Homeless in Arizona

Students are free to pray in school

Students are free to pray in school

Dec. 28, 2012 07:23 PM

Regarding "Turn to a higher power" (Letters, Saturday):

The letter writer is sadly misinformed. Prayer was never removed from schools.

Teacher-led prayer has been done away with in order to keep church and state separate and avoid favoring one religion over another. I am sure many Christian parents would frown on a Muslim teacher leading Muslim prayers to their children and vice versa.

However, if students wish to pray, it is entirely up to them. They may pray to the God of the Bible or the math god before the big test or even the football god to help with those touchdowns.

Removing teacher-led prayer gives everyone the freedom to pray (or not) to whichever god they choose, and that is something we can all be thankful for.

-- Kara Estes, Phoenix

Do we need a cop that is paid $96,200 at every high school????

Do we need a police officer that is paid $96,200 at every high school????

Do we need a school resource officer that is paid $96,200 at every high school????

Funding affects West Valley school-resource officers

By Melissa Leu and Eddi Trevizo The Republic | azcentral.com Thu Dec 27, 2012 9:47 AM

Some West Valley schools have police officers on campus, an idea that got a renewed push by the National Rifle Association.

The NRA is advocating for armed guards on every school campus after the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., where a gunman killed 20 children and six educators this month.

Currently, there is a divide among high schools. Those in such cities as Avondale, Peoria and Surprise have police officers, called school-resource officers, on campus, while many high schools in Glendale do not.

It comes down to money. [So it sounds like most schools will gladly have a cop, police officer or school resource officers on their campus - As long as the school doesn't have to pay the cops $96,200 yearly salary]

As the recession hit, funding for school-resource officers dried up, causing the Glendale Police Department to pull back its officers from schools.

State funding for school officers was cut nearly in half amid tight finances the past five years. A Democrat state lawmaker is calling to renew that funding.

Beyond money, the proposal is one that is sure to spark conversation in West Valley communities and beyond.

“Obviously, we think it’s the right thing to do to have a police officer there for our middle schools and high schools — because they already are there,” said Christy Agosta, a school-board member in the Deer Valley Unified School District.

Whether to have armed guards in elementary schools is a tougher question.

“As a parent, as well as a school-board member, having my kids have to go by armed security arriving at schools is kind of a heartbreaking thought,” Agosta said. “I’m mixed. … If there had been an armed guard standing outside Sandy Hook, those parents still might have their children. So it’s hard to say we shouldn’t.”

She said such a decision would have to come after a community conversation.

School-resource officers are armed and have the authority of a police officer [and they ARE POLICE OFFICERS], but their duties go beyond security. They offer lessons on law-related issues and add a friendly face on campus for students and staff to turn to for advice.

Police officials credit them with reducing the number of student disciplinary problems.

In 2011, before Centennial High School in Peoria hired its resource officer, the school reported 318 disciplinary incidents. That dropped to 147 incidents, according to Peoria police.

Centennial resource Officer Dave Fernandez typically starts his day at 6:30 a.m. in the school parking lot, helping parents navigate traffic. [Why do you need a cop that is paid an average of $96,200 a year to help parents navigate traffic???]

After about an hour, he heads to his office to answer e-mails, and if nothing major is happening, he walks the campus. [So most of the time he does nothing. Well other then answer e-mails and help parents navigate traffic. And this guy is paid an average of $96,200]

“The best way to see if there is an issue is to be outside looking and talking to people,” Fernandez said.

He said the Sandy Hook shootings were a tragedy. “But we think about these things constantly not just after something has occurred.”

Dale Nicol, principal at Sunrise Mountain High School in Peoria, said resource officers act as a preventive measure.

“He can gather (information) as a result of making connections with students. [I suspect teachers and other school employees can also gather (information) as a result of making connections with students. Do you really need a cop that is making an average of $96,200 a year to do that???] Consequently, we can intervene and stop negative behaviors before they escalate,” Nicol said.

But a divide exists among the Peoria district schools, which stretch across Glendale and Peoria.

The district partners with the city to pay for resource officers in its Peoria-based high schools, but Glendale does not provide funding.

“The police department’s budget is not able to support funding of these positions at this time,” Glendale police spokeswoman Tracey Breeden said.

She noted districts can hire off-duty officers to work in schools.

For the Peoria district, the cost of having officers in Glendale high schools is beyond its budget.

“Grant opportunities are scarce. It becomes funding issues for both the city and the school district,” said Steve Savoy, Peoria’s administrator for K-12 academic services.

The salary of Peoria’s school-resource officers averages $96,200 per year including benefits, Peoria police spokeswoman Amanda Jacinto said. In the past, it was paid by a combination of grants and school district and city budgets.

When the money disappeared, the Peoria district and police partnered to continue the program. The district pays about $30,000 toward the officers’ salaries, and Peoria police pay the rest.

The district relies on neighborhood patrol officers at its Glendale high schools.

The Deer Valley district shoulders the cost of paying officers $30 to $35 an hour for each of its five high schools and three middle schools in Glendale and Phoenix, said Bill Gahn, the district’s director of school operations.

The district earmarks about $300,000 in its budget, which is supplemented through event ticket sales.

An officer is almost always on campus during school hours and after-school events, but the same officer doesn’t always work every day of the week, Gahn said.

“It adds a calming presence on campus,” Gahn said.

Two years ago, Glendale Union had to eliminate its school-resource officers. At one point, the district had officers at seven of its nine campuses in Glendale and Phoenix, district spokeswoman Kim Mesquita said.

That number declined with state grant funding. When the district failed to win the grant last school year, the officers disappeared completely. The district now relies mostly on teachers and administrators to pick up the slack.

Avondale’s Agua Fria Union High School District has a resource officer at each school, funded with state grants and shared costs with local police departments.

Surprise’s Dysart Unified School District has resource officers at each of its four high schools with grant funding.

The district’s 20 elementary schools do not have resource officers, Dysart spokesman Jim Dean said.

Resource officers are rare in elementary schools.

Sometimes it’s simply hard to fill the position, said Jim Cummings, spokesman for the Glendale Elementary School District.

His district received federal funding five years ago for officers at Challenger and Landmark schools, but had to return some of that money because of a lack of candidates, Cummings said.

As a result, schools rely on patrol officers.

“When we call, (police are) here in minutes,” Cummings said.

School officials note that elementary schools typically have less of a need for officers than in high schools, where drugs, theft and violence may be more common.

Patrol officers assigned to Peoria and Glendale neighborhoods regularly check in with elementary principals and students, Peoria’s Savoy said.

The Litchfield Elementary School District used to provide resource officers for its middle schools in partnership with the Avondale and Goodyear police departments and the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office.

The program was cut amid budget constraints in 2009.

“We would approve of armed security at our schools if the state or federal government paid for it,” said Litchfield Elementary spokeswoman Ann Donahue, noting the district would not be able to cover the costs.

Whether that happens remains to be seen.

State Superintendent John Huppenthal on Friday noted the NRA’s proposal would be a large expense to an already financially stressed education system.

House Minority Leader Chad Campbell, D-Phoenix, said he plans to introduce legislation in 2013 to fully fund and train school resource officers at every Arizona school.

Meanwhile, conversations will continue over what parents and residents want for their schools.

Dysart school board member Jerry Enyon said concerns are high, but school officials go through training and routinely practice safety drills.

“They know what to do to keep the kids as safe as possible,” Enyon said.

Reporter Anne Ryman contributed to this article.

Using the Connecticut shooting to create a jobs program for cops???

Do each of the nations approximately 70,000 schools need a police officers to protect against an incident which only happens one or twice every 10 years or so? I don't really think that is a cost efficient solution.

However if you are a police chief and want to expand your empire, hiring 70,000 new cops sounds like a great idea for an empire building bureaucrat. Even if it isn't cost efficient it is a way to increase your pay and empire size.

Source

Experts: Trained police necessary to protect schools

John Gastaldo

Rich Agundez

Associated Press

WASHINGTON - The student's attack began with a shotgun blast through the windows of a California high school. Rich Agundez, the El Cajon policeman assigned to the school, felt his mind shift into overdrive.

People yelled at him amid the chaos but he didn't hear. He experienced "a tunnel vision of concentration."

While two teachers and three students were injured when the glass shattered in the 2001 attack on Granite Hills High School, Agundez confronted the assailant and wounded him before he could get inside the school and use his second weapon, a handgun.

The National Rifle Association's response to a Connecticut school massacre envisions, in part, having trained, armed volunteers in every school in America. But Agundez, school safety experts and school board members say there's a huge difference between a trained law enforcement officer who becomes part of the school family and a guard with a gun. [Translation - He wants to create jobs for police officers, not armed guards who are not police officers.]

The NRA's proposal has sparked a debate across the country as gun control rises once again as a national issue. President Obama promised to present a plan in January to confront gun violence in the aftermath of the killing of 20 Sandy Hook Elementary School students and six teachers in Newtown, Conn.

Agundez said what happened before the shooting in the San Diego County school should frame the debate over the NRA's proposal.

After a shooting at another county school just weeks before, Agundez had trained the staff in how to lock down the school, assigned evacuation points, instructed teachers to lock doors, close curtains and turn off the lights. He even told them computers should be used where possible to communicate, to lessen the chaos.

And his training? A former SWAT team member, Agundez's preparation placed him in simulated stressful situations.

The kids in the school knew to follow his advice because they knew him. He spoke in their classrooms and counseled them when they came to him with problems.

In the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre, school boards, administrators, teachers and parents are reviewing their security measures.

School security officers can range from the best-trained police officers to unarmed private guards. Some big-city districts with gang and crime problems formed their own police agencies years ago.

Others, after the murder of 13 people at Columbine High School in 1999, started joint agreements with local police departments to have officers assigned to schools - even though that was no guarantee of preventing violence. A trained police officer at Columbine confronted one of two shooters but couldn't prevent the death of 13 people.

"Our association would be uncomfortable with volunteers," [Of course they are uncomfortable with volunteers, it means less jobs for police officers] said Mo Canady, executive director of the National Association of School Resource Officers - whose members are mostly trained law enforcement officers who "become part of the school family.' " [I think a better title for their group would be National Association of Police Officers who work in Schools. "Resource Officers" is just a politically correct word for cops that work in schools]

Canady questioned how police agencies responding to reports of a shooter would know whether the person with a gun is a volunteer or the assailant. [You can ask the same question and say how would the cops know if a person was a teacher or the assailant?]

Former Rep. Asa Hutchinson, who also was a top Homeland Security official and will head the NRA effort, said the program will have two key elements.

One is a model security plan "based on the latest, most up-to-date technical information from the foremost experts in their fields." Each school could tweak the plan to its own circumstances, and "armed, trained, qualified school security personnel will be but one element."

The second element may prove the more controversial because, to avoid massive funding for local authorities, it would use volunteers. Hutchinson said in his home state of Arkansas, his son was a volunteer with a local group "Watchdog Dads," who volunteered at schools to patrol playgrounds and provide added security.

He said retired police officers, former members of the military or rescue personnel would be among those likely to volunteer.

There's debate over whether anyone should have a gun in a school, even a trained law enforcement officer.

"In general teachers don't want guns in schools, period," said Dennis Van Roekel, president of the National Education Association, one of the two large unions representing teachers. He added that one size does not fit all districts and said the union has supported schools that wanted a trained officer. Most teachers, he said, do not want to be armed themselves.

"It's a school. It's not a place where guns should be," he commented.

The security situation around the country is mixed.

• Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne proposed a plan to allow one educator in each school to carry a gun. [Isn't Tom Horne the guy who is trying to distract the public from his alleged affair with Carmen Chenal and the alleged hit and run accident he was involved in on his way to an alleged affair with Carmen Chenal???]

• Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio says he has the authority to mobilize private citizens to fight crime and plans to post armed private posse members around the perimeter of schools. He said he hasn't spoken to specific school districts and doesn't plan to have the citizen posse members inside the buildings. [ Sheriff Joe is just a publicity hound who is using the Connecticut shooting to get attention for himself]

• The Snohomish School District north of Seattle got rid of its school officers because of the expense.

• The Las Vegas-based Clark County School District has its own police department and places armed officers in and around its 49 high school campuses. Officers patrol outside elementary and middle schools. The Washoe County School District in Nevada also has a police force that was authorized about a decade ago to carry guns on campus.

• In Milwaukee, a dozen city police officers cover the school district but spend most of their time in seven of the 25 high schools. In Madison, Wis., an armed police officer has worked in each of the district's four high schools since the mid-1990s.

• A Utah group is offering free concealed-weapons permit training for teachers as a result of the Connecticut shootings.

Source

"I would select an experienced, tactically trained, on-duty police officer. I would have them in every school in the United States, preschool through college" - The author who is an ex-cop and owner of a police training school has a vested interest in hiring more cops.

Only armed guards can protect against shootings

Saturday December 29, 2012 4:39 AM

The discussion concerning active-shooter situations needs to remain productive and on-topic.

Some of that discussion involves the controversial option of arming teachers and other qualified concealed-carry-permit holders. Some politicians and media folks have attempted to hijack the narrative on the subject and offer nonsensical solutions. [So if you are not a cop, you are too stupid to be involved in this discussion???] Those of us in law enforcement must reinforce those who voice legitimate solutions. Our kids are being murdered in elementary schools. We have no choice but to make ourselves heard.

Law-enforcement professionals have done a pretty good job over the past 14 years in training and preparing for such situations. [Yea, but off hand I don't remember then stopping ANY shootings. The shooters usually commit suicide, or are arrested after they leave the scene] As a former police officer and co-owner of North American SWAT Training Association, I have been directly involved in this training and preparation for thousands of officers and educators throughout the United States since 1999. [So he has a vested interest in hiring more cops] In many cases, responding officers and educators have limited the number of casualties. This comprehensive approach to training and preparation must continue and be improved upon.

Historically, a homicidal-suicidal active shooter stops killing innocent people only when he or she is confronted by a responsible person carrying a gun. [Yes I remember a few of these incidents the cop were cowards and didn't confront the assailants. Columbine was one of them.]

Therefore, we must cause this confrontation to take place within seconds of when an active shooter starts his or her rampage.

The only way to ensure this is to have a responsible and armed person at the scene when the situation begins. Like most, I would prefer to hand-pick those individuals for this assignment. I would select an experienced, tactically trained, on-duty police officer. I would have them in every school in the United States, preschool through college. [And of course after those thousands of cops are hired I will make of buck off of training a few of them]

But I'm not convinced that we have enough sworn personnel or resources to accomplish that task.

Another option: Recruit off-duty and retired police officers, paid or volunteer. How many active and retired officers, former military personnel and other qualified gun owners already volunteer in their kids’ and grandkids’ schools? I would gladly volunteer for the assignment.

Another option: Arming responsible teachers who are proficient in the use of firearms. It has worked successfully in some school districts throughout Texas and other states. The Harrold School District in Texas has an excellent plan that includes all of the necessary selection, training and policy procedures.

Law enforcement would need to assist educators in establishing a safe and workable plan.

Like most officers, I want to be there when an active-shooter situation erupts. If I can't be there, I want a fellow officer to confront the shooter. If we can't be there in the first 30-90 seconds, I want someone else armed and prepared to end the situation. [If you ask me it's highly unlikely that a school cop will get their in 30 to 90 seconds]

When the lives of our children are at stake, we can't afford to take any solution off the table. [Translation I want to make a few bucks training cops, and I think you can afford to pay me] Politicians and celebrities are provided individualized, armed security 24/7. How can we justify depriving our children of at least one armed security professional per school?

JAMES J. SCANLON

General partner, North American SWAT Training Association

Westerville

City Council members use discretionary accounts to rip off taxpayers???

Source

Discretionary council funds scrutinized

By David Madrid The Republic | azcentral.com Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:16 AM

A Phoenix councilman [Phoenix Vice Mayor Michael Johnson who is a former Phoenix Police Officer] used more than $20,000 to attend conferences.

A West Valley councilwoman [Glendale Councilwoman Norma Alvarez] used $18,000 to pave a road in her district.

A small-city mayor [Surprise Mayor Lyn Truitt] spent nearly $70 to buy shirts and monogram “mayor” on them.

All three tapped so-called discretionary funds, public money that is spent at a council member’s discretion with little public scrutiny.

In the last two years, 10 Valley cities have spent $1.2 million in taxpayer funds for meals, travel, construction projects and iPads, an investigation by The Arizona Republic has found.

The money also was used to pay for more run-of-the-mill expenses like photos, picture frames, candy for a parade and appreciation plaques. [Stuff that is really needed by the taxpayers - at least that's what these royal rulers say]

These purchases were made as recession-battered cities have cut jobs, delayed maintenance and asked residents to cope with fewer services.

Supporters of discretionary funds say they are a useful tool and can pay for neighborhood projects, charity donations, lobbying trips and training for newly elected leaders. [And increasing their income without the taxpayers finding out, well except when articles like this are published]

Critics worry that the main beneficiaries are council members themselves. [and the critics are right] While the funds are just a sliver of a multimillion-dollar city budget, local politicians can use the money to take pricey trips or raise their profile by splurging on favored projects in their districts, some say.

Despite city leaders’ best intentions, discretionary funds are ripe for misuse or even abuse, according to ethics experts and some city leaders.

“You can spend on just about anything you want,” said Surprise City Councilman Mike Woodard, who has been critical of the funds and helped change how they are handled in his city.

“It’s not appropriate,” he said.

How it works

A discretionary account is a pool of money, often taken from a city’s general fund, that is set aside for an individual council member to use at his or her discretion. It’s a common practice among city councils around the country. In the Valley, 10 cities, including Phoenix, Peoria, Glendale, Mesa, Chandler and Avondale, maintain discretionary funds, which range from $500 to more than $30,000 a year.

Council members vote on the amount they are allowed to spend each year. In some cities, mayors receive more than other council members. [If a council member votes themselves a $5,000 pay raise everybody finds out about it. If instead they vote themselves a $5,000 increase in discretionary money nobody finds out.]

Although the amounts are outlined in the city budget, details on how the money is spent is not discussed in public meetings.

Still, most communities have discretionary-fund policies, though they vary widely in the level of oversight. Some cities won’t cut a check unless an expense meets discretionary-fund rules. Others merely ask council members to provide receipts.

Avondale’s policy, for example, is informal. “Council member discretionary funds ... can be used for any legal public purpose such as official City travel, educational opportunities such as training or conferences, support of non-profit organizations, etc.,” it states. [And the taxpayers rarely find out when they are used for illegal purchases]

Several cities allow council members to “roll over” unused dollars to the next year or to borrow money from council colleagues when they run out of cash. [Sounds more like an illegal slush fund then a discretionary fund!!!]

The Phoenix council has an executive assistant who acts as a gatekeeper approving each expense. [Yea, an executive assistant that works for the person spending the money. Ask an accountant if this is a good "internal control" to keep the money from being used illegally and they will tell you it isn't!!!!]

Tracking the spending often falls to a city administrator, who can’t hold a public official accountable, said Judy Nadler, a senior fellow in government ethics at Santa Clara University, in Santa Clara, Calif.

The Republic examined council and mayor discretionary funds with travel and capital spending for fiscal years 2010-11 and 2011-12.

Other Valley city councils without discretionary funds pay for these expenses through the budget process. The Republic did not examine those budgets.

Conferences and travel

The Republic analysis shows that about 15 percent of discretionary funds were spent on travel and conference-related expenses in 2010-11 and 2011-12. [So it's really travel and party money, that is kept secret from the taxpayers???]

Officials in Valley cities without discretionary funds also use taxpayer money to travel but do it through the budget process, allowing public input.

Local leaders who support the out-of-town trips say they help cement federal support for local programs. Conferences help council members learn how to better represent their constituents. [These guys were elected to city government officers, there is no need for them to hobnob with government officials in Washington D.C.]

The benefits of such travel, supporters and critics agree, can be hard to quantify. [And that's why city council members love these discretionary accounts]

Phoenix Vice Mayor Michael Johnson spent more than $22,000 in discretionary funds on conference-related hotels and travel. He spent more discretionary funds on hotels and travel than any other council member or mayor in the Valley. That included hotel bills for National League of City conferences totaling more than $5,000 for two stays at the Washington Marriott Wardman Park Hotel. [Wow! I wonder when he has time to work at his real job in Phoenix as a Phoenix Council member]

For those conferences, he stayed in the hotel for at least a week, said Johnson, who serves on the Advisory Board of the National League of Cities. He was also the president of the National Black Caucus of Local Elected Officials, a group within the league.

The benefits to the city of his trips far exceed the money he spent on travel, Johnson added. [Of course he didn't give the Arizona Republic any hard numbers] In addition to attending the conferences, he met with the state’s congressional delegation and had a sit-down meeting with President Barack Obama.

However, it is difficult to calculate how many dollars exactly those trips brought to Phoenix, Johnson said. “It’s hard to say, ‘Well, can you tell me the exact amount you were responsible for?’ That would be difficult to say,” he said.

Those meetings helped Phoenix get utility subsidies for the poor and allowed the city to keep its share of Community Development Block Grants, a federal program that aims to spur development in low-income neighborhoods, the councilman said. The trips also helped bring the league’s 2011 Congress of Cities conference to Phoenix, which generated $4.5 million in direct spending, Johnson said.

Avondale Mayor Marie Lopez Rogers, who is president of the National League of Cities, said conferences are valuable for new and experienced city leaders alike. At league conferences, council members learn about open-meeting laws, new technological advances and how to handle the relationships between city leaders and city employees, Rogers said. She used discretionary funds for her travel to conferences but was reimbursed for most of it by the national league.

But Phoenix City Councilman Sal DiCiccio said he doesn’t see the value in extensive conference attendance. “Quite frankly, if it was that important for someone to go, you don’t have to have more than one person go to those things to represent your city,” DiCiccio said.

And in the age of teleconferencing, such travel can be reduced, said Kevin McCarthy, president of the Arizona Tax Research Association.

But Rogers said that in politics a conference call is not always as effective as an in-person visit. When Goodyear and Litchfield Park needed to prod federal officials about polluted groundwater or when federal grants to cities were on the chopping block, local leaders had to travel to Washington, she said. [Of course the city council members will use any lame excuse they can to take the money and run.]

“Certainly we can use technology,” she said. “We use technology as much as we can, but politics is about relationships, and if you don’t build those face-to-face contacts, you lose something.”

Construction projects

Some city leaders pour discretionary funds into neighborhoods, using it to pay for projects that might not otherwise receive funding but also to bolster council members’ political profiles. The money can pay to stucco old walls, paint graffiti-covered fences, and help local homeowners associations pay for improvements. For example, Peoria City Councilwoman Joan Evans spent $1,275 for community-pool improvements at Lake Pleasant Estates.

Council members say this is often an ideal way to spend the money, making small, badly needed upgrades in their community. [So if the money is spent this way it means the normal way government operates isn't working???]

Ethics experts warn that this kind of spending may encourage council members to use the money for political advantage.

In February, Glendale Councilwoman Norma Alvarez paid Vulcan Materials Co. $18,138 from her discretionary account to provide asphalt for repairs to Griffin Lane, a quarter-mile-long, dead-end neighborhood street. City workers paved the road. [I bet everybody on that block voted to reelect Glendale Councilwoman Norma Alvarez. Of course she will say the $18,138 wasn't used to buy votes]

It was legitimate discretionary spending: Glendale’s policy allows each council member to spend up to $15,000 on construction or equipment. [Legitimate doesn't mean ethical. ]

Alvarez said that south Glendale is not the city’s priority but that the repaving was something constituents wanted. The city could not otherwise have afforded it at a time when Glendale was cutting library services and recreation programs. [Well if the city couldn't have afforded it she shouldn't have spent the money]

“The project was needed,” she said. “I was told I had miscellaneous money to go to conferences and so forth. ... I have spent all the money in the neighborhoods.”

Stuart Kent, Glendale executive director of public works, said Griffin Lane was on a list of streets identified as below standards and in need of work. City employees repaved the road at Alvarez’s request, he said.

In Peoria, Vice Mayor Ron Aames spends almost 75 percent of his discretionary funds on neighborhood-improvement projects, [buying votes in his district??? I'm sure he will have a lame excuse to deny that] some of which he features prominently in newsletters he sends to constituents. The articles feature photographs of Aames and residents smiling in front of the improvements such as neighborhood-entry signs.

Aames, who was unopposed in his bid for a second term in the November 2010 election, said he isn’t campaigning using discretionary funds. He defended the newsletters, saying his constituents have a right to know what he is doing. [But he didn't say it's a lot cheaper to spend the taxpayers money to get himself reelected, then spending his own money]

“Communication is important,” he said. “I do it primarily so people know who I am and are aware that they can make such requests, and we do this in the district.”

It is difficult to say whether officials are touting such projects to lay the groundwork for their next election, said James Svara, a professor in the School of Public Affairs at Arizona State University. “Is that a project of sufficient importance that it warrants being done, compared with other uses that money could be put to?” he asked. [Then if this stuff is so questionable, then it probably shouldn't be done]

Aames said the projects return tax money to citizens. [Liar, liar, pants on fire???] Using discretionary funds allows him to work directly with residents, instead of directing them to a city program. [And it sure buys a lot of votes when it comes to getting reelected]

Charities

Another popular, and significant, discretionary expenditure is donating money to charity. [There is nothing I hate more then charity at gun point. That's when our government rulers tax you so they can give YOUR money to THEIR favorite charity.]

Especially in bad economic times, discretionary money helps non-profits provide valuable services to residents, council members say. But the donations can raise questions about relationships between city leaders and those who benefit from the gift.

Phoenix City Councilwoman Thelda Williams spent almost $3,000 at Turf Paradise for a dance and dinner to raise money for the Pioneer Arizona Living History Museum and Village, a city park in her district. She said the Pioneer ball raised $15,000 for the museum. [Maybe, since the party was pay with taxpayer money, the public should have been invited to attend it free of charge. But Phoenix City Councilwoman Thelda Williams probably wouldn't like that!!]

“I do an annual fundraiser for them, and we do it there, because they give us the best price,” she said of Turf Paradise, a horse-racing track, which isn’t in her district.

Williams received a $430 campaign donation from Ronald Simms, a co-owner of Turf Paradise. But Williams said the donation had nothing to do withher choosing the racetrack for the event. “You’re talking horses. It’s in the pioneer theme,” she said. [Honest, it's not a bribe. Honest, it's not a bribe]

In 2010, Woodard, the Surprise councilman, donated $1,200 to a holiday-lights extravaganza at a private home known as the “Christmas House.” Woodard said he was criticized for giving money to private citizens, and people speculated that he bought decorations for the house or paid the electric bill. Rather, the money paid for toys to give to hundreds of children who came to see the house, Woodard said.

“I would do it again given the opportunity, but the way it is now, it would have to be approved by the council,” he said.

Another Surprise politician, former Mayor Lyn Truitt, made several unusual purchases using discretionary funds. While Truitt was mayor, the council bought iPads using the funds. He said council members had a choice between iPads or laptops. Other cities have purchased iPads for council members but went through the public budgeting process to buy them.

Truitt also spent $68 on shirts and a jacket, which he had embroidered with his title and name. That way, residents and visitors who didn’t know him could identify him, he said. “I believe it was an appropriate council expenditure,” he said. [and the rest of us believe that he ripped off the taxpayers]

Future accountability

While some city leaders are uneasy about how discretionary funds are being spent, few outside groups monitor them.

The money is a small fraction of overall city budgets. For example, in Phoenix, City Council and mayoral discretionary spending totals about $80,000 annually, while the city budget is $3.5 billion. [I think what they are saying is since the city of Phoenix annually spends $3.5 billion it's no big deal if the members of the Phoenix city council rip off the taxpayers for $80,000 annually???]

Still, some are advocating changes in the way discretionary funds are handled.

In Surprise, Woodard has successfully pushed for change. This year, the council agreed to cut its discretionary budget and pool the money in a community-outreach pot. Any spending from the community-outreach fund requires a council vote.

Earlier this month, Glendale’s City Council offered to reduce each council member’s discretionary fund from $33,000 to $9,000 annually. The decision comes as city leaders consider eliminating 64 full-time positions to save $6 million during the next fiscal year.

Nadler, the university ethics fellow, said she doesn’t see any movement across the country to end discretionary funds or revise how they are handled. But, she said, given cities’ financial struggles, the time has come to do so. “We’ve reduced police forces. We’ve reduced the hours at the library,” she said.

“So we cannot afford to waste one dime on expenses that are not legitimate and that do not advance the work elected officials are charged to do on behalf of the public,” Nadler said.

Phoenix: Spending limit not exceeded - Honest that's what the mayor says!!!!

Phoenix: Spending limit not exceeded

By David Madrid The Republic | azcentral.com Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:13 AM

Former Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon overspent his discretionary funds while he was in office.

Or he didn’t.

City figures show that in fiscal year 2010-11 Gordon spent $17,000 more than the $5,000 limit on the taxpayer-funded account. [I'm sure he will say that this looks bad, but honest, he didn't rip off the taxpayers for $12,000]

A city spokeswoman sees it differently. [Well let's say a city spokeswoman that works for Mayor Gordon and is paid by Mayor Gordon, and is only accountable to Mayor Gordon sees it differently] Since Gordon’s total spending that year was lower than his total $1.6 million mayoral budget, it’s not important if the former mayor overspent in one category.

The Arizona Republic requested discretionary-fund spending data from 10 cities — including Phoenix — that have such accounts for city-council members. The other cities are Glendale, Peoria, Mesa, Avondale, Chandler, Tolleson, Litchfield Park, Goodyear and Surprise.

The funds are supposed to be spent on expenses that ultimately help residents. In many cities, council members and mayors must follow some guidelines. For some, however, there is little oversight and city leaders spend the money as they see fit.

Gordon was Phoenix’s mayor from 2004 to 2012.

Toni Maccarone, a Phoenix spokeswoman, said Gordon’s total office budget in fiscal year 2010-11 was $1,588,202. His year-end actual spending was $1,338,332, she said.

So therefore, Gordon’s office was $249,870 under its budget, she said.

“That is what is important for the overall city budgeting process, not whether one particular line item in the budget was over or under, because departments can make up for it with underspending in other areas of their budgets,” Maccarone said.

In Phoenix, the mayor’s and council members’ budgets are divided into several categories, said Mario Paniagua, Phoenix budget and research director.

Gordon’s overall $1.6 million budget included discretionary funds as well as money for personnel services that covered staff costs, contractual services and office supplies.

The discretionary budget is for the mayor and council’s miscellaneous expenses including constituent services, outreach and travel, Paniagua said.

In an interview, Gordon said he filled out proper paperwork for the discretionary-account expenses, which were approved.

According to city documents, Gordon spent $14,085 of his discretionary funds over the two fiscal years on conferences and business travel.

The rest of his discretionary money paid for event-support services and office supplies.

In addition to the taxpayer-funded money, Gordon controlled an account that was funded by donations from developers and other political supporters.

“What I call my discretionary funds, I raised all privately and had the downtown partnership oversee that,” he said.

Valley officials' purchases using discretionary funds

Valley officials' purchases using discretionary funds

The Republic | azcentral.com Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:08 AM

In the last two years, 10 Valley cities have spent $1.2 million in taxpayer funds for meals, travel, construction projects and iPads, an investigation by The Arizona Republic has found.

Here is a closer look at some of the more unusual uses of discretionary funds:

Phoenix City Councilwoman Thelda Williams spent almost $3,000 at Turf Paradise to help pay for a museum fundraiser. The horse-racing track is co-owned by a campaign donor.

Glendale Councilwoman Norma Alvarez paid more than $18,000 to repave a road. Without her help, she says, the road would have remained a low city priority.

Former Surprise Mayor Lyn Truitt bought an iPad with discretionary funds. He said the council chose to purchase iPads because they are less cumbersome than laptops and help with constituent email and keeping a city calendar.

Truitt also spent $68 on shirts and a jacket, which he had embroidered with his title and name. He said that helped residents because people who didn’t know him were able to identify him when he was in public and could approach him. [Sorry Mayor Truitt a 50 cent name tag would have been a lot cheaper!!!]

Phoenix City Councilman Michael Nowakowski paid $5,822 over two years to a children’s inflatable bounce house business to rent a screen and projector used for a movies in the park program in Southwest Phoenix.

Former Surprise Councilman Mike Woodard, a foe of most discretionary spending, donated $1,200 to the “Christmas House” which featured many holiday lights. Woodard was criticized by residents for giving money to private citizens. He said the money was used to buy toys for children, and he would do it again.

Mayoral and city council discretionary fund spending

Mayoral and city council discretionary fund spending

A discretionary account is a pool of money, often taken from a city’s general fund, that is set aside for an individual council member to use at his or her discretion. The use of discretionary funds is a common practice among city councils around the country.

In the Valley, 10 cities, including Phoenix, Peoria, Glendale, Mesa, Chandler and Avondale maintain discretionary funds. Funds across the Valley range from $500 a year to $33,000.

Some cities allow their councils and mayors to roll over unspent discretionary funds into next year's budgets. Peoria, Glendale and Avondale all allow for this. Avondale and Goodyear allows council members to give some of their discretionary budget to other members.

The following individuals spent more than their budgets in either Fiscal Year 2011 or Fiscal Year 2012: Avondale Mayor Marie Lopez Rogers went over $500 in FY 2012 and Vice Mayor Stephanie Karlin went over her FY 2011 budget by $872.

Phil Gordon went over his FY 2011 budget of $5,000, spending $21,955.53.

In Mesa, Mayor Scott Smith spent $23,227.94 in FY 2012, going over his $18,000 by $5,227.94. [This is the same Mayor Scott Smith who is going to help the Feds reign in their spending and balance the budget??? What a joke!!!!]

[To see the graphs that came with this article check out the original article in the Arizona Republic here]

Obama: Gun control ‘not something I will be putting off’

Obama: Gun control ‘not something I will be putting off’

Posted by Sean Sullivan on December 30, 2012 at 9:01 am

President Obama reiterated his commitment to passing new gun control measures in an interview broadcast on Sunday morning, saying he would like to get such legislation done in the first year of his second term. He also expressed skepticism about a proposal to put more armed guards in schools across the country.

“The question is are we going to be able to have a national conversation and move something through Congress,” Obama said on NBC News’s “Meet The Press.” “I’d like to get it done in the first year. I will put forward a very specific proposal based on the recommendations that Joe Biden’s task force is putting together as we speak. And so this is not something that I will be putting off.”

Obama, who recently established a task force led by Vice President Biden to offer recommendations for how to best curb gun violence, also pushed back against an idea the National Rifle Association put forth following the mass shooting earlier this month at a school in Newtown, Conn. As gun control advocates called for tighter restrictions, the NRA urged that armed guards be placed in schools to deter and defend against future acts of violence.

“I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools. And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem,” Obama said.

Obama reiterated his support for a ban on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines that gun control advocates in Congress have said they will be pushing for.

“Here’s the bottom line. We’re not going to get this done unless the American people decide it’s important,” Obama added.

Reasonable Restrictions on your First and Second Amendment rights

Imagine that the First Amendment is subject to just a few 'reasonable restrictions.'

All you have to do, it turns out, is apply for a federal Churchgoing License, a federal Prayer Permit, a federal Publication Permit, or a federal Letter-to-the-Editor License, whichever is appropriate.

The forms are free! Of course, you have to submit to fingerprinting. You have to mail in with your application and your fingerprint card a signed letter from your local sheriff or chief of police, stating he has no objections.

The application fee is $200. The waiting period to hear whether you've been approved generally runs about six months.

If you ask me there are NO reasonable restrictions on your rights.

It's not about the children, it's about the money!!!

Source

Overrides may go back on ballot

By By Hayley Ringle The Republic | azcentral.com

Tue Jan 1, 2013 12:29 AM

The Higley Unified School District is the first school district in Maricopa County to call for another budget override election this fall in an effort to reverse last November’s defeat of two override requests.

Given the economic climate, millions of dollars cut by the state Legislature in the past few years and new federal mandates such as the Common Core Standards, new teacher evaluations and mandatory third-grade literacy, Higley’s action could inspire other school districts that lost override elections to try again this fall.

By calling for an election so early, Higley officials hope to spend even more time talking to residents about why the district needs this money.

“We’re going to ensure we do a better job of communicating accurate information about how we use these dollars conservatively and judiciously,” said Higley board member Venessa Whitener in a prepared statement.

Higley’s $4.9million maintenance-and-operations override narrowly failed, by 189 votes, preventing the district from continuing to increase its operations budget by 10percent. The district’s $4.9million capital-budget override lost more decisively, 54 to 47percent.

Renewing the two budget overrides would maintain existing programs and ultimately ease the fiscal impact of the district’s transition to a middle-school setup. The still-growing district, covering southeast Gilbert and northwest Queen Creek, plans to open its first two middle schools in August.

Whitener said the Higley vote was adversely affected by opposition to the failed Proposition 204 ballot measure, which would have made permanent a temporary 1-cent-per-dollar state sales-tax increase. “People had thought that those overrides and the sales tax were all related.”

Voters in almost half the 28 school districts with budget or bond questions on the Nov.6 ballot rejected requests for either capital-budget or maintenance-and-operations budget overrides.

Other districts where overrides failed included the Agua Fria Union High School, Avondale Elementary, Chandler Unified, Deer Valley Unified, Gilbert Public Schools, Litchfield Elementary,Nadaburg Unified, Queen Creek Unified, Roosevelt Elementary, Scottsdale Unified, Tempe Union High and Washington Elementary.

They now must begin looking to make millions of dollars in cuts to programs both inside and outside the classroom.

As school-district administrators and school-board members prepare to make those decisions for the next school year, taking another shot at an override this year likely is on many officials’ minds and will likely soon be a discussion among school boards.

School boards have a July8 deadline to call for a November override election, and many typically call for an election a month or two before.

“You can be sure there is work all around the state, because it’s so vital,” Arizona School Boards Association spokeswoman Tracey Benson said. “Not knowing what the next fiscal year will bring, passing those overrides is going to be vitally important.”

Some Higley residents criticized the district for making this decision so soon after voters turned down both overrides. Newly elected member Jake Hoffman, who will join the board next week, criticized the board for unanimously approving the measure on Dec.4 — before he and another newcomer replace two incumbents.

“I am disheartened by the apparent contempt and lack of respect for the intelligence of the Higley voters by the school district’s superintendent and governing board,” said Hoffman in a prepared statement. “The district’s message ... was that the voters were ‘ignorant’ and lacked understanding regarding the ballot measures.”

But several local education advocates say Higley is doing the right thing. Andrew Morrill, president of the Arizona Education Association, called the move a “sign of the times and a sign of the state’s financial crisis across the state.”

“We’re the lowest-funded state in the country. We’ve cut the most from our general fund for public education. Districts are feeling it,” Morrill said. “Districts are just having things heaped on them and no funding. What I think is happening is there’s no confidence in the Legislature.

“I do think it’s wise, especially if they can organize an effort to really reach out to the community and say in a no-nonsense way, ‘Here is what we’re up against. Here all are the expectations we are facing,’” Morrill added.

Chuck Essigs, director of government relations for the Arizona Association of School Business Officials, said that there’s nothing “innately wrong” with calling an early election but added that district officials need to explore why voters turned down the overrides in the first place, especially if similar measures have been approved in the past.

“You need to give the community more time with all the facts available without speculation or hearsay,” Essigs said. “I do think in the case of Higley, where it was very close and there was a possible misunderstanding of the importance of it, the earlier you meet with the community, the better chance they have to explain the importance of passing the override.”

Higley held more than a dozen parent forums, stressing the importance of voters approving the ballot proposals.

Gilbert Public Schools, which failed to win approval for a $16.6million maintenance-and-operations override, also may ask voters again in November to continue the override. Newly re-elected Gilbert board clerk Lily Tram praised Higley for making the decision early, calling it a “really smart” move. Board members will begin discussing possible override plans at the second board meeting this month, Tram said.

Voters rejected the Scottsdale Unified School District’s request for a 15percent override. Now, the district must decide whether to put it on the ballot again this fall.

Complicating that decision is the district’s plans to ask voters this year to approve a $175million construction bond plan to renovate its elementary schools. Scottsdale voters might see both the override and school bond questions on a November ballot — in addition to a city bond proposal.

Chandler Unified School District voters rejected its $28million override.

The district went out a year ahead of time so that if the measure failed, it could ask voters this November to approve another, but smaller, override. Governing-board members and Superintendent Camille Casteel have said they will consider the matter in May.

The Deer Valley Unified School District also is considering an override vote this year after its $52.5million capital override failed. A board study session on seeking a vote this year is likely to be discussed this month or February, said district spokeswoman Ashley Morris.

Religious Grand Canyon University wants a government handout???

Source

Cities vow to avoid GCU battle

By By Parker Leavitt The Republic | azcentral.com Tue Jan 1, 2013 12:34 AM

Civic leaders are pledging to resist a regional bidding battle as Phoenix-based Grand Canyon University solicits economic-incentive packages for its planned satellite campus in the southeast Valley suburbs.

The for-profit university plans to build a 75- to 150-acre campus that could eventually boast 7,500 students and 2,000 employees. The school’s main campus is near 33rd Avenue and Camelback Road in Phoenix.

Grand Canyon last month invited five southeast Valley communities to propose sites for the new campus and offer incentives ranging from land giveaways and tax rebates to infrastructure improvements.

Besides asking Mesa, Chandler, Gilbert, Tempe and Queen Creek to bid, the company invited Las Vegas and Albuquerque to join the competition.

But after years of border fights over coveted economic assets like auto malls and shopping centers, community leaders say the culture of competition is giving way to a spirit of cooperation.

City officials are now more inclined to work together in competing with major markets in California, Texas and overseas rather than fight among themselves, East Valley Partnership President Roc Arnett said.

Arnett said he expects civic leaders to take the same approach in negotiating an agreement for the Grand Canyon University campus.

“In the last two years, I’ve seen more cooperation between cities than I’ve seen in a long, long time,” Arnett said. “I think the cities will avoid at all costs a bidding war, and they’ll communicate together.”

Elected officials and city administrators in the southeast Valley echoed that sentiment.

Chandler Mayor Jay Tibshraeny said he has already spoken “in generalities” about the university bid with the other four mayors and does not anticipate a bidding war.

“We’re in this individually, but we have had some dialogue as a group that it’s not wise to jeopardize taxpayers’ dollars,” Tibshraeny said. “From Chandler’s perspective, it won’t happen.”

Mesa Mayor Scott Smith, whose city recently landed five small liberal-arts colleges without offering incentives, said he does not want to be “manipulated” by a for-profit company that’s looking to grow.

“The incentive for them (the five colleges) was that this is a great community where they can succeed,” Smith said.

Mesa will work with neighboring communities to find the best place for the new Grand Canyon campus, which will benefit the entire region regardless of which site is chosen, Smith said.

“We’re always interested when an organization wants

to come and invest in our community,” Smith said. “We’ll work with Grand Canyon and the other cities in a reasonable way to help them find the right place.”

Grand Canyon CEO Brian Mueller said the company is happy to work with a group of cities collectively if officials prefer that approach.

“We want the best location where we can serve the greatest number of students,” Mueller said. “We just think there’s going to be a trend of students wanting to stay closer to home to go to school and wanting to do it in the most economically feasible way possible.”

Grand Canyon officials pointed to several recent examples where public subsidies were used to support higher education, including $14 million from Phoenix for a University of Arizona cancer center and up to $2.5 million from Peoria for Trine University.

Plans for the new Grand Canyon campus include four 80,000-square-foot buildings with amenities such as a student union, laboratories, a recreational center, a bookstore and a library, according to the company’s request for proposals.

The university wants to open the first building in time for classes in fall 2014, company executives have said. The second building would likely open in 2016, followed by a third and fourth by 2020.

Gilbert Mayor John Lewis said civic leaders will want to be “ambassadors” for their own communities but must also realize the campus will be an asset for the entire region.

“Economic development and education go hand in hand,” Lewis said. “A strong workforce is important for retaining and attracting businesses.”

That doesn’t mean incentives won’t be a part of the conversation, however.

Queen Creek Economic Development Director Doreen Cott said the town is working with local landowners to identify potential sites and intends to submit a bid package that could include development incentives.

General tools the town has to offer include expediting plans through its development process, waiving building and permitting fees or helping improve infrastructure, she said.

Chandler Economic Development Director Christine Mackay said officials in her city are still poring through the request for proposals but expressed interest and excitement to “see something new.”

Tempe spokeswoman Nikki Ripley said the city is “staying engaged in the process and evaluating the situation” but declined to comment further.

Grand Canyon initially indicated that cities should respond with a notice of intent by Jan. 7, but Smith said the company should be “more realistic” with expectations.

Mueller, the Grand Canyon CEO, said that the Jan. 7 date is not a hard deadline and that the company does not need “anything substantial” from the cities until later.

The university’s proposal lists Feb. 15 as a deadline for cities to submit bids and says it will notify the winner by May 1.

New York newspaper that reported gun permits using armed guards

Maybe now they realize that guns are useful for self defense, in addition to their intended Second Amendment purpose of allowing the people to overthrow government tyrants.

Of course the main reason these gun control laws are passes is because our government masters don't like the serfs they rule over to be able to defend themselves.

Source

New York newspaper that reported gun permits using armed guards

Associated Press Thu Jan 3, 2013 7:22 AM

WHITE PLAINS, New York — A New York state newspaper that created a public outcry when it published the names and addresses of residents with handgun permits is being protected by armed guards.

Journal News publisher Janet Hasson told the New York Times, “The safety of my staff is my top priority.”

The newspaper last month published online maps with the names and addresses of pistol permit holders in two counties it covers. It sought the public records after the school shooting in nearby Newtown, Connecticut.

Critics say the publication is an invasion of privacy.

Boy, 6, suspended from Silver Spring school for pointing finger like a gun

Boy, 6, suspended from Silver Spring school for pointing finger like a gun

By Donna St. George, Published: January 2

The parents of a 6-year-old Silver Spring boy are fighting the first-grader’s suspension from a Montgomery County public school for pointing his finger like a gun and saying “pow,” an incident school officials characterized in a disciplinary letter as a threat “to shoot a student.”

The first-grader was suspended for one day, Dec. 21. The family’s attorney filed an appeal Wednesday, asking that the incident be expunged from the boy’s school record amid concerns of long-term fallout.

The boy “had no intention to shoot anyone,” said attorney Robin Ficker, who described the child as soft-spoken, with no propensity for violence. “He’s skinny and meek. In his words, he was playing.”

The suspension came in a week when the nation was reeling from the massacre that claimed the lives of 20 children and six staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. — and left elected leaders, educators and parents debating how best to keep schools safe.

But it also comes as leaders in Maryland and a growing number of states are working to reduce out-of-school suspensions, which have increased greatly in the past several decades and are linked in studies to lower achievement and students dropping out of school.

Ficker attributed some of the reaction by school officials to the widespread alarm that followed the Newtown shootings. But he contended that the school system’s portrayal of the episode could be damaging to the boy. The Washington Post generally does not identify juveniles accused of crimes or other wrongdoing.

“They took the worst possible interpretation of this little child’s actions, and five years from now, if he gets into a tussle, they’re going to look back and say, ‘This is one bad little kid,’ ” Ficker said.

Montgomery schools spokesman Dana Tofig said he could not discuss individual students for privacy reasons. But in a written statement, Tofig said the suspension “was not a kneejerk reaction to a single incident.”

In disciplining young students, Tofig added: “We always make sure there is clear conversation with the student and parents about any behaviors that have to change and what the consequences are if that behavior doesn’t change.”

School officials recognize that “suspending a student is a serious matter, and that is especially true of a student who is in our early grades,” Tofig said, adding that school officials must deal with behavior that affects a school’s sense of safety and security.

Across the Washington region, school systems have suspended thousands of students in the early grades, according to a 2012 Washington Post analysis that showed kindergartners and first-graders had been ousted for disciplinary offenses in nearly every local school system.

In Silver Spring, the 6-year-old’s parents received a Dec. 20 letter from Renee Garraway, an assistant principal at Roscoe Nix Elementary School, saying that their son “threatened to shoot a student” and that he had been spoken to earlier about similar behavior.

Responding to questions from the family’s attorney, school officials later offered more detail, responding in a letter that an assistant principal had warned one parent that the child’s behavior could lead to a suspension. At school, a counselor “had an extended conversation” with the child to emphasize “the inappropriateness of using objects to make shooting gestures,” and an assistant principal had talked to the boy about the “seriousness” of the issue, the letter said.

“Yet, after the meeting with the counselor and assistant principal, [the boy] chose to point his finger at a female classmate and say ‘Pow,’ ” wrote Judith S. Bresler, the school system’s attorney.

The boy attended school Wednesday, and school officials are considering the appeal, according to the family’s attorney.

The suspension comes as the Maryland State Board of Education is preparing for a final vote in the coming weeks on proposed regulations that would transform the use of out-of-school suspension for minor offenses. The new regulations ban zero-tolerance approaches and require school systems to adopt a rehabilitative philosophy toward discipline, with the goal of limiting suspensions and teaching positive behavior.

Steve Benson - Gun Grabber

Gun Grabbing Gabrielle Giffords

Recovering Giffords takes on new fight

By Shaun McKinnon The Republic | azcentral.com

Wed Jan 9, 2013 12:56 AM

Two years after being shot in the head, former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona still struggles to speak, even as she and her husband, Mark Kelly, add their voices to one of the more lopsided debates in American politics, pledging to take on the influential gun lobby.

On Tuesday, the second anniversary of the mass shooting outside Tucson that killed six and wounded 13, Giffords and Kelly offered a new glimpse into her steady but clearly frustrating recovery.

In an interview with ABC News, Giffords struggled at times to express herself, acknowledging that her ability to speak couldn’t yet keep up with her thoughts.

“Slowly, so slowly,” she said of her progress. She nodded eagerly when Kelly or Diane Sawyer, the ABC anchorwoman, helped her complete a sentence or an idea. Her one-word answer to a question about gun violence — “Enough” — lit up news accounts and social media in advance of the interview.

Giffords and Kelly, a former space-shuttle commander, used the ABC interview and a newspaper column to launch Americans for Responsible Solutions, a political-action committee that the couple said will support elected officials who want to pursue gun-control measures.

“Until now, the gun lobby’s political contributions, advertising and lobbying have dwarfed spending from anti-gun-violence groups. No longer,” Giffords and Kelly wrote in a column published in USA Today and The Arizona Republic on the second anniversary of the Jan. 8, 2011, shooting.

Speaking with Sawyer, Giffords and Kelly said they were moved to act after the December attack that killed 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. The couple met with victims’ families last week.

“When it can happen to children in a classroom, it’s time to say — ” Sawyer prompted.

“Enough,” Giffords said.

Sawyer asked Giffords about comments in an earlier interview that she wasn’t angry about what had happened to her. Do you still feel that way, Sawyer wanted to know.

“No,” Giffords said. She does get angry now. “Complicated.”

Giffords was shot in the head during the attack at a constituent event outside a grocery store near Tucson. The gunman, Jared Loughner, was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic and was sentenced in November to seven life terms in prison.

Kelly used Loughner’s sentencing to criticize elected officials for ignoring gun violence. He issued a stronger statement after the Newtown attack and delivered the bluntest assessment yet in the newspaper column Tuesday, accusing Congress of failing to act even after one of their own was shot.

“Special interests purporting to represent gun owners but really advancing the interests of an ideological fringe have used big money and influence to cow Congress into submission,” the couple wrote.

The political-action committee is intended to help balance the power and money wielded by gun-rights organizations, such as the National Rifle Association. Gun-rights groups have in recent years outspent gun-control advocates by as much as 10-to-1, according to an analysis by the non-profit Center for Responsive Politics.

One of the nation’s most prominent gun-control organizations commended Giffords and Kelly in a statement Tuesday.

“Gabby and Mark have shown incredible courage and commitment since that tragic day in Tucson two years ago,” said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “They have increased their effort to ending senseless gun violence.”

The NRA and other gun-rights groups have said they will not back away from their position that attempting to control guns violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Some of Giffords’ former House colleagues remain opposed to sweeping gun legislation.

“We need to look at the cause of the problem,” said Apryl Marie Fogel, a spokeswoman for Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz. Even with gun control, “people with untreated mental illness would be committing the same types of crimes but with other weapons.”

Video from the interview showed Giffords walking alongside Kelly and a service dog named Nelson. They said Giffords has been able to ride a horse and could soon reclaim one of her favorite activities, riding a bicycle.

Giffords told Sawyer she works daily with “physical therapy, yoga, speech therapy.”

“Gabby works very hard in her rehab,” Kelly told Sawyer. “Now we intend to work very hard on this new project.”

Republic reporter Rebekah L. Sanders contributed to this story.

More on Gun Grabbing Gabrielle Giffords

Gabrielle Giffords takes aim at the NRA

For a woman who has difficulty speaking, Gabby Giffords came through loud and clear on Tuesday, calling for a national conversation about gun violence and taking direct aim at the National Rifle Association.

All of a sudden there is hope that something substantive might actually be possible in the wake of Newtown and Aurora and Tucson and too many other places where hideous attacks have gone unanswered by the people who claim to lead us.

Now there is Giffords, finding her voice.

“Special interests purporting to represent gun owners but really advancing the interest of an ideological fringe have used big money and influence to cow Congress into submission,” she and husband Mark Kelly wrote Tuesday, on the second anniversary of the Tucson massacre. “Rather than working to find the balance between our rights and the regulation of a dangerous product, these groups have cast simple protections for our communities as existential threats to individual liberties. Rather than conducting a dialogue, they threaten those who divert from their orthodoxy with political extinction.”

After Columbine, there were calls to plug the gun-show loophole that allows anybody – nut or not — to buy a gun from a private source, no questions asked. But in Congress, cue the crickets.

After Virginia Tech, there was a movement to flag would-be gun buyers with documented mental problems. But it never led to more rigorous background checks.

After Tucson, there was all-too-brief talk about outlawing high-capacity magazines. Since then we’ve seen Aurora and now Newtown, where extended magazines contributed to extended, heart wrenching carnage.

So what does the NRA suggest? Posting armed volunteers at the schools.

Not good enough, Mr. LaPierre. Not this time.

We need to have a calm, considered conversation in this country, about guns and about mental illness and about what we can do to at least try to prevent another massacre. (And yes, I’m aware that nuts can resort to putting bombs in their underwear and in their fertilizer. But I refuse to accept that as an excuse to do nothing.)

Rick Stein of Scottsdale, a longtime NRA member, says a ban on guns that resemble military assault weapons would be nothing more than feel-good legislation. “What we oppose,” he told me on Tuesday, “is any sort of effort to call the gun the problem.”

Stein believes the answer lies in better reporting of those with mental illness and in holding parents and others criminally liable when they know someone is a danger yet do nothing to prevent that person from getting a gun.

Stein makes an important point. The problem is guns in the hands of the wrong people.

But Sam Polito of Tucson, makes an important point as well. He, too, is a longtime NRA member, one who advocates plugging the gun-show loophole and banning extended magazines such as the 33-round affair that Jared Loughner used to shoot Giffords and 18 other people.

“If he had had a ten-round clip or an eight-round clip for that type of pistol,” Polito said, “he wouldn’t have harmed so many people because when he went to change magazines, you will recall they took him down.”

And saved lives.

Surely we can agree that we need to toughen laws that allow the mentally ill to legally obtain weapons – and even to get them back after the police confiscate them, as Kristi Stadler’s story on Sunday so sadly illustrated.

Surely, we can agree to have a rational conversation about what might work. Unfortunately, it’s a conversation the NRA and the politicians who reside in its hip pocket seem determined to thwart. Instead, they whip up citizens to believe the government is coming after grandpa’s hunting rifle.

But now comes Giffords, a gun owner and longtime Second Amendment supporter who seems determined not the let the conversation fade away. Not this time. Not when an entire class of first graders lies dead in their graves.

Giffords and Kelly have formed Americans for Responsible Solutions, a political-action committed aimed at balancing out the money that allows the NRA to control politics in this country.

“We can’t just hope that the last shooting tragedy will prevent the next,” they wrote. “Achieving reforms to reduce gun violence and prevent mass shootings will mean matching gun lobbyists in their reach and resources.”

It’s an ambitious plan, trying to break the hold of the NRA and inject some sanity into our gun laws. Others have tried and failed. An empty first-grade classroom demands that we try again.

It seems somehow fitting, almost ordained, that Giffords would lead the way.

Who better, after all, to pull off a miracle than the woman who is a miracle?

A rant from gun grabber EJ Montini

Posted on January 7, 2013 4:03 pm by EJ Montini

The only gun reform that will work

Gov. Jan Brewer says that she is willing to consider some form of legislation aimed at curtailing gun violence. Good for her.

The same is true of the federal government.

There no doubt will be a series of suggestions, but there is only one type of gun reform that has a chance to work.

Just one.

It is this: Every gun sale, EVERY ONE, whether from a dealer or from a private owner, must include a background check.

That’s it.

There are other areas of reform that will help in small ways (officers in schools, better mental health screening) but without requiring a background check for every transaction all of those reforms are more about what feels good rather than what actually DOES good.

It is estimated that roughly 40 percent of firearm purchases are made between two private individuals, not licensed gun dealers.

If that is allowed to continue, there is no reasonable way to prevent a mentally ill person from acquiring a weapon.

Or a criminal. Or a terrorist. Or a kid. Or anyone else.

We can close the so-called gun show loophole, which currently allows individuals at gun shows to purchase weapons without background checks when buying from private individuals.

But that wouldn’t prevent people from answering gun-sale ads online or purchasing weapons any number of other ways.

We need a universal background check for every sale.

Would requiring a background check for every single gun sale be a burden for private sellers and private purchasers?

Yes.

Would it prevent people from selling or buying weapons?

No.

A system could be worked out.

Would requiring background checks for every sale prevent all potentially dangerous people from getting weapons?

No.

There will always be those who break the law.

But that is true of every law.

A background check for every sale will make it more difficult for the wrong people to acquire weapons.

That’s the best we can hope for.

It’s the only strategy that has a chance to do good rather than simple make us feel good.

Although, honestly, would any of us feel good about a series of gun violence “reforms” that would still allow 40 percent of weapons sales to go on completely unregulated?

Obama wants to take our guns

White House tries to keep momentum on gun control

Associated Press Tue Jan 8, 2013 5:04 PM

WASHINGTON — Less than a month after a horrific elementary school shooting, the White House is fighting to keep the momentum for new gun legislation amid signs it’s losing ground in Congress to other pressing issues.

Vice President Joe Biden has invited the National Rifle Association and other gun-owner groups for talks at the White House on Thursday. On Wednesday, the vice president will meet with victims’ organizations and representatives from the video game and entertainment industries. The administration’s goal is to forge consensus over proposals to curb gun violence.

President Barack Obama wants Biden to report back to him with policy proposals by the end of January. Obama has vowed to move swiftly on the recommendations, a package expected to include both legislative proposals and executive action.

“He is mindful of the need to act,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said on Tuesday.

But as the shock and sorrow over the Newtown, Conn., shooting fades, the tough fight facing the White House and gun-control backers is growing clearer. Gun-rights advocates, including the powerful NRA, are digging in against tighter legislation, conservative groups are launching pro-gun initiatives and the Senate’s top Republican has warned it could be spring before Capitol Hill begins considering any gun legislation.

“The biggest problem we have at the moment is spending and debt,” Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said on Sunday. “That’s going to dominate the Congress between now and the end of March. None of these issues will have the kind of priority as spending and debt over the next two or three months.”

Tuesday marked the second anniversary of the Tucson, Ariz., attack that killed six people and critically injured former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Following that shooting, Obama called for a national dialogue on gun violence. But his words were followed by little action.

Giffords took a prominent role in the gun debate on Tuesday’s anniversary. She and husband Mark Kelly, a former astronaut, wrote in an op-ed published in USA Today that their Americans for Responsible Solutions initiative would help raise money to support greater gun control efforts “to balance the influence of the gun lobby.” Kelly has indicated that he and Giffords want to become a prominent voice for gun control and hope to start a national conversation about gun violence.

There was also little national progress on curbing gun bloodshed following shootings at an Aurora, Colo., movie theater, a Texas Army base or a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, all of which occurred during Obama’s first term.

Still, the killing of 6- and 7-year-olds at Newtown’s Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14 did appear to stir a deeper reaction from the White House and Capitol Hill. Obama pushed gun control to the top of his domestic agenda for the first time and pledged to put the full weight of his presidency behind the issue. And some Republican and conservative lawmakers with strong gun rights records also took the extraordinary step of calling for a discussion on new measures.

But other gun-rights advocates have shown less flexibility. The NRA has rejected stricter gun legislation and suggested instead that the government put armed guards in every school in America as a way to curb violence. A coalition of conservative groups is also organizing a “gun appreciation day” later this month, to coincide with Obama’s inauguration.

The president hopes to announce his administration’s next steps to tackle gun violence shortly after he is sworn in for a second term on Jan. 21.

Obama wants Congress to reinstate a ban on military-style assault weapons, close loopholes that allow gun buyers to skirt background checks and restrict high-capacity magazines. Other recommendations to the Biden group include making gun trafficking a felony, getting the Justice Department to prosecute people caught lying on gun background-check forms and ordering federal agencies to send data to the National Gun Background Check Database.

Some of those steps could be taken through executive action, without the approval of Congress. White House officials say Obama will not finalize any actions until receiving Biden’s recommendations.

Gun-rights lawmakers and outside groups have also insisted that any policy response to the Newtown shooting also include an examination of mental health policies and the impact of violent movies and video games. To those people, the White House has pledged a comprehensive response.

“It is not a problem that can be solved by any specific action or single action that the government might take,” Carney said. “It’s a problem that encompasses issues of mental health, of education, as well as access to guns.”

In addition to Biden’s meetings this week, Education Secretary Arne Duncan will meet with parent and teacher groups, while Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius will meet with mental health and disability advocates.

The White House said other meetings are also scheduled with community organizations, business owners and religious leaders.

———

Associated Press writer Philip Elliott contributed to this report.

———

Follow Julie Pace at http://twitter.com/jpaceDC.

FBI changes focus of firearms training

Source

FBI changes focus of firearms training

By Kevin Johnson USA Today Tue Jan 8, 2013 9:06 PM

QUANTICO, Va. -- The FBI has broken with its long-standing firearms training regimen, putting a new emphasis on close-quarters combat to reflect the overwhelming number of shootings in which suspects are confronting officers at point-blank range.

New training protocols were formally implemented last January after a review of nearly 200 shootings involving FBI agents during a 17-year period. The analysis found that 75 percent of the incidents involved suspects who were within 3 yards of agents when shots were exchanged.

The move represents a dramatic shift for the agency, which for more than three decades has relied on long-range marksmanship training. Apart from the new shooting regimen, agents are also being exposed to technology borrowed from Hollywood.

The technology helps agents apply skills acquired on the shooting range to virtual scenarios involving the pursuit of armed suspects in schools, office buildings, apartment complexes and other potential targets.

The virtual simulation technology, developed by Georgia-based Motion Reality Inc., won a 2005 Academy Award for technical achievement in character animation.

In its law enforcement adaptation, virtual scenarios are fed from computers in agents’ backpacks to viewfinders. This transforms an empty room into virtual worlds where agents are pitted against animated armed suspects — many of them in close-range encounters.

John Wilson, chief of the FBI’s virtual simulation program, says the system is also capable of “negatively rewarding” trainees’ bad decisions by transmitting jolts to their bodies that simulate gunshots.

FBI training instructor Larry “Pogo” Akin, who helps supervise trainees on the live-shooting range, said, “The thing that jumps out at you from the (shooting incident) research is that if we’re not preparing agents to get off three to four rounds at a target between zero and 3 yards, then we’re not preparing them for what is likely to happen in the real world.”

The FBI’s research predates more recent fatal shootings of local law enforcement officers, many of whom were victims of close-range ambush attacks while answering calls for service or serving warrants.

A Justice Department analysis of 63 killings of local police in 2011 found 7percent were ambush or execution-style assaults.

Bud Colonna, chief of the FBI’s Firearms Training Unit, said FBI Director Robert Mueller personally oversaw the live-firearm training changes, meeting with instructors at the bureau’s sprawling training facility here and taking part in the actual shooting drills.

Until last January, the pistol-qualification course required agents to participate in quarterly exercises in which they fired 50 rounds, more than half of them from between 15 and 25 yards. The new course involves 60 rounds, with 40 of those fired from between 3 and 7 yards.

The new live-fire training is separate from the virtual simulation unit, housed in a converted storage room in Quantico since its launch in February. But the missions of both training units underscore the new emphasis on armed confrontations in close quarters.

For now, the simulation system serves to teach agents the proper way to enter and clear rooms in search of potential suspects, confront armed assailants and determine when deadly force is appropriate.

“When you are in these exercises, people forget that these are virtual scenarios,” said Tom McLaughlin, Motion Reality’s chief executive. “The brain believes this is real. We make these to be as close as you would find in the real world.”

The system can build in blueprints and schematics of any known suspect hideout or hostage location.

Once built, the system would allow agents to train before launching operations against suspected targets. Until now, rehearsals for some major operations required the full or partial physical construction of target locations.

Last month, Wilson said, the FBI’s elite Hostage Rescue Team, began using the simulator.

“The possibilities are endless,” Wilson said.

More on gun grabbers Gabrielle Giffords and Mark Kelly

Can Giffords revive gun-control cause?

By Ronald J. Hansen The Republic | azcentral.com

Wed Jan 9, 2013 11:32 PM

Gabrielle Giffords’ decision this week to help raise money to promote gun control could test the financial limits of her appeal by directly aligning her with an issue that has floundered in politics for decades.

In the months after she was shot in the head on Jan. 8, 2011, a wave of support from sympathetic donors helped the then-congresswoman raise $1 million in campaign contributions, nearly all of which was spent that year. A vaguely centrist political-action committee that bears her name scarcely made a ripple in 2012, raising less than $30,000 since its August debut.

Now Giffords and her husband, former astronaut Mark Kelly, have created Americans for Responsible Solutions, an organization that includes a “super PAC” that can raise and spend unlimited funds for political messaging as long as it doesn’t coordinate with others.

The move underscores and tries to build on Giffords’ status as perhaps the most visible face of the gun-control movement, which has gained renewed energy since a spate of mass shootings, including the murder last month of 20 elementary-school students and seven adults in Newtown, Conn.

Patrick Egan, an assistant politics professor at New York University, said Giffords will pay at least some political price for her activism, but she is well-positioned to bring new resources to the issue, which has been dominated for years by gun-rights groups that are far more organized and well-funded.

“It’s clear she’s spending political capital. Whenever anyone does that ... inevitably it’s going to make them a less nonpartisan figure,” he said. “You’re not going to find a more sympathetic person for this cause than Gabrielle Giffords. She’s a likable person and comes across as very reasonable.”

Giffords’ reputation as a moderate from the West also can help broaden the group’s appeal, Egan said. Besides, a few wealthy benefactors can sustain it.

Underscoring that point was a report Wednesday by USA Today that a wealthy Texas lawyer who is treasurer of Americans for Responsible Solutions donated $1 million and that online donations had reached $400,000 in a single day.

“I think the PAC will do all right financially. With a super PAC, you don’t need a lot of people giving. You just need a few people giving a lot of money,” said Clyde Wilcox, a government professor at Georgetown University who researches money in politics and public opinion. “But raising money and changing the framework of the debate is a different matter. In the long run, it takes a lot of money to drive public opinion.”

Campaign-finance records show that outrage over the massacre near Tucson has had only a modest longer-term financial benefit on Giffords’ broader political aims.

The committee that funded Giffords’ campaign activities raised $1 million from the time she was shot through the end of 2011. Nearly half of it came from PACs as her supporters tried to keep her financially viable if she sought another term. Throughout the year she remained a member of Congress, her campaign committee stayed busy, spending more than $500,000 on operations. Most of that went to consultants and staff salaries.

After Giffords resigned her seat in January 2012 and with no campaign to manage, her committee transferred more than $300,000 to the national and state Democratic Party in 2012. It also refunded $130,000 to individuals and PACs last year.

In August, Giffords formed Gabby PAC, an organization to support border and veterans’ issues. Records show it raised less than $30,000 and spent less than $15,000 during the election season. Giffords’ candidate committee still has $333,000, though it’s unclear whether that money can be transferred to her newest endeavor.

Generally, the Federal Election Commission prohibits campaign funds from going to organizations that benefit the candidate or their family. Last year, the FEC permitted Texas Gov. Rick Perry to convert his presidential committee to a PAC and use any funds the donors didn’t want back. Records show Giffords created a new super PAC rather than amend her existing candidate committee.

Before Giffords, the gun-control movement’s most powerful symbol had been James Brady, President Ronald Reagan’s press secretary, who was among those wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt against Reagan.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the gun-control organization that bears his name, is linked to legislation passed in the 1990s but hasn’t managed to compete with gun-rights groups in political contributions.

The decline in the gun-control movement is reflected in the Brady Campaign’s flagging fundraising. In 2005, the organization reported $5.7 million in revenue, according to its tax records. By 2010, that had fallen to $2.9 million.

By comparison, the National Rifle Association, the most well-known gun-rights group, raised $164 million in 2005, peaked at $332 million in 2007 and dipped to $228 million in 2010. Its political arm has poured millions into congressional races each campaign cycle.

Experts say the NRA might see another surge of financial support from gun enthusiasts concerned by the renewed push for gun-control legislation.

Ray La Raja, an associate political-science professor at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst who studies interest groups, said Giffords’ creation of a super PAC rather than a push for legislation signals a long-range plan that is a departure from other gun-control efforts.

“She wants to make this a part of her legacy,” he said.

Egan said Giffords’ group may have its biggest impact by providing financial support in select races involving moderates from either party who support gun-control measures and face reprisals from gun-rights groups.

“If they can help those kinds of candidates — and it may just be a handful — survive strong electoral challenges, then I think it can declare a victory,” he said.

By early Wednesday, Giffords’ organization claimed to have nearly 24,000 supporters on Facebook.

Reach the reporter at ronald.hansen@arizonarepublic.com or 602-444-4493.

Politicians use Connecticut murders to demand more cops and gun control

Arizona lawmakers to begin session split over solutions

By Alia Beard Rau The Republic | azcentral.com Wed Jan 9, 2013 11:35 PM

Gun control and school safety are emerging as hot-button issues for Arizona’s 2013 legislative session, which begins Monday. But with conflicting proposals among even members of the same party, the conversation is likely to become divisive rather than reassuring in the wake of December’s massacre at a Connecticut elementary school.

In general, Republicans are pushing to put more armed individuals in schools, while Democrats want to toughen state gun laws. But some common ground is emerging in the area of funding school-resource officers and services for the seriously mentally ill.

There is also a move afoot at the national level, but various proposals are also swirling there. Vice President Joe Biden kicked off a week of meetings Wednesday to gather input on the best way to prevent gun violence. Among the participants was Arizonan Hildy Saizow, president of the grass-roots group Arizonans for Gun Safety.

Arizona House Minority Leader Chad Campbell on Wednesday introduced his $261 million Arizona Safer Schools, Safer Communities Plan, which includes more money for school-resource officers and school counselors, increased state funding for services for the mentally ill, and gun-law reforms.

His bill is the latest in a series of measures proposed by politicians throughout the state in response to the Connecticut shooting.

“It’s time to have an adult conversation and avoid the partisan nature this conversation has had in the past couple of years,” said Campbell, D-Phoenix.

Today, Senate Assistant Minority Leader Linda Lopez will unveil details of her proposal to reform state gun laws. Her plan includes requiring background checks for all private and gun-show gun sales and banning high-capacity ammunition magazines.

Both plans face an uphill battle in the Republican-dominated Legislature, which in recent years pushed for some of the loosest gun laws in the nation, including successfully passing a measure to allow Arizonans to carry concealed weapons without any training or a permit. The Legislature also passed bills to allow guns on college campuses and in public buildings, but Republican Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed them.

Brewer this week said she is open to addressing school-safety issues, including possibly providing more state funding for school-resource officers.

Brewer spokesman Matthew Benson said the governor will introduce a plan of her own in the coming days.

“The governor is the leader,” Benson said. “She recognizes the importance of making sure our kids have a safe place to learn. She’s been studying the issue and has held off on coming forward with a plan until she felt she was ready.”

Benson declined to comment on the specific gun proposals.

“Governor Brewer is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, but she does recognize that there is a balance with public safety,” he said. “We have safe zones like public buildings and schools where we don’t have guns.”

Republican lawmakers will also introduce plans of their own.

No related bills have been officially filed yet, but state Attorney General Tom Horne has proposed allowing each school to train and arm its principal or another staff member.

Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu has voiced support for arming school employees.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio wants to put armed volunteer Sheriff’s Office posse members near schools.

Senate President Andy Biggs said his party is still developing a plan, which will include additional safety measures for schools.

“We haven’t yet narrowed it down, but one of the things we need to really focus on is the seriously mentally ill,” he said. “It seems to me that’s where the bulk of these problems seem to be coming from.”

Biggs said state leaders need to avoid any knee-jerk response and provide a structure for leaders and the community to talk about a rational solution.

“I have a sense that everybody in the public has a different answer, everything from seize all guns and melt them down to arm everybody in schools, and everything in between,” he said. “This is a very sensitive and emotional issue. It’s going to require some deep thought and discussion and dialogue.”

Charles Heller, spokesman for the Arizona Citizens Defense League, a gun-rights group behind many of Arizona’s prior efforts to loosen gun laws, said he’s not interested in any new laws regulating guns.

“More school-resource officers are not a bad idea if they’re not stuck in a classroom teaching DARE classes. And the idea of studying security circumstances in every school is brilliant, ” he said. “But we don’t need a single new law.”

He said he supports training gun users, but not as a state law. He said background checks don’t work. He supports allowing retired law-enforcement and military personnel to work as armed security in the schools.

“What we can do is be vigilant and be armed,” he said.

Lopez said the debate over funding mental-health care should be a separate budget discussion from gun-law reform.

“You need a multipronged approach, but if we can’t get the funding in place right away, if we can’t get the services, we at least need to do something to impede access to high-capacity magazine clips and make sure we have a universal background check on every gun sale,” Lopez said.

Lopez said she’s skeptical that Republicans will support any gun reforms and dismissed their argument that they need to focus on the budget.

“That’s a cop-out,” she said. “Yes, the budget is important. But this is an important issue, as well.”

Sen. Steve Gallardo, D-Phoenix, criticized Campbell’s plan, saying the House leader is wasting an opportunity by trying to do too much. He said Democrats should focus on pushing through a few key issues that can realistically succeed. He is pushing to focus on gun safety, including requiring individuals to report any lost or stolen gun, and reinstating gun-training requirements.

“Over the last 10 years that I’ve been here, I’ve introduced a firearms bill every year, and we’ve never had a real discussion,” he said. “I think, because of Connecticut, we’re at a point where the public wants to have a real discussion. But too many ideas muddy up the water.”

BATF makes up imaginary gun laws

Arizona gun dealers challenge rifle-reporting requirement

Associated Press Wed Jan 9, 2013 11:25 AM

WASHINGTON — A lawyer for two Arizona gun dealers argued Wednesday that the Obama administration in trying to halt the flow of U.S. guns to Mexican drug gangs overstepped its legal authority when it required dealers in Southwestern border states to report when customers buy multiple high-powered rifles.

Attorney Richard Gardiner told a federal appeals court panel Wednesday that the directive requires gun dealers to create a records system and the government has no authority to do that.

At issue is a requirement that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives imposed in 2011 on gun sellers in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. The requirement, issued in what is known as a demand letter, compels those sellers to report to the ATF when anyone buys — within a five-day period — two or more semi-automatic weapons capable of accepting a detachable magazine and with a caliber greater than .22. The ATF says the requirement is needed to help stop the flow of guns to Mexican drug cartels.

Judge Harry T. Edwards, an appointee of Democratic President Jimmy Carter, asked Gardiner if the model number on a rifle would indicate whether it was covered by the ATF requirement.

“It might,” Gardiner replied, but added that the person doing the record-keeping might not be able to tell that.

“Oh, come on, that can’t be right,” Edwards said, suggesting that the person who owns the federal license to sell firearms would know.

Gardiner, who is representing J&G Sales, Ltd., of Prescott, Ariz., and Foothills Firearms, LLC, of Yuma, Ariz., said that nothing in the law allows for the presumption that the federal licensee would have that knowledge.

Judge Judith W. Rogers, an appointee of Democratic President Bill Clinton, asked if the types of rifles covered by the demand letter were unusual.

Gardiner said they were not: “There are probably 100 million of them in the United States — if not more.” Gardiner said that the definition is so broad it covers rifles for everything from target practice to hunting wolves, deer or bear, or even smaller game.

Justice Department lawyer Michael Raab said sellers should be able to determine by the manufacturer and model number if a particular rifle is covered by the requirement. He also said that sellers were told they can call the ATF’s firearm’s technology branch if they have any questions.

“We’re not aware of any requests or confusion,” he said.

The third judge on the panel, Karen LeCraft Henderson, who was appointed by Republican President George H.W. Bush, asked Raab about al measure Congress passes every year banning the ATF from establishing a national firearms registry. Raab noted that the ATF already requires sellers nationwide to report when someone purchases two or more pistols or revolvers within five days, which is not being challenged in this case. The ATF demand letter at issue here, Raab said, is “much narrower.”

The appeals court is reviewing the case as the Obama administration works to meet a self-imposed Jan. 31 deadline for proposals to curb gun violence in the wake of last month’s massacre of 20 children and six adults at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school. President Barack Obama has already called on Congress to reinstate a ban on military-style assault weapons, close loopholes that allow gun buyers to skirt background checks and restrict high-capacity magazines.

Last year, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer rejected a challenge to the ATF requirement by the two Arizona gun sellers and the firearms industry trade group, the National Shooting Sports Foundation. In court papers, the trade group argues that the agency didn’t have the legal authority to issue the requirement, and even if it did, its decision to impose it on every retailer in the border states was arbitrary and capricious.

“There is no rational law enforcement connection between the problem ATF sought to address — illegal firearms trafficking from the United States to Mexico — and merely conducting a lawful retail firearms business from premises located in one of the border states,” the trade group wrote in its appeal brief. It also said that Collyer’s review was “at best perfunctory,” and claimed that she “rubber stamped” the ATF’s policy. Collyer is an appointee of Republican President George W. Bush.

Tucson gun buyback effort raises legal questions

As the article points out ALL the guns bought back MUST be returned to their owners or resold. Well if the city of Tucson follows Arizona law, and you can't count on that. Our royal government masters frequently think they are above the law.

Source

Tucson gun buyback effort raises legal questions

Associated Press Sat Dec 29, 2012 12:43 PM

TUCSON — An effort to raise money for a gun buyback program in Tucson is prompting questions about a change in state law.

Councilman Steve Kozachik is raising $5,000 so Tucson residents may have a way to dispose of unwanted firearms while making money in the process.

“With the success other cities have had with voluntary gun buybacks, I want to test the water to see how Tucson residents respond,” Kozachik told the Arizona Daily Star. “The rules are simple: Bring in your gun on a totally voluntary basis, no questions asked, and you’ll trade it for a Safeway $50 gift card.”

But Todd Rathner, a member of the National Rifle Association’s board of directors, said any buyback program would be meaningless since the police department would be required to return or resell the weapons under a change made earlier this year to state law.

“The police would have to take the guns and run them through the national database. If they are stolen, they are returned to the owner,” he said. “If they are not stolen, (the Tucson Police Department) is mandated by state law to sell them to the public.”

The police department checks every gun it receives to ensure they aren’t stolen or have been used to commit a crime. Spokeswoman Sgt. Maria Hawke said the department holds several “destruction boards” throughout the year to dispose of things such as illicit drugs and guns and the same process would hold true for guns purchased through a buyback program.

Hawke said the department is researching how the statute applies to its practices regarding the disposal of firearms.

Rathner contends that destruction of firearms would put the department in violation of the law.

“If they are in violation of state law, we will see them in a courtroom or we will change the law and have them sanctioned financially,” he said.

City Attorney Mike Rankin believes the law is intended to apply to guns seized by police, not those firearms voluntarily surrendered by their owners.

Kozachik said he doesn’t understand why the NRA would oppose a voluntary program like the one he’s proposing.

Ken Rineer, president of Gun Owners of Arizona, said he has reservations over losing guns committed during a crime, people unwittingly selling antique firearms and the legal issues regarding who is a licensed gun dealer when large numbers of weapons are purchased.

“I don’t know if these issues can be laid to rest if they follow the no-question policy,” Rineer said. He added that buyback programs work well as symbolism but have minor impacts in the real world.

Previous articles on the government schools or public schools as our government masters like to call them.

More articles on the government schools or public schools as our government masters like to call them.