TUCSON, Ariz. Former Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords is taking to the airwaves in hopes of persuading Congress to approve gun-control measures.
A political action committee formed by Giffords and husband Mark Kelly says it began airing a TV commercial Monday that shows images of the aftermath of four mass shootings and an on-camera appeal by Giffords for congressional action.
She's recovering from a head wound suffered in a January 2011 shooting in Tucson that left six people dead.
The ad notes that nine in 10 Americans support universal background checks, a finding that came in a recent CBS News/New York Times poll.
Americans for Responsible Solutions says the ad is airing in Washington and in home districts and states of congressional leaders in San Francisco, Cincinnati, Las Vegas and Louisville, Ky.
Group spokeswoman Jen Bluestein will only say the cost of the airtime tops $100,000.
"Take it from me - Congress must act," Giffords says at the end of the commercial with her husband by her side. "Let's get this done."
In remarks at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on gun violence last month, Giffords made a defiant call for Congress to "be bold" and "act" on gun violence.
"Too many children are dying," she said. "We must do something."
Giffords read slowly but forcefully from prepared remarks, and acknowledged that "speaking is difficult."
"But I need to say something important. Violence is a big problem," she said. "It will be hard. But the time is now. You must act. Be bold. Be courageous. Americans are counting on you."
We need to get the lunatics off the streets.
Apparently, some members of the government would rather circumvent the constitution, which they have sworn to uphold, than to amend it where it would matter, the 1at amendment and not the 2nd.
Criminals will never go through background checks because criminals get their guns in the black market, they don't buy at gun shows.
http://www.infowars.com/why-the-banking-elite-wants-riots-in-america/
Because they aren't biased. Jeesh.
Take a look at the REAL polls when the issue is explained in an unbiased and factual way.
Very few people want to establish a de-facto gun registry, or expand the list of prohibited purposes to include anyone arrested (not convicted, just arrested) on certain charges.
Or how about losing your 2nd Amendment rights because you took a mental evaluation, no matter what the results were and who ordered it.
Mandatory background checks are a solution looking for a problem. Less than 5% of all 'crime guns' are traced to private transfers.
Almost 50% of illegal guns are traced to 'straw' buyers who knowingly purchase firearms (and can pass a check) for criminals. Less than 100 people were even prosecuted for this last year.
When this is explained, most people see that mandatory background checks have more problems than solutions.
But I wouldn't hold my breath to hear that from the New York Times...
a) the number of people responding to it
b) the mood of the people who responded
Unless the poll was taken by 200 million people, it does not reflect every voting-eligible adult in this country.
C. the actual question asked (and if there were reservations required by the respondent.. such as, are background checks ok if NO national registry database is maintained?)
D. Impartiality on the part of the pollsters (CBS and any New York publication owned holly or in part by Mayor Bloomberg immediately are invalidated)