No one spent much time talking about the role of the Internal Revenue Service in causing the death of seven employees at a Wakefield, Mass., software company on the day after Christmas, 2000. <\/p>\n
The defendant in the killings, Michael McDermott, 43, was convicted on seven counts of first-degree murder. <\/p>\n
McDermott did it, and he deserves the vast bulk of the blame. But prosecutors said McDermott went on his rampage because the company planned to comply — no questions asked — with an order from the Internal Revenue Service to withhold a large part of his salary to pay \u201cback taxes.\u201d <\/p>\n
Does the IRS give employers and their bookkeepers the opportunity to say \u201cNo thanks\u201d when it dragoons them into withholding so much from someone\u2019s paycheck that the victim won\u2019t be able to cover both groceries and a house payment? (In numerous cases, the IRS orders the ENTIRE paycheck seized.) No. <\/p>\n
Does the \u201cService\u201d generally go before a real court to prove its case before ordering such \u201cwage garnishments\u201d? No. <\/p>\n
Does the IRS compensate employers who are thus ordered to act as tax collectors, which means they\u2019re required to run the risk of facing the kind of fury born of impotence that was seen in Wakefield? No. Does the IRS indemnify them? Compensate the survivors of such crimes? No. <\/p>\n
But that\u2019s not all. It turns out McDermott had an additional accomplice. <\/p>\n
\u201cWhen Michael McDermott walked into the offices of an internet consulting firm and shot seven people dead, he had an accomplice — the legislature of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,\u201d writes Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America in a 2008 piece called \u201cMassachusetts Legislature: Blood on Their Hands. (http:\/\/gunowners.org\/op0109.htm<\/a>.) <\/p>\n \u201cTragically, one of the victims was a legal gun owner who was licensed to carry in next-door New Hampshire\u201d where he lived, Mr. Pratt points out. \u201cBut Massachusetts law prevented him from carrying his firearm in the state and on the job\u201d — a firearm the licensed Vietnam veteran could very well have used to cut short McDermott\u2019s deadly spree. <\/p>\n \u201cThere is no doubt that Sandy Javelle was bold,\u201d Pratt writes. \u201cWhen the shooting started, Sandy ordered his coworkers to lock the door behind him and barricade it. He then confronted McDermott and soon became the third victim. <\/p>\n \u201cHad the Citizens\u2019 Self-Defense Act sponsored by Maryland\u2019s Roscoe Bartlett been on the books, Javelle would likely have been willing to carry his gun illegally in Massachusetts. He would have been able to seek an injunction and damages in federal court against prosecution for his violation of Massachusetts\u2019 anti-self defense law,\u201d Mr. Pratt wrote, three years ago. \u201cLamentably, Javelle was more afraid of the Massachusetts cops than he was of Michael McDermott. Deadly choice.” <\/p>\n The Bartlett bill in question would have required states to honor the concealed handgun carry permits of other states, the same way they honor other states\u2019 driver\u2019s licenses. <\/p>\n Since Rep. Bartlett\u2019s bill failed to become law, the House of Representatives now tries again. <\/p>\n By a bipartisan vote of 272-154, the House on Nov. 16 passed a measure that will enable non-resident gun owners to carry a concealed firearm across state borders, ABC News reports. <\/p>\n H.R. 822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011, would allow gun owners with valid state-issued concealed firearm permits to carry concealed in other states that also allow concealed carry. (That is to say, it wouldn\u2019t apply in Illinois, the only state which won\u2019t issue a \u201cpermit\u201d for this purpose to anyone.) <\/p>\n The bill is unlikely to even be scheduled for a Senate vote by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who\u2019s only \u201cin favor of gun rights\u201d once every six years, when he returns to Nevada to run for re-election. <\/p>\n ‘381 PEOPLE KILLED’<\/p>\n The House bill is not without its problems. <\/p>\n \u201cIt forces Vermont residents (who do not need a permit to carry) to either obtain an out-of-state permit or to push their state to pass a more restrictive concealed carry law than it now enjoys,\u201d GOA points out. <\/p>\n Furthermore, \u201cBy requiring permits for reciprocity, the bill undermines efforts at the state level to pass constitutional carry (i.e., Vermont-style carry)\u201d in other states. <\/p>\n Needless to say, the usual victim disarmanent gang are going nuts, anyway. <\/p>\n \u201cThis is an atrocious idea,\u201d editorialized the Eugene, Ore. Register-Guard on Nov. 14. \u201cThis is more than an issue of states\u2019 rights. It\u2019s an issue of safety. Contrary to the gun lobby\u2019s propaganda, not all concealed carry permit holders are responsible, law-abiding citizens. Eleven police officers and at least 370 other people have been killed by concealed carry permit holders over the past four years, according to the Violence Policy Center.\u201d <\/p>\n What an interesting statistic. Of course, wrongful killings by police officers likely exceed that number, over the past four years. Does the \u201cViolence Policy Center\u201d conclude we should disarm all police? <\/p>\n But on closer examination, note the VPC doesn\u2019t even say permit holders \u201dwrongfully\u201d killed 381 people, anyway. Nor does it even say all these \u201cvictims\u201d were shot. <\/p>\n The VPC \u201cdeath count,\u201d accessible on the Internet at www.vpc.org\/ccwkillers.htm<\/a>, \u201cis so egregious,\u201d says Erich Pratt of GOA. \u201cThey count shooters without permits. They count non-gun deaths involving people with permits.\u201d <\/p>\n An outfit called PajamasMedia.com analyzed the VPC statistics back in 2009. The anti-gun group \u201cdouble counts victims to inflate their statistics,\u201d reports Bob Owens, in \u201cViolence Policy Center Makes It Up as They Go Along — Again\u201d (http:\/\/tinyurl.com\/85rn3cz<\/a>.) <\/p>\n Furthermore, the gun-grabbing outfit \u201cincludes deaths that were caused by rifles, beatings or strangulation — in other words, tabulating deaths that were clearly NOT caused by concealed handguns; and in some cases, even counts \u2018murderers\u2019 who were later cleared in court as having acted in self-defense.\u201d <\/p>\n According to the Pajamas Media analysis, less than half the deaths which were attributed to concealed carry holders by the VPC were actually \u201ccommitted by a permit holder drawing and firing his or her concealed weapon.\u201d <\/p>\n A classic case is that of Tony Villegas, a Florida man who strangled a woman in her own garage. <\/p>\n