On Oct. 1, a 64-year-old retiree with no real criminal history sat perched in his suite at a high-rise hotel overlooking the Vegas Strip with an arsenal of weapons, raining bullets down into a crowd at a country music festival.
Aided by a bump stock device, which allows semi-automatic devices to mimic machine guns, Stephen Paddock killed 58 people and injured more than 400.
Last week, state Senate Republicans in a party-line vote beat back an attempt by Democrats to force a vote on four measures tightening gun regulations in New York, including a ban on bump stock devices.
The Democrats also included measures to expand the time allowed for background checks, allow judges to issue so-called Extreme Protection Orders that would block individuals deemed likely to harm themselves or others from possessing or purchasing guns and boost research into gun violence.
The move by the Democrats came on the two-week anniversary of the massacre of 17 high school students and staff members in Parkland, Florida.
Republicans who control the Senate responded by not permitting a vote on the Democrats’ proposals.
Instead, Senate Majority Leader John Flanagan (R-East Northport) issued a statement calling for “more money for security cameras and hardening of schools doors,” funds earmarked for placing armed guards in any school district that wants them and the installation of “panic buttons.”
According to the New York Post, state Sen. Elaine Phillips twice fled a reporter attempting to ask her position on gun control.
She later issued a news release in which she said she supported legislation making school shootings acts of terrorism, which would allow for greater sharing of intelligence among police agencies.
Sounds reasonable.
But in neither Flanagan’s statement nor Phillips’ was there any mention of restricting guns or their users. Or addressing any of the Democratic bills.
Turn schools into fortresses, yes. Take guns out of the hands of people who should not have them, no. This makes no sense at all.
The Republican senators also made no mention of movie theaters, shopping malls, churches, synagogues and mosques, concert centers – all the site of mass shootings in recent years.
Are Republican state senators also going to approve funding to harden these targets? If not, how are they going to protect us?
On Monday, Phillips issued a statement calling for most of what the Democrats had proposed, including a bump stock ban as well the Republican proposal to classify mass shootings as domestic terrorism.
On Tuesday, she announced that the state Senate had passed “a comprehensive package of school safety measures.” But missing were the gun restrictions proposed by Democrats.
We hope Phillips explains the omission in upcoming days.
A more important question for Phillips and District 7 voters is what happens if her fellow Republicans refuse to support what seems to us to be common-sense solutions by Senate Democrats?
Do district residents vote against Phillips in November to give Democrats a Senate majority that would back the four proposals – regardless of where Phillips stands on the issue?
In the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, the New York State Legislature in 2013 approved the NY SAFE ACT, which was at the time touted as the most comprehensive gun law in the nation.
Among the bill’s provisions was a ban on high-capacity magazines and assault weapons.
It also required mental health professionals to report when there is a reason to believe a patient is likely to engage in conduct that will cause serious harm to themselves or others.
The Legislature’s vote in favor of the act included both Democrats and Republicans with then-state Sen. Jack Martins, the previous occupant of Phillips’ seat, as well as Flanagan among them.
So why can’t there be bipartisanship now?
Since Sandy Hook there have been at least 1,607 mass shootings nationwide, with at least 1,846 people killed and 6,459 wounded, according to Vox.
Despite the ongoing carnage, Congress and the president appear incapable of crossing the National Rifle Association and voting for sensible gun measures such as a national bump stock ban and universal background checks.
So it will be up to New York’s legislators to tighten the state’s laws and deal with people bringing arms into New York from states with weaker gun laws.
It is not an ideal situation, but better than the alternative.
The NRA has managed to thwart stricter gun laws and even relax them thanks to single-issue voters who base their vote solely on opposition to gun safety laws.
Supporters of stricter gun regulations have not done the same. But in the wake of the Parkland shooting that might be changing.
Republican state senators might want to think about that possibility.
If not, they could soon be looking down the barrel of an angry electorate.
