Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) called on Rupert Murdoch not to to air today’s NASCAR Sprint Cup race because the NRA is a sponsor of the event. Murphy wrote:
The horror that unfolded on December 14th at Sandy Hook Elementary School has sparked a national conversation about the adequacy of our gun laws. Considering your support of sane gun control measures and the extreme nature of the NRA, I urge you to not broadcast this race on April 13th. Inserting Fox Sports in this debate at this critical time will give credence to an extreme organization that is opposed to reasonable policies to stem gun violence.
A member of the government instructing media as to what they can and cannot air? A member of the government calling an organization designed to protect a right protected by the Constitution extreme?
That’s two rights undermined in one paragraph, Murphy.
In response, NASCAR spokesman David Higdon gave this weak response, indicating that Fox would continue with its plan to broadcast the race:
The NRA’s sponsorship of the event at Texas Motor Speedway fit within existing parameters that NASCAR affords tracks in securing partnerships. However, this situation has made it clear that we need to take a closer look at our approval process moving forward, as current circumstances need to be factored in when making decisions.
**It must be noted that this report came to my attention through Dylan Byers’s Politico piece, where he writes the following:
In Murdoch, Murphy may find a sympathetic ear: The media mogual [sic] has long been a staunch advocacte [sic] of gun control and even called for an automatic weapons ban in the wake of both the Newtown shooting and the Aurora, Colo., shooting, in July.
Called for an “automatic weapons ban?”
Can we have a ban on media types talking about that which they know nothing? Automatic weapons have been essentially illegal for civilians to own for years.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Fully automatic weapons have been illegal in the US since the 1930s.
What these idiots want to ban now are “scary looking weapons.”
Chris Murphy is a fascist. He’ll of course deny it, but the evidence is clear. He’s using his position of authority in Congress to “urge” a media outlet protected by the 1st amendment to not promote an event sponsored by an organization which exists to protect the 2nd amendment.
“That’s two rights undermined in one paragraph, Murphy.”
Spot on Anne! Spot on! We need to push back against these “blueshirt” thugs hard.
Murphy is only a reflection of CT voters. Another extreme lefty Richard Blumenthal is CT’s other federal senator.
Again, these two are the choices of CT voters. We have a looooooooooong way to go in educating voters on the importance of limited government. Getting rid of the public schools would be a serious first step. The likelihood of that happening is exactly zero.
Can’t wait to hear a liberal call for banning my ‘automatic revolver.’
Chris Murphy is mimicking the behavior of the Dictator himself.
This is going to be a looong wait till 2016 to find out if voters have had enough yet.
Schmuck with a capital Shh…
Murphy does not trust people who may be offended by an NRA sponsored NASCAR race to switch their television to another channel. No, he believes a U.S. Senator needs to pressure a private company not to air a private sporting event to protect stupid people who are too dumb to use a remote control from seeing something they shouldn’t see.
Democrats do this all the time. The Democrat mayors of Chicago and Boston don’t think people can decide for themselves whether to patronize Chick-fil-A or not. Being the petty tyrants that all liberal Democrats are, they try to abuse their position of authority and use government coercion to prevent Chick-fil-A from opening new locations in their cities or run them out of town altogether.
Democrats are just awful.
“Stupidity here makes an easy bedfellow, as always, with gun control”(Christopher Hitchens paraphrased).
What the Liberal want is an “automatic” ban on everything that is a constitutional or fundamental right or freedom.
I’m pleased to say that fully automatic weapons have NOT been illegal since the 1930s. The NFA act of 1934 merely added a number of additional Federal hoops one must jump through in order to possess a fully automatic weapon, including a sign-off by your local police chief (or equivalent) and the payment of a $200 tax stamp, and (of course) an Federal background check. My local range here in Massachusetts (gasp!) has a whole area set aside specifically for fully-automatic weapons legally owned by members.
At the time the NFA was passed, of course, $200 was an enormous sum intended to curb transfers, but not so much today when $200 is a small fraction of the price of the weapon itself–heck, a set of new iron sights is likely to cost more than the tax stamp.
Then George Bush senior passed the gun law that stated no NEW automatic weapons manufactured AFTER the date of adoption of the law could be transferred to civilians, but any automatic weapons manufactured BEFORE that date are still fair trade.
Some individual states, such as NY, have adopted state-specific bans on automatic weapons within their borders, but that’s not a nation-wide restriction, obviously.
In any case, how many crimes are committed each year by criminals armed with fully automatic weapons? Answer: ZERO. Just like assault weapons are not used in criminal acts in any statistically meaningful way, neither are fully automatic weapons, or suppressors, or grenades, or .50 caliber rifles, etc.
The only way to curb “gun’ violence is to curb the criminals who use guns to commit crimes.
Still waiting for cars to be banned because bad people kill good people with them–by the many tens of thousands every year.
The only horror at sandy hook was the incredibly bad acting. Those people can’t act their way out of a wet cardboard ammo box.