Welcome to The FloridaProgressives.Com Podcast, Episode Fourteen, for August 3rd, 2014. I'm Mike Eidson.
This show delivers news and updates via interviews with activists around the state on the issues that you, the people of Florida, care about.
Susan Smith has previously been on episodes 1 and 6 of this podcast, where we talked education and other issues. Now, we’re getting to another major issue she works on: gun safety.
Susan is the president of the Democratic Progressive Caucus of Florida. She serves on the advisory board of Progress Florida and is also a board member of the Tiger Bay Club of Tampa. She is the training resource director for the Democratic Women's Club of Florida and a member of the Florida Democratic Party Legislative committee and the Clubs and Caucuses committee. She is a volunteer with Awake the State and Planned Parenthood.
Susan Smith, thanks so much for being on the show today.
SS:
Thank you for having me.
ME:
Let’s provide some context for listeners about your role in the gun control movement -- although I suppose politicians don’t use the term “gun control” much anymore -- and also what you’ve been doing lately. As the president of the DPCF you released a gun report a little more than a year ago, where you compared some prominent politicians’ records on gun policy, and in the past few months, you’ve been making some noise online -- and I mean that as a compliment -- about being a gun sense voter. Would you like to describe those two things?
SS:
Sure. Well, I’ll go back and tell you a little bit about my own history with guns.
I grew up up in East Tennessee, up in the mountains. And I learned how to shoot a .22, back in the day. And we had guns around the house. But what we didn’t have when I was growing up was a culture of violence that we are living with today: in our media and in our everyday lives, it seems. Y’know, we were fairly sheltered from violent cartoons, from violent images in the press, or on TV, or in the movies.
So, we’re living in a whole different world now, and back in, I guess it was the 80s, I decided that this was an issue that I cared a lot about, and I donated to the Brady Campaign for Handgun Control, and I’ve off and on given to that organization over the years.
And when we started our active work with the Progressive Caucus, during the Legislative Session, we decided to take on guns, as one of the issues that we would focus on. We have other caucuses that focus more on equality issues or reproductive choice issues, but our caucus decided to primarily focus on public education and on gun safety.
So, we are supposed to the term “gun safety” now or talk about gun violence, and not talk about “gun control” so much, because we don’t want to make people think that we’re taking away their rights [because we’re not].
So, we did the report last year, comparing the records of Nan Rich and Charlie Crist, and Alex Sink (because we thought at the time that she might still get into the governor’s race). And what we found was pretty much what we expected to find: Nan Rich had always introduced legislation for gun safety, and to try to prevent gun violence, and Governor Crist had always been a big proponent and an A+ person with the NRA. And that concerned us, and it still concerns us. And that’s one of the reasons why I am personally supporting Senator Rich in the gubernatorial primary [August 26th].
[Former NYC] Mayor [Michael] Bloomberg, as you know, has a group called Mayors Against Illegal Guns. And we have worked some with that group on messaging, along the way, and, about two months ago, they introduced a new PAC they started called Everytown. And what they’re trying to do, this Everytown group, they’ve joined forces with Moms Demand Action Against Gun Violence, and they decided to get people to sign a pledge that they will make this a priority issue, because one of the reasons that we haven’t been very effective in the legislative arena is because, for every call we make to a legislator, the NRA gets something like eight calls in.
Because our voters, people who really want to focus more on gun safety, our voters don’t see this as a primary issue with them. And we want to change that. So, I have taken the [Gun Sense Voter] Pledge, and that means that I will not be donating to or voting for anybody who doesn’t support Gun-Sense legislation, which pretty much means background checks and a limitation on certain kinds of weapons, in my mind, that I don’t think any individuals have business owning.
ME:
So, with this --
SS:
-- But mostly it’s about background checks.
ME:
Okay, that was my question. Is there a general consensus among everyone that’s signing the pledge what exactly the gun regulation would be?
SS:
Well, they asked. People do ask when you ask them to sign the pledge, what it means. And we say, “Universal background checks,” which are supported by 9 out of 10 Americans and even 70%+ of NRA members, apparently, even favor doing universal background checks.
What we have is a patchwork system, where one state does [background checks], one state doesn’t. With Florida, it’s a county-by-county thing. You can have a gun show -- we also want to close the gun-show loophole. And what that means is that people can go to gun shows and sell their guns without any kind of waiting period or background check. They can choose to do [a background check at a gun show], if they want to, but it’s not enforced, except on a county-by-county basis.
You can have a gun store owner who gets closed down for whatever reason, maybe because he didn’t follow the rules and regulations for [being] a gun store owner, and he gets shut down and his license to sell guns taken away, he can put his guns in the back of his car and go to a gun show and sell them there, without any kind of real rules and regulations. So that’s another loophole that needs to be closed, in the law.
5:20
ME:
Mm-hmm. So that was a little bit about background checks, a little bit about closing the gun show loophole; like you said, [these two reforms both] enjoy large support from the American people, despite how much we hear in the media about the NRA, a very powerful lobbying group, and [about] Congress, failing after Newtown to pass those two reforms.
Are there any more reforms that you feel are very personal to you and have a pretty large base of support?
SS:
Well, I think limiting the size of magazine clips -- the NRA supporters get very picky about the language that we use, and I don’t know what the language is, the exact language, but there’s no reason for somebody to be able to go in and have enough ammunition in enough clips on these weapons that they use that they can mow down 30, 40, 50, 60 people, without carrying a trunk full of ammunition, that they have to load separately.
The police officers, I believe, have those regulations. But the bad guys with these semi-automatic weapons don’t. So they have unlimited -- well, it is limited, but limiting the size of those clips would be a thing.
I would have very strong gun regulation if I were ruling the world, but --
ME:
[laughs]
SS:
-- I don’t rule the world, unfortunately.
ME:
Alright, how about this: my next three questions are devil’s advocate questions. You probably have often heard these responses --
SS:
Probably. [laughs]
ME:
So their just statements, they’re not really questions, but let me know what you think, when you hear them.
SS:
Okay.
ME:
#1. The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.
SS:
That’s been disproven, and I can get the study for you. I’ve asked about those statistics. And it’s a known fact: if you have a gun in your home, you are more likely to be killed with it than you are if you don’t have a gun in your home. You are more likely to kill someone you know than a stranger. There are all kinds of statistics to back this up. So that is just a fallacy that the weapons manufacturers like to tell us.
ME:
Sure, I mean, I completely agree*, around the home, there are so many statistics that prove exactly what you just said, but I think [gun rights advocates] often use [this argument] for those gun-free zones. Schools, hospitals, things like that. If there’s a rampager going through, a good guy with a gun could stop them.
[*Editor’s note: Just to be clear on my own views, I was agreeing with stressing the statistics of increased deaths in the home, which are troubling numbers that Americans should know about, but I am also a supporter of the Castle Doctrine self-defense law.]
SS:
Well, it didn’t happen when they shot up the Army base. It didn’t happen when they went into, what was the federal building in DC, that they went into --
ME:
I’m not sure.
SS:
-- A year or two ago and killed 13 people. The bad guy, or woman, has the element of surprise on their side. So, even if you have a gun, you’re not necessarily trained to be able to react in time to stop any kind of killings that could happen.
ME:
Right.
SS:
And I’ve heard people who were trained in this say that. That they are trained to react in situations like that. The average person is not trained.
ME:
Alright, devil’s advocate #2: This is a mental health issue, first and foremost.
SS:
Well, I mean, the very same people who are trying to give everybody a gun are the people that don’t want to pay for people who need it, so that’s one of the arguments I would use there.
ME:
I know, I was surprised, because I saw a news report recently, where gun-rights [advocates] -- because, you know, they call themselves gun-rights advocates** -- were actually pushing mental health. But, like you say, I’ve seen plenty of people say, no budget for that, either, y’know?
[**Editor’s note: Lots of clarifications, here -- almost as if this is a controversial subject! -- but I’m not mocking their term for themselves, I’m noting how it portrays the other side, namely us. Plenty of “gun-rights advocates” can be for background checks and closing the gun-show loophole, to use two examples.]
SS:
And you don’t always know when somebody’s going to have a breakdown and get a gun. Y’know, there are people who are perfectly sane, as far as we know, but anybody who kills is crazy, just by definition of what they’ve done. I mean, I hate to use the word “crazy” because I don’t mean to deride people with mental illness.
There was a case in Tampa, I think it was about three or four months ago now. This father bought a gun, and he bought fireworks, and then, late one night, he executed his wife and his two teenage children with the gun, and then he used the fireworks to set fire to the house, and then he killed himself. He had no history of mental illness, no history of financial problems, there’s nothing in his background. Nobody has a clue why this man did it, but if he hadn’t had easy access to a weapon, his family might be alive right now. So, it’s just another tragedy.
Eight children a day are killed in this country, one about every three hours, are killed, with a gun. And there’s no excuse for that.
ME:
Yeah.
SS:
The violence that’s associated with these kinds of weapons needs to stop.
ME:
The proliferation of guns, too, it’s hard to put the genie back into the bottle, because there’s so many out there, black market or just able to buy legally, like you say.
SS:
Mm-hmm.
ME:
Alright, my final devil’s advocate was: You’re infringing on my constitutional rights.
SS:
Well, I think the right to life comes before the right to own a gun, if I’m not mistaken. So, your right to have a gun does not come before my right to live in a safe world.
ME:
Yeah. Okay, so let’s move on to some recent events. Chicago, in particular, has been -- y’know, tons of gun violence there. I think they had 70 in one week [editor’s note: 82 shootings in four days]. Newtown, from a couple of years ago. And, y’know, there have been other mass shooters, we don’t need to go into every single one, because there are so many. The domestic violence and suicides -- I have this feeling that other countries just look at us and wonder, “What the hell is going on?” Do you agree?
SS:
Yes, absolutely, and I don’t know why we can’t address this serious public health issue that we have. And that’s what it is, it’s a public health and safety issue. It’s not about your right to have a weapon, I’m sorry. Again, that doesn’t trump my right to live in a safe community.
And these poor people in cities like Chicago, probably Detroit (where I just was), Philadelphia, there are issues there that we could talk about another day, because we learned a lot at Netroots Nation [in Detroit] about the disinvestment in communities that creates an atmosphere where gangs can proliferate, and they’re destroying the sense of community that people have. And community institutions are being taken away, so that people have to live with this constant death and violence, and it should not be permitted. And our elected officials should finally stand up and say, “No more.”
ME:
So what I’m hearing from you is, it’s not like “either/or,” it seems to be “all of the above.” It’s culture, poverty, you mentioned entertainment briefly. And it’s also the wide availability of guns. I think the NRA will put video games as the number-one culprit, above everything else, when yes, it is true that video games, movies, television have gotten more violent, but I wouldn’t say that’s the predominant contributing factor, would you?
SS:
No, I don’t think it’s the predominant factor, but you combine that along with the proliferation of guns, along with the stressed-out society we are living in. Y’know, where people are constant pressure, whether it’s educational pressure or pressure to perform or poverty issues they’re living with. We live in a very stressful world. And when you combine all of these things, it’s just like a time-bomb, waiting to go off.
So, there are many issues that need to be addressed. We have a lot of broken systems, and I don’t know when our elected officials are going to decide it’s time to fix them, but until they do, and I know that you and I had communicated about that article about the Democratic Party losing its way, and I think it’s so true, and until we realize that it’s not just the way we messaged something along the way, it’s because we have a broken economy, we have broken infrastructure, we have so many things about our world are broken, and we’re not willing to address those issues. And we don’t have courageous leaders that will address them. And I really am worried about our country, at this point in time.
ME:
Right. In some ways, the Democratic Party is broken, but I think two contributing things -- the only way we’ll get these gun regulations through, really, is fixing the redistricting of the House of Representatives, and getting the money out of politics. That way the NRA won’t have such a huge influence over members of Congress. And those two things are going to take a lot of time and a lot of effort.
SS:
Well, I don’t know if you heard Ben Jealous from the NAACP, last night with Chris Hayes [editor’s note: this interview was recorded July 29th], but he made some excellent points. He said, part of it is the priorities we put during election seasons. And I think we can see that in Florida right now, with all the emphasis that’s going on with the governor’s race. But Ben Jealous said, we’ve got a party that will spend a billion dollars on a presidential election, but they won’t put a few million into voter registration in a state where they’ve got the Democratic potential votes. They’re just not willing to organize at that level and put the resources into it. I’ve heard that said about South Carolina, and I think they are starting to do more voter registration drives, but it’s also a matter of priorities and how we choose to spend the money that we’ve got. And there are creative ways it can be spent. And if the resources were allocated differently, we could have a bigger impact.
He said the reason we don’t win midterm elections is because we don’t organize the base. We put all our emphasis on every four years and we’re not putting that emphasis on the off-year elections. And when we do, we only focus at the top of the ticket. How much publicity do we see on the State House and Senate races? We don’t even have candidates running in half of them.
ME:
Mm-hmm. To shift the attention back to Florida, let’s talk about what Florida is facing, and how to fix it. Stand Your Ground is one of the major things that Florida became famous for -- I mean, I know the law is in other states as well -- the Trayvon Martin case, things like that.
Are you seeing any kind of optimism or ways to change this, yet? I know you’ve been out there in the streets and you’ve been talking to other activists. Are we anywhere near closer to getting -- because I remember, Matt Gaetz said, “We are not going to change one comma of Stand Your Ground.” This was a Florida state legislator.
SS:
Yeah, he did. He was the head of the committee that was a special hearing they did on it. And they’re not going to change it. It’s going to take people finally saying, “Enough is enough, and I’m not going to vote for you. I don’t care how good you are on all these other issues, but this is the primary issue for me and my family. And I’m not going to vote for you. I don’t care how much I like you, you will not get my vote unless you take a stand on this” and finally stick together as a Democratic Caucus.
And I think it was very disheartening last year when we went through [attempted Stand Your Ground reform], to see all the Democrats who wouldn’t take a stand on it. They’re not even strategic about how they do it, which frustrates me.
And I don’t see a lot of hope. I don’t know if you saw, the Docs vs. Glocks ruling was overturned. The judge had ruled that the law that said pediatricians can’t talk to families about guns, just like they talk to you about a car seat in your car, with your child, they’re not allowed to ask you about guns, and the courts had said the law is unconstitutional. And then yesterday or the day before, the ruling was overturned, and now they’re saying it is constitutional. I’m sure it’s going to get appealed again.
But until we get rid of these legislators that are bought and paid for by the NRA, and there are a lot of Democrats among them. Democrats who are afraid of their own shadows and don’t know how to lead on this issue, because you can take a brave stand and people will support you, but it’s going to take an education process, and we are going to have to have that kind of leadership.
And I think it would help us with our minority voters, too. This is the reason they say, “You only come to us during election time, when you want our votes,” because we’re not there for them, now. The Dream Defenders are trying to organize in the minority neighborhoods, and we should be out there with them. This is an issue that resonates with Democratic base voters. And it might not resonate with Dixiecrats up in the Panhandle, but it does resonate with Democratic voters around the state. But our party is not showing the leadership it should be showing on it.
ME:
Okay, thank you, Susan Smith, for joining me today, and thanks for all you do, on these issues.
SS:
Thank you. Thanks again for having me.
ME:
More on many of the issues, news stories, and organizations discussed on the show are linked to in the transcript for this podcast at Florida Progressives Dot Com, as are Susan’s first two appearances on the program. Gun laws, like every other issue discussed on the show, will only change with political pressure, and I think I need to do a money-in-politics episode soon, because that is the one issue that connects all the other one. It is the biggest blockade for progressive change.
You can find Susan Smith on Facebook and Twitter. You can find the Democratic Progressive Caucus of Florida at http://www.progressivedemcaucusfl.org/ .
This concludes the #5interviews5days event, but in a few days I’ll have a clip show that will have a preview of Episode 15, along with portions of Episodes 11 through 14. I want to thank all six of my guests from the past five days. It was a pretty insane schedule and I won’t be doing that again, but it was a fun experiment.
You can find me on Facebook at The FloridaProgressives.Com Podcast. You can find me on Twitter at mike eidson, spelled e i d s o n.
This music is by Kevin MacLeod at incompetech.com . It is licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
Thanks for listening.
No comments:
Post a Comment