaders have that corrupts these politicians? Votes? Absolutely not. Their members are decidedly in the minority on the assault weapon issue.
They do, though, have money. Cold cash. And organization. They can withdraw the grease that lubricates the re-election machine of members of Congress. They can support a congressman's opponent with impressive resources. They are disciplined, single-issue-oriented and relentless in their opposition to anyone who has the audacity to suggest any weapon or ammunition controls be implemented.
I understand the politicians' concern. When I wrote an op-ed piece before the assault weapons ban lapsed, urging Congress to renew it, I received approximately 1,000 e-mails from NRA members. One was careless enough to attach the e-mail from an NRA leader who had forwarded my e-mail address to the organization's members and urged them to let me know how "alone" I was in my viewpoint.
The membership dutifully responded. Some of these e-mails were thoughtful and interesting. Some were threatening and criminal. (I concluded that the people who wrote the latter messages had skipped over the 1st Amendment to the Constitution in their haste to distort the 2nd. But I suspect they could name every member of the Simpson family.)
But remember, I am a harmless and powerless voice. I can only imagine the resources the NRA can train on those with the power to protect children like Starkesia against these weapons of slaughter.
Until we change our political system so that sound ideas rather than 30-second ads bought by private contributions decide our elections, we will have to rely on the courage of our elected officials to keep our children safe. I suppose even a brave lawmaker could ask, "What good would it do for me to act on this issue if it results in my being voted out of office and losing power?"
My response would be: "What good is being in office if it gives you the power to save the life of Starkesia Reed and all those who will tragically follow, yet you choose not to exercise it?"
That failure to act ratifies the corruption. The corruption that cost Starkesia Reed her young life.
----------
During the 1990s, then-Assistant U.S. Atty. Ronald S. Safer headed the Justice Department's prosecution of Chicago's Gangster Disciples.
The fact that dangerous assault rifles that are only intended for crime have poured onto our streets thanks to Bush and the Republican Leadership in Congress is further proof of the unholy alliance between the GOP and NRA which derives most of its revenues from gun manufacturers supplying criminals like the gang members who killed this young honors student.
The NRA only derives a portion of their revenues from the paltry dues of their members. On the other hand, there is a lot of money to be made supplying criminal gangs with weapons, and the NRA and gun manufacturers are happy to share some of that money bribing Republicans in office funding their re-election campaigns and taking them on trips (as well as threatening to unseat them through campaigning against them if they refuse to comply).
I would only add to to Mr. Safer’s piece that in addition to fear our elected officials are aware that they are paid prostitutes of the very organizations supplying guns and bullets to criminal gangs in America. How different are they than politicians who take bribes from the Mafia? No different at all.
2006 is an election year. Clear Congress of Criminals this November!
Joe
Fear kept Washington officials from standing up to the NRA
By Ronald S. Safer
Published March 10, 2006, Chicago Tribune
We are focused these days, and rightly so, on public officials whose self-serving acts of corruption victimize American citizens. All well and good--provided we don't lose sight of an equally insidious, equally intractable, equally endemic form of corruption: the corruption that killed Starkesia Reed, a 14-year-old freshman honor student at Chicago's Harper High School. You've read about Starkesia. She was struck down by a stray bullet from a high-powered assault weapon last Friday morning as she stood in the sanctity of her own home.
I don't absolve the killer who fired the weapon. I think I earned my anti-street-crime bona fides as a federal prosecutor. But the killer had a big assist from Congress and our president. In 2004, those so-called public servants let lapse the federal law that banned assault weapons like the one that evidently killed Starkesia. Tuesday's Tribune reported that law enforcement sources have concluded that the shooter sprayed 29 rounds, hitting seven other houses on the stretch of South Honore Street where Starkesia lived.It is now lawful for companies to manufacture, sell and distribute these weapons. And it is lawful for a person to buy an assault weapon if he or she is not a felon.
Why did the president and Congress allow these weapons to again fill our streets?
Not because the law banning assault weapons was unpopular; poll after poll shows that the public favors gun control, particularly a ban on assault weapons.
Not because lawmakers and the president wanted to support law enforcement; most police unions and law enforcement organizations that spoke to the issue in 2004 favored renewing the ban. That made sense. Officers and agents are tired of being outgunned by criminals.
Not to protect the rights of hunters. I know of no deer or duck hunters who use assault rifles.
Not to allow people to protect their homes. It is the rare homeowner who goes to bed with an Uzi under his pillow.
And, most chilling, not because they didn't know that Starkesia Reed would have her precious life taken by one such weapon. They knew.
They did not know her lyrical name and they did not know the date: March 3, 2006. But they knew that legions of innocent children have been cut down in the crossfire of drive-by shootings.
Those drive-bys are precisely what these semi-automatic weapons--many of them convertible to automatic--are designed to execute. They're efficient, capable of quickly spraying a broad area with lethal bullets. Anyone in that area--an intended victim or a bystander like Starkesia--risks extermination.
Our elected officials in Washington, D.C., knew. They had to know. And they let it happen. Why?
Corruption. They weren't bribed by a gang. This corruption is more subtle. They were corrupted by fear. The National Rifle Association opposed the ban on assault weapons--just as it indiscriminately opposes any legislation to ban ammunition such as armor-piercing bullets that are designed to penetrate the supposedly bulletproof vests of law enforcement officers.
What do NRA leaders have that corrupts these politicians? Votes? Absolutely not. Their members are decidedly in the minority on the assault weapon issue.
They do, though, have money. Cold cash. And organization. They can withdraw the grease that lubricates the re-election machine of members of Congress. They can support a congressman's opponent with impressive resources. They are disciplined, single-issue-oriented and relentless in their opposition to anyone who has the audacity to suggest any weapon or ammunition controls be implemented.
I understand the politicians' concern. When I wrote an op-ed piece before the assault weapons ban lapsed, urging Congress to renew it, I received approximately 1,000 e-mails from NRA members. One was careless enough to attach the e-mail from an NRA leader who had forwarded my e-mail address to the organization's members and urged them to let me know how "alone" I was in my viewpoint.
The membership dutifully responded. Some of these e-mails were thoughtful and interesting. Some were threatening and criminal. (I concluded that the people who wrote the latter messages had skipped over the 1st Amendment to the Constitution in their haste to distort the 2nd. But I suspect they could name every member of the Simpson family.)
But remember, I am a harmless and powerless voice. I can only imagine the resources the NRA can train on those with the power to protect children like Starkesia against these weapons of slaughter.
Until we change our political system so that sound ideas rather than 30-second ads bought by private contributions decide our elections, we will have to rely on the courage of our elected officials to keep our children safe. I suppose even a brave lawmaker could ask, "What good would it do for me to act on this issue if it results in my being voted out of office and losing power?"
My response would be: "What good is being in office if it gives you the power to save the life of Starkesia Reed and all those who will tragically follow, yet you choose not to exercise it?"
That failure to act ratifies the corruption. The corruption that cost Starkesia Reed her young life.
----------
During the 1990s, then-Assistant U.S. Atty. Ronald S. Safer headed the Justice Department's prosecution of Chicago's Gangster Disciples.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact that dangerous assault rifles that are only intended for crime have poured onto our streets thanks to Bush and the Republican Leadership in Congress is further proof of the unholy alliance between the GOP and NRA which derives most of its revenues from gun manufacturers supplying criminals like the gang members who killed this young honors student.
The NRA only derives a portion of their revenues from the paltry dues of their members. On the other hand, there is a lot of money to be made supplying criminal gangs with weapons, and the NRA and gun manufacturers are happy to share some of that money bribing Republicans in office funding their re-election campaigns and taking them on trips (as well as threatening to unseat them through campaigning against them if they refuse to comply).
I would only add to to Mr. Safer’s piece that in addition to fear our elected officials are aware that they are paid prostitutes of the very organizations supplying guns and bullets to criminal gangs in America. How different are they than politicians who take bribes from the Mafia? No different at all.
2006 is an election year. Clear Congress of Criminals this November!
Joe
posted by Joe | 3/11/2006 08:53:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home