NRA – RI Future

June 21, 2016

RI legislators not returning illegal campaign donations

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Despite the NRA paying a record fine for making illegal campaign donations to Rhode Island politicians, to date, not one current office holder in the state has seen fit to return the money.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) was fined by the RI Board of Elections for funneling illegal donations to RI politicians, including House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello and Senate President M Teresa Paiva-Weed. One estimate puts the total amount of contributions at over $160,000, over a 10 year period from 2004 to 2014. Due to the detective work of Sam Bell, executive director of the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats of America, the NRA was fined $63,000 and the NRA’s Rhode Island PAC was formally dissolved.

Technically, any money received by any candidate in Rhode Island that comes from the NRA Political Victory Fund PAC before January 2014 was illegal. That doesn’t mean that it’s a crime to keep the money after the fact, and it’s likely that the politicians did not know that the campaign donations were illegal before Bell made his case.

That said, the bottom line is that the money these politicians accepted from the NRA is tainted, and the influence this money has on our General Assembly can be felt acutely when observing the legislature in action.

Are you still wondering why our General Assembly can’t seem to pass common sense gun control legislation?

Between 2004 and 2014, House Speaker Nick Mattiello received $2,975 from the NRA. All these donations appear to be illegal, tainted contributions. The Speaker has kept every penny. Seventeen other representatives have also taken thousands of dollars.

Joseph McNamara is the head of the RI Democratic Party, the same party whose national platform calls for banning assault weapons and strengthening gun laws to prevent violence. McNamara accepted $700 in illegal NRA contributions over the years.

During the same 10 year period, Senate President M Teresa Paiva-Weed has accepted, and kept, what appears to be $6,075 in illegal contributions from the NRA. Seventeen other senators took illegal NRA cash, including Senate Majority Leader Domenic Ruggerio, who raked in $3350 and Senate Judiciary Chair Michael McCaffrey, whose committee handles every bill about guns that comes to the Senate, to the tune of$3500.

Rep Jan Malik, who was recently challenged by his primary opponent Jason Knight to return his illegal donations, took $1075. On the last day of the most recent legislative session, Rep Malik voted for a House bill that would have made it easier to get concealed carry permits in RI before changing his vote after the fact.

I went through the campaign finance reports available here, and carefully made a list of all incumbents who have accepted NRA money between 2004 and 2014.

Here’s the list:

In addition to Representatives and Senators, Attorney General Peter Kilmartin has accepted $1150 in illegal donations.

Attorney General KILMARTIN, PETER F   03/30/2004   $200.00
Attorney General KILMARTIN, PETER F   03/07/2006   $250.00
Attorney General KILMARTIN, PETER F   04/27/2007   $200.00
Attorney General KILMARTIN, PETER F   12/31/2009   $200.00
Attorney General KILMARTIN, PETER F   03/04/2009   $300.00

Former Speaker of the House, William Murphy, now a lobbyist, raked in a series of illegal NRA contributions. He now rakes in even more as a lobbyist for gun interests.

Lobbyist MURPHY, WILLIAM J   02/05/2004   $500.00
Lobbyist MURPHY, WILLIAM J   02/05/2004   $500.00
Lobbyist MURPHY, WILLIAM J   04/14/2006   $350.00
Lobbyist MURPHY, WILLIAM J   04/27/2007   $1,000.00
Lobbyist MURPHY, WILLIAM J   03/31/2005   $875.00
Lobbyist MURPHY, WILLIAM J   02/22/2009   $1,000.00
Lobbyist MURPHY, WILLIAM J   01/31/2008   $1,000.00

Representative   MATTIELLO, NICHOLAS   11/05/2006   $250.00
Representative   MATTIELLO, NICHOLAS   04/27/2007   $150.00
Representative   MATTIELLO, NICHOLAS   04/01/2008   $150.00
Representative   MATTIELLO, NICHOLAS   07/06/2010   $450.00
Representative   MATTIELLO, NICHOLAS   04/04/2011   $450.00
Representative   MATTIELLO, NICHOLAS   06/06/2012   $450.00
Representative   MATTIELLO, NICHOLAS   02/13/2013   $800.00
Representative   MATTIELLO, NICHOLAS   05/28/2009   $225.00

Representative   CARNEVALE, JOHN M   06/05/2010   $200.00
Representative   CARNEVALE, JOHN M   04/12/2011   $200.00
Representative   CHIPPENDALE, MICHAEL W   10/15/2012   $500.00
Representative   CORVESE, ARTHUR J   05/08/2004   $300.00
Representative   CORVESE, ARTHUR J   05/16/2005   $300.00
Representative   CORVESE, ARTHUR J   07/11/2006   $300.00
Representative   COSTA, DOREEN MARIE   10/15/2012   $500.00
Representative   DESIMONE, JOHN J   07/08/2004   $150.00
Representative   FELLELA, DEBORAH A   08/20/2006   $250.00
Representative   FELLELA, DEBORAH A   04/27/2007   $100.00
Representative   FELLELA, DEBORAH A   01/12/2010   $150.00
Representative   FELLELA, DEBORAH A   04/12/2011   $200.00
Representative   JACQUARD, ROBERT B   07/19/2004   $300.00
Representative   JACQUARD, ROBERT B   10/20/2004   $500.00
Representative   JACQUARD, ROBERT B   10/12/2006   $350.00
Representative   JACQUARD, ROBERT B   04/12/2011   $200.00
Representative   KENNEDY, BRIAN PATRICK   07/19/2004   $400.00
Representative   KENNEDY, BRIAN PATRICK   08/02/2006   $400.00
Representative   KENNEDY, BRIAN PATRICK   06/11/2009   $400.00
Representative   KENNEDY, BRIAN PATRICK   06/05/2010   $375.00
Representative   KENNEDY, BRIAN PATRICK   04/12/2011   $375.00
Representative   LIMA, CHARLENE       04/06/2004   $300.00
Representative   MACBETH, KAREN       11/01/2009   $100.00
Representative   MACBETH, KAREN       05/27/2010   $200.00
Representative   MACBETH, KAREN       12/08/2011   $200.00
Representative   MALIK, JAN       08/18/2004   $200.00
Representative   MALIK, JAN       11/19/2004   $250.00
Representative   MALIK, JAN       06/29/2005   $225.00
Representative   MALIK, JAN       09/06/2006   $300.00
Representative   MALIK, JAN       06/05/2010   $300.00
Representative   MCNAMARA, JOSEPH   05/26/2004   $200.00
Representative   MCNAMARA, JOSEPH   05/25/2005   $300.00
Representative   MCNAMARA, JOSEPH   06/16/2011   $200.00
Representative   MELO, HELIO       03/10/2010   $225.00
Representative   MELO, HELIO       04/12/2011   $200.00
Representative   NEWBERRY, BRIAN C   11/03/2006   $300.00
Representative   NEWBERRY, BRIAN C   05/29/2009   $150.00
Representative   NEWBERRY, BRIAN C   02/24/2010   $150.00
Representative   NEWBERRY, BRIAN C   06/29/2011   $200.00
Representative   NEWBERRY, BRIAN C   04/15/2013   $250.00
Representative   TRILLO, JOSEPH A   04/02/2004   $100.00
Representative   TRILLO, JOSEPH A   04/05/2004   $500.00
Representative   TRILLO, JOSEPH A   04/06/2004   $200.00
Representative   TRILLO, JOSEPH A   04/07/2004   $100.00
Representative   TRILLO, JOSEPH A   04/22/2004   $150.00
Representative   TRILLO, JOSEPH A   06/29/2005   $200.00
Representative   TRILLO, JOSEPH A   06/15/2006   $300.00
Representative   TRILLO, JOSEPH A   07/24/2007   $300.00
Representative   TRILLO, JOSEPH A   05/17/2008   $300.00
Representative   TRILLO, JOSEPH A   05/29/2009   $300.00
Representative   TRILLO, JOSEPH A   06/05/2010   $300.00
Representative   TRILLO, JOSEPH A   04/12/2011   $200.00
Representative   UCCI, STEPHEN R       11/19/2004   $500.00
Representative   UCCI, STEPHEN R       08/21/2006   $250.00
Representative   UCCI, STEPHEN R       11/02/2006   $200.00
Representative   UCCI, STEPHEN R       07/27/2007   $300.00
Representative   UCCI, STEPHEN R       06/29/2009   $200.00
Representative   UCCI, STEPHEN R       06/29/2009   $200.00
Representative   UCCI, STEPHEN R       06/25/2011   $200.00
Representative   UCCI, STEPHEN R       06/15/2010   $200.00
Representative   WINFIELD, THOMAS J   08/22/2004   $200.00
Representative   WINFIELD, THOMAS J   06/15/2006   $200.00
Representative   WINFIELD, THOMAS J   11/06/2006   $90.00
Representative   WINFIELD, THOMAS J   08/10/2007   $225.00

Senator   PAIVA WEED, M TERESA   02/24/2011   $1,000.00
Senator   PAIVA WEED, M TERESA   02/02/2012   $1,000.00
Senator   PAIVA WEED, M TERESA   08/12/2013   $800.00
Senator   PAIVA WEED, M TERESA   04/22/2004   $375.00
Senator   PAIVA WEED, M TERESA   05/14/2007   $500.00
Senator   PAIVA WEED, M TERESA   05/17/2008   $400.00
Senator   PAIVA WEED, M TERESA   02/11/2009   $1,000.00
Senator   PAIVA WEED, M TERESA   02/24/2010   $1,000.00

Senator   CICCONE III, FRANK A   07/10/2004   $150.00
Senator   CICCONE III, FRANK A   05/25/2005   $225.00
Senator   CICCONE III, FRANK A   06/21/2006   $300.00
Senator   CICCONE III, FRANK A   11/03/2006   $300.00
Senator   CICCONE III, FRANK A   05/07/2007   $300.00
Senator   CICCONE III, FRANK A   04/15/2008   $300.00
Senator   CICCONE III, FRANK A   06/03/2009   $300.00
Senator   CICCONE III, FRANK A   06/12/2010   $300.00
Senator   CICCONE III, FRANK A   06/21/2013   $400.00
Senator   COTE, MARC A       03/23/2004   $200.00
Senator   COTE, MARC A       05/16/2005   $200.00
Senator   COTE, MARC A       06/15/2006   $200.00
Senator   COTE, MARC A       04/16/2008   $200.00
Senator   COTE, MARC A       04/06/2010   $200.00
Senator   DAPONTE, DANIEL       02/24/2010   $200.00
Senator   DAPONTE, DANIEL       04/12/2011   $200.00
Senator   DOYLE II, JAMES E   06/17/2006   $150.00
Senator   DOYLE II, JAMES E   03/31/2008   $300.00
Senator   FELAG JR, WALTER S   07/04/2004   $200.00
Senator   FELAG JR, WALTER S   09/01/2006   $300.00
Senator   FELAG JR, WALTER S   06/15/2008   $300.00
Senator   FELAG JR, WALTER S   03/03/2010   $300.00
Senator   FELAG JR, WALTER S   04/12/2011   $300.00
Senator   FOGARTY, PAUL W       05/13/2004   $100.00
Senator   FOGARTY, PAUL W       07/01/2005   $150.00
Senator   FOGARTY, PAUL W       09/21/2007   $150.00
Senator   FOGARTY, PAUL W       01/10/2008   $150.00
Senator   FOGARTY, PAUL W       06/11/2009   $200.00
Senator   GALLO, HANNA M       06/01/2004   $150.00
Senator   GALLO, HANNA M       05/24/2005   $150.00
Senator   GALLO, HANNA M       05/17/2008   $150.00
Senator   GALLO, HANNA M       08/05/2009   $200.00
Senator   GALLO, HANNA M       04/28/2011   $200.00
Senator   GALLO, HANNA M       04/12/2011   $200.00
Senator   GOODWIN, MARYELLEN   08/16/2004   $150.00
Senator   GOODWIN, MARYELLEN   07/09/2010   $200.00
Senator   GOODWIN, MARYELLEN   05/13/2011   $200.00
Senator   LYNCH PRATA, ERIN P   06/08/2009   $200.00
Senator   LYNCH PRATA, ERIN P   06/10/2010   $200.00
Senator   LYNCH PRATA, ERIN P   04/12/2011   $200.00
Senator   MCCAFFREY, MICHAEL J   07/21/2004   $500.00
Senator   MCCAFFREY, MICHAEL J   07/21/2005   $750.00
Senator   MCCAFFREY, MICHAEL J   08/06/2006   $750.00
Senator   MCCAFFREY, MICHAEL J   08/07/2007   $750.00
Senator   MCCAFFREY, MICHAEL J   06/24/2008   $750.00
Senator   MCCAFFREY, MICHAEL J   06/05/2009   $750.00
Senator   MCCAFFREY, MICHAEL J   06/15/2010   $750.00
Senator   MCCAFFREY, MICHAEL J   05/20/2011   $750.00
Senator   MCCAFFREY, MICHAEL J   06/28/2013   $400.00
Senator   PICARD, ROGER A       07/19/2004   $200.00
Senator   PICARD, ROGER A       08/03/2005   $200.00
Senator   PICARD, ROGER A       05/15/2006   $250.00
Senator   PICARD, ROGER A       06/20/2009   $300.00
Senator   PICARD, ROGER A       06/12/2010   $150.00
Senator   RAPTAKIS, LEONIDAS P   05/10/2006   $300.00
Senator   RAPTAKIS, LEONIDAS P   07/24/2007   $300.00
Senator   RAPTAKIS, LEONIDAS P   06/30/2008   $300.00
Senator   RAPTAKIS, LEONIDAS P   02/26/2013   $250.00
Senator   RAPTAKIS, LEONIDAS P   07/19/2004   $300.00
Senator   RUGGERIO, DOMINICK J   05/19/2004   $300.00
Senator   RUGGERIO, DOMINICK J   05/25/2005   $300.00
Senator   RUGGERIO, DOMINICK J   05/10/2006   $300.00
Senator   RUGGERIO, DOMINICK J   04/27/2007   $300.00
Senator   RUGGERIO, DOMINICK J   05/17/2008   $300.00
Senator   RUGGERIO, DOMINICK J   02/21/2013   $500.00
Senator   RUGGERIO, DOMINICK J   05/29/2009   $300.00
Senator   RUGGERIO, DOMINICK J   02/24/2011   $450.00
Senator   RUGGERIO, DOMINICK J   02/08/2012   $500.00
Senator   SERPA, PATRICIA A   07/01/2009   $150.00
Senator   SERPA, PATRICIA A   06/05/2010   $150.00
Senator   SERPA, PATRICIA A   07/18/2011   $200.00
Senator   SERPA, PATRICIA A   03/30/2013   $250.00
Senator   SHEEHAN, JAMES C   05/04/2004   $150.00
Senator   SHEEHAN, JAMES C   07/08/2005   $150.00
Senator   SHEEHAN, JAMES C   07/24/2007   $100.00
Senator   SOSNOWSKI, V SUSAN   07/28/2004   $200.00
Senator   SOSNOWSKI, V SUSAN   10/18/2004   $100.00
Senator   SOSNOWSKI, V SUSAN   04/08/2008   $200.00
Senator   SOSNOWSKI, V SUSAN   03/02/2010   $200.00
Senator   SOSNOWSKI, V SUSAN   06/16/2011   $200.00
Senator   WALASKA, WILLIAM A   04/26/2004   $300.00
Senator   WALASKA, WILLIAM A   04/05/2005   $300.00
Senator   WALASKA, WILLIAM A   09/01/2006   $300.00
Senator   WALASKA, WILLIAM A   05/02/2007   $300.00
Senator   WALASKA, WILLIAM A   05/17/2008   $300.00
Senator   WALASKA, WILLIAM A   06/07/2009   $300.00
Senator   WALASKA, WILLIAM A   06/05/2010   $300.00
Senator   WALASKA, WILLIAM A   04/12/2011   $300.00

RI HOUSE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE   04/29/2004   $300.00
RI HOUSE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE   09/15/2005   $300.00
RI HOUSE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE   04/06/2006   $200.00

SENATE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE 04/21/2004 $625.00
SENATE DEMOCRATS 2004 PAC 08/16/2004 $600.00

June 15, 2016June 15, 2016

Knight challenges Rep Malik to return NRA cash

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Today Jason Knight called on his opponent, Jan Malik, to turn down the NRA‘s endorsement and return any donations he’s received from the gun lobby.

“The news coming out of Orlando is beyond heartbreaking. We lost mothers, fathers, and children to this senseless violence. Their families join the thousands who are destroyed every year by gun violence. The time to act is now. We need to do something. It’s the duty of our legislators to work to ensure we have done everything possible to prevent a tragedy like this and for there to be no doubt about their motivations.

“That’s why I’m calling on my opponent to do the right thing. Turn down the NRA’s endorsement and return any donations he’s received from the gun lobby. He has happily accepted money and support from the NRA and the gun lobby for years. In fact, he currently holds an A+ rating with the NRA,” Knight continued, “But it’s time he stand up for the people of this district and join the fight for common sense measures to prevent further tragedy. We need to ensure that background checks are universal, that guns are kept out of the hands of domestic abusers, and that assault weapons like the ones used in Orlando are kept off the streets and out of our schools. I served in our military and I know that those weapons have no place in our community.”

“I will not accept a dollar from the gun lobby and I will neither seek nor accept the endorsement of the NRA. I hope my opponent will do the same.”

[From a press release]
See: Jason Knight challenges Jan Malik in District 67

June 15, 2016June 15, 2016

Moms Demand Action walks out on Mattiello during prayer for Orlando

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Speaker Nicholas Mattiello opened yesterday’s House session by asking Rep Deborah Ruggiero to lead the chamber in a moment of silence and a prayer for the victims of the Pulse massacre in Orlando. In the galley, over a half dozen people representing Moms Demand Action stood up and left, tired of the meaningless platitudes and prayers offered by a General Assembly that does nothing to curb the easy access to the weapons used by mass murderers in this country.

Moms has advocated for a bill to take guns away from domestic abusers for three years. Every year the bill dies in committee.

Jennifer Smith Boylan, RI Chapter Leader at Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America told me after the walk-out, “As advocates for commonsense gun laws, Moms are weary of moments of silence and thoughts and prayers from our elected officials. We walked out to send a message that moments of silence do not disarm dangerous people who should not have easy access to firearms. We look to law makers to do their jobs and make laws to keep Rhode Islanders safe.”

With their heads bowed in a public display of of false piety, most of the legislators probably missed the walk out. Fortunately, I got it on video:

Moments earlier members of Moms Demand Action were on the floor of the House, where they presented the Speaker with 49 flowers, one for each victim killed in Orlando, and nearly 700 domestic violence post cards.. Mattiello was happy to take the flowers and find a place to display them, but offered no promises of legislative action that might stop killers from accessing weapons. Instead, he handed the problem of displaying the flowers and doing something with the post cards off to his staff and moved on. Conversation was all but impossible due to the ringing of the session bell.

Mattiello’s office has declined to answer my request for a comment on the status of pending gun legislation. But the Speaker told channel 12 “A terrorist militant is always going to find a way to access a weapon. Gun issue discussions are always valuable. However, not in this case.”

The Speaker has an A rating from the National Rifle Association. Former House Speaker William Murphy, is a highly paid NRA lobbyist and a close friend of Mattiello. The Speaker is more than happy to offer useless prayers, as he did when he issued his very first tweet from his new Twitter account on Sunday, but actually doing his job and passing common sense legislation to curb access to weapons that kill dozens in seconds is somehow beyond him.

With the General Assembly expected to wrap up all its business this week, it may already be too late to do anything about guns this legislative session. But that doesn’t mean that our legislators are off the hook.

This is an election year.

March 22, 2016March 22, 2016

Common sense gun legislation once again before House Judiciary

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The State House will be a raucous, contentious place this evening as a series of bills dealing with guns will be heard in the House Judiciary meeting in room 101 at the rise of the House, around 4:30-5pm. Testimony is expected to run until late in the evening. Ahead of the testimony the 2nd Amendment Coalition, the Official National Rifle Association (NRA) Affiliate for the State of Rhode Island, is holding a rally at 3pm in the State House rotunda and they will have a parade of guest speakers.

The Rhode Island Coalition Against Gun Violence (RICAGV) is backing three bills.

H7283 would take away guns from those convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors.

“Rhode Island law prohibits gun ownership and possession by individuals convicted of a domestic violence felony,” says the RICAGV, “This law is weaker than federal law which prohibits gun ownership and possession by those convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors. There is ample evidence that misdemeanor domestic violence offenders present an extreme risk to domestic partners when in possession of a firearm. Rhode Island should help protect the victims of domestic violence, not their abusers.”

H7243 would close a loophole that allows guns in schools and on school grounds.

“Concealed Carry Permit (CCP) holders can carry their weapons ‘everywhere’ including schools, but not in RI courthouses, airports and most government buildings,” says the RICAGV, “RI’s concealed carry law came into existence in 1990, long before Columbine and other school shootings, so schools were not exempted at that time. Currently, any CCP holder (staff, parent, visitor) can carry a firearm on school grounds including the school, surrounding property, parking lots, and after school sporting events and gatherings without knowledge of police or school officials.”

H7199, a high capacity magazine (HCM) ban, limits the number of rounds in a weapon to 10.

“Limiting HCMs to 10 rounds saves lives,” says the RICAGV, “Limiting rounds in a magazine requires that a shooter pause to change out the magazine. The shooter in Sandy Hook Elementary School killed 20 small children in less than 5 minutes with HCMs. Evidence reveals that several children escaped the schoolroom when his magazine jammed and he was forced to reload. Similarly, the shooter in the Gabby Gifford Tucson, AZ mass shooting was disarmed when he dropped his HCM clip during reloading. This enabled bystanders to subdue him saving lives.”

January 22, 2016January 22, 2016

Trio of common sense gun bills introduced in the House

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Last year, when Speaker Nicholas Mattiello brought the legislative season to an abrupt end, he said that the bills that did not come to the floor were “not very consequential” and “just not as important” as the legislation he had dealt with and passed. Among the bills that Mattiello deemed inconsequential and unimportant were three that dealt with guns.

Those three bills have just been reintroduced in the House.

H7199 criminalizes the manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale or transfer of any ammunition feeding device capable of accepting more than ten rounds. Two years ago, when this bill was first introduced, Jerry Belair, president of the Rhode Island Coalition Against Gun Violence asked the following question, “Rhode Island law limits the number of rounds to five when hunting deer. Rhode Island law limits the number of rounds to three when hunting ducks. If we can limit the number of rounds in a firearm to protect deer and ducks, how can we not limit the number of rounds to protect our children and citizens?”

H7243 provides that only peace officers and persons approved by the school authorities for the purposes of educational instruction may carry firearms or other weapons on school grounds. A similar bill was introduced last year and died in committee. Apparently the idea that someone might bring a gun into a school in Rhode Island without the knowledge of school administrators does not bother our legislature.

H7283 prohibits any person convicted of a misdemeanor offense under §12-29-2 (a crime involving domestic violence) from purchasing, owning, transporting, carrying, or possessing any firearm. A similar bill submitted last year died in committee after Frank Saccoccio of the Second Amendment Coalition successfully mischaracterized the bill as a gun grab in both the House and Senate committee meetings.

Last year a poll indicated that 80 percent of Rhode Islanders want to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers, yet when it came time for action, the General Assembly, under the leadership of Speaker Mattiello deemed the bills above “not very consequential” and “just not as important.”

What has to change in Rhode Island before common sense gun legislation can be passed? Mattiello has an A+ (100 percent) rating with the National Rifle Association (NRA). Senate President M Teresa Paiva-Weed has an A (93 percent) rating from the NRA.

November 29, 2015November 29, 2015

The great gun giveaway: Or, how easy is it to get a gun online

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The firearms industry and the consumers who rally against the notion of gun-safety measures do so using a public face of constitutional nobility. The rhetoric is one of rights and revolution as well as self defense for gun owners and their families. Yet, recently I was inadvertently given a glimpse into the world of the irresponsible marketing of guns and, in my experience, it is anything but noble.

Approximately six weeks ago, I was using the internet for its intended purpose: arguing with strangers about social policy issues while simultaneously binge-watching the latest Netflix series and shopping for the best online deals for boxer-briefs. During my bandwidth frenzy the social media debate in which I was engaged turned to the issue of gun laws. It must have been in the recent aftermath of one or another mass shooting. With the frequency of such occurrences, I cannot recall which one.

I made a comment concerning the relative ease of purchasing a firearm and was met with a strong opposing statement about how difficult it is to buy a gun. I believe I had said that peanut butter is too dangerous to bring on to school property, but certain lawmakers want to allow concealed firearms. I followed that up with something comparing the simplicity of buying a gun to that of buying peanut butter. Admittedly, this was not my best case argument to date. But, I was testing an angle. I decided to try an experiment.

Opening yet another browser window on my laptop, now hot to the touch due to the number of running applications, I typed into Google, “buy a gun online.” I clicked the first response that popped up. Six and a half minutes later, I had located a 9mm semi-automatic handgun, completed the background questionnaire, and been approved. I requested a hold for delivery to a nearby gun shop for pick up within six days. I also checked to see how long it would take to buy peanut butter online. For the record, ordering peanut butter for in-store pickup was quicker and easier by a good two or three minutes.

Also, for the record, I had no intention of actually purchasing a firearm. Nor do I plan on owning a gun. I rely heavily on statistics for most decisions and the numbers point to a much higher probability of something irreparably traumatic occurring to me or someone for whom I care than of requiring such a device for protection. I feel no need to repeat the statistics that have been accurately expressed ad nauseum by other sources. Suffice it to say, they all strongly suggest that more guns result in more shootings.

It was after I went through the online registration with the site that acted as the broker for my gun purchase that never was, that I started to receive the almost daily promotional e-mails from Gallery of Guns, a site that prices and deals in firearms. I had gone through something that called itself the Gun Genie. The primary address for the operation is in Prescott, Arizona. Yet, I also noticed a secondary address in Greensboro, North Carolina. I have no knowledge of Arizona. I did, however, live in Greensboro, North Carolina for six years. I went to college there. And, I cannot say that I am at all surprised that such an operation would exist in Greensboro.

But I digress. Below are some of the highlights from the e-mails that I have been receiving.

Then there was a bit of a shock when I was offered aan opportunity to enter for a chance to win not one, but two guns. Mind you, these are not just any guns. The Jericho 9mm is a nearly indestructible, polymer sidearm; and the Tavor is a unique, bullpup design, with a similar barrel-length and muzzle velocity to an AR-15 assault rifle. However, the configuration allows it to be more compact and maneuverable in close-combat situations. You know, like close-combat deer hunting and close-combat target shooting. Both are Israeli-design and versions are used by the Israeli military. I will be sure to let you all know more about their design characteristics if I win the “Great Gun Giveaway.”The last promotional e-mail is the real class-act. One might think that the day following the November 27 Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood siege, in which a gunman killed three and wounded four over the course of a six hour standoff, it would be in good taste to refrain from sending advertisements for military-style firearms. However, one would be wrong to think so. Advertised as a special for this weekend only, the ever popular AR-15 type weapon, touted here as the best gun for WSHF/WROL (without forward assist). If you do not know (I had to look it up) that stands for “when shit hits the fan,” and “without rule of law.” So, I suppose this is the one you would want to buy if you found yourself trapped by police after invading a women’s health facility and opening fire on unarmed, innocent civilians.

I cannot pinpoint exactly what to take away from my own story. I suppose the issue worthy of discussion is this: If guns are tools of either survival or of sport, why are they being marketed so hard. As soon as I provided one single point of contact, I have been bombarded with a barrage of marketing that has showed me a glimpse of the culture of the firearms market. These are instruments designed to maximize the efficiency with which a human being can cause life threatening injury or death to another living thing. When there are cries of guns getting into the hands of the wrong people and discussions of responsible gun owners, limiting access to convicted felons, or (the most recent scapegoat) the mentally ill, it holds even less weight than before I became aware of all the savings, deals, promotions, and shameless advertising tactics for tactical weapons.

This experience has further validated my suspicions of an industry and a culture that speaks out of both sides of its mouth when it promotes rights and responsibilities and then acts in such a sensational and classless manner, offering deals on AR-15 rifles the day after a national gun-related tragedy. And, as for the “Great Gun Giveaway,” yes, they have indeed given it away. But not just the gun. They gave away the whole scam.

October 14, 2015October 16, 2015

Support the RICAGV with Jim Langevin and Teresa Tanzi

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Congressman Jim Langevin and State Representative Teresa Tanzi will be the guests at a RI Coalition Against Gun Violence (RICAGV) fundraiser Thursday evening. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse is the honorary host, but is unable to attend. The event is taking place at a private residence and tickets are $50 per person. Contact RICoalitionAgainstGunViolence@gmail.com to purchase tickets and confirm the event’s address.

With the debate on guns in the United States taking a long slow turn against the intractable positions of the NRA (National Rifle Association) and towards instituting common sense gun legislation, it is only a matter of time before the RICAGV starts making real progress in the RI General Assembly.

Based on the first Democratic Party presidential debate it seems that a taste is developing for taking on the NRA with both Hilary Clinton and Martin O’Malley claiming the group as a political enemy. Even Bernie Sanders, thought to be “soft on guns” has a D- rating with the NRA and has consistently called for the kind of common sense legislation the RICAGV has been calling for in Rhode Island.

President Obama has issued an executive order and called for Congress to pass legislation that might deal with the almost daily issue of mass shootings.

State Senator M. Teresa Paiva-Weed and Speaker Nicholas Mattiello may well find that their staunch support for the NRA a political liability as the local Democratic Party moves ever further away from the values and positions of the national party.

Last year the RICAGV was stunned to find little appetite in the General Assembly to deal with guns. Bills to limit ammo clips to ten rounds, keep guns out of schools and keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers all died in committee despite overwhelming public support.

This year these bills and more must pass, or there will be big changes coming in both the make-up and leadership at the General Assembly. Become a part of this change and consider volunteering or donating to the RICAGV.

July 1, 2015

The General Assembly’s inaction on guns

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Rhode Island is one of eight states that “continues to fail at submitting records of dangerously mentally ill people who are prohibited from owning guns to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS),” says gun violence prevention group Everytown for Gun Safety, based on recently compiled FBI data.

Jack Warner, spokesman for the group, said, “Each record is critical. In fact, the Virginia Tech shooter in 2007 was able to buy his gun because his mental health records had not been submitted… RI is still among the worst-performing states.”

Due to the vast influence of the National Rifle Association (NRA) on the General Assembly in Rhode Island, no meaningful legislation has passed in this state limiting access to guns in years. Not wanting to take any meaningful action after the terrible shootings in Newtown CT, in which 20 children and six adults lost their lives to a shooter, the Rhode Island General Assembly convened a task force to deal with the issue of mental health and guns.

The report compiled by that task force, “Behavioral Health and Firearms Safety Task Force to Review, and Make Recommendations for, Statutes Relating to Firearms and Behavioral Health Issues” made a series of recommendations for legislation that might improve Rhode Island’s participation in the NCIS program, none of which were followed up on by the General Assembly this legislative session.

According to Everytown, “States that have taken steps to improve record-sharing have seen tangible results, not just in record submission, but in background check denials to dangerous people. In 2014, 342 gun sales to seriously mentally ill individuals in South Carolina were blocked by background checks, up five-fold from just four years before.”

Rhode Island has submitted only 27 reports to the NICS. To join with the best performing states Rhode Island would have to submit 8,505 records. According to Everytown, “20,400 gun background checks were conducted in Rhode Island in 2012 using this incomplete database, which fails to block gun sales to the hundreds of thousands of prohibited purchasers whose mental health records are not in the system.”

In addition to do nothing about keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, the General Assembly also failed to move forward on a bill designed to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers. Yet when Speaker Nicholas Mattiello brought the legislative season to an abrupt end, last week, he said that the bills that did not come to the floor were “not very consequential” and “just not as important” as the legislation he dealt with and passed.

“It is inconceivable that domestic violence could be seen as trivial or characterized as inconsequential…” said the Rev. Gene Dyszlewski, Chair of the Religious Coalition for a Violence-Free RI.

“The person who has been violent in the home has already lost the trust of his family and of most reasonable people. What more do we need? Rhode Island families deserve better. For a legislature that has accomplished so little, this could be the crowning achievement; instead it is a mark of shame.”

April 17, 2015April 28, 2016

Record numbers at State House ‘Rally Against Gun Violence’

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

There were more than 350 people in support of the Rally Against Gun Violence at the State house Thursday afternoon, by far the largest gun control rally in Rhode island’s history. The event was organized by the Rhode Island Coalition Against Gun Violence (RICAGV), made up of over 60 groups representing 100,000 Rhode Islanders.

This year the RICAGV is advocating for three pieces of common sense legislation that seek to make our state safer. The coalition wants to pass legislation to deny guns to domestic abusers, keep guns out of schools, and limit magazine capacity to ten bullets.

Rally Against Gun Violence 050 — Mayor Jorge Elorza

Providence Mayor Jorge Elorza was at the rally and in support of the bills. Noting the presence of Teny Gross, executive director of the Institute for the Study and Practice of Nonviolence, Elorza said, “I can’t think of a better slogan than the institute’s ‘Everybody, let’s choose peace.’” Elorza advocated for non-violence training in schools, and asked that people join him in committing “to being preventive rather than reactive to gun violence.”

The rally was emotional at times, with a gripping account by Carmen Cruz, founding member of SOAR, Sisters Overcoming Abusive Relationships. She came to Rhode Island in 1999 to escape an abusive relationship, but her ex-husband found her and shot her in front of her eight-year-old son and her granddaughter. “Domestic abuse and firearms are a terrible combination,” said Cruz.

Rally Against Gun Violence 007 — Extraordinary Rendition Band

There was also lighter entertainment, starting with music from the Extraordinary Rendition Band, then Sheryl Albright sang a rousing version of “If I Had a Hammer.”

Myra Latimer-Nichols took to the podium to talk about losing her son, Steven, to senseless gun violence four years ago. Two days short of his 23rd birthday, Latimer-Nichols’ son was outside a club and accidentally leaned on the wrong car. The car’s owner tracked him and his friends down later in the night, and shot them in a drive by. Steven died, leaving his daughter, Nevea, behind.

Rally Against Gun Violence 054 — Myra Latimer-Nichols

“The last time I saw him and his daughter together he was telling her about the importance of education,” said his mother, “She was robbed of a life with her father.”

Said Providence Public Safety Commissioner Steven Paré, “Every year we come here to ask for the tools to keep us safe. This is common sense legislation.”

Commenting on the need to limit the number of rounds in guns, Pare said, “If you need a banana clip, you should be hunting, not on the streets of Providence. We won’t give up until we’re there.”

Rally Against Gun Violence 062 — Wendy Bowen

Retired school teacher Wendy Bowen spoke next. Bowen was a teacher in Newtown, CT the day a gunman shot and killed six teachers and twenty elementary school children. When her school went into lock down, Bowen and her students, “huddled together in fear, with absolutely no idea what had happened.”

Students have a “right to learn in a safe environment, free of fear. Guns do not belong in school,” said Bowen, “Supporting gun sense laws would save so many lives.”

Episcopal Bishop Knisely led the crowd in prayer (but included a nice shout-out for random Humanists in the crowd) as Representative Doreen Costa skirted the edge of the crowd taking photos with her phone. Costa has an A+ voting record with the NRA, and is a keen opponent of most legislation that might even slightly inconvenience gun owners.

Sheryl Albright then led a collection of schoolchildren from six different schools in Central Falls in a rendition of “Give Kids a Chance” before the crowd was asked to move inside the State House for a direct appeal to the legislators.

In the main rotunda of the State House, Julia Wyman, legislative director of the RICAGV, made a valiant effort to be heard over the clanging of the bell that calls the legislators to session. She introduced Teny Gross who said that the law should clearly state that guns are not allowed in schools. “When my kids go to school,” said Gross, “I don’t want someone with a license to carry to be in charge of protecting my children.”

Rally Against Gun Violence 084 — Mayor James Diossa

The last speaker was Central Falls Mayor James Diossa. Diossa is a member of Mayors Against Illegal Guns. The mayor introduced the Central Falls schoolchildren a final time, and they sang a moving song about Sandy Hook Elementary, a song that mentioned the names of all twenty children who died that day, a tragedy many in our state are trying to prevent from happening again.

Rally Against Gun Violence 034 — Sheryl Albright

Rally Against Gun Violence 043 — Carmen Cruz

Rally Against Gun Violence 061 — Commissioner Steven Paré

Rally Against Gun Violence 064 — Bishop Knisely

Rally Against Gun Violence 078 — Harold Metts

Rally Against Gun Violence 082 — Teny Gross

January 16, 2014January 17, 2014

Breaking News: NRA settles with Board of Elections for $63,000

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The Board of Elections has settled with the NRA for the sum of $63,000. In September, I filed a campaign finance complaint against the NRA on behalf of the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats, alleging that the NRA’s Rhode Island PAC was illegally funded by the national NRA PAC. In the consent order laying out the terms of the settlement, the Board of Elections has confirmed that the NRA did indeed illegally fund its Rhode Island PAC from the federal PAC, revealing that that actually shared the same bank account.

“Heading into what may turn out to be the most expensive year in modern Rhode Island elections, Common Cause is please to see that the Board of Elections is vigorously enforcing the state’s campaign finance laws,” said John Marion, executive director of Common Cause Rhode Island. “The NRA, with its vast resources, should have had no problem properly segregating their funds. This consent decree, with its significant financial penalty and additional stipulations, sends a clear signal that if you’re going to participate in our political process you need to obey the rules. When it comes to the 2nd Amendment the NRA preaches the need to enforce existing laws. We’re glad to see that the Board of Elections decided to take their advice when it came to campaign finance laws.”

Since 2002, the NRA RI PAC has contributed $163,495 to Rhode Island candidates, mostly conservative Democrats like House Speaker Gordon Fox, Senate President Teresa Paiva-Weed, Senate Majority Leader Dominic Ruggerio, and House Majority Leader Nick Mattiello. Mike McCaffrey, the conservative Democrat from Warwick who chairs the Senate Judiciary committee, which has jurisdiction over most gun legislation, has also received thousands of dollars from the controversial gun lobby. So did former Speaker Bill Murphy, the Democrat who is currently the chief lobbyist for the gun interests in Rhode Island.

Shortly after I filed the campaign finance complaint, the NRA closed down its Rhode Island PAC. In the settlement, the NRA agrees to follow campaign finance law should it reopen its PAC.

December 18, 2013December 20, 2013

Exeter could still lose on the gun issue that sparked failed recall

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

On Saturday, the people of Exeter spoke decisively. Rejecting the gun lobby’s attempt to overturn the results of the 2012 election, they overwhelmingly voted against the recall of the four Democrats on the five-member town council. But will this matter for the issue this whole election was fought over—fixing the small town’s “shall issue” concealed carry permitting loophole? Sadly, the answer is probably no. Why? Because the NRA still controls the General Assembly.

Many Rhode Islanders are shocked to learn that House Speaker Gordon Fox, House Majority Leader Nick Mattiello, Senate President Teresa Paiva-Weed, and Senate Majority Leader Dominick Ruggerio—all Democrats—have each taken thousands of dollars from the NRA. And I believe those contributions are illegal. (The NRA’s Rhode Island PAC shut down in response to a complaint I filed alleging major violations.) As if that were not enough, the chief lobbyist for the gun people is former House Speaker Bill Murphy, who is nominally a Democrat. All this in a state that favors an assault weapons ban by a 37-point margin.

Even though reform advocates probably have the votes for an assault weapons ban on the Senate Judiciary Committee, conservative chairman Mike McCaffrey (who has also received thousands of dollars from the NRA) refuses to call a vote. Although the House Judiciary Committee is chaired by true Democrat Edie Ajello, who has never taken a dime from the NRA, Speaker Gordon Fox refuses to let her call a vote either. A few weeks ago, Fox told me privately that he will not allow any substantive gun control measures to move in the 2014 session.*

The interesting question is whether he will extend this ban to something as minor as a tweak in permitting authority. In many ways, it makes political sense for him. Letting a measure this tiny get a vote would allow Fox to pretend he is doing something about gun violence, while avoiding actually doing anything about gun violence. Of course, if he is so deeply ideologically committed to the NRA that he opposes any step forward, he will once again deny the people of Exeter this small public safety measure, a measure they clearly want. It is up to Gordon Fox.

*Speaker Fox denies saying this to me, according to his office. I stand by my words.

December 16, 2013December 16, 2013

RIF Radio: DePetro to return Tues; gambling for charity; gravel mining in Westerly; income inequality, social mobility

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Monday Dec 16, 2013
North Kingstown, RI – Good morning, Ocean State. This is Bob Plain, editor and publisher of the RI Future blog podcasting to you from The Hideaway on the banks of the Mattatuxet River behind the Shady Lea Mill in North Kingstown, Rhode Island.

It’s Monday, December 16 and Rhode Islanders have officially survived more than half of the holiday season without having to hear from John DePetro, though GoLocal reports (mindsets?) the notoriously nasty morning shock jock will be back on WPRO tomorrow morning … that’s got to be a dicey proposition for Alex and Ani, which could become the focus on storefront protests if labor decides to take its anti-DePetro protest to the next level…

Twin River is in the news today … the state-sanctioned gambling parlor in Lincoln is . And as news breaks that Twin River is hoping to expand into the Monte Carlo of the Deep South, several state lawmakers are catching flack for playing charity blackjack at Twin River … the big winners included Reps Scott Slater and Lisa Tomaso and Senator Mike McCaffrey.

In any case, I’m really glad Reps Scott Slater and Lisa Tomaso were able to redistribute a couple bucks from Twin River to local food pantries.

If it’s true that the Exeter recall campaign reflected the strong opposition to changing gun laws in Rhode Island, as Rhode Island Public Radio reported the day before the vote, then those who’d like to see stronger gun laws in Rhode Island should have nothing to fear from the NRA. 63 percent of this pretty rural and relatively gun-loving community voted against a recall that was, ostensibly, about the right to bear arms … or at least the right to get a permit to carry a concealed handgun from the local town clerk instead of law enforcement, as the rest of Rhode Island requires…

And kudos to Progressive Charlestown for beating the rest of the state on the Exeter recall story, by the way. This left-leaning blog that covers South County actually consistently has some of the best stuff in the state … for another example read Will Collete’s coverage of the COPAR quarry disaster wreaking havok with area drinnking water. The city of Westerly says COPAR is illegally mining a granite quarry for gravel, and while the issues is stuck in court, COPAR is allowed to go right on mining gravel.

Watch this weekend’s Newsmakers for a great debate on whether Edward Snowden was a hero or a criminal … my thought: the two aren’t mutually exclusive. For example, Nelson Mandela was both a criminal and a hero. So was Robin Hood, for that matter. And for a famous right-wing example of hero/criminal … a bunch of pretty well to-do Boston merchants decided to launch about a million bucks worth of tea into Boston Harbor.

MIT, Harvard and Brown have a new study that shows there’s little to no correlation between high stakes test scores and “the ability to analyze abstract problems and think logically.”

Is economic inequality the “defining issue of our time,” as President Obama said recently? Paul Krugman of the New York Times say so and Ezra Klein of the Washington Post has a more nuanced answer.

The key to this debate isn’t whether it’s fair or not that some of us get to be rich and others have to be poor … it’s the lack of social mobility. Put in Rhode Island terms, if you grew up in Barrington, chances are you are going to make a decent living as an adult. And if you grow up in Central Falls, chances are you’ll struggle financially.

November 21, 2013November 22, 2013

When the NRA says jump, Doreen Costa asks how high

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The recall election in Exeter, scheduled for December 14th, is being pushed through mostly by out-of-town gun rights zealots intent on punishing the Exeter Town Council for trying to enact a minor change in the law regarding the concealed weapon permit system. Rhode Island State Representative Doreen Costa has been involved in this issue from the beginning. Even though she is not a resident of Exeter, she does represent a small section of the town (the corner over by the Yawgoo Ski Area) in the Rhode Island General Assembly

What the Exeter Town Council attempted to do was change the law in Rhode Island so that the Exeter Town Clerk would no longer be responsible for issuing concealed weapon permits. In most cities and towns residents can go either to their police chiefs or to the state Attorney General, but Exeter has no police force. So by state law, the duty of issuing permits falls to the Town Clerk, a person with no law enforcement training.

On November 11, 2011, Costa agreed with the majority of the Exeter Town Council on the matter. According to the minutes of the regular meeting of the Exeter Town Council from November 11, 2011 Costa originally maintained that “she does not think the responsibility [for issuing concealed weapon permits] should be on the Town Clerk” and that she “is looking into possible help from the State Police on the matter.”

However, at a special Exeter Town Council meeting held on March 11, 2013, Doreen Costa changed her position for the benefit of the large crowd of gun enthusiasts in the audience. As can be seen in the video of the meeting posted on YouTube (starting at eight minutes 49 seconds) Costa used her time to read a letter from Darin Goens of the National Rifle Association, and addressed her comments primarily to the audience, not to the Town Council. The letter presented the NRA’s position that the Exeter Town Clerk should maintain responsibility for issuing concealed weapon’s permits, a position Costa now agrees with.

This begs the question, does Doreen Costa represent the citizens of Rhode Island or the interests of the NRA?

You can help fight this pernicious recall by going to saveexeter.org

October 24, 2013October 24, 2013

NRA PAC leaves RI politics

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The local political action committee for NRA has gone away, according to the state Board of Elections. And Sam Bell of the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats thinks it might be because his group filed a campaign finance complaint against them.

“As far as we are aware, the Board of Elections has yet to issue a formal ruling, but we view this move as confirmation of the seriousness of the violations we have alleged,” Bell said in an email. “We hope that the Board will issue appropriate fines after a thorough and complete investigation.”

According to records, the NRA Political Victory Fund dissolved on September 26. In September the RI Progressive Democrats filed a complaint alleging that the local NRA PAC is lying on campaign disclosure forms when it claims to have received at least 1,500 donations of $100 or less.

Ric Thonton, who oversees campaign finance matters for the Board of Elections, said he could neither confirm nor comment on investigations. But he did say, “the dissolution of a PAC does not prevent it from being investigated.”

Rhode Island isn’t known as a hotbed of gun rights, but it has been a hotbed of gun politics lately. Republicans were embarrassed for raffling off an assault rifle at a gun club fundraiser and Exeter Town Councilors are facing a recall election for outsourcing handgun permitting to the state police. Meanwhile, both Providence and the state are divesting from investments in guns.

September 9, 2013September 9, 2013

Progressive Democrats fire complaint at NRA

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The Rhode Island chapter of the Progressive Democrats of America accused the NRA of violating campaign finance laws by using a national political action committee to fund its local PAC here. The complaint alleges that the local NRA PAC is lying on campaign disclosure forms when it claims to have received at least 1,500 donations of $100 or less.

“We find that highly implausible,” wrote the RIPDA in a press statement released Friday. The Providence Journal filed this story based on the group’s announcement.

“We present very strong evidence that the money actually comes from the NRA’s national PAC,” said the release. “Not only is it illegal for national PACs to donate to a Rhode Island PAC (or candidate), but it is also illegal for any PAC to donate more than $1000 per annum to any other PAC. The NRA, we believe, violates both laws.”

Here’s a copy of the report that Sam Bell of the RIPDA filed with the state Board of Elections:

To the Rhode Island Board of Elections

I write with concern over what I believe to be a large-scale ongoing violation of Rhode Island’s campaign finance laws by the NRA Political Victory Fund PAC.

The National Rifle Association of America Political Victory Fund (hereafter referred to as “NRA-Federal PAC”) is a national committee registered with the Federal Election Commission (ID Number C00053553) as a Separate Segregated Fund located in Fairfax, Virginia. In order to participate in elections in the State of Rhode Island, this organization has also registered a PAC with the Rhode Island Board of Elections (hereafter referred to as “NRA-RI PAC”).

There is reason to believe that NRA-RI PAC has been circumventing contribution disclosure rules as required by § 17-25-3(3). Specifically, NRA-RI PAC has failed to disclose any of the required donor information such as the name, address, and place of employment of a contributor as required by § 17-25-11(a)(3)(i). As such, it is impossible to tell whether NRA-RI PAC received excessive contributions of $1000 or more per annum from any individual or organization, as prohibited by § 17-25-10.1(a). NRA-RI PAC maintains a balance of $0 cash-on-hand at the end of each report.

It appears to raise precisely the amount that it spends each reporting period. Moreover, NRA-Federal PAC reports making the same exact contributions to candidates in Rhode Island that NRA-RI PAC does. It is therefore reasonable to question whether the funds that end up in the accounts of candidates in Rhode Island are derived directly from the national committee, NRA-Federal PAC, which is a source that is not permissible by Rhode Island law.

The strong evidence suggesting that these contributions are directly from NRAFederal PAC has several implications, the most important of which is the aforementioned issue that no donor information is disclosed to the public. Because federal law requires that only contributors aggregating over $200 (twice the Rhode Island threshold of $100) be disclosed, it is certain that many contributors required by RI law to be disclosed to the public never are, yet their contribution dollars influence the outcomes of elections in RI.

Moreover, because it is unclear which contributors to NRA-Federal PAC are subsequently earmarked for RI elections, it is impossible to know whether such contributions 1) exceed contribution limits (federal contribution limits are over twice as high as RI) and 2) are otherwise impermissible under RI law (federal law allows PACs to receive contributions from unregistered committees and organizations in amounts not exceeding $1000).

At the very least, this matter is worthy of further investigation by the RI Board of Elections. Never has the potential for large, national interests to disproportionately influence the outcomes of local elections been more prevalent. For that reason, it is necessary for the Board of Elections to be as unambiguous as possible in its execution of its campaign finance regulations.

As an example of the behavior described above, I have attached the reports from the first and second quarters of 2013 for NRA-RI PAC and a list of the associated NRAFederal PAC contributions. However, these practices appear to have persisted since at least the first quarter of 2002, the most recent report available in the online ERTS

In order to participate in elections in the State of Rhode Island, this reporting system. I have attached a summary of the contributions over this period from the ERTS system.

Under pain and penalty of perjury, I attest that the above statements are, to the best of my knowledge, fully accurate. Please feel free to contact me with any questions.

Sincerely,

Samuel Wade Bell

May 1, 2013May 1, 2013

The NRA, Bilbo Baggins, URI and Teny Oded Gross

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Teny Oded Gross sounds off to State House reporters. (Photos by Ryan T. Conaty. — Teny Oded Gross sounds off to State House reporters. (Photo by Ryan T. Conaty.

Just like it did in Congress, it looks like the NRA will beat back stricter gun laws at the Rhode Island State House as well, reports Sam Bell of the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats.

“Rhode Islanders favor an assault weapons ban by a margin of 64% to 27%, but we aren’t hearing from them,” Rep. Linda Finn told him. “We’re just hearing from the NRA.”

Is anyone surprised by this? Or even think it’s at all newsworthy that the NRA is more politically powerful than the entire progressive left on this issue here in Rhode Island? Of course not!

We live in a culture dominated by violence. Today in Rhode Island we are celebrating the Haymarket riot and tomorrow there is a State House ceremony honoring the burning of the Gaspee. These are two acts of terrorism that we celebrate for their historical significance. The other weekend, to escape the horrible reality of the Boston bombings and subsequent manhunt, I watched a fantasy movie called The Hobbit. It was about magical forest creatures who have been at bloody war with each other for 60 years.

But one of the most tacitly violence-condoning actions in our violence-dominated society is the totally outlandish notion that Americans have a right to a gun just in case anyone wants to wage a war against the government. Teny Oded Gross, of the Institute for the Study and Practice of Nonviolence, put it this way to Ian Donnis of RIPR:

“As far as I know [the US] is the first democracy on the planet that is actually saying you should arm yourself against your own citizens. That is actually outlandish. I’m surprised there’s not more outrage about that.”

I really don’t care what constitutional scholars think about the wording of the Second Amendment, I’m pretty certain this is a societal recipe for disaster.

While we may not be able to beat back the NRA at the State House, we can support the Institute for the Study & Practice of Nonviolence out in the real world. In fact, you can do so tonight.

A URI journalism “digital immersion” class has spent the semester making content for the Institute and they will be showing it off tonight at the downtown Providence campus on Washington Street from 6 to 8 p.m. If you plan on being at the State House tonight to testify, please stop by this exhibit. And if you’re going to this exhibit, please go to the State House to testify for stricter gun control in Rhode Island.

Here’s an example of their work, which explains more about what the Institute does:

Here’s more on the event tonight:

March 5, 2013March 5, 2013

Teny Oded Gross’ Unique Look At Gun Violence

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Teny Oded Gross at the State House. (Photos by Ryan T. Conaty – for more, check out his )

Something nefarious happened last week at the State House in regards to reforming the state’s gun control laws, and it wasn’t that an NRA lobbyist came to push his conservative agenda. It’s that Teny Oded Gross was the only member of the public to ask him to take it elsewhere.

‘It’s a deceitful organization,” Oded Gross told me later. “The NRA knows very well that panic and fear is good for business. If you have more deaths, you have more people buying guns.”

Oded Gross is not your typical advocate for greater gun control legislation.

For one, he’s a former Israeli Army sergeant. “I come to liberalism from seeing carnage,” he told me. And for another, he is the executive director of the Institute for the Study and Practice of Nonviolence, an organization that works with inner city gang members. “I saw and see a lot of violence,” he added.

Teny Oded Gross at the State House. (Photos by Ryan T. Conaty – for more, check out his )

“We respond to the hospital when someone gets shot,” Oded Gross said. “I work with the people who are the shooters.”

The Institute, he said, responded to more than 150 instances of gun violence last year, and they were involved with all 17 homicides in Rhode Island.

He doesn’t buy the NRA talking point that gun control measures will only affect the legal gun owners. He says many guns get to the streets through otherwise legal channels.

“People who are denying gun availability leads to violence are either disillusion or straight liars,” he said. “The NRA has made it so easy to get them. We need to have a better ability to track down and monitor guns. But for some people this is contentious.

“We are reaching out to the people who invited the NRA. If you don’t want more gun control, come and work with us. Roll up your sleeves and help us reduce the violence.”

February 27, 2013February 27, 2013

RI Legislature Should Ignore NRA Lobbyist

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

In May 1998, I was driving through east Texas. I pulled off at a restaurant to grab a bite to eat. I grabbed a newspaper to catch the headlines. I turned the folded paper over and received perhaps the biggest shock of my life. Mrs. Kinkel, my high school Spanish teacher in Springfield, Oregon, where I grew up, had been shot by her son, who then went over the town’s other high school, where he killed two students and wounded twenty-five. Today, the killing of two students by gun violence at a high school barely receives any attention. It takes a horrible massacre like Newtown to grab the nation’s attention about gun violence.

So I was more than a little dismayed to hear that Rep. Lisa Baldelli Hunt has invited a National Rifle Association lobbyist to hold “an informational briefing,” i.e. a meeting to shape gun policy, for Rhode Island legislators. Obviously any organization should have the right to make its opinion known, but the NRA holds power far beyond its membership numbers in modern politics, promoting the almost unfettered access to any weapon, no matter the potential for violence or the number of people who die from guns in this country.

Let’s take a step back and actually read the Second Amendment.

“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

What does that really mean? Like most of the Constitution, it’s not easy to articulate a clear answer. Applying a document written over 200 years ago to the modern United States creates difficulties. Our society has changed so much since 1787. So have the meanings of words. People interpret the Constitution to fit their own political beliefs, nowhere more so than the Second Amendment.

If you talk to gun advocates, they interpret the Second Amendment as reading “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” But that’s not the whole amendment. If every word in the document is sacred, then every word is indeed sacred. How does the “well regulated militia” affect how we should interpret the amendment? In my reading as a U.S. historian, the only clear right it grants to modern Americans is the ability of National Guard members (the equivalent to the state militias) to have a gun. That much is self-evident. More than that is quite open to interpretation.

There’s nothing in there about high-capacity magazines, military-style assault rifles, the numbers of guns one can own, the conditions in which they can and can’t own them (outside of militia members), etc. Americans have interpreted these laws differently over the centuries. There has not been a hard and fast understanding of gun rights in American history. At the very least though, there is clear precedent for significant gun control legislation under the Second Amendment.

In fact, the recent craze for uncontrolled gun legislation is really quite new. Up until the 1970s, the National Rifle Association was a group in favor of responsible gun ownership and had promoted a great deal of gun control legislation. In the 70s, it nearly left its Virginia headquarters to move to Colorado and work only on sportsman’s issues. During the 1960s, conservatives, including Ronald Reagan, were largely for restricting gun rights. Fearful of the Black Panthers carrying arms publicly, Reagan campaigned on gun control, telling reporters that he saw “no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.”But the 70s was also the decade of white backlash to the Civil Rights Movement and the growth of conservatism. Beginning in 1977, the NRA began using increasingly harsh language about crime and government threats to citizens to transform the organization into what it is today.

So what kind of an organization is Rep. Hunt bringing to Rhode Island to advise legislators on gun control. Until recently, the NRA had a Nixon-style “Enemies List” on its website that included politicians, entertainers, and media figures it considered not pro-gun enough. Rep. Hunt is a Democrat. Does she believe, like the NRA, that President Obama is an “elitist hypocrite?” Does she believe that we should placed armed guards in all of our schools, even though an armed guard was actually at the Columbine shooting in Colorado and was completely ineffective? Rep. Baldelli Hunt says she would need many questions answered before supporting a ban on military-style assault rifles. Why? Can anyone name one good reason why people should own these guns?

Since 26 people died at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut on December 14, at least 2,309 Americans have died from gun violence, as of this writing. For comparison, 2753 people died on 9/11. We don’t have accurate statistics into the types of guns that killed these 2,309, but we do know that the U.S. has far and away the most gun deaths of any developed nation and we know that at least some of these people were killed by high-powered assault rifles.

What we need is for our legislators to listen to rational, responsible gun owner organizations that will help craft a reasonable policy for the people of Rhode Island. The National Rifle Association is not that rational, responsible gun owner organization. I hope the legislature ignores the NRA and passes gun control legislation that will help keep the citizens of this state alive.

December 21, 2012December 22, 2012

Four Reasons the NRA is a Red Herring

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

In the wake of another tragedy, calls for gun regulation rises again. Many citizens do not tend to “wait and see” what the politicians will do, and many expect a little saber-rattling and then see their elected officials bow down to the powerful pro-gun lobbyNational Rifle Association. People have already begun targeting the NRA as a pressure point for the problem of gun violence. There are four key factors to consider when going after the NRA.

1. The NRA provides political cover for profiteers.

The NRA is designed to absorb public pressure. As a member-based public relations group, they routinely deal with all manner of the public, can rally “card carrying members,” and have a sit-down with any politician they like. The NRA has many members who served this country, who died for this country, and currently serve in a law enforcement or political capacity. The Second Amendment is a fundamental principle of America, and open to debate as to how far we extend the right to own a gun. Those who believe it is only for hunting are neglecting the concern our Founding Fathers had of a federal government that disarms the citizenry.

Many Americans have no problem with the vast majority of guns the 2^nd Amendment protects. Although most pistols are now semi-automatic with about 15-round clips, the greatest outrage is against the semi-automatic assault rifles such as the Bushmaster AR-15. Bushmaster, by the way, operates in relative obscurity- free of criticism, protest, and public pressure. They provide jobs at their factory in upstate New York. They do not even provide a public statement when one of their weapons is used in a massacre of elementary school children.

Most Americans are not aware that Bushmaster is one of multiple weapons manufacturers bought up by Cerberus Capitol Management, and merged into a company called Freedom Group. Cerebrus is a private equity firm that will pool the wealth of those with excess wealth, and make investments they believe will continue to profit. Therefore, Cerberus believed that Bushmaster, and the AR-15 was a good investment. In the history of protest and change, businesses are far less “armed” to handle public pressure than ideological groups.

This week Cereberus made the announcement that they will sell Freedom Group. This underscores the point that markets are only viable to the level that the public permits. As Cerebrus states:

“Our role is to make investments on behalf of our clients who are comprised of the pension plans of firemen, teachers, policemen and other municipal workers and unions, endowments, and other institutions and individuals. It is not our role to take positions, or attempt to shape or influence the gun control policy debate. That is the job of our federal and state legislators.”

Part of this statement is misleading, where Wall Street are the largest donors to politicians and the Citizens United ruling held that any firm can make any independent ad to attempt to shape or influence any debate. Former Vice-President Quayle is a key director at Cerberus. Whereas weapons manufacturers have played a significant role in the policies being as they now are, Cerberus would like to point the finger at our legislatures alone.

2. Economic power motivates more politicians than ideological power.

The USA is the top weapons exporter in the world. Even if we exclude the weapons of mass destruction that are traditionally only sold to governments (or bought with taxpayer funds and then gifted to others), America exports far more small arms than other nations. Combine that with the amount of guns bought annually per year by Americans, and we have an entire industry at stake.

Those who are insistent upon massive curtailing of arms manufacturing in America are up against the Third Rail: “Jobs.” Even reductions in crime that reduce the need for prisons have had a difficult time putting a prison guard out of work. Much of the Military Industrial Complex is about jobs. This point is not meant to shut down the ideological and moral arguments against manufacturing and selling weapons. Instead, the point is to recognize the realities of America’s stake in the game.

3. The NRA is legitimized by the Supreme Court, not campaign contributions.

When the Supreme Court thoroughly argued D.C. v. Heller, and then later held that theSecond Amendment also applied to the state governments, most people would be surprised that the Court took this long to dig down deep into what this right entails. In 2007, the Heller decision marked the first time in 70 years that this right came up for debate. In many ways, that is a good thing- because we are deep into our “The Right to Own a Gun” is outmoded, due to technology. I won’t rehash the debate here, but it is a good one, with multiple perspectives from America’s top jurists.

Those wishing to engage in such a debate about the Second Amendment would be aided in reading all the Opinions, as there may be rationales that sound legitimate, or un-American, or inspire new ideas. The constitution can be amended, laws can be passed around the edges, and different Courts can have different interpretations on the language. But a meaningful discussion needs to start somewhere, preferably in our founding principles, if we are to uphold the democracy of America.

4. Gun control can be a red herring to systemic issues of violence.

It is true that a federal ban on assault weapons was passed in 1994. In 1996, AEDPAcreated further limitations on weaponry sales (in the wake of the bombing of the Murragh federal building). The federal ban expired in 2004, and was not considered important enough to renew. It was a flimsy piece of legislation, easily evaded. Practically any weapon that would have been banned has a close counterpart that is legal. Such feel-good legislation is certainly not going to have any practical impacts.

To have a genuine impact on present and future gun ownership, massive prohibitions must be put in place. Furthermore, the government may need to confiscate high-capacity, high-velocity, high-caliber weapons. Setting aside the difficulty with such a route, let us assume it is possible…

Gun ownership is an effect. Violence is an effect. There are internal and external forces that propel most decisions we make in life, even most reactions we make- as we have been conditioned to react. Many shooting deaths in America involve drugs: either drug dealers settling disputes or drug users in search of money to get their drugs. For those people, most guns are gotten from an illicit market among the millions of guns already in America. Many of their guns are small and cheap, sometimes not working properly. Regulation is unlikely to have any impact. The causes are some combination of addiction, desperation, anger, and inability to see (or choose) a more peaceful way to their goal.

The cynic would argue that Americans don’t care about the “street” criminal (insert racial analysis here). What they care about are the killings that impact White middle-class America. Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora, Newtown are all etched in our conscience, as they should be. Setting aside the racial and class contexts, the point remains: it isn’t gun ownership that caused the shooters to “go postal” (as we used to say). There is some validity to “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” And it is heartening to know that the Obama Administration has announced that his Task Force will focus on mental health and education, in addition to gun regulation. We are not likely to hear such public dislike of teachers as we have in recent years, and it should stay that way (in my opinion).

Perhaps the unfortunate reality is that we have developed a very violent culture in America, built on the foundations of revolution, the Wild West, slavery, and an awkwardly-settled Civil War. Our movies, books, video games, news and TV shows feed off the mantra “If it Bleeds, it Leads.” The choice to tear down and destabilize our attempts to help Americans who are struggling with mental health comes with repercussions. The savings in closing down mental hospitals has helped fuel a costly prison explosion. The challenge for people getting coverage for mental health treatment also creates other costs. Until we can look at the savings and costs in a holistic manner, we will continue to be baffled by systemic troubles and occasional travesties.

In a final thought, I hope there are survivors of other tragic events, such as students of Columbine or during Katrina, who have developed tools to share with the kids, parents, teachers, and neighbors of Newtown. It may not be for a while, but people should prepare for the worst PTSD imaginable.

I have been on all sides of this issue. My family includes small children, teachers, military, mentally ill people, and gun owners. Those who kill, including myself, and those who have been killed. I have worked with mental health and substance abuse professionals, regarding expanding treatment. I have strategized in achieving political goals. There are many worthwhile and intelligent opinions on the matter of guns and violence. My hope here is that discussions are meaningful and vibrant, not just wars of words.