Equal Rights for everyone

slide_436062_5714050_freeI was getting in a cab in Paris when I found out that the Supreme Court passed marriage equality nationwide.  I started to cry.  I was seriously overcome with emotion.  We are finally moving forward as a nation from gay rights to healthcare to the slow evolution of legalizing weed to taking down the Confederate flag and that says something about where our nation is going.  I hope that gun control is next.

IMG_8031My daughter sent me this.  The numbers are staggering.  Let’s hope that there is a movement afoot and this is just the beginnings of change in our country.

I am celebrating this past week but we have to remember there is still a journey ahead of us.

Comments (Archived):

  1. Anne Libby

    Everytown for Gun Safety (a Bloomberg endeavor) is mobilizing moms in this effort…

    1. Gotham Gal

      Moms is the way to go.

  2. lisa hickey

    Yes, we do have a ways to go. But I can’t help but believe these issues are interrelated. Marriage Equality leads to openness and tolerance and less focus on “the other”. It breaks down the stereotypical Man-Box. Perhaps most importantly, it demonstrates that you don’t always need violence and upheaval to create significant social change. It also shows people that the tools and knowledge and resources to create meaningful social change are within most people’s grasp. If Marriage Equality can expand and grow as quickly as it did, perhaps things we previously thought impossible really are now possible.I am as excited for the future as I ever have been. Yes, we still have a long way to go. But what happened this week feels like real progress. And it is momentum we can build on.

  3. Matt Kruza

    Gun control will not move the same way. Almost no chance. Completely no chance of it being similar to gay marriage and the confederate flag. Best that will happen, and probably something I would support is enhanced background checks. The real reason those won’t pass is many liberals real goal is to ban almost all weapons to the average citizen (see Bloomberg and his dishonesty / hypocrisy / non-straigt forwardness on this issue). Oh, and the whole second amendment thing gets in the way. I can not forsee anyway that the 2nd ammenmdent is overturned in the next 50 -100 years. (personal bias here: never have owned or shot a gun, but do think americans have a fundamental right to self-protection). Abortion (free and with no restrictios) and gun control will NOT change like many other issues have.

    1. Kirsten Lambertsen

      “…many liberals real goal is to ban almost all weapons to the average citizen…”I don’t believe we can ever know what is truly in another’s mind. I think this meme is just that, a meme created by pro-gun extremists.I think you might be right, though. We will likely never see it.

      1. Matt Kruza

        To be clear, and I don’t think you are saying this, but I am far from a pro-gun extremists. But DC, Chicago, and even Bloomberg himself want to deny law-abiding citzens the right to hand guns. There is really no ambiguity here. There was a big case 2008? I think that finally 100% affirmed the right to hand gun ownerhship. 5-4 decision I believe, and one no doubt liberal advocates will try to overturn if the supreme court goes back in there favor. I guess my point is there is really no reason to be reasonable if you know your opponent is ideologically opposed to almost any personal weapon ownership at all. And that is why the pro-gun “extremists” as you say, will not budge. 150 million or so have access to guns in there homeand only a few thousand murders are committed by / or against non-criminals. Most gun deaths are either criminal or criminal or domestic violence. I am not too sadabout criminal on criminal (although we should reduce crime overall) and the domestic violence one is an issue tat we should no doubt work on. I guess that really is the point, that if prominent liberals want no guns, then it is hard to compromise on the domestic violence / abuse /assaut gun related backgrounds. Not sure if this is helpful or not, but I think my approach is what liberals need to take up if they actually want to advance POLICY and REALITY and not just try to score political points, something that I often question. Again, not attributing any of these sinister motives of liberals here to you or Joanne, but I am doing that to many of thel iberal political leaders who often demagogue vs. lead / legistlate.

    2. lisa hickey

      I would like to understand the numbers better. My understanding is that of the 32,000 gun deaths a year, the majority of those are suicides. Do you know, Matt, how many of those gun deaths were actually from people protecting themselves and or their families? That is, what percentage of gun deaths are as a result of what you think is a fundamental right to self-protection?

      1. LE

        I have no dog in this fight as the saying goes (I am not a gun owner and never intend to be one) but those figures are out of context and as such you can’t generalize from them. As far as suicides the wikipedia page on this seems to confirm that and that assumes that info is correct.Further I don’t think that it would exactly be a surprise that much of the gun deaths in this country occur as a result of drugs and shit that happens in poor neighborhoods and most likely by people who would get guns even if there were more controls put on them today that would constrain lawful owners.People always like to trot out and cherry pick countries that have drastically different makeups and issues than we have in the US I mean seriously where is the comparison between Israel or Switzerland and the US as only one example.Here is a site that appears to have some good info, using Spain as one example:http://www.gunpolicy.org/fihttp://www.gunpolicy.org/fi

        1. lisa hickey

          My “dog in the fight” is that I would prefer there to be fewer preventable, violent deaths in this world, and I’m not a big fan of products whose primary goal is to cause irreparable harm and death.I wasn’t trying to compare the US to other countries—although I do love that interactive chart and the ability to compare and contrast, @domainregistry:disqus. I also didn’t say we should take away the guns of lawful gun owners.I am simply trying to understand this from a business/numbers perspective—what number of gun deaths are from the product being used the way it was intended?I do understand you can’t compare gun deaths to other products that cause unintentional deaths. If you have other products that cause a large amount of irreparable harm that is unintentional—if 87 people die because of a faulty ignition switch or 7 people die from Carmel Apples that have Listeriosis—there is immediate action and immediate consequences. But I guess the difference there is that the product was used the way it was supposed to be used and people were unaware it could cause death. Nobody is unaware that guns cause death. So I’d be curious to know if guns that are sold for “protection” are actually effective and how so. If they actually cause the deaths they are designed to cause.

          1. pointsnfigures

            They are. When someone breaks into your home and they hear the cock of a shotgun, they generally leave-unless they are insane. Game Theory would instruct anyone that having concealed carry everywhere changes the probability. The criminals always get guns-they ignore the laws. Chicago where I live has the toughest gun laws in the country and certain neighborhoods are shooting galleries. There is no perfect policy with regard to guns, so I’d prefer to err on the side of freedom.

          2. pointsnfigures

            http://www.dnainfo.com/chic… In Chicago lately we have seen stabbings increase. This one occurred in a pretty good neighborhood (Lincoln Square)

      2. Matt Kruza

        of the 32k about 20k are suicide, about 10k are homicide and probably less than 1k are self-protection. A good majority of those 10k (probably 5-8k) are contained to the criminal class. Drug policy reform that pretty much ends gangs as we know tem would bring that 10k down to 3-4k at which point a lot of the hysterics about the numbers would subside. Pretty well versed on this issue, but definitely welcome any other numbers or positions to elaborate.

  4. Kirsten Lambertsen

    What a memory you’ll have now of coming home from abroad, celebrating an anniversary, to a changed America. We’ve lived in incredible times, haven’t we? I feel so lucky to have been born when I was.I don’t know if gun control can be uncoupled, or not, from its co-conspirators of institutional racism and our culture of fear. Which came first? But I’d love to also see a coherent campaign against the culture of fear take shape.Meanwhile, this week, we should celebrate! Being on Twitter yesterday was like being at the best party ever.

    1. Gotham Gal

      I’m still teary

    2. lisa hickey

      @MsPseudolus:disqus, I like that framework as a way to move towards a solution. How do we look at the culture of fear as a way of understanding and fixing both racism and gun culture? It seems to me the arguments against gay marriage were fear based. And now (hopefully) it’s just a matter of people getting used to the fact that this is the way it is.

      1. Gotham Gal

        I agree. Change is scary for most.

      2. Kirsten Lambertsen

        Movement-building is really nuanced, sophisticated stuff. I don’t know how to do it, frankly 🙂 However, I personally plan to start pointing out every time I see fear being used to sell something (looking at you, Mark Cuban). Should keep me busy ;)The SCOTUS decision has nothing and everything to do with movement/cultural change. The court supposedly does not make its decisions based upon popular opinion. But what makes its way to the Supreme Court has everything to do with diligent, savvy movement builders working for years and years.So, along with culture-shaping, it would be interesting to think about how fear mongering is a violation of our constitutional rights, maybe. (I’m really spitballing here.) Things that one might consider for, say, a class action lawsuit, could be examined for possible reframing as a constitutional issue, maybe.The reality is that our gov’t does very little in the way of real change. We would have waited forever for Congress to pass a marriage equality law (and even then it probably would have been watered down). Historically, real change for the most part has, for better or worse, come from the Court.So, if we were serious movement builders, we’d be looking in the Court’s direction in parallel with creating cultural change. Everyone learned from the disappointing experience with the Equal Rights Amendment, the Court’s the way to go.

  5. Yinka!

    Glad the US is finally on the same page with many other countries on the marriage equality issue. When Canada legalized it 10 years ago, it was the 4th country in the world to do so.Here’s to hoping on gun control issues…

  6. laurie kalmanson

    yeswaiting to see if the opposition will litigate forever, like it has against reproductive rights, or give up

  7. laurie kalmanson

    guns: test, license, register, renew, insure; like cars. it’s much harder to kill a school full of children or a church full of people with a car, and drivers are subject to those public good regulations.

  8. pointsnfigures

    Kind of an anachronism on gun control. If we should be free to marry, free to choose to use drugs if we want, we ought to be free to have a gun if we want too.