Nearly 150 CEOs send letter to Congress urging action on gun violence

Originally published at:


Unfortunately, our government is dominated by honest politicians.

1 Like

So, mass shootings are bad for business now, or what?

Seriously, though - I hope at least some of those who signed the letter will put their and their corporations money where their mouths are and allocate campaign contributions accordingly.


Nothing about a DMV (ATF?) and required liability insurance for guns? – The most business-friendly approach to the issue – from America’s CEO’s™? I sold a vehicle recently, and dealt with the title transfer, and still got a scary letter from the DMV about civil penalties because I cancelled the insurance (and the insurance company contacted the DMV to alert them to this fact) before that title transfer was completed. I spent two days scrambling around with the buyer and the DMV to sort this out. I sure would love to see gun owners jump through at least as many hoops.


No reaction to the letter as of yet from Senate Republicans. Shocking, I know.

So confusing, when their masters and sugar daddies suddenly tell them to stop doing what they’ve been telling them to do for years.

Tick-tock, ammosexuals.


They’ll have to clear their responses with their supervising officers first.


The GOP:


Just a point on clarification from the image featured on the post:

It isn’t a “gun show loop hole”. You could call it a “private sales loop hole”. If you go to a gun show 90-95% of guns being sold there is being sold by FFLs and you have to go through the same NICS check and adhere to the same laws as anywhere else. You will find private individuals looking to sell/trade, and some tables are of someone trying to sell an estate, thin their collection, or otherwise have a private sale - not through an FFL.

The common conception is that every gun in there is free to buy with no checks and that isn’t true for the vast majority of them.


“Don’t ask me what we haven’t done. We have done it,” she added. “If you are annoyed with my impatience, it’s because people are dying because Sen. McConnell hasn’t acted. Why don’t you go ask him if he has any regrets for all the people who died because he hasn’t acted?”

I agree with her that the inaction here is completely on Mitch’s shoulders, but I think she’s being a little disingenuous about the optics of passing a bill and then going on a six-week vacation and hoping for the best from your caustic, evil co-worker.



Makes me think of George Lakoff’s work on “framing.”

If I understand the concept correctly, negating the frame winds up activating the frame. In other words, the more talk about possible gun restrictions, the more folks are prompted to go out purchase more weapons and ammo. This is red meat for their paranoid fantasies.

Might be better to work on restrictions upstream, i.e., hold the gun and ammo manufacturers responsible, maybe allowing victims and their families the right to sue them.


There was a good article by former FBI Director Andrew McCabe about the limitations of the NICS system. One of the things he proposed is a longer time limit than the current 3 days for full NICS checks. He cited that about 4,000 sales per year complete without the NICS check due to time-out, that end up being to people who do not pass the background check. Then the FBI has to issue an order to ATF to retrieve the guns from the purchaser, which isn’t very successful.

Most of those 4,000 illegal sales per year take place at gun shows. So it’s still a functional end-around of the system.


I’ve been talking about that for ages. Mandatory liability insurance would not only be a market friendly way to encourage responsible gun ownership (something the NRA apparently opposes tooth and nail) but also close the national level data collection loopholes which give us a brisk illegal gun trade (“the iron pipeline”).

What you may not realize is all property/casualty insurance policy information is kept at a national level for purposes of combating fraud. Having to open up policies every time you buy a new gun creates a separate set of eyes which can flag down suspicious purchases and gun hoarding. Best of all it can’t be used as a pretext for confiscation (the typical ammosexual argument against such data gathering)


Why is everyone fixated on background checks and “red flags”?

Many mass shootings happen due to people who passed background checks, or obtained their weapons from people who did.

Nancy Lanza would have cleared a background check, and we all know how that went.

How about we keep the gun ownership restricted to the well regulated militias? Or would that be unconstitutional?


All of this is because the ATF is not allowed to adequately collect national level gun ownership data. Thanks to NRA lobbying efforts. The number of end runs around the system are so great it has become a vigorous interstate illegal trade.


Its more of a fix for the illegal gun trade which fuels street crime related gun death. A far more common threat. As of now, thanks to the NRA, it is virtually impossible to distinguish between a law abiding gun buyer and an interstate gun smuggler.

1 Like

congress only has 40 more days in session this year, republicans are just running out the clock, remember tiny schoolkids were slaughtered, nothing changed

most of those 150 corporations donate to both parties to hedge their bets, if they really wanted change they would alter that balance dramatically


Yeah, the NRA (and related gun industry corps) called dibs on em with their campaign contributions. Nothing left over to give but ‘thoughts and prayers.’


I suspect some of it is there is a possibility of consensus and actual progress on the background check issue.

1 Like

Yeah, that’s it exactly. How many companies use guns as an active part of doing business? Guns are bad for the employees and customers both.

1 Like