Congress Protects Monsanto, Not Third Graders
By Carl Gibson, Reader Supported News
26 March 13
My 9-year-old niece Evelyn in Maryland is already very politically-active. Like most of America, she was saddened and outraged about the kids in Connecticut who were mowed down by a killer wielding an assault rifle with 30-round clips. She was especially horrified that the victims were her own age, and in class when they were shot. The 113th Congress has already decided that while it won’t protect 3rd graders from assault rifles and high-powered magazines, it will protect Monsanto from the courts. They won’t listen to a third grader who took the time to make her own sign and join a march in DC in support of sensible gun regulations, but they’ll listen to anyone who writes a big enough check.
The push for a renewed ban on assault weapons, which George W. Bush repealed in 2004, died when Harry Reid flatly told Dianne Feinstein that the gun legislation to be discussed in the Senate wouldn’t include a renewal of the assault weapons ban. The NRA won again, thanks to their millions spent on browbeating Congress with armies of lobbyists, hefty amounts of campaign cash, and the lowest of tactics, which included robocalling homes in Newtown, Connecticut.
We couldn’t even get the Democratic leader of the Senate to stand by a renewal of an assault weapons ban that was in place just nine years ago, when the 2nd Amendment was still very much intact and people still had plenty of guns. We failed to reinstate a ban on high-capacity magazines, despite ample evidence that Adam Lanza murdered 26 people, including kids just barely out of infancy, in just under 5 minutes thanks to 30-round magazines in an AR-15 assault rifle. In this moving segment, Rachel Maddow breaks down the situation step by step, explaining how many young lives could have been saved if Lanza had had to reload after every ten rounds and carry that many more magazines.