Goodlatte will be key player in gun control debate
Bob Goodlatte
Last Friday’s school shooting in Newtown, Conn., has reignited a national debate over gun control and calls for action in the next Congress. Republican Rep. Bob Goodlatte of Roanoke County could be a key player in the process, and a potential brake on a push for new gun control measures.
Goodlatte is the incoming chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over firearms regulations. He has an “A” rating from the politically muscular National Rifle Association, which has led the charge to block new gun control laws in Congress and in state legislatures.
The Roanoke Times reached out Tuesday to Goodlatte’s office and to the other congressmen who represent parts of Southwest Virginia – Republicans Morgan Griffith of Salem and Robert Hurt of Chatham – to ask where they stand on issues such as reinstituting the assault weapons ban and requiring background checks for private sales at gun shows. In response, all three generally refrained from stating a position out of respect for the families of the Newtown victims.
Goodlatte issued this statement: “Our hearts and prayers as a nation are with Newtown. We must take a close look at what happened on Friday morning and what can be done to help avoid it in the future. However, today my focus remains on the community of Newtown and the families of the victims as they mourn the lives lost in this terrible tragedy.”
But Goodlatte told the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call that he does not favor tightening controls on firearms, such as banning assault weapons or high capacity magazines after the killings in Newtown last week.
“We’re going to take a look at what happened there and what can be done to help avoid it in the future, but gun control is not going to be something that I would support,” Goodlatte told Roll Call.
The gun control debate is heating up in Washington at a time when Goodlatte is hearing some rumblings of discontent from Republicans back in his home district. Last month, the GOP’s 6th District Congressional Committee called on Goodlatte to oppose the re-election of House Speaker John Boehner. In a letter to Goodlatte, the district committee complained that Boehner had not done enough to thwart President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul.
– Michael Sluss
December 19, 2012 - 1:43 PM
I sincerely hope Congressman Goodlatte will not have a closed mind on ways of addressing this national problem. -JG
“We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” -Albert Einstein
Is Congressman Goodlatte afraid of losing the support of the NRA? How can he NOT be in favor of regulating the use of assault weapons, etc. If he does not take a positive stand on this issue, he should not be re-elected!
And what is the problem? Violent crime rates have been falling since 1992. Do you think the insane and criminals obey the ‘gun-free zone’ laws? The kid killed himself when he heard footsteps from the police in the hallway. He didn’t want confrontation… He wanted easy targets. – The world is changing around us… Evil and desperation is everywhere. Also, if a stranger breaks through your front window, would you rather have a means to protect your babies, or pray the cops get there before the intruder has his way with your family? I know what my choice would be…
“We’re going to take a look at what happened there and what can be done to help avoid it in the future, but gun control is not going to be something that I would support,” Goodlatte told Roll Call.”
What if gun control becomes an element of the solution? Besides, who cares what he thinks ~ or the 6th district “self-anointed and appointed” committee wants ~ congressional representatives serve their entire districts. It’s time for Goodlatte to go ~ out to pasture in 2014! People in Roanoke county began saying this in 2008 and voices only grow more numerous since.
The overlooked factor in this tragedy is mental health programs in our country. We had at one time a system where mentally ill people were committed to an institution, where treatment and proper care would be provided. Mental health must be a part of the discussion. Remember the Oklahoma incident, Tim McVeigh did not use a gun. I am concerned that our current leadership will go too far in an attempt to demonize all firearms. We must have better reporting and record keeping of people who must not have access to any weapons. The Constitution is still the law of the land.
It is not surprising that Hurt dodged the question since he is an empty suit and only responds to the whims of corporate donors and the NRA. Cantor chose well when he backed Hurt as his puppet.
Respect hunters and traditional responsible gun owners. But there is also this: “They [conservatives, gun owners, NRA members] say it, not me: ‘The crazies have taken over the NRA.’” – Joe Scarborough
Assault weapons are very very rarely used in crimes for a lot of reasons. That they’re too big to conceal and very expensive even on the black market are two of the chiefest. Most cops are most worried about the smallest guns, ones they never see until it is too late. No, banning assault weapons is a bad choice. The cost of registering and enforcement alone will be too high and also the very real possibility of the Supreme Court striking the law down as unconstitutional. Then of all that time and effort wasted on something that wouldn’t even do any good except to make lawmakers ‘look’ like they’re doing something useful!
Most murders are actually committed by repeat felons upon other felons! Most of those are directly related to the drug trade. Legalizing pot would defund gangs and cartels greatly, reduce their fighting, and also keep criminals from growing pot and setting booby traps on public land.
“Goodlatte will be key player“, Reagan was way wrong on the “most terrifying words in the English language“. By far.
The facts are in 2010 there were about 12,996 people murdered by firearms in the US which works out to about 36 people per day (See http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl20.xls). These are the “word doctored” figures the news media and anti-gun folks like to publicize because people relate to the magnitude of those numbers and it sounds like a lot of people until you realize this is out of a population of 310 million Americans. In that context, it works out to about 1 person out of every 24,000 people being murdered by a firearm. Dwell on the magnitude of your individual significance next time you are in a stadium with 24,000 people. To me, 1 in 24,000 is an acceptable cost for the right to own a semi-automatic AR15 rifle with a standard 30 round magazine that has harmed no one. If 1 in 24,000 is too high, how about 1 in 860,000. That’s about the number of people that can be accommodated by 10 Dallas Cowboy stadiums. Would that be acceptable? That is the equivalent number of people (358 out of 310 million Americans) that were murdered with a rifle in 2010 (The AR15 is considered a type of rifle for you non-gun folks). If that is not an acceptable cost, than what is? Assuming you accept the fact that life is not risk free what number would ever satisfy you? If all the guns were banned, do you really think that would stop a person who is determined to kill a lot of people? Human beings adapt to situations and constraints – it’s called tactics. The school shooter probably chose the rifle (AR15) because it was available and met his needs. Ban all the guns and a determined individual could have used something else and there are a lot of other options thanks to the Internet. If you think this was a horrific crime, imagine the carnage and suffering if he had used a homemade flamethrower and accomplished the task in half the time. What would you ban then? Gasoline?
” To me, 1 in 24,000 is an acceptable cost for the right to own a semi-automatic AR15 rifle with a standard 30 round magazine that has harmed no one.”
That’s fine, Mr Smith. And your say is exactly as valuable as everyone else’s, and your vote worth exactly as much.
Good. Lets get rid of all the stupid bills currently proposed, and then proceed to have that serious conversation the gun haters keep talking about but cannot seem to calm down long enough to have.
We can talk about high capacity clippies, heat seeking bullets, exploding bullets, cop killer missiles, a-salt gun thingies, pistol grippers, barrel shroud watchemcalits, gun show donut holes, and all kinds of other false and misleading derp the anti-gun crowd knows NOTHING about.
I can’t imagine there is a human being on earth not interested in a serious conversation with you “Willy Snap”.
Touché, Sandi