Update to Another School Shooting with Multiple Victims, 1 dead, 4 wounded, Possibly Multiple Shooters

Kids learn from what they see about how to deal with their emotions, with conflicts, with impulses, and they learn violence from the adults in their environment, including media.

Events like this result from our culture of gun violence.  Expanding gun carry, expanding who we can shoot and when we can shoot directly makes events like this more likely to occur.  It sends the wrong message about what it means to be an adult, and how people SHOULD respond to situations.

Shooting is NOT what we want, it is not what we should make more legal.  It is not acceptable from older people and it certainly is not acceptable from kids.

We need to send the message by our laws and by example that this is NOT how responsible adults behave, that this is undesirable behavior.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

What we DO need to be doing to set a better example is to honor the UNARMED teacher who protected students, who chased the gun wielding kid out of the school before anyone else could be hurt, as an example of good behavior, honorable and brave behavior. THAT is courage that should be recognized, honored, celebrated and rewarded; NOT the example of more people shooting other people in a crisis. THAT is the only way to discourage this kind of occurrence, not more guns, and certainly not adults shooting students with guns.

From MSNBC.comt: 4 hurt in Ohio high school shooting

At least four students were injured in a shooting Monday morning at Chardon High School in Chardon, Ohio, according to Cleveland television station WKYC.
Authorities say the alleged gunman is in custody. A spokesperson for the sheriff's office would not confirm whether the shooter is male or a student.
Some students told Fox 8 News they saw two gunmen.
FBI agent Scott Wilson said after Monday morning's shooting that there was one suspected shooter. He wouldn't discuss the extent of the students' injuries.
According to WKBN.com, police scanner traffic is reporting three victims are in critical condition and one is stable. Medical helicopters are converging on the Wal-Mart in Chardon, where a landing zone has been set up.

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported the shooting happened in the cafeteria, according to a waiting parent, Jessica Bryant, whose daughter had seen it and sent her a text message.
Another parent, Jeannette Roth, said her son told her the shooting happened while students were eating breakfast and waiting for first period. She told the paper a student "stood up and started shooting, and then it was chaos." Nearly 1,100 students attend Chardon High School.
Students fled and locked themselves in classrooms for safety.
Civil deputy Erin Knife, of the Geauga County Sheriff's Office, says the shooting was reported around 7:30 a.m.
Schools in the area are locked down.   
Chardon is located about 30 miles east of Cleveland.

From the number of recent shootings at WalMarts, it makes sense they'd be the go-to site for the evacuation of the injured.

There have been lots of shootings AT WalMarts in the news, in recent months, from the bargain hunting with guns last November (shoppers seemed to confuse deer hunting with bargain hunting), and/or the accidental shooting as a shop lifter drove over the foot of the security officer earlier this month, and of course the funny if it weren't so dangerous drops-his-pants and drops his gun discharge in the WalMart bathroom incident,  or the recent WalMart employee who shot a supervisor and then shot himself,  and then there was the one where a WalMart employee was arrested because of only threatening to shoot a supervisor, or maybe blow up a WalMart.

Clearly, people with guns are dangerous to other people, in public places, in shopping centers, in schools.  And thank you WalMart for making your parking lot available as a public service for the evacuation of wounded, including your own employees and shoppers after shootings.  It is very public service minded of you.  Of course, WalMart, you also do a brisk business in selling guns and ammo to these people.  Having been a fan of the peopleofwalmart.com site, when I need a good laugh.......I'd be happier if they didn't sell to these people.

Presumably the employees get a discount on these purchases, making it both cheaper and more convenient for the subsequent parking lot medical evacuations after the in-store shootings.

And for an additional connection to more pro-gun  legislation, and more gun and ammo sales?  Look no further than ALEC, and the 2010 list of - pardon the pun - the 'big guns' behind ALEC, the organization that drafts so much of the right wing extremist legislation, from 2nd Amendment to Immigration laws like the Arizona 'papers please' legislation.  The American Association for Justice (formerly the Association of Trial Lawyers of America) report, available in pdf here for 2010 - ALEC_report.pdf, shows...who else?

ALEC Private Sector Board Members 2010 

Raymond Bracy, Wal-Mart

Virginia Supplied East Coast Crime Guns

I find a correlation to lax gun laws, pro gun carry states and poor education scores, as a reflection of poor political priorities and failed value systems.  Virginia, in the preceding post, ranked the best of the states named where they allowed guns in bars, states which have generally had lax regulation.

It is not in our state's interest to follow the bad examples of these states, including the proposed 'Shoot First' legislation.

The Republican majorities are now trying to undo the legislation passed after the Virginia Tech Massacre in 2007 in which 32 people were killed, 25 were wounded and the shooter then committed suicide.  The problems with the laws of other states and their failures at background checks only serves to underline the problems with the loose reciprocity provisions of the Shoot First legislation.

It should be noted about Cho, the shooter in the mass murder / suicide:

During February and March 2007, Cho began purchasing the weapons that he later used during the killings. On February 9, 2007, Cho purchased his first handgun, a .22 caliber Walther P22 semi-automatic pistol, from TGSCOM Inc., a federally licensed firearms dealer based in Green Bay, Wisconsin and the operator of the website through which Cho ordered the gun.^{[76][77][78][79]} TGSCOM Inc. shipped the Walther P22 to JND Pawnbrokers in Blacksburg, Virginia, where Cho completed the legally required background check for the purchase transaction and took possession of the handgun.^[80] Cho bought a second handgun, a 9mm Glock 19 semiautomatic pistol, on March 13, 2007 from Roanoke Firearms, a licensed gun dealer located in Roanoke, Virginia.^[76][81]
Cho was able to pass both background checks and successfully complete both handgun purchases after he presented to the gun dealers his U.S. permanent residency card, his Virginia driver's permit to prove legal age and length of Virginia residence and a checkbook showing his Virginia address, in addition to waiting the required 30-day period between each gun purchase.

 

Glock 19 semi-automatic pistol,

model used by Cho

Walther P22 semi-automatic pistol, another model of handgun used by Cho

The adverse results of such lax regulation was noted in the following article, where the problems with lax gun laws is outlined.  Large type/ bold is my emphasis to the original article, 

One of the photographs of Seung-Hui Cho 

 that he sent to NBC News 

on the day of the massacre

from NBC Washington DC and the AP:

Va. Gov. McDonnell Considering Opinions Before Repealing Gun Law

Va. Tech shooting victims reach out to Gov. McDonnell on gun law repeal.

 Parents of Virginia Tech survivors and victims of the 2007 campus massacre urged Gov. Bob McDonnell on Saturday to keep in place a law that allows the purchase of only one handgun a month.

McDonnell held a conference call Saturday with the families of Virginia Tech survivors and victims. A spokesman for the governor told the Associated Press that McDonnell "appreciated hearing directly from the families on this issue.''

"It was a straightforward and substantive discussion,'' said the spokesman, J. Tucker Martin. "His thoughts and prayers remain with them as they continue to deal with their tremendous loss. We will have further comment on the legislation at the appropriate time.''

Andrew Goddard, whose son was wounded in the Virginia Tech shooting that left 33 dead, including the gunman, told the AP that "I hold out hope that [the Governor] will take into account the 66 percent of the people in the polls who want to keep this thing.'' Goddard said that the Governor vowed that he would inform the families of his decision early next week. 

The Virginia Senate passed legislation earlier this month repealing the 1993 law, all but ensuring the demise of a statute enacted after the state became a notorious supplier of guns used in crimes in major East Coast cities. In 1991, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms found that 40 percent of the 1,236 guns found at crime scenes in New York had been purchased in Virginia.

The families of Virginia Tech students, as well as survivors of the 2007 campus massacre, have been active in Virginia and elsewhere to limit the sale of handguns.

Castles and Killing: Booze and Bullets Don't Mix Well, (Nor Does Brainy and Guns)

The Shoot First expansion on Castle Doctrine drastically expands gun carry and when it is legal to shoot, and it does so in a bad way.

We have had people in the past claim that there is no danger in our allowing guns in bars, despite the obvious examples of how badly alcohol and guns combine, in public and private environments.

Proponents of more concealed carry, and more open carry like to assert that the expansion of guns in public places, the expansion of people carrying 'just because' and not because they have an occupational or other legitimate need to do so hasn't resulted in blood running all over the floors of our public places, like Starbucks, where there was a recent firearm murder suicide.

There very much IS blood running on the floors of our public places.

The pro-gunners also like to assure us that they are ONLY carrying their firearms to protect themselves and that they will intervene ONLY on behalf of other innocent victims to defend them.

Bullshit.  We have incidents all the time where there is gun violence in and around the outsides of bars, and plenty of that violence comes from those not-so-law abiding, not-so-very-well-screened legal gun carriers who are NOT defending people from gun violence. They are rather the ones perpetrating it.


The New York Times wrote about the trend back in October 2010; (emphasis in bold /large type is mine)

 “If someone’s sticking a gun in my face, I’m not relying on their charity to keep me alive,” said Mr. Ringenberg, 30, who said he carries the gun for personal protection when he is not at work.

The problem with people like Mr,Ringenberg is that there are plenty of people just like him who are doing that sticking of a gun in people's faces, and doing plenty of shooting as well.

Gun rights advocates like Mr. Ringenberg may applaud the new law, but many customers, waiters and restaurateurs here are dismayed by the decision.
“That’s not cool in my book,” Art Andersen, 44, said as he nursed a Coors Light at Sam’s Sports Bar and Grill near Vanderbilt University. “It opens the door to trouble. It’s giving you the right to be Wyatt Earp.”
Tennessee is one of four states, along with Arizona, Georgia and Virginia, that recently enacted laws explicitly allowing loaded guns in bars. (Eighteen other states allow weapons in restaurants that serve alcohol.) The new measures in Tennessee and the three other states come after two landmark Supreme Court rulings that citizens have an individual right — not just in connection with a well-regulated militia — to keep a loaded handgun for home defense.

Experts say these laws represent the latest wave in the country’s gun debate, as the gun lobby seeks, state by state, to expand the realm of guns in everyday life.

So, how safe are bars and restaurants where there is a mix of booze and guns?  How predictable that the following incident took place in Tennessee, although it could as easily have occurred in any of those other states that made it legal to have guns in bars.  Booze + Bullets = Bleeding Bodies

From MSNBC.com: 1 dead, 19 hurt after nightclub shooting in Jackson, Tennessee

By msnbc.com staff and news services

JACKSON, Tenn. -- One man was killed and 19 other people injured after a shooting at a nightclub, police in West Tennessee said Sunday.
Officers were called to the Karma Lounge in downtown Jackson at about 2 a.m. Sunday and arrived to find one man dead, 17 people with gunshot wounds and two who were trampled, according to Jackson Police Lt. Tyreece Miller.
Miller said a dispute among several people led to the shooting. Evidence indicates at least three people used handguns to fire into the crowd.
According to WMCTV, the nightclub had advertised a Lane College and LeMoyne-Owen College after-game party.
Lecarlos Todd, 19, of Memphis, was killed. Another shooting victim was in critical condition Sunday night at a local hospital.
Authorities released photos of two men taken by the club's video cameras. Miller said investigators want to question them.

Guns kill people.  People with guns kill people.  If you don't want people using guns to kill people --- have fewer guns and keep them secured at home.  Because clearly people are not trustworthy to refrain from violence just because the law allows them to carry, or even because they had a short training course and a minimal background check.  That doesn't guarantee someone won't act violently in an emotional moment.  We have weekly, almost daily murder suicides that demonstrate that.  We have people using firearms in anger, often, in both public and private.

A perfect example of home self-defense use gone badly when combined with alcohol was this example from Wassilla Alaska, another too-pro-gun state with below education and a tedency to right wing priorities.  Alcohol was involved, with both husband and wife being intoxicated, mistaking each other for home invaders, and shooting at each other.  The two residents, engaging in shooting under the Castle Doctrine for self-defense further posed a risk to law enforcement when they arrived to respond.  Pro-'Shoot First' legislation supporters don't like to admit that these incidents happen, just like they don't acknowledge the occurrence of events like the Tennessee bar shooting or the Starbucks murder suicide by legal gun carrier:

Dispatchers received an initial 911 call just after 12:30 p.m. Saturday from Russell W. Tanner, 56. Both he and a 53-year-old woman told dispatchers of armed intruders, said trooper Capt. Hans Brinke, who commands the Mat-Su trooper detachment.
When patrol troopers got to the residence, they heard shots fired inside. Within an hour of the initial call, they saw a man -- later determined to be Tanner -- leap from a second-story balcony with a firearm. At some point, a trooper fired a round.
Troopers and medics took Tanner to the Mat-Su Regional Medical Center, where he was treated and released for a gunshot wound to the elbow. He then was jailed on one count of misdemeanor weapons misconduct. Troopers say he was in possession of a firearm while under the influence but haven't released any details.
A woman in the house, Karen Walters, 53, also exited the house and was taken to the hospital, where she was treated and released for an undisclosed medical condition, Brinke said. He said he didn't know the relationship between Tanner and Walters but said it appears that they both live in the house. A Web post by troopers about the incident described the woman as Tanner's wife but didn't name her. Brinke said he didn't know if she just walked out the front door or if she got out another way.
Troopers, including members of a Special Emergency Reaction Team -- the trooper version of a SWAT team, -- surrounded the home. Troopers had to make sure the residence was secure and didn't get in to sweep it until about 4:30 p.m., Ipsen said. Inside, troopers found firearms and evidence that shots had been fired. But they didn't find any signs of intruders or a home invasion, troopers said.
"At this time it is still unclear whether the injury to Tanner occurred within the home, or outside of the home when the state trooper fired," troopers said in an on-line post about the incident.

Expanding guns allowed in public places is a bad idea; making it easier for people to shoot other people in private places is an equally bad idea, for the same reasons.  People act rashly, people act emotionally rather than rationally. 

I don't want to see Minnesota become Tennessee, or Florida, or Arizona.  Those states have lax gun laws, they don't supply or fund providing data to the NICS background check, which renders such checks useless - and Minnesota doesn't either.  And they have more shootings, more gun violence than we do.  They also tend to be Republican states with poor education and poor social services.

In this ranking of states for education, Minnesota is among the top states, well above average.  In comparison with the states where the mindset is to have more guns, like the ones above, Tennessee and Florida made it to average; states like Arizona, where they've been more aggressive in pushing right wing priorities like more guns, and less government (including public education), is far below average.  With the exception of Virginia, which was slightly above average, ALL of the states where there is more open carry, more concealed carry, and more allowance for guns in public places are also the dumb states, the less educated states.  That's not a good mix stupid + guns, either.  But it is part of the same value system, the same belief system that guns are good, that they make us free, and that education is bad, like teaching honest and accurate sex education, or evolution and climate change and other subjects about which there is established scientific consensus which are unpopular with the right wing, or factual history and economics for that matter either.

The push for more guns, more lenient laws on shooting is an emotional appeal to the worst impulses.  It is no thoughtful, it is not reasonable, it is not logical and it is not sensible.  Consistently, having more guns, both publicly and privately results in more gun violence.  That is especially true when guns combine with either public or private consumption of alcohol.

What it doesn't do is make anyone safer, or more free.  It does not reduce crime, and it doesn't keep law abiding people any safer.  And it certainly doesn't make our state any smarter, but it might do the opposite.

Starbuck's Shooting, and Gun Carry

This was in the news I perused this morning.  It struck me as interesting, because Starbucks was recently on the receiving end of complaints by the people who feel we are a more polite and civilized society, a safer society, when we are not armed and ready for immediate and lethal violence as part of our normal daily life.

The comments on another blog where I posted that story was that we didn't have Starbucks 'running with blood'.  I don't know that to be true; apparently we DO have Starbucks coffee shops running with blood.  And I don't see where having al those armed people provided the protection that the gun carry crowd insist results from their carrying.

The other position which doesn't appear to be reasonable or realistic is that we should not prohibit people from being armed on a proactive basis, but only on a reactive one where we hold them accountable for bad conduct, but don't do anything to prevent that conduct from occurring in the first place.

I don't see here how the man responsible for shooting the victim and himself can possibly be effectively 'held accountable' in any way.  He's dead.  It's too little, too late.  There is nothing left to do but dispose of his remains in whatever way he or his family chooses.  We have murder suicides occurring several times a week in this country.  In every case, more than one person is shot, and usually killed; in some cases a lot of people are shot and killed in these murder suicides.

These instances occur as often at public places, beauty parlors and spas, or coffee shops, or fast food restaurants, or shopping malls, and business offices.  The phrase 'going postal' came into being because of a spate of postal employees who engaged in workplace violence. 

Our public spaces ARE bloody, bloody and dangerous in ways that do not occur with the same frequency, or the same kind or number of fatalities, when and where there are fewer guns, and stricter, not more permissive, gun policies.  This is true for violence from both legally owned and illegally owned firearms.

Here is today's story from MSNBC and the News Services, followed by instances of the Starbuck's controversy in the media.

DA: Mass. cop shoots police officer, returns to scene and kills self

By msnbc.com staff and news services

BEVERLY, Mass. -- An off-duty police sergeant shot a police officer from a nearby town in Northeastern Massachusetts Friday night, then returned to the scene and killed himself as authorities closed in, the local district attorney said.
Authorities responded to a Starbucks in Beverly after a 911 call at about 5:45 p.m. ET Friday and found Beverly police Officer Jason Lantych shot multiple times, Essex District Attorney Jonathan Blodgett said. Lantych is in serious condition and undergoing surgery, he said.
Off-duty Hamilton police Sgt. Ken Nagy shot Lantych and fled, the district attorney's office said. A warrant was issued for Nagy's arrest on a charge of assault with intent to murder, and authorities said he was believed to be armed and dangerous.
The 43-year-old Nagy returned to the Starbucks at about 10:30 p.m. ET, and police there began to cordon off the scene. Nagy fatally shot himself in his car as officers approached him, Blodgett said.
"He has taken his life," Blodgett told Boston.com. "It is a tragic day."
Nagy and Lantych knew each other but the motive for the shooting is unclear, the district attorney's office said. Beverly and Hamilton are towns about 5 miles apart in northeastern Massachusetts.
Boston.com reported that the investigation was ongoing and that dozens of police officers and emergency medical personnel were gathered at the roped-off Starbucks parking lot Saturday morning.
Nagy was promoted to sergeant last summer after 19 years of service, according to a July 3 story from the Hamilton-Wenham Chronicle. His wife, Katie, smiled as she pinned a badge on Nagy's uniform, and their two young sons clapped, the newspaper reported.
When asked his feelings about the promotion, Nagy told the newspaper, "It feels great. I worked hard over the 19 years to get here."

From the Christian Science Monitor two years ago, and this past Valentine's Day, there was this coverage, from MSNBC.com:  Starbucks pulled into gun debate

The company says business is normal Tuesday even as groups promise action over its gun policies.

By Kim Peterson Feb 14, 2012 4:22PM

Starbucks (SBUX -0.33%) has become the unlikely center of a Valentine's Day debate over U.S. gun laws.

A group that aims to reduce gun violence says it is boycotting the coffee giant Tuesday because Starbucks has not stopped customers from bringing guns into stores when the law allows it. Starbucks has the legal right to ban guns, the National Gun Victim's Action Council says. The group has sent an open letter to Starbucks with its complaints.

That boycott didn't sit well with some gun owners, and some said they would visit Starbucks Tuesday to show their support. The gun owners have even created their own "I love guns and coffee" shirts, with an image of a gun-totin' Starbucks mermaid mascot to boot.

Starbucks seems to be trying to stay out of the issue. The company, which complies with local gun-control laws, said that all of its U.S. stores are open Tuesday and business is normal.

"Our long-standing approach to this issue remains unchanged and we abide by the laws that permit open carry in 43 U.S. states," the company said in a statement. "Where these laws don't exist, openly carrying weapons in our stores is prohibited."

Investors were unfazed by the gun debate. Starbucks shares were essentially flat Tuesday, closing at $49.12.

So, it looks like those protesters, the ones who don't feel safe in Starbucks, they DO have a problem with blood running on the floor, at least in one Starbucks.  While the lax carry laws wouldn't have stopped police officers from having weapons in this specific case, it is clear that having armed caffeine consumers doesn't make anyone safer.  No one carrying a firearm, either concealed or open carry whipped out their weapon to stop this shooting, there was no defensive return of fire.  The assertion people carry to protect themselves and innocent others is nothing more than an heroic fantasy that gun carriers have about themselves.  It is not the reality.

We're lucky this attempted murder / suicide didn't kill MORE people, as so many of them do.

I'm actually grateful there wasn't more shooting, but it does underline that we have a larger problem with the issue of how our gun culture affects conflict resolution, and we have clear evidence that more people carrying firearms is simply a greater risk for gun problems.  More guns result in more gun use; more guns results in more gun accidents. More guns do NOT result in more safety.

We need fewer guns, fewer deliberate shootings of all kinds, and fewer gun accidents. What we don't need is looser gun laws, looser background checks, and loopholes that make guns available too easily.  The only people served by the NRA lobby and their lock on conservative politics is the gun manufacturers who put profit over lives and safety.

Gun Violence Is NOT Funny, Congressman

I took some heat in an email to the penigma account recently, from a year ago when I wrote about the connection between the position promoted by failed Senate candidate and right wing extremist Sharron Angle who advocated that if the right didn't get their way in the 2010 election, they should resort to the ammo box instead of the ballot box to correct what was, to their minds, a mistake in the election.

The shooting the following January 2011 of Arizona Congresswoman Gabby Giffords by a schizophrenic gun man who was motivated in part by right wing extremist propaganda put Angle's words into sharp contrast with the reality of shooting people who we elect.  The recent email complained that the person did not feel I had adequately exonerated Sharron Angle from responsibility, presumably because of the finding that Loughner was insane, too insane so far to stand trial.

While it is of course true that there is no direct link between Sharron Angle and the Giffords shooting - and I don't claim there is a direct or proximate cause between the violence advocated by Angle, and the violent act perpetrated on Gifford - I still DO very much fault the position of Angle as terribly wrong, horribly bad, as anti-American and un-patriotic. And sadly, it is still very much the attitude of the far right extremists running for political office, and in at least one recent case, IN political office.  We can only hope that person might find himself back OUT of office this November.

Who is the latst Angle-like advocate for gun violence against our lawfully elected representatives in government?

Like Angle, this poster-child for bad gun culture excesses is from a southwestern state.  Angle was from Nevada, this is Congressman John Sullivan, from Oklahoma.  Sullivan calls his comments a joke - although he didn't appear to do so until AFTER he got blow-back from saying it, which makes his disclaimer seem a whole lot less sincere.

So for the nice man who very politely emailed me this week at the blog email - this is for you.

No, Sharron Angle clearly did NOT influence Jared Loughner, as it turned out.  But that doesn't make her advocating shooting people any less objectionable.  Unlike Republican member of Congress, Representative Sullivan, she never properly apologized either - and she lost, because people did NOT like her views.

So, in case there was any confusion on the subject, let me be very clear here.  Advocating shooting members of Congress, either the House or the Senate, advocating shooting governors, or the President or Vice President, or hell - advocating shooting ANYBODY is just plain completely and totally UNACCEPTABLE.

It is not funny, it is not clever, it is not amusing, and it should not be done, but least of all should it be done in the context of politics and government.  Because comments, including those made by right wing media that influenced the murder of Dr. Tiller, and the murder attempts by Charlie Wilson, in Washington to shoot a senator that was influenced by the right wing extremist idiot Glenn Beck, those rants, those stupid, ugly and violent admonitions --------those are not funny, and sometimes they have deadly consequences.

So, I hope our readers will be moved to oppose, criticize and condemn such speech, instead of nit picking it.  Because - you SHOULD.  Because people like Angle, Coburn, Sullivan, and the right wing media and blogosphere need to learn to self-regulate themselves not to make these inappropriate and unacceptable comments, and they aren't going to do so without outside help.

Frankly, if the congressman is this irresponsible in his speech, maybe he shouldn't be allowed to own a gun, due to his stupidity and poor judgment.  The right are fond of stating that guns don't kill people, people kill people.  The reality is that stupid and violent people WITH GUNS kill people; it's possible the congressman fits that description, because otherwise the idea wouldn't be amusing to him.  Clearly, he isn't the only one who doesn't get how inappropriate and just plain wrong joking about gun violence towards our congressmen and women, and our Senators is; it appears to be endemic on the right as a problem.

And if Congressman Sullivan, and Senator Coburn don't like the way the current budgets or other legislative battles are going, maybe they should persuade their party to be less belligerant, intransigent, and obstructionist.   As to Sharron Angle, she should just go seek professional help to become a nicer, saner human being than she is now as a violence advocating delusional tea party extremist.

From the Huff Po - here is the John Sullivan story:

John Sullivan, GOP Congressman, Apologizes For 'Killing' Comments

OKLAHOMA CITY — An Oklahoma congressman apologized on Friday for suggesting that "killing a couple" of U.S. senators may be the only way to get a budget passed through Congress.
U.S. Rep. John Sullivan made the comments Wednesday during a town hall meeting in Bixby. When asked about federal spending, the Tulsa Republican expressed his frustration with the Senate for its failure to approve a budget.
"I'd love to get them to vote for it," Sullivan said at the event. "Boy, I'd love that, you know. But other than me going over there with a gun and pointing it to their head and maybe killing a couple of `em, I don't think they're going to listen unless they get beat."
Sullivan's comments were first posted on the political blog Talking Points Memo.
Sullivan spokesman Vaughn Jennings said Friday that the congressman was speaking off the cuff during the town hall meeting and sincerely apologized for his remarks. Jennings added that Sullivan also spoke during the event about the importance of civility in Washington.
"The congressman offers his sincere apologies to anyone he offended and for using a poor choice of words to make his point – which was that Senate Democrats are refusing to pass a budget or even vote on the 28 House-passed jobs bills," Jennings said in a statement. "Millions of Americans are hurting – the Congressman feels their pain, and does not want his comments to deflect attention away from the serious issues our country faces today, and he certainly does not condone any form of violence as a means to fix what is broken in Washington."
Jennings said the congressman has not been contacted by law enforcement about his remarks.
Sullivan's comments drew criticism from U.S. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., a longtime proponent of stricter gun laws whose husband was killed and her son severely injured during a mass shooting on a Long Island Rail Road train in 1993.
"Mr. Sullivan's remarks show a staggering insensitivity to the families of 30-plus Americans that are killed by gunfire every single day," McCarthy said in a statement. "This kind of rhetoric helps illustrate just how hard it is to pass sensible laws to reduce gun violence in the Republican-controlled House."
The vice chairman of the Tulsa Democratic Party said Sullivan's comment "exceeds the limits of poor taste by miles," particularly in the wake of a January 2011 shooting in Arizona that killed six people and wounded 13 others, including Sullivan's former colleague U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords who was shot in the head.
"Metaphor or not, your words suggested to the community that violence is a solution if you do not agree with an elected official's point of view," Michael Whelan wrote in a letter to Sullivan. "While the political discourse in Washington may be ugly these days, it is incumbent upon our leaders to set the example and to calm the toxic firestorms brewing within their perspective parties. Your statements poured fuel on that fire."
It's not the first time an Oklahoma lawmaker has faced criticism for remarks about guns. At a town hall meeting in Langley in August, U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn, in describing his frustration with Congress, said: "It's a good thing I can't pack a gun on the Senate floor."
Coburn's office quickly issued an apology on the senator's behalf, but Coburn himself told his critics to "get over it."
"Political correctness is B.S.," Coburn told The Associated Press at the time. "Tell `em to get over it. It was a joke and everybody laughed. That's all I have to say about it."