Survivors of Sutherland Springs shooting say DOJ appeal damages gun safety laws

Survivors of a mass shooting at a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas in 2017 said they were disappointed, confused and angry as the Justice Department approaches the deadline to appeal a decision holding the federal government responsible for the attack, in which resulted in the death of 26 of their fellow members of the church.

Critics of the potential DOJ appeal, including survivors, said the agency’s alleged arguments undermine the background check system, a cornerstone of President Joe Biden’s gun policy priorities. Lawyers for the government argued during the first trial that the shooter could have acquired the firearm elsewhere, even if background checks would have prevented him from legally acquiring it from a licensed gun dealer.

The government has until January 9 to file its appeal, in which it could further argue that the background check system — a key defense in the United States to ensure guns are not acquired by criminals or people with a history of violence — is broken. , which critics say is a common talking point in the gun lobby.

The disharmony between the Justice Department’s case and the Biden administration’s gun safety efforts, and the fear and pressure that a lost appeal could damage gun safety laws, are at the core of survivors’ grievances.

“If I had the opportunity to meet with President Biden, I would ask him: “Why? Why are you doing all this (gun reform) and yet fighting it here?” said Juan “Gunny” Macias, a survivor who was repeatedly shot during the attack and who considered the President’s gun safety priorities inconsistent with a potential Ministry appeal. justice.

In July 2021, the government was held liable for failing to provide records that could have prevented Devin Kelly from acquiring the weapons he used in the First Baptist Church shooting in Sutherland Springs and was ordered to pay over 80 survivors and family members of the victim $230 million . The Justice Department has received two extensions to file an appeal brief due next week and is unlikely to receive another.

Investigators work at First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas on November 6, 2017, a day after more than 20 people were killed in a mass shooting.
Investigators at First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas on November 6, 2017.Jay Jenner/Austin American Statesman via AP File

The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment, but argued in court that if the Air Force had complied with the law and the shooter had not been allowed to purchase the firearm, he could have found the gun in a different way and committed the same. actions, as follows from the record of the court session.

Although required by federal law, the Air Force did not inform the FBI of the shooter’s 2012 arrest and court martial for domestic violence. If a military unit had reported his court martial, this would have been revealed through background checks, and the former airman who committed suicide after a mass shooting would have been banned from buying or possessing firearms and ammunition.

It also failed to alert others to the pattern of behavior that led to him being banned from all US military bases. Court records show that the Air Force was aware of the death threats he made to his family, military security forces, police officers and members of his squadron.

Macias, a retired Marine, was badly wounded in the firefight. He burst into tears as he recounted dealing with common hernias, lead poisoning from bullets, and the colostomy bag he now has to wear that often leaks or falls off, making it difficult to travel in public places and ruining “simple pleasures like eating seat. ”

Juan
Juan “Gunny” Macias, a survivor, was hit multiple times during the attack.Provided by National Judicial Law

His voice betrayed a deep sense of anger as he discussed the appeal, which involves more than 80 survivors and victims’ families, and the government’s refusal to disclose the shooter’s violent past.

“The law exists for a reason,” Macias said. “And if they had followed this law, if they had done their job, this would never have happened. Twenty-six people would be alive today.”

Jamal Alsaffar, a lawyer for the victims, said the Justice Department has declined to mediate the case and is preparing for a potential appeal that he believes could undermine gun safety laws. It will also keep his clients going through traumatic shooting for many more months, he said.

“The gun lobby can’t wait for them to file this appeal because then they’ll say, ‘Look, even Biden (DOJ) says they don’t have to follow background check laws because they don’t really work. ‘” he said.

The intention of government lawyers may be to point out that the country’s gun control measures are rather limited and that there are many loopholes to exploit, said Robert Spitzer, professor of political science at the State University of New York College in New York. . Cortland, author of six books on gun policy. Still, gun rights advocates are likely to celebrate the Justice Department’s success in this case, he added.

Because “DOJ lawyers are meant to be good lawyers, not good Democrats or Republicans,” he said, they are likely trying to win at any cost without fully considering the political implications or how it will affect the victims.

“My guess is that the Justice Department is taking this position because lawyers are looking for the best legal options that will get them the result they want,” he said. “But sometimes a good legal strategy is a bad political strategy, and this could be an example of that.”

Hayley McNulty, who survived the shooting at the age of 15, seemed to think that might be the case. She was shot five times and recovered, but continues to suffer physically and emotionally after being shot. Her mother, who pushed her under the bench and tried to defend herself, was shot in the head and died inches from her during the attack.

“I was so scared and nervous that I rolled over to try to get my mother’s attention to talk to her, and she didn’t answer,” she recalled, later bursting into tears when her grandmother talked about taking her to the hospital. hospital. “And then it dawned on me that she was dead.”

Haley McNulty at her mother Tara's grave.
Haley McNulty at her mother Tara’s grave. Her mother, who pushed her under the bench and tried to defend herself, was shot in the head and died inches from her during the attack. Contributed by Hayley McNulty

McNulty argued that the Justice Department was cynically undermining background checks in order to win in court, which was inconsistent with the Biden administration’s political efforts to protect people from gun violence.

“How do they expect the citizens of the United States to abide by these laws when they see that those in charge don’t even have to listen to or abide by them?” she said. “That’s what creates chaos. That’s what creates problems like the ones we’re facing.”

Fearing what the appeal could mean for US gun laws, a coalition of 37 gun safety organizations sent Attorney General Merrick Garland a letter in October stating the Justice Department’s intention to appeal. In the letter, they state that “the federal government’s failure to take responsibility for its failure in this matter is actively undermining the very gun safety laws it is required to enforce” and “relinquishes the government’s promise to keep communities safe by preventing prohibited individuals from purchasing firearms.” weapon”.

Expanded background checks and red flag laws were the cornerstone of Biden’s landmark gun control law, which was passed this year in the wake of the Uvalde, Texas shooting that killed 19 elementary school students and two teachers.

The White House said it could not comment on the upcoming trial, but stressed that “Biden’s commitment to reducing gun violence couldn’t be clearer.”

“President Biden has championed stricter gun safety laws for decades, from helping create a gun background checks system and passing an assault weapons ban during his time in the Senate to signing the strictest gun safety law in White in 30 years. house last year. summer,” Olivia Dalton, the White House deputy press secretary, said, adding that Biden intended to “take extra steps to end gun violence in America.”

But those intentions mean little to McNulty, especially since the possibility of an appeal no longer looms so far away.

Content Source

Dallas Press News – Latest News:
Dallas Local News || Fort Worth Local News | Texas State News || Crime and Safety News || National news || Business News || Health News

Related Articles

Back to top button