Sen. Flake: Bloomberg ads wrong, 'I did vote' for background checks

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) is pushing back against attack ads that say he broke his promise to support passing new gun laws.

"If you are anywhere close to a television set in Arizona in the coming days, you’ll likely see an ad about gun control financed by NYC Mayor Bloomberg," Flake wrote Friday on his Facebook page. "Contrary to the ad, I did vote to strengthen background checks."

Flake is responding to ads from Mayors Against Illegal Guns, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's (I) group that supports tightening gun laws. Recent advertising by the group accuses Flake of breaking his promise to help pass expanded background checks.

Flake voted against an amendment co-sponsored by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) that would have expanded background checks to include firearms purchases at gun shows and over the Internet. But Flake says he did not break his promise because he supported an alternate gun control proposal by Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas).

"I voted for the bipartisan Grassley amendment, which included language from a bill I helped write which strengthened background checks for those with mental illness," Flake continued. "The Grassley amendment also included language to increase prosecution of criminals and fugitives who circumvent the current background check system.

"Mayor Bloomberg can spend millions trying to get me to support his view of background checks. That’s his call. But we Arizonans aren’t easily bullied. The legislation that would have done the most to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them was the Grassley amendment. And that’s the amendment I supported."

Flake is one of a number of lawmakers Mayors Against Illegal Guns has targeted on guns. The group has also begun airing gun ads directed at Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.). On Thursday, Ayotte sent out a fundraising email to supporters with a statement similar to Flake's.

"Michael Bloomberg and his liberal allies think their $700,000 smear campaign will pressure me into changing my vote on the Manchin-Toomey gun control bill," Ayotte wrote in the email, according to CNN. "They couldn't be more wrong. As a mother, I am 100 percent dedicated to fighting gun violence. But I also have the experience to know that expanding an already broken background check system will not prevent a deranged individual or criminal from obtaining and misusing firearms."

In response, Mayors Against Illegal Guns stuck with its criticism.

"Sen. Flake is obfuscating his position by citing his vote for a decoy bill created by the Washington gun lobby (Grassley-Cruz) that would have actually weakened the background check system and made it easier for dangerous people to get guns," the group said in a statement.

—This story was updated at 4:52 p.m.

View Comments

View the original article here

Background Conference Call by White House Official on Syria

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Via Telephone

1:23 P.M. EDT

MS. HAYDEN:  Hi, guys.  Thank you very much for joining on what I know is short notice, but we wanted to have an opportunity to provide you with a little bit of context to the letters you've seen that were sent today from the White House's Director of the Office of Legislative Affairs, Miguel Rodriguez.  Those letters were to Senator McCain and Senator Levin.  You've probably also seen Secretary Hagel's comments, and we just wanted to give an opportunity to answer some questions.

This call is on background attributable to a White House official.  With that, I'll turn it over to your unnamed official to go ahead and get started, and then we'll take some questions. 

WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL:  Thanks, Caitlin.  I'll just say a few introductory comments. 

You all presumably have the letter that was sent up to the Hill; if you need it we can provide that.  The letter was in response to a letter that was sent to the President yesterday, April 24th, from Senator McCain, Senator Levin, Senator Corker, Senator Menendez, Senator Chambliss, Senator Ayotte, Senator Casey and Senator Graham.  And the question that was posed in that letter was:  Has the Assad regime or Syrian elements associated with or supported by the Assad regime used chemical weapons in Syria since the conflict began in March 2011? 

I'll just highlight a few parts of the letter by way of opening, and then take your questions.  What I will say is, for some time now, as you know, the President has directed the government to closely monitor the potential use of chemical weapons within Syria.  Given our concern that as the situation deteriorated and the regime became more desperate, they may use some of their significant stockpiles of chemical weapons.

What we say in the letter is that our intelligence community does assess with varying degrees of confidence that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically the chemical agent sarin.  This assessment is based in part on physiological samples.  Our standard of evidence must build on these intelligence assessments as we seek to establish credible and corroborated facts.  For example, the chain of custody is not clear, so we cannot confirm how the exposure occurred and under what conditions. 

We go on to reaffirm that the President has set a clear red line as it relates to the United States that the use of chemical weapons or the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist groups is a red line that is not acceptable to us, nor should it be to the international community.  It's precisely because we take this red line so seriously that we believe there is an obligation to fully investigate any and all evidence of chemical weapons use within Syria.

We are currently pressing for a comprehensive U.N. investigation that can credibly evaluate the evidence and establish what took place in association with these reports of the use of chemical weapons.  At the same time as that U.N. investigation is underway -- and we're seeking to make it more comprehensive -- we're also working with our friends and allies as well as the Syrian opposition to procure, share and evaluate additional information associated with reports of use of chemical weapons so that we can establish the facts. 

And I think the point here is that given the stakes involved, given how serious the situation is, and what we have learned, frankly, from our own recent experience, intelligence assessments are not alone sufficient.  Only credible and corroborated facts that provide us with some degree of certainty can then guide our decision-making and inform our leadership of the international community.

So with that, I'll move to take your questions.

Q    Thanks so much for doing the call, and thank you for your service.  Secretary Kerry told lawmakers today that the intelligence assessments referenced, with various degrees of confidence, two instances of chemical weapons use inside Syria.  Were these the two alleged uses in Damascus and Aleppo in March?  Or was this also the alleged use in Homs in December?  And do you believe that President Obama's red line has been crossed?

WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL:  Thanks for the question, Josh.  Let me just say a number of things.  I don't want to speak in detail about intelligence assessments, because portions of them, of course, are classified and the intelligence community is best positioned to characterize in detail their assessments.  I will say, for instance, the incident in Aleppo that you referenced, in March, was one of the reports that we've been following up on, and in fact was a precipitating factor in the call for the U.N. investigation.  And, in fact, the Syrian government itself said that they would support a U.N. investigation.  What we've made clear is that U.N. investigation needs to be comprehensive.  It needs to look into all reports of chemical weapons use, and it needs to have credible access in order to ascertain exactly what took place. 

As relates to the numbers of incidents, I won't go beyond what Secretary Kerry said.  Again, what we are saying is that the intelligence community does assess, with varying degrees of confidence, that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria.  And we'll continue to seek to gather additional facts associated with that assessment.

On your red line question, it is absolutely the case that the President's red line is the use of chemical weapons or the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist groups.  However, I also want to underscore that given how important this issue is and how important these decisions are, our standard of evidence has to build on these intelligence assessments.  So the intelligence assessments inform our decision-making.  We want to continue to investigate above and beyond those intelligence assessments to gather facts so that we can establish a credible and corroborated set of information that can then inform our decision-making. 

So currently, again, we have benefited from a lot of rigorous intelligence work.  That intelligence work is based on a mosaic of information.  There is evidence associated with that, including physiological samples.  At the same time, we believe it's necessary to continue to investigate to corroborate that information and to have a strong, firm, evidentiary basis for the way in which we consult our friends and allies in the international community on this issue and the way in which the President will ultimately makes decisions.

So we are continuing to do further work to establish a definitive judgment as to whether or not the red line has been crossed and to inform our decision-making about what to do next.

Q    Just a point of clarification on the last -- you said you need a better or a strong, firm, evidentiary basis to do what exactly?  I mean, what is on the table here, both with your allies and, as you said, for the presidential decision?  What are the range of those options?

WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL:  Sure.  Thanks for the question.  So, as you know, we currently have a number of lines of effort in Syria, ranging from our humanitarian assistance to our significantly-increasing, nonlethal support to the opposition.  At the same time, though, the President has tasked that there be a full range of options for him to consider for additional action in Syria. 

And if, again, we reach a definitive determination that this red line has been crossed based on credible, corroborated information, what we will be doing is consulting closely with our friends and allies in the international community more broadly, as well as the Syrian opposition, to determine what the best course of action is.

I don't want to get into those hypotheticals at this juncture, but suffice it to say all options are on the table in terms of our response, and it could run a broad spectrum of activity across our various lines of effort in Syria, which already include diplomatic initiatives, already include assistance to the opposition.  But again, at the President's direction, there are additional options and contingencies that we prepared for that we would have to consider as we make a determination about chemical weapons use.

Q    Thank you so much.  Senator McCain has called on the White House to establish a safe zone for Syrian civilians.  In light of this new evidence that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons, would the White House consider that?  And my second question is, the President has called on President Assad to step down.  He said that he lost his legitimacy.  Who does he hold responsible in this incident in terms of using chemical weapons?  Is still President Assad responsible for that?  Thank you.

WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL:  Sure, let me just take the second question first.  As we say in the letter, we believe -- the United States intelligence community assesses that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons, again, with varying degrees of confidence.  At the same time, we're seeking to establish additional facts associated with that assessment.  We reference the chain of custody, so in terms of our efforts to confirm how the exposure occurred and under what conditions it occurred.

What we also say is that we believe that any use of chemical weapons in Syria would very likely have originated with the Assad regime.  We believe that the Assad regime maintains custody of chemical weapons within Syria, and we believe that they have repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to escalate their use of violence against the Syrian people.  So we are very skeptical that the reports of use of chemical weapons could be attributed to anyone other than the Assad regime in Syria given our belief that they remain in custody of those chemical weapons.

We've also made it clear that President Assad, as the leader of the Assad regime, is ultimately responsible for the security of those chemical weapons and responsible for ensuring that they are not used.  So ultimately, he is accountable for any use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime.  And President Assad and those around him should know that the world is going to continue to carefully monitor this issue and bring forward information as we have it and as we are doing today, and that ultimately, if it is established in a credible and confirmable way that there was a use of chemical weapons by the regime, we do believe that President Assad is ultimately accountable for that action.

With respect to the option that you referenced from Senator McCain, I don't want to get into a specific hypothetical scenario beyond saying that we will consummately have prepared contingency planning for different scenarios in Syria.  I think the military has spoken to the fact that they do prudent planning in terms of preparing a range of options for different contingencies.  But what we will ultimately do is going to be informed by what we believe is going to make the greatest difference.  And that is a judgment that we want to reach not just by ourselves, but in close coordination and consultation with other countries -- beginning with our close allies, countries like the British and the French, who have closely worked with us on this issue of chemical weapons and on the issue of Syria more generally; also the countries in the region that we've been working very closely with -- Turkey, our Gulf partners, Jordan.

So this will be a process in which we not only seek to evaluate and confirm instances of use of chemical weapons, but as it relates to our response, we'll be reviewing our own contingency planning.  But we'll also be in close consultations with our friends and allies as well.

Q    Secretary Hagel had indicated that this conclusion, these assessments had been reached in the past 24 hours.  Could you talk to us about what happened in the last 24 hours and whether you saw any change in the situations at Syrian chemical weapons depots?  And also, just to clarify on your answer on Aleppo, you had said that that was one of the incidents the U.S. had been following up on.  Did you mean that that is one of the two incidents that Kerry was referencing? 

WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL:  First of all, I don't want to confirm any particular incident as being confirmed at this point, given the fact that these are intelligence assessments and they're based on a broad range of information -- some of it classified.  What I was confirming is that the incident in Aleppo is one that prompted further investigation and we believe merits further investigation.

With respect to your other question --

MS. HAYDEN:  Margaret, this is Caitlin.  Can you just repeat the other part of your question please?

WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL:  Oh, it was Hagel, sorry, yes.  So with respect to Secretary Hagel’s comment about the last 24 hours, the way I’d characterize that, Margaret, is that we are constantly reviewing our intelligence as it relates to chemical weapons.  We have been doing so for several months.

I would also note that we are the ones who often raise the profile of the issue of chemical weapons precisely because we saw things that were concerning to us within Syria.  And as we made clear in the letter, we raise those issues publically, we raise those issues privately in seeking to deter the use of chemical weapons.

As a part of that process, we also continually kept Congress informed of our assessments of chemical weapons and our efforts to investigate reports of the use of chemical weapons.  In the last 24 hours, a determination was made to respond to the letter that we received from the several senators on an unclassified basis. 

Given the fact that we have been developing additional information within our intelligence community and given the fact that we want to be responsive to Congress, to the international community and the American people on these issues, we felt it was the right and prudent thing to do to respond in an unclassified form to this letter.  So we took that decision last night, and the letter was delivered to Capitol Hill this morning.

As you also have no doubt seen, we were briefing the Congress on this issue as well today in our commitment to keep them fully informed.  So these are constantly updated intelligence assessments.  They evolve over time as we gather more information.  And the decision that was made in the last 24 hours was to finalize the assessment that we would provide, both in terms of our briefing to members of Congress today, but also in terms of deciding to respond to this letter in an unclassified fashion.

Q    Thanks for doing the call.  In Congress, Republicans and Democrats -- the Democrat, Dianne Feinstein, just put out a statement -- appear to believe that a red line has been crossed.  And Dianne Feinstein said if action isn’t taken now, the Syrian regime will see that there’s no sanction to even limited use of chemical weapons.  To what degree is the administration sensitive to the charge -- both leveled by members of Congress and a fear that is within the Syrian opposition -- that if nothing is done now, the Syrian regime, desperate, will only escalate its use of chemical weapons because nothing is being done after proof positive has been determined -- at least by several governments, and partially by ours -- and that the situation is so chaotic in Syria right now that the credible and collaborative or corroborative evidence standard the administration sets can never be reached?

WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL:  Thanks for the question, Major.  Let me just say a few things.  First of all, we’re already doing a significant amount in Syria, and we recently doubled our assistance to the opposition, including direct assistance to the Syrian military coalition on the ground.  So we have now $250 million worth of nonlethal assistance.  Again, that will include direct support to the people who are fighting on the ground as it relates to things like meals, medical equipment, body armor and things that are directly relevant to their efforts.  And we also have over $400 million in humanitarian assistance that we’re deploying and delivering into Syria as well -- as well as dealing with the refugee crisis in neighboring countries.

With respect to your question on chemical weapons, I would say that we are the ones who took the determination to come forward with our assessment as it stands today, just as we have consistently raised the profile of the issue of chemical weapons.

The other countries that you reference, I think if you were to ask them, they’ll speak for themselves, but they are very much in the same position that we are in assessing that there is evidence of the use of chemical weapons, but there needs to be further investigation so that there is a clear, corroborated and credible basis for the decisions that we need to make.

So again, it’s precisely because we take the red line seriously that we feel like there needs to be clear, factual, evidentiary basis for our decisions.  And we will be continuing that investigation.  And frankly, we feel like even with the chaotic situation in Syria, there are ways for us to establish the facts.

Now, the simplest way is for the U.N. investigation to have the access that it needs to do a credible investigation, and that means people being able to get in on the ground and do the evaluations necessary. 

But even without that investigation, we're already working with the Syrian opposition, who can help us in corroborating reports and gathering evidence.  We're working with other countries, like the British, for instance, who are also undertaking their own investigations and gathering their own information.  So we are also capable of collecting further information, evaluating that information and presenting it to the public. 

But I would say that given our own history with intelligence assessments, including intelligence assessments related to weapons of mass destruction, it's very important that we are able to establish this with certainty and that we are able to present information that is airtight in a public and credible fashion to underpin all of our decision-making.  That is I think the threshold that is demanded given how serious this issue is.

But I think nobody should have any mistake about what our red line is.  It is when we firmly establish that there has been chemical weapons use within Syria, that is not acceptable to the United States, nor is the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist organizations.  And the people in Syria and the Assad regime should know that the President means what he says when he set that red line.  And keep in mind, he is the one who laid down that marker.  He's the one who directed that we provide this information to the public.  And he's the one who directed that we do everything we can to further investigate this information so that we can establish in credible, corroborated, factual basis what exactly took place.

Q    Two questions.  One, could you give us any more detail on the physiological samples?  Are we talking about soil samples, some other form of material?  And secondly, on the question coming up, what Major asked earlier -- if you're having to wait until you establish this comprehensive case, this evidentiary case you talked about, is there a risk that Assad, who has kind of ratcheted up the use of weapons steadily throughout this war, might feel emboldened to take it to the next level?  I mean, if this is something that’s going to take you weeks or even months to establish definitively, isn't there a risk that Assad will somehow see that as a pretext to go even further in his use of weapons?

WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL:  On your first question, I don’t want to get into the details of the physiological evidence because it's still rooted in intelligence gathering.  The fact is these assessments, which the intelligence community can speak to, are based on a broad mosaic of information.  Some of it is physiological. 

The point I'd make that's relevant here to our follow-through is that we do have the ability to gather that type of information, precisely because we are working with countries in the region and we're working with the Syrian opposition.  So we continually gather that type of evidence ourselves.  We do believe that the United Nations should have more direct access into Syria to form a credible investigation of their own.  But in the interim, we're also going to continue to work with our friends and allies in the opposition to gather as much evidence as we can.

With respect to your second question, I think what the Assad regime needs to know is that we are watching this incredibly closely.  And just the fact that we were able to establish the assessments that we already have collected points to how closely we are monitoring chemical weapons within Syria.  Were he to undertake any additional use, he would be doing so under very careful monitoring from us and the international community. 

With respect to the reports of use already, we are already gathering facts associated with those reports so we can establish the type of evidentiary basis that I spoke about.  So I think the message to the Syrian regime should be perfectly clear, even with what we are doing today, which is that we are going to be methodical, rigorous and relentless in gathering the relevant information and putting it together so we can establish exactly what happened around these reports of chemical weapons use.  And if there are any additional reports, we're similarly going to be following through on those as well, and we're going to be doing so in the context where the entire world, the international community, is focused on this issue.

So there should be no mistaking our determination not just to get to the bottom of these reports, but to send a message that as we establish the facts here and as we continue to stick to a red line that makes clear that the use of chemical weapons is unacceptable to us, the United States of America is committed to following through on what the President said, which is that Bashar al-Assad and his regime will be held accountable for these types of actions.  And I think we're joined by other like-minded friends and allies who share that view.

Q    Can you tell us whether the physiological samples that you received are associated with any deaths?

WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL:  I don't want to get into the details of the physiological samples, just because they're rooted ultimately in intelligence.  What I will say is that as we have a mosaic of information that informs our intelligence judgments, we also have a capability to gather this type of evidence.  And that's an ongoing process that's underway. 

And we're not the only ones who are engaged in that effort.  We're able to speak to the Syrian opposition, for instance, in our efforts to corroborate this information.  So this information picture continues to fill in.  That's what informed the letter that was delivered to the Hill today.  And that's what will inform our continued efforts to establish the facts of what happened associated with these reports of chemical weapons use, and associated with the broader challenge of chemical weapons in Syria in general.

I'll just conclude by saying that we, number one, will continue to be deeply engaged in the situation in Syria.  And I think you've already seen the upward trajectory of our assistance and our contact with the opposition as representative of our commitment to bring about a transition in Syria.  The President has been consulting with other leaders.  He had the Emir of Qatar here the other day.  We have King Abdullah coming here shortly.  So we have an ongoing set of consultations about Syria already on chemical weapons.  We'll continue to provide information to Congress and the public as we gather it. 

And that's I think what you see today with the effort to be transparent with what we know, which is reflected fully in the letter that was delivered and the briefings that have been delivered on the Hill.  And so we'll continue to keep people informed going forward as this situation develops. 

END
1:49 P.M. EDT

President Obama travels to Waco, Texas to speak at a memorial service for those lost and injured in the deadly explosion at a fertilizer plant in nearby West, Texas.

President and Mrs. Obama joined all the former living Presidents -- and four previous First Ladies -- for the event in Dallas, Texas.

Shaun Donovan and Cecilia Munoz highlight the impact of the Strong Cities, Strong Communities initiative.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

Republican Senator Makes The Conservative Case For Universal Background Checks

At a town hall in Oklahoma on Monday, Sen. Tom Corbun (R-OK) made perhaps the best argument to convince conservative gun owners that they should support required background checks on every single gun purchase. Taking the recent debate over gun regulations from the political to the personal, Coburn told constituents that universal checks are “the responsible way” for gun owners to ensure that they don’t sell their own guns to “someone you wouldn’t want to have it”:

Those on that list will include felons and people with mental instability. A concern that gun owners are on that list or one separate to it was discounted by the senator, a fact that has been and continues to be checked on by his staff on a regular basis.

“I’m for enhanced background checks because it’s a way for you to go online to make sure you’re not selling your gun to someone you wouldn’t want to have it,” said Coburn.The responsible way is to check them against this [National Instant Criminal Background Check System] list and they don’t know that you did it.”

“About 80 percent of criminals get their guns from us (responsible gun owners).

Coburn didn’t suggest that this check would stop all gun crime, however, he was positive it will slow it down a significant degree.

Currently, private sales are exempt from background checks, and it’s estimated that 40 percent of firearm sales are completed without a check. According to Bloomberg News, “A 2004 Bureau of Justice Statistics survey of inmates convicted of gun crimes found that 80 percent acquired the weapons through a private transfer.” Ninety-two percent of Americans want to change this grim statistic, and support a background check on all sales.

As members of the Senate debate new gun regulations, Coburn has gone back and forth on his support of universal background checks, expressing concern that the government could use such a system to keep a record of all gun owners. A recent spat over this detail led Senators to factor Coburn out of negotiations on a bill.

View the original article here

NRA Concedes Background Checks Are Necessary

The National Rifle Association (NRA)’s “School Shield” task force released its recommendations for school safety improvements on Tuesday, which included “model legislation” for placing armed guards in schools. But the mechanism former Rep. Asa Hutchinson (R-AR), the task force’s head, proposed for making sure these guards wouldn’t hurt students were background checks — something the organization opposes for gun owners more broadly. “Yes, yes, [background checks are] part of the recommendation,” Hutchison bragged, without the slightest sense of irony. “They would have to go through background checks, they would have to go through testing and screening and then 40 to 60 hours of training.”

Reporters quickly poked holes in the group’s effort, questioning why it didn’t recommend limits on magazine size (which would have reduced the carnage at Newtown, Connecticut) and ignore research showing that more guns lead to greater deaths. Hutchinson didn’t have much in the way of answers. The former Congressman shrugged off the inconvenient questions and insisted that had teachers or law enforcement officials had access to weapons in Newtown, they would have saved lives.

Q: You talk about response time. As we saw in Newtown, the shooter was able to get off dozens of rounds before anyone was able to get there. Did you think about recommending to the NRA and lawmakers that they look at limiting magazines?

HUTCHISON: In reference to Newtown, what was the first thing the school did after the incident? They got armed officers there to protect the children. It was very importance for the confidence of the parents. And there they did not have response capability. You had teachers giving up their lives. And so we want to teachers to have to do that. We want a better response …

Watch it:

Though the NRA task force’s recommendations were premised on the idea that it’s easy for shooters to get into schools now, the NRA is actively opposing legislation requiring the same background checks on for all gun purchasers that its task force supports for armed guards.

While there is little real evidence that armed school guards can save lives, and some evidence that they tend to harass students of color, universal background checks are the single most obvious and effective way of reducing gun violence on the table today. A high-capacity magazine ban, which the NRA opposes, would also limit the ability of mass shooters to kill.

Hutchinson also could not explain how many guards a school would need to be safe, how expensive the plan would be to implement nationally, or how it could protect kids at recess or otherwise outside.

View the original article here

Why Are These Six Democratic Senators Blocking Universal Background Checks?

After axing the assault weapons ban from the Senate’s comprehensive gun violence prevention plan, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is struggling to scrape together enough votes to pass the centerpiece of the plan: universal background checks. Republicans are refusing to vote for it, and even several Democrats in red states are wavering on their support. According to Greg Sargent at the Washington Post, these key votes include Senators Kay Hagan (D-NC), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Joe Donnelly (D-IN), and Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND).

Universal background checks are considered essential to the gun bill. They would close the “gun show loophole” that currently allows anyone to skip a background check if they buy a gun through a private sale. “Private” transactions between individuals or at gun shows are the origin point for 80 percent of guns used in crimes.

ThinkProgress examined data from the home states of six Democratic senators currently on the fence: Arkansas, Indiana, North Carolina, Louisiana, Alaska, and North Dakota. According to the most recent data available, these six states had: 1) 1,462 gun murders in 2010; 2) 351 gun deaths since the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre at the end of last year; and 3) widespread support for universal background checks (following the national trend). Meanwhile, 152 gun shows are scheduled to take place in these states this year, providing criminals who can’t pass background checks in stores with ample opportunity to stock up on guns. All of the states, with the exception of North Carolina, allow individuals to buy guns at these shows without any review:

Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his pro-gun regulation group Mayors Against Illegal Guns recently launched an ad blitz to encourage residents in 13 key states to lobby their senators to support the proposal. Sen. Donnelly (D-IN) is reportedly considering “a bipartisan compromise on background checks.”

View the original article here

Background on Naturalization Ceremony at the White House

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, President Obama delivered remarks at a naturalization ceremony for service members and civilians in the East Room of the White House. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Alejandro Mayorkas presented the countries of the candidates for naturalization and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano delivered the oath of allegiance. The audience was composed of service members, civilians and their families.

The President hosted similar naturalization ceremonies at the White House on May 1, 2009, April 23, 2010 and July 4, 2012.

The following service members and civilians attended as candidates for naturalization:

Asau Asanuma, Watercraft Operator, Army
Palau

Youssef Benalla
Morocco

Jesus Vega Benavides, Corporal, Marines
Mexico

Girma Besufekad
Ethiopia

Antonella Bravo, Hospital Corpsman, Navy
Peru

Elrina Brits, Damage Controlman, Navy
South Africa

Julian De La Valle
Colombia

Maria De Paz
Peru

Kingsley Elebo
Nigeria

Liliana Fernandez
Bolivia

Nikita Kirichenko, Airmen First Class, Air Force
Ukraine

Pertula George Redd
St. Lucia

Edwin Alexander Herera Zelaya, Marines
El Salvador

Mohammed Hossain
Bangladesh

Paulette House
Jamaica

Manish Kapoor
India

Hyuntaek Lim
South Korea

Jiang Lin Liu, Navy
China

Faafetai Wiki Mamea, Marines
American Samoa

Patricia Marie Marcaida
Philippines

Hanna Myroshnychenko
Ukraine

Nazo Raoufi
Afghanistan

Pascale Reynolds
Germany

Brandon Alexander Rheutobottom, Aviation Machinist, Navy
Canada

Oscar de Jesus Tejada Urena, Watercraft Engineer, Army
Dominican Republic

Roosevelt Antonio Trana Reyes, Corporal, Army Reserve
Nicaragua

Pharez Naldo Urian Hanna, Dental Lab Technician, Air Force
Bahamas

Long Zhang, Navy
China

President Obama signs proclamations establishing five new national monuments that celebrate our nation’s rich history and natural heritage.

Yesterday, President Obama celebrated Passover and touched upon the powerful symbols that it represents, and the inspiration it provides to him and to all people seeking a more just and peaceful future.

President Obama welcome 28 new American citizens to our nation of immigrants and called for reforms to our immigration system that will help harness the talent and ingenuity of all those like them who want to work hard and find a place here in America.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

ABC Journalist Calls Out Karl Rove: ‘Stop Scaring People’ About Background Checks

During a heated debate about gun regulations on Sunday morning, ABC News’ Terry Moran accused Karl Rove of using “Orwellian” language to scare people about background checks, noting that the federal government is not seeking to confiscate guns but rather keep them out of the hands of criminals and people who are mentally ill.

Discussing proposals that would require private sellers to maintain records of the background checks they perform, Rove falsely claimed that the government would maintain a “registry if a grandfather wants to give a treasured shotgun to his grandson or granddaughter” and keep a “national registry of gun sales and gun purchases and gun owners.” Moran hit back at Rove, noting that he was spreading “paranoia” and “fear” in order to build opposition against the measure:

MORAN: Karl — stop scaring people, you’re scaring people with this Orwellian sense, that black helicopters and the government are going to confiscate Americans’ guns. That kind of paranoia fuels…

ROVE: Will all due respect, it’s not paranoia.

MORAN: Who is going to confiscate all of the guns?

ROVE: People have a fear of this. Why do it? Why do you need it? …

MORAN: The result of this is that all the votes that have been taken since Newtown have weakened gun control.

Watch it:

The proposals currently being drafted would require a background check on all gun purchases including those by private sellers while exempting family and temporary transfers. In some of the drafts being circulated, private dealers would have to maintain records for all private sales, while other exempt non-commercial private sales from record keeping. None of the bills would maintain a national gun registry, which is already illegal under current law. But the record keeping provision is important, advocates claim, to ensure that the checks are being properly conducted.

A recent Quinnipiac University poll found that 88 percent of Americans, including 85 percent of gun owners, believe “those purchasing firearms at private sales and gun shows should undergo a background check.”

View the original article here

Bloomberg Warns: ‘Price To Pay’ For Lawmakers Who Ignore Popular Opinion And Oppose Background Checks

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg appeared on Meet the Press on Sunday and warned lawmakers in Washington that there would be a political price to pay if they vote against popular gun regulation proposals like universal background checks and a new assault weapons ban:

GREGORY: You made it very clear this week you’re paying attention to the vote in the Senate, in Congress, and you’re taking names. Will you target people, Republicans and Democrats, who do not support a weapons ban, an assault weapons ban, who do not vote for background checks — will you spend money, lots of money, to target them in 2014, in a midterm race?

BLOOMBERG: Well let me phrase it this way. I think I have a responsibility, and I think you and all of your viewers have responsibilities, to try and make this country safer for our families and for each other. And if I can do that by spending some money and taking the NRA from being the only voice to being one of the voices, so the public can really understand the issues, then I think my money would be well spent and I think I have an obligation to do that…If 90 percent of the public wants something and their representatives vote against that, common sense says they are going to have a price to pay for that.

Yesterday, the New York Times reported that Bloomberg has plans to spend $12 million to finance ads from his pro-gun regulation group Mayors Against Illegal Guns in 13 key states whose senators are thought to be on the fence over new legislation on an assault weapons ban and universal background checks.

The ads will begin airing this week, Bloomberg told Gregory, and will crescendo over the Easter break when most legislators host events back in their home districts.

View the original article here

Governor Trying To Save Republicans From Themselves Comes Out In Favor Of Universal Background Checks

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal (R), who has been trying to make a name for himself as a maverick in the GOP, on Sunday became the latest Republican to come out in favor of universal background checks on all gun sales.

Jindal is engaged in a dedicated effort to frame himself as a politician outside of the Republican establishment. Last month, he gave a speech begging Republicans not to be “the stupid party.” Presumably as part of the effort, Jindal on Sunday’s Meet the Press, agued that background checks are the most sensible, and agreeable, route to take on gun regulations:

I think there is an opportunity to do something here. If we’re serious about doing something and not just having a political football here, I think we can work with Democrats, we can work even with the administration to say. I think we all agree that we shouldn’t have guns get into the hands with those with serious mental illness. We propose legislation to provide more of that legislation, more of those records into the background check system than is happening today. Let’s fix the current background system.

In January, Jindal pushed to strengthen the system in Louisiana for inputting the mentally ill into the National Instant Criminal Background Check system, but the move was mostly symbolic. Overall, Jindal’s track record on guns has been to side with gun manufacturers over protecting citizens. In 2010, he signed a law that allowed guns in houses of worship. He has also voted to protect gun manufacturers from lawsuits, and vehemently opposes any regulation on high capacity magazine clips or automatic weapons.

Currently, background checks are not required on private gun sales, allowing an easy workaround for criminals or the mentally ill to buy firearms. But 92 percent of Americans think that they should be. And Jindal is actually not a maverick on the issue; Republicans have been tapping into this public opinion of late, with several prominent figures including Sens. John McCain (R-AZ), Tom Coburn (R-OK), and Mark Kirk (R-IL) assessing that it’s an achievable goal for Congress to take on.

View the original article here

Background on Medal of Valor Ceremony

Background on Medal of Valor Ceremony | The White House Skip to main content | Skip to footer site map The White House. President Barack Obama Get Email UpdatesContact Us Go to homepage. The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts 2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Executive Orders Presidential Memoranda Proclamations Legislation Pending Legislation Signed Legislation Vetoed Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Visitor Access Records Financial Disclosures 2012 Annual Report to Congress 2011 Annual Report to Congress 2010 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff A Commitment to Transparency

Browse White House visitor logs

Issues Civil Rights It Gets Better Defense End of Iraq War Disabilities Economy Jobs Reform and Fiscal Responsibility Strengthening the Middle Class A Plan for Refinancing Support for Business Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Immigration Reform Taxes Tax Receipt The Buffett Rule Rural Urban Policy Veterans Joining Forces Technology Seniors & Social Security Service Snapshots Creating Jobs Health Care Small Business PreK-12 Education Women Violence Prevention Now Is The Time

To do something about gun violence

Immigration Reform

Creating an Immigration System for the 21st Century

The Administration We the People

Create and Sign Petitions Now

President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet 2010 Video Reports White House Staff Chief of Staff Denis McDonough Deputy Chief of Staff Rob Nabors Deputy Chief of Staff Alyssa Mastromonaco Counselor to the President Peter Rouse Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House White House On the Go

Download our mobile apps

2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

Inside the White House Interactive Tour West Wing Tour Video Series Décor and Art Holidays Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows President’s Commission About the Fellowship Current Class Staff Bios News and Newsletters White House Internships About Program Presidential Department Descriptions Selection Process Internship Timeline & FAQs Tours & Events 2013 Easter Egg Roll Kitchen Garden Tours Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources /* Maximize height of menu features. */if(typeof(jQuery)!='undefined')jQuery.each($('#topnav'),function(i,v){var o=$(v),oh=o.height(),sh=o.siblings().height();if(oh Home • Briefing Room • Statements & Releases   The White House

Office of the Vice President

For Immediate Release February 20, 2013 Background on Medal of Valor Ceremony

On Wednesday, February 20, 2013, the Vice President will host a Medal of Valor ceremony with Attorney General Eric Holder. The Vice President and Attorney General will deliver remarks at this ceremony. Below is background information on the Medal of Valor and the recipients of the Medal at Wednesday’s ceremony.

Watch this event live on Wednesday at 1:30 PM ET at www.whitehouse.gov/live

THE PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER MEDAL OF VALOR:

The Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor, authorized by the Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor Act of 2001, is the highest national award for valor by a public safety officer. The medal is awarded to public safety officers who have exhibited exceptional courage, regardless of personal safety, in the attempt to save or protect human life. Including today’s awardees, a total of 78 medals have been presented since the first recipients were honored in 2003.
 
To receive the Medal of Valor, public safety officers must be nominated by the chief executive officer of their employing agencies, recommended by the bipartisan Medal of Valor Review Board, and cited by the Attorney General. The Attorney General designated Mary Lou Leary, Acting Assistant Attorney General in the Department’s Office of Justice Programs (OJP), to serve as the Federal point of contact for the Medal of Valor initiative. OJP’s Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), led by Director Denise E. O’Donnell, assists in overseeing the Medal of Valor initiative.
 
More information about the award, the Medal of Valor Review Board members, and the nomination process is available at: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/medalofvalor.  
 
 
RECIPIENTS OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER MEDAL OF VALOR:
 
2009-2010 Medal of Valor Recipients
 
Officer Julie Olson
Maplewood Police Department, Minnesota
 
On September 7, 2009, Officer Julie Olson was called to assist North St. Paul Officer Richard Crittenden. A woman had called the police concerned that her estranged husband had returned to her apartment and might be inside. North St. Paul’s police department had dealt with the suspect several times in the past, including as recently as the previous night when the suspect fled before squads arrived. The woman had an Order of Protection against the suspect.
 
Officer Olson and Officer Crittenden arrived on the scene at the same time.  They initially searched a vacant apartment, knowing the suspect had hidden there in the past. They were then let into the complainant’s apartment, which was next door to the vacant apartment. As they entered the darkened apartment, Officer Crittenden observed a flaming cloth advancing in his and the residents’ direction. He pushed the residents out of harm’s way and was struck in the face and side of the head with an accelerant-soaked t-shirt. The suspect grabbed Officer Crittenden in a “bear hug.” After a brief struggle, the suspect then grabbed Officer Olson in an apparent effort to disarm her. He then disengaged with Officer Olson and re-engaged with Officer Crittenden. The suspect grabbed Officer Crittenden’s sidearm from his holster and fired one round at point-blank range at Officer Crittenden’s head, killing him. 
 
The suspect then turned the gun on Officer Olson. When Officer Olson heard one round sail past her ear, she responded as she had been trained, and side stepping and returning fire. Another round struck Officer Olson’s spare magazine on her duty belt, shattering it and causing pieces of the round to enter her strong-side arm. Now injured, Officer Olson returned fire on the suspect, striking him five times. While under the extreme pressure of the moment, she had the wherewithal to do a combat reload as she backed out of the apartment, only to find she had attempted to reload with the shattered magazine. She subsequently dropped the shattered magazine and reloaded with another magazine, as Officer Lonn Bakke entered the apartment building. Officer Olson and Officer Bakke then re-entered the apartment to disarm and handcuff the suspect, who subsequently died at the scene.

Officer Reeshemah Taylor
Osceola County Corrections Department, Florida
 
On June 22, 2009, Officer Reeshemah Taylor was assigned to the Medical Unit of the Osceola County Jail. While performing her duties, Officer Taylor was confronted by a high-risk inmate who had taken one officer hostage and changed into that officer’s uniform. The inmate placed a fully loaded 9mm semi-automatic handgun to Officer Taylor’s head as she walked into the room where the inmate and the captive officer were located. This inmate had a history of violent felony charges and was already serving three consecutive life sentences with no possibility of parole within the Florida Department of Corrections. The inmate was being held at the Osceola County Jail pending trial for a violent armed robbery. The inmate was also a well-known member of the “Los 27” and “La Nieta” gangs domiciled out of Puerto Rico, who are notorious for their violent acts against law enforcement personnel. Through the subsequent criminal investigation of this attempted escape, it was determined that this inmate planned to walk out of the jail dressed as a corrections officer.  The gun was factored into his plan and would be used if someone attempted to stop him or intervene.  According to investigators, there was no doubt that this inmate would have used the firearm to ensure that his escape was successful.  He was prepared to shoot anyone who might attempt to avert him from his plan, as he felt he had nothing to lose and did not want to return to prison.
 
During Officer Taylor’s face-to-face confrontation with the inmate, a struggle took place for the weapon. While the weapon was pointed at Officer Taylor, she immediately grabbed the weapon with both hands, diverting it from her direction, and delivered a knee spike to the inmate’s groin. The inmate dropped to the floor, dislodging the weapon from his hand. The gun dropped several feet away from Officer Taylor and the inmate. Officer Taylor placed herself on top of the inmate, with one arm around his head to fashion a headlock, and her legs scissoring his lower body, to keep him on the floor and away from the gun. With her free hand, she utilized her portable radio to announce the code and summon assistance. Officer Taylor engaged an inmate that was far superior in size, strength, motivation, and intention. She successfully subdued this inmate through sheer determination, instincts, will, and courage. Her efforts, in the face of imminent death, saved the lives of many.
 
Wildlife Officer Michael Neal
Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, Arkansas
 
On May 20, 2010, Officer Neal answered a call for assistance after two West Memphis Police officers had been shot and killed during a traffic stop along Interstate 40, and engaged two suspects in the Walmart parking lot. The two suspects were engaged in a firefight with Sheriff Dick Busby and Chief Deputy W. A. Wren. The Sheriff and Deputy, armed with only handguns, were taking fire from an AK-47 assault rifle and a handgun.
 
Officer Neal used his truck to ram the suspects’ van to prevent the suspects from being mobile and possibly harming innocent bystanders, and to divert the suspects’ attention away from the Sheriff and Deputy. Once Officer Neal rammed the suspects’ van, the suspects opened fire on Officer Neal’s truck, firing several rounds through his windshield. Officer Neal avoided being hit by the AK-47 rounds and returned fire with his issued AR-15. He disabled the driver and possibly the passenger before putting his truck in reverse and backing out of the line of fire so other officers could continue the firefight.  Both suspects were pronounced dead at the scene.  By putting himself in harm’s way, Officer Neal’s actions undoubtedly saved the lives of Sheriff Busby and Deputy Wren, both of whom were injured by the suspects. Officer Neal was only slightly injured.
 
Officer Sean Haller
Officer Rafael Rivera
California Highway Patrol, California
 
On February 25, 2010, the Fresno County Sheriff’s Office attempted to serve a search warrant in the town of Minkler. As deputies attempted to breach the main door of the residence, they came under intense gunfire from within the building, which fatally wounded one of the deputies. The deputies immediately broadcast “shots fired” over the radio.
 
Officer Haller monitored the “shots fired” call over the radio and responded to the scene.  Upon arriving at the scene, he heard gun shots. Officer Haller stopped his patrol vehicle and engaged the suspect in gunfire.  Fellow California Highway Patrol Officer Rivera arrived and took cover behind Officer Haller’s patrol vehicle. Both officers were engaged in gunfire with the suspect for an undetermined amount of time until someone on scene gave a “cease-fire” command. This was followed by approximately 30 minutes with no shooting.
 
The suspect again began firing from within the home. Fearing for their safety and the safety of the other officers at the scene, both Officers Rivera and Haller returned fire. During this exchange, Officer Rivera overheard someone say, “Officer down!” and moved toward the location of the downed officer. He found the downed officer on the passenger side of a marked patrol vehicle.  Officer Rivera recognized the fallen officer as Officer Javier Bejar of the Reedley Police Department and attempted to remove him from the line of fire. The suspect began shooting directly at Officer Rivera as he attempted to rescue the downed officer. Seeing this, Officer Haller broke cover and moved into the line of fire. He engaged the suspect and provided cover fire to assist with the removal effort.
Officer Rivera was able to move the downed officer to a location of cover.  Although Officer Bejar did not survive his injuries, Officers Rivera and Haller exhibited great personal courage, while putting themselves in danger in their efforts to save Officer Bejar’s life. The assailant in this incident subsequently committed suicide by shooting himself prior to the officers’ entry into the residence.
 
 
Trooper Robert Lombardo
Fallen Trooper Joshua Miller
Pennsylvania State Police, Pennsylvania
 
On June 7, 2009, a subject arrived at his estranged wife’s residence in Nazareth, Pennsylvania. After threatening his wife with a handgun, the subject abducted his 9-year-old son and fled the scene in a black Honda Civic with his son seated in the right front passenger seat. The Nazareth Borough Police Department became involved in a high speed pursuit of the subject. Troopers Joshua D. Miller and Robert K. Lombardo, as well as other Swiftwater Station members and local police department officers, assisted in the pursuit. The pursuit went on for some 40 miles and ended on State Route 611 in Coolbaugh Township, Monroe County, Pennsylvania, when Trooper Miller employed the PIT maneuver to bring the vehicle to a stop.  The PIT maneuver is a method by which the pursuit car forces the other vehicle to abruptly turn sideways towards the direction of travel. This causes the driver to lose control and stop.
 
Recognizing that the child was in extreme peril, Troopers Miller and Lombardo immediately approached the driver’s side of the Honda in an attempt to arrest the subject and rescue the child. Troopers Lombardo and Miller both used their collapsible batons to shatter the driver’s side window of the Honda. The subject then fired three shots from a 9mm Taurus, striking Trooper Lombardo once in the left shoulder, and Trooper Miller in the right thigh and neck. Troopers Miller and Lombardo returned fire, striking the assailant eight times. The force of the impact of being shot spun Trooper Lombardo to his left. Despite knowing Trooper Miller was wounded and his own left arm was now paralyzed, Trooper Lombardo did not seek cover. Trooper Lombardo chose to continue to engage the assailant with one arm. Only after the threat was neutralized did Trooper Lombardo seek treatment for his wounds. The suspect’s son was rescued uninjured.
 
Trooper Miller was subsequently flown to Lehigh Valley Hospital in Allentown where he was pronounced dead. Trooper Lombardo was taken to Community Medical Center in Scranton, Pennsylvania, where he was treated for his wounds. Trooper Lombard recently returned to duty. Trooper Miller gave his life and Trooper Lombardo risked his life to rescue the 9-year-old boy. They were/are dedicated officers of the law, committed to serving the citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
 
 
2010-2011 Medal of Valor Recipients
 
Firefighter Peter Demontreux
New York City Fire Department, New York
 
On August 30, 2010, Firefighter Peter Demontreux’s unit responded to a fire in a 4 story brownstone. On arrival they encountered heavy fire at the front door and up the stairway to the third floor preventing entry until a hoseline was put in place. Instead of waiting for a hoseline, Firefighter Demontreux climbed an aerial ladder to a third floor window. There he encountered a civilian who stated that his friend was still trapped inside the burning apartment. After assisting the civilian onto the ladder, Firefighter Demontreux immediately entered the apartment to conduct a search. He located the victim deep within the apartment.
 
In the ensuing minutes, Firefighter Demontreux executed one of the most remarkable rescues ever witnessed. As he assisted the victim through the apartment, the entire third floor suddenly exploded into flames setting both rescuer and victim ablaze. According to the on-scene Battalion Chief’s report, Firefighter Demontreux, now on fire, made the split second decision that he would not leave victim behind. After reaching the window, Firefighter Demontreux insured the victim was safely on the aerial ladder before diving out himself. Both men were extinguished by a hoseline and though badly burned- the civilian victim received burns over 50% of his body- both survived. Firefighter Demontreux’s protective equipment was subsequently tested and found to have been subjected to temperatures in excess of 1,000 degrees.
                       
Firefighter Hope Scott
Battalion Chief William Reynolds
Virginia Beach Fire Department, Virginia
 
On October 12, 2010, the Virginia Beach Fire Department received multiple 911 calls for a house fire with people trapped in a single family dwelling. Engine 7 with Captain William Reynolds and Firefighter Hope Scott, arrived on scene. Captain Reynolds reported heavy fire from the corner of the first floor spreading to the second floor. Two family members were on the porch roof attempting to enter the structure and were screaming that a baby and was in the second floor bedroom and the great grandmother was still inside. Heavy smoke and heat conditions forced the civilian would-be rescuers to withdraw from their rescue efforts.
 
Captain Reynolds, hearing the pleas of the family and realizing time was of the essence, made the tactical decision to enter the second floor window with Firefighter Scott without the protection of a fire hose. This tactic is known as Vent-Enter-Search in the fire service, and is considered a high risk maneuver to the personnel making the entry. Captain Reynolds and Firefighter Scott climbed a ladder and entered the second floor window without the protection of a charged fire hose (hand-line). They encountered high heat and zero visibility conditions. Captain Reynolds was equipped with a thermal imaging camera to aid in the rescue effort. However, the high heat conditions rendered the camera ineffective and they were forced the crew to crawl blindly through the assorted debris. The fire still raged underneath the bedroom, made the floor so hot that Firefighter Scott could feel the heat through her protective gear. Captain Reynolds encouraged Firefighter Scott to keep pushing on as they knew the child was located somewhere in the room.
 
Approximately two minutes into the search, Firefighter Scott heard what she thought was a faint cry. She started sweeping the floor with her arms and located an infant lying on a mattress located on the floor covered in makeshift bedding material. Firefighter Scott scooped up the infant and handed the lifeless infant to Captain Reynolds as he was positioned near the window. Captain Reynolds handed the infant through the window to firefighters who were standing on an egress ladder. The infant was not breathing and unresponsive once she was removed from the structure. Resuscitation efforts were immediately started and EMS personnel transported the infant to Norfolk General Hospital Burn Center. The infant has since made a full recovery without any major medical issues or deficits.
 
After Firefighter Scott located the infant, she and Captain Reynolds continued to search the second floor for the other reported fire victim. Other responding personnel found the 73 year old woman, lying on the stairs leading to the second floor. She was unconscious and unresponsive, suffering from smoke inhalation. She was removed from the structure and resuscitation efforts immediately started. Unfortunately, she died from her injuries three days later.
 
Captain Reynolds and Firefighter Hope Scott demonstrated incredible bravery and self sacrifice in their decision to enter the floor directly above the uncontrolled fire without the protection of a charged hose-line and placed themselves at one of the greatest risks recognized in the fire service. Their fast, decisive actions and disregard for their own safety truly resulted in the saving of the life of a young infant who would have succumbed from the smoke and fire if not for their brave actions.
 
Deputy Sheriff Krista McDonald
Kitsap County Sheriff’s Office, Washington
 
On January, 23, 2011, the Kitsap County Sheriff's Office had been given information on the location of a possibly armed suspect, accompanied by an underage female who was reported as missing from Utah and a runaway. Deputies Stacy and Ejde approached the suspect and his 13 year-old companion as they sat outside the entrance to a Walmart Store in Port Orchard, Washington. These deputies were assisted by Deputy Krista McDonald who had responded as an additional back-up.
 
The suspect refused to identify himself, and attempted to run from the location. Deputy Stacy tried to grab the suspect but missed and fell. Deputy Ejde ran after the suspect as he attempted to run across the street and into the parking lot. Halfway across the roadway, the suspect drew a semi-automatic handgun hidden on his person, turned and fired multiple shots. He struck Deputy Ejde twice, in the left shoulder and right arm. Deputy Ejde went down into a raised flowerbed. By this time Deputy Stacy had regained his footing and was running after the suspect. The suspect shot and wounded Deputy Stacy in the right shoulder. Deputy Stacy also fell to the asphalt. Deputy McDonald began firing at suspect from her position at her patrol vehicle, approximately 90 - 100 feet distance. The suspect then directed his attention toward Deputy McDonald as she started to move toward her two downed colleagues. The suspect continued to shoot at both Deputy McDonald and Deputy Ejde.
 
Advancing toward the suspect without benefit of protective cover, Deputy McDonald stayed in the gunfight and returned fire. The suspect was struck in the left leg and dropped to the pavement where he continued to fire on the deputies. By this time Deputy McDonald had moved to within 60 feet of the suspect, placing herself in the line of fire to distract the suspect. The young girl, witnessing this, ran over to the suspect. As she approached she was shot by the suspect and mortally wounded. Moments later the suspect then committed suicide when he turned his handgun on himself.

Officer Timothy McClintick
Officer Max McDonald
Officer Douglas Weaver
Sergeant Karl Lounge Jr.
Fallen Sergeant Thomas Baitinger
Saint Petersburg Police Department, Florida
 
On January 24, 2011, a Federal Fugitive Task Force arrived at a residence in Saint Petersburg in an attempt to locate a violent fugitive who had been on the run from law enforcement for several months. The fugitive’s wife eventually advised officers that he was hiding in the attic of the house.
 
Additional units were called to the house to help secure the perimeter. After the fugitive failed to respond to any attempts to establish contact, Officer Yaslowitz and US Marshal Ley obtained a latter and entered the attic. They subsequently located the fugitive laying face down some 15 feet for the attic opening.  The fugitive was initially compliant to direction, but as Officer Yaslowitz attempted to handcuff him, the fugitive began to aggressively resist. During the struggle, Marshal Ley deployed his Taser, and then heard a single muffled shot follow by three additional shots. Officer Yaslowitz collapsed and Marshal Ley was subsequent shot twice, causing him to fall through the attic opening onto the floor below.
 
During the ensuing minutes, the fugitive continuously fired multiple rounds through the ceiling at the officers below. Officer McClintick saw a bloodied Marshal Ley on the floor and realized that he was wounded. He reached into the hallway and grabbed Marshal Ley’s foot and tried to drag him back into the bathroom. Unable to get enough leverage, Officer McClintick came out into the hallway, directly under the attic opening and under fire, to grab Marshal Ley and pull him out of the kill zone and into the bathroom. There, he performed lifesaving measures to control the bleeding of Marshal Ley while continuing to provide cover from the assailant.
 
The assailant then moved Officer Yaslowitz’s body to the attic opening, and positioned him so that his foot protruded over the opening.  This was an apparent attempt to lour responding officers out into the open. It was later learned that he had also tied Officer Yasolwitz’s body in place so this it could not be moved while he continued to wait in ambush. During this time officers could hear Lacey moving around in the attic, and firing at anything he heard below.
 
A Rapid Response Team quickly came together to rescue the officers inside the house. Sergeant Thomas Baitinger had arrived at about the same time as Sergeant Karl Lounge. Officer Max McDonald was present, along with Officer Doug Weaver. Sergeant Lounge was carrying his AR15 and a ballistic shield from his cruiser. They only knew that a suspect had shot multiple officers inside the house, that the suspect or suspects were inside the house, and wounded officers were trapped inside, perhaps as hostages. Sergeant Baitinger, a Rapid Response Instructor, recognized that he was the best qualified to handle the shield and lead the entry and assumed that role.
 
Sergeant Baitinger and Officer Weaver moved into the hallway at the far end of the house and observed the open attic and a step stool under it. A Sergeant, positioned by the front door, warned that the assailant and Officer Yaslowitz were in the attic, and to be careful, that the assailant had been shooting down through the ceiling.
 
Sergeant Lounge and Officer McDonald covered the hallway and attic opening from the living room. Sergeant Baitinger put the shield up over his head as he passed under the attic opening and into the threshold of the bedroom, right at the end of the hall. As Sergeant Baitinger entered the kill zone, a hail of gunfire erupted from the attic above. The other officers in the house reported that Sergeant Baitinger was struck once in the back, stopped by his vest. The impact knocked him forward and spun him around. He brought up the shield and yelled, “I’m hit, I’m OK, I can see Yaz in the attic, get him out!” Another burst of gunfire rained down from the attic and Sergeant Baitinger was fatally wounded by a round passing over the shield.
 
During this extensive gun battle, all the involved officers continued to come under fire by the assailant. Sergeant Tom Baitinger, Sergeant Karl Lounge, Officer Doug Weaver, Officer Max McDonald, and Officer Timothy McClintick each demonstrated incredible courage and professionalism under very difficult circumstances. They braved heavy gunfire while attempting to rescue the wounded officers, with Sergeant Baitinger making the supreme sacrifice. Officer McClintick braved heavy gunfire, moving into the kill zone, directly under the attic opening where two officers had already been shot, and another was later killed, to rescue the wounded U.S. Deputy Marshal. The incident ended when the assailant was killed during an exchange of gunfire with the St. Petersburg TAC Team on scene.                                                
 
Fallen Deputy Cameron Justus
Fallen Deputy William Stiltner
Buchanan County Sheriff's Office, Virginia
 
On March 13, 2011, Deputy William Stiltner was at home when he heard through his scanner that two fellow officers were shot while responding to a larceny call at a local salvage yard. Deputy Stiltner headed to the scene to find that a sniper was shooting from the woods above the salvage yard, and both officers were lying on the ground. Without hesitation Deputy Stiltner along second deputy went to aid their fellow colleagues by trying to move them out of the range of the shooter and into safety. As the deputies carried fallen Deputy Rasnake to a nearby car, a shot rang out from behind them. The car window shattered and Deputy Stiltner fell to the ground fatally wounded.
 
Shortly afterwards, Deputy Cameron Justus, who was also off duty, heard that a gunman had shot three of his fellow deputies, and that officers were trapped at the scene by the gunman. By the time Deputy Justus arrived at the salvage yard, he already knew the gravity of the situation. An unknown assailant armed with a high-power rifle had taken refuge in the tree line behind the property. This skilled sniper who had already shot three deputies multiple times, had the advantage of being perched above them on the mountainside. Deputy Justus met with Sheriff Ray Foster and both officers took cover behind their vehicle. Armed with his M-16 rifle, Deputy Justus suddenly spotted a shadowy figure in the pine trees. He called out to the sheriff that he had the man in his sights and was going to take the shot. Just as Deputy Justus pulled the trigger and the bullet erupted from his rifle, simultaneously the sniper fired from his weapon, fatally wounding Deputy Justus. After refusing to surrender, the assailant was shot and killed by other deputies on the scene.
 
Deputy Stiltner's heroic efforts to save the lives of his fellow deputies, along with Deputy Justus’ courageous actions putting him in a dangerous position in order to safeguard the lives of his fellow deputies unquestionably demonstrate performance that went above and beyond the call of duty.
 

Blog posts on this issue February 21, 2013 5:39 PM ESTWest Wing Week: 02/22/13 or “A Single Sacred Word: Citizen” February 21, 2013 1:10 PM ESTA Balanced Plan to Avert the Sequester and Reduce the Deficit

President Obama has already reduced the deficit by over $2.5 trillion, cutting spending by over $1.4 trillion, bringing domestic discretionary spending to its lowest level as a share of the economy since the Eisenhower era.

February 21, 2013 12:53 PM ESTDon't Miss Out! Tickets Lottery for the 2013 Easter Egg Roll Opens Today

Enter today for a chance to join President Obama and the First Family on the South Lawn for a day of singing, dancing and egg rolling.

view all related blog posts ul.related-content li.views-row img {float: left; padding: 5px 10px 0 0;}ul.related-content li.view-all {padding-bottom: 3em;} Stay ConnectedFacebookTwitterFlickrGoogle+YouTubeVimeoiTunesLinkedIn   Home The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Issues Civil Rights Defense Disabilities Economy Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Taxes Rural Urban Policy Veterans Technology Seniors & Social Security Service Snapshots Women Violence Prevention The Administration President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House Inside the White House Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows White House Internships Tours & Events Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources En español Accessibility Copyright Information Privacy Policy Contact USA.gov Developers Apply for a Job

View the original article here

NRA Head Fearmongers About Background Checks: ‘I Just Don’t Think You Can Trust These People’

National Rifle Association Executive Vice President and CEO Wayne LaPierre offered a litany of excuses for his organization’s opposition to universal background checks on gun sales and purchases this morning, telling Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace that the American Medical Association and other organizations were to blame for thwarting an expanded background check system. He also warned that universal checks could lead to a national registry:

LAPIERRE: I think what they’ll do is they’ll turn this universal check on the law-abiding into a universal registry of law-abiding people, and law-abiding people don’t want that.

WALLACE: Forgive me sir, but you take something that is here, and you take it all the way over there. There is nothing anyone in the administration has said that indicates they’re going to have a universal registry.

LAPIERRE: And Obamacare wasn’t a tax until they needed it to be a tax. I just don’t think you can trust these people.

The NRA has consistently used this as an excuse to oppose expanded background checks, even though federal law prohibits agencies from retaining information on people who pass background checks, making a national gun registry virtually impossible.

The gun lobby backed expanded background checks following the 1999 Columbine High School shooting, but LaPierre reiterated during a hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee this week that the organization no longer supports those checks and told Wallace that the mental health community is also against them. “I have finally become convinced, after fighting to get the mental records computerized for 20 years and watching the mental health lobby, the HIPAA laws, and the AMA oppose it, I don’t think it’s going to happen,” he said. “The mental health lobby won’t let it happen.”

In addition to computerizing mental health records, LaPierre told Wallace that he would “change civil commitment laws” and “interdict” more mental health patients, an approach that would blatantly ignore concerns about patient privacy and the stigmatization of mental health patients, which drove the AMA’s opposition to some elements of universal background checks in the past. President Obama, meanwhile, issued an executive order last month that sought to rework the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) to make it easier for states to report information to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System while addressing concerns about privacy and stigmatization.

View the original article here