Following the successful passage of a bill in Connecticut
restricting gun use, a political bar had been crossed. It is a considerable
understatement to say that the political rhetoric wielded mostly by Democrats,
without which the bill might not have passed, was overheated. To a man and
woman, the chief actors – Governor Dannel Malloy and most Democratic leaders in
the General Assembly – insisted time and again that their legislation would
prevent such events as the mass slaughter at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
“One Connecticut
rifle manufacturer is leaving the state because of its strict new gun
restrictions,” Maureen Dowd wrote in a New York Times column, a provocation to which
newly elected U.S. Senator
Chris Murphy responded, “If we made our schools safer at the expense of a handful
of jobs, I think that’s a trade-off we have to make.”
The Connecticut legislation did pass with the bi-partisan
support of Republican leaders in the General Assembly, two of whom, State
Senator John McKinney and State Representative Larry Cafero, managed to put
their fingerprints on the legislation without resorting to the kind of
boilerplate prose that moved Mr. Murphy to launch at the National Rifle
Association (NRA) several nuclear tipped rhetorical missiles.
Mr. Malloy was incautious enough to include Connecticut
manufacturers of so called “assault weapons” -- defined by those who wish to
abolish them as any weapon used in an assault -- among the impets fluttering
around the NRA. On the Sunday after he signed the gun restriction bill into
law, Mr. Malloy visited CNN’s show “State of the Union,” friendly ground, and fragged the gun
industry. “What this is about,” said Mr. Malloy, “is the ability of the gun
industry to sell as many guns to as many people as possible—even if they are
deranged, even if they are mentally ill, even if they have a criminal
background. They don’t care. They want to sell guns.”
Back at home in Connecticut, Joe Bartozzi – the Senior Vice President and
General Counsel of the oldest family-owned and operated firearms manufacturer
in America, O.F. Mossberg & Sons, located in North Haven, Connecticut – saw
the program and dashed off a letter to Mr. Malloy.
“In a recent letter to us,” Mr. Bartozzi wrote to the governor, “you
stated that you hoped our company would stay here in Connecticut and that we
can have am ‘open an honest dialogue’ over issues where we may disagree. Your
letter went on to say that there is in Connecticut ‘an administration that has
been consistently dedicated to supporting the kind of precision manufacturing
that takes place at your company.’ I would submit that your recent public (emphasis original) comments about
our industry are not at all consistent with your private (emphasis original) letter to us. With all due respect,
your comments came across as insulting and slanderous to our employees and to
our industry, and appear to be politically motivated as opposed to constructive
or meaningful.”
Hard to imagine – a politician priming the rhetorical pump for political
reasons.
Mr. Bartozzi pointed out to Mr. Malloy that his company had gone on the
public record, both in public hearings and in private consultations with legislators,
to support real world solutions to mass murders in public schools. His company, Mr. Bartozzi wrote, supported
measures to prevent access to firearms prohibited to criminals and other at-risk
people, repairing and updating the National Instant Check System (NICS), making
available to the NICS data base system relevant mental health records and restraining
order status and enforcing current laws against the illegal possession of
weapons. He reminded Mr. Malloy that his company has already distributed, free
of charge, “over nine and a half million firearm locking devices to help gun
owners keep their firearms securely stored and inaccessible to children or at rick
individuals in their homes.”
Both Mr. Malloy and Mr. Murphy are familiar with Mr. Bartozzi’s prudent
and common sense ideas, and both would have found it very difficult politically
to acknowledge them while demagoging the gun industry. It is never a good idea in politics to give your scapegoat an opportunity to plead innocent. Mr. Malloy
and Mr. Murphy simply found it convenient to keep Mr. Bartozzi’s practical
suggestions close to their chests while their largely self-serving demagogic rampage
was in full eruption. While Mr. Murphy was slaying the NRA dragon and Mr.
Malloy was putting the horns on gun manufacturer in his home state, U.S. Senator
Dick Blumenthal was attending to more mundane matters, for which he was
reproved by the New Haven Register.
The paper did NOT say in its editorial that U.S. Senator
Dick Blumenthal ought not to be raising campaign funds from atop the bodies of
20 slain school children; this would have been irregular and, perhaps worst,
impolite.
The editorial said that U.S. Representative Chris Murphy and
Governor Dannel Malloy were “helping give voice to the victims’ families” in
Washington D.C. preceding a vote on a gun regulation bill, a ghostly shadow of
Connecticut’s far stronger bill. However, the paper noted,
“The issue took a disgusting political turn on Thursday, though, when U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.,
used Sandy Hook to raise money. The money is not for one of the relief funds
set up to help victims’ families, or to fund mental health services, or to
support autism research… In the wake of the horror of the December 14, 2012,
massacre of 20 beautiful children and 6 dedicated educators, Blumenthal is
asking supporters to send money to his 2016 re-election campaign!... Using the
‘horror’ of the ‘massacre of 20 beautiful children’ at a time when critical
legislation honoring their memory is at stake to beg for $5 for your next political
campaign is as tasteless as it gets.”
Mr. Blumenthal, the
eighth richest millionaire senator in Congress, wrote in an auto-appeal
to his prospective campaign contributors – some of whom may reside in stricken
Newtown -- “In the wake of the horror of the December 14, 2012, massacre of 20
beautiful children and 6 dedicated educators… As your senator, I will continue
fighting for the rights of all the people, not the special interests. But I
need your help, Please contribute $5 now as the Senate debate continues on
common-sense gun reform legislation this week.”
Mr. Murphy later
defended Mr. Blumenthal’s poorly timed campaign pitch: “People want to
support the work that we do and right now people supporting the work we are
doing is on this bill.”
Asked by a reporter if using the Sandy Hook slaughter as a
pitch for money was “insensitive,” Mr. Blumenthal, avoiding a direct answer,
responded “I am committed to working with the families in fighting for the
cause of gun violence prevention.”
In the past, Mr. Blumenthal several times claimed before
various select groups – inadvertently, he hotly protested – that he had served
in the military in Vietnam. The false claims were picked up by the New York Times and used by Linda McMahon,
then running as a Republican for the U .S. Senate, as a battering ram against
the impregnable Mr. Blumenthal, who suffered the minor annoyance with great
tolerance, went into hiding near the end of his campaign and finally emerged
victorious. After 20 years handling press inquiries as Connecticut’s crusading
Attorney General, Mr. Blumenthal has got the dodge dance down pat: When
confronted with a hostile question, answer the question you wished you had been
asked; then shut up and make yourself scarce.
Comments