few days ago, just before the Senate headed home for a full month summer vacation, they were debating the highly important defense bill, but then the Senate majority leader, Republican Bill Frist, changed direction, abruptly cutting off the debate, rescheduling it for the fall, in order to turn attention to the interest of the national Rifle Association. Nothing seems to change, does it? Wouldn't you believe that the senators would have, as a priority, passing the defense bill, giving  support to American troops in many parts of the world? No, they thought it more imperative to shield firearms manufacturers and dealers from individuals or local governments  trying to hold them responsible in court for damage caused by the unlawful use of guns.
National security legislation must, surely, be more pressing and important. The White House sides with the gun lobby, implying that the gun manufacturers could be driven out of business by frivolous lawsuits and so they need special attention. My reading on the issue is limited so, checking with the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, I learned that for the ten years, starting in 1993, out of the estimated 10 million tort suits filed, 57 suits were filed against the gun industry. It surely doesn't appear that arms manufacturers are facing any financial difficulties or any onslaught of suits. Since the election of 2004 the gun lobby's grip on Congress has strengthened.
Remember the snipers who terrorized the Washington D.C. area in 2002, killing six victims? The surviving relatives received a settlement of just over $2 million from Bull's Eye Shooter Supply in Washington State. That gun dealer was unable to account for 200 weapons that mysteriously left the shop, including the assault rifle used by the convicted snipers. I wonder what would have been the outcome if the measure had been passed in 2002. They'd probably have received nothing.
And the defense bill must wait ...why?

Now, to those who believe that Republicans are all fair-game for criticism, let me tip my hat to three Senators who are knowledgeable, fair and really doing the right thing. John McCain, John Warner and Lindsey Graham. They are really bugging the White House in their attempt to get legislation passed that would specifically prohibit cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment of detainees in US custody. There was a memorable comment by Senator McCain when, during the floor debate, Sen. Jeff Sessions from Alabama said that there was no need for the legislation because, as he worded it, "the detainees are not prisoners of war, they are terrorists." McCain said, in response, that the debate "is not about who they are. It's about who we are." None can argue with the experience of the three Republican Senators; they've all served their country with distinction. They are generally thought of as "hawkish," but they feel this to be a major concern  that must be resolved. The Vice President met with them but was unable to convince them that the legislation would interfere with President Bush's ability to fight terrorism. McCain (five years a POW), Warner, (served in WW2 and Korea) and Graham (several years a military lawyer), were not persuaded ...and right. This country holds itself up to a higher standard ...always.