

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
One voter told the Maine governor, who is running for US Senate, that she is wondering "why you would fight on behalf of us on the national level if you couldn't do it on the state level."
Most of the national news surrounding the Maine Democratic Senate primary has zeroed in on candidate Graham Platner's record—a tattoo he got while serving in the Marines and posts he wrote several years ago on Reddit.
But a video recording obtained by Drop Site News of a local Democratic group's Zoom meeting last week with Platner's main opponent, Gov. Janet Mills, brought to light discussions Maine voters are having not about the first-time candidate's controversies—which have done little to damage his campaign, according to numerous polls—but about the record of the governor who's run the state for the last six years.
For 30 minutes on March 19, members of the Hancock County Democrats grilled Mills about her history of vetoing significant pieces of legislation and opposing measures broadly supported by Mainers.
⚡️Leaked Video: Janet Mills Attack Ad Against Graham Platner Backfires With Maine Democrats
A Zoom recording with Gov. Janet Mills captures unfiltered voter reactions to the governor’s recent attack ad against her U.S. Senate primary opponent, Graham Platner.
Story by… pic.twitter.com/xF6bmqDsAf
— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) March 23, 2026
A former Democratic state representative, Mark Worth, asked Mills early in the question-and-answer session about her "record on tribal sovereignty, labor, and gun safety bills, such as your veto of the red flag law"—an apparent reference to Mills' opposition to the red flag law that was passed by referendum in 2025, with 62% supporting the measure to make it easier for law enforcement to take away someone's firearm if they pose a threat to themself or others.
Mills instead supported the state's "yellow flag law," which requires police to take a person into custody and obtain an assessment by a mental health professional before a gun can be taken away.
Nearly two dozen states and the District of Columbia have red flag laws, also known as extreme risk protection orders, and they are supported by 77% of Americans, including a majority of gun owners and Republicans, according to an APM Research Lab/Guns & America/Call To Mind poll from 2019.
Mills responded to the question by defending gun control legislation that has passed in Maine during her tenure—including a ban on ghost guns and expanded background checks—but did not mention the broadly popular red flag law that she opposed.
She said that she had sought to find "common ground" between gun control advocates and gun owners—even though the referendum was supported by nearly two-thirds of voters, including many gun owners—one of whom was Platner, a combat veteran.
The governor has also been criticized for vetoing a bill that would have barred the state from seizing tribal lands, and has angered the state's labor movement several times, including when she vetoed an offshore wind development bill due to her opposition to an amendment requiring collective bargaining agreements, and another measure that would have allowed farmworkers to unionize.
At the meeting this month, a voter named Diana Morenda introduced herself as a "three-time cancer veteran" and asked about two other vetoes by the governor—those of LD 765, which aimed to prohibit "unsupported price increases" of prescription drugs, and LD 1117, which would have prohibited excessive rises in the price of generic prescription drugs.
With the vetoes, Morenda told Mills, she "essentially destroyed any chance that your constituents would have had to combat excessive pricing, kind of siding with Big Pharma."
"You can understand why I... and many others in Hancock County, we might be wondering out loud why you would fight on behalf of us on the national level if you couldn't do it on the state level," said Morenda.
Mills responded similarly as she had to the earlier question, naming other moves she's taken to increase access to prescription drugs and price transparency and telling the voter, "Whoever gave you those two numbers didn't give you the rest of the bills that we did pass."
The controversies surrounding Platner's campaign came up during the meeting, with Worth telling Mills her recent attack ad against Platner was "divisive and odious," and another voter accusing the governor of "using underhanded means" against her opponent.
The ad included several women looking at posts Platner wrote in 2013 disparaging sexual assault survivors. Platner has addressed his old online comments several times, saying his views have evolved since he wrote them.
One voter disclosed that he is a friend of Platner's before asking Mills: "Do you believe in a Maine and a country where a person can be redeemed? Where they can change and become a better version of themself?"
Mills deflected the question, claiming that her concern is not "whether he's reformed or thinks better," but electability.
"The issue is who can beat Susan Collins," said Mills, referring to the state's Republican senator.
The governor has persistently claimed that she has the greatest chance of beating Collins in November, contrary to several polls.
The voter addressed those claims in his question.
"You say electability is what you're looking for here," he said. "And if you truly do believe that and you've read the polls—which I imagine you have—that isn't the case."
"This is no way for our kids to live," said one gun control advocate.
Child safety advocates renewed calls for tighter gun control measures following a Monday mass shooting at a high school hockey game in Rhode Island that left three people including the gunman dead and three others injured.
WPRI reported that the father of a North Providence High School senior shot five members of his family at a hockey game at Dennis M. Lynch Arena in Pawtucket at around 2:30 pm local time. The student's mother was killed at the rink, while his sister died after being rushed to a local hospital. Three other relatives are reportedly in critical condition at Rhode Island Hospital.
"We realized pretty quickly that it was a gunshot. It was very scary," hockey player Silas Core said during an interview with WCVB, adding that he and his teammates rushed into a locker room.
"We barricaded the locker room with our bodies. We were all pressing up against it," he said. "Everybody was, you know, worried about our parents and everybody."
Core's mother told WCVB that everything "just happened so fast."
"You don't even know. You know, you just see everybody else on the ground and you kind of get on the ground," she said. "This is really disturbing, you know? And it's the other team's senior day. Like, it was supposed to be a special day for the team."
Pawtucket Police Chief Tina Goncalves said the shooting appeared to be “a family dispute," a “tragic” but "isolated" incident.
A woman who said she was the shooter's daughter told WCVB that the man suffered from mental health problems.
"He shot my family, and he's dead now," she said.
FBI Director Kash Patel said on X that the agency "will provide state and local law enforcement any and all resources necessary and keep the public updated as we are able."
"In the meantime," he added, "please pray for the victims and their families."
Democratic Rhode Island Gov. Dan McKee said that "as governor, a parent, and a former coach, my heart breaks for the victims, families, students, and everyone impacted by the devastating shooting at Lynch Arena in Pawtucket."
McKee added that he is "praying for our communities."
Gun control advocates demanded more than the customary thoughts and prayers.
People in this country should be able to enjoy school athletics without the fear of being gunned down. When will enough be enough?
— Moms Demand Action (@momsdemandaction.org) February 16, 2026 at 2:29 PM
"As a native Rhode Islander who has played many games in that very rink, this tragedy hits especially close to home," Stop Gun Violence board chair Brian Lemek said. "That space holds memories of community, competition, and joy—and now it’s filled with pain no community should have to carry."
"The only thing young athletes should worry about is the scoreboard—not their safety," he continued. "Our kids deserve spaces that bring communities together, they deserve to be safe, and they deserve a future free from this constant fear."
"This is no way for our kids to live," Lemek added. "We need to stop this madness."
Monday's incident follows December's mass shooting at Brown University in Providence—which is less than 10 miles from Pawtucket—that left two people dead and nine others wounded.
"We can and should work together to promote responsible gun ownership and pass legislation like safe storage laws and red flag laws—widely supported measures that keep guns out of dangerous situations while respecting responsible ownership," Lemek asserted Monday.
"I’m holding the victims and their loved ones in my heart," he added, "and I’m more determined than ever to build a future where our kids are safe in the places meant for joy."
American violence in its many forms destabilized the alleged killer Rahmanullah Lakanwal.
I’ve heard very few people say it, but Spencer Ackerman recently said it best: “The most sobering fact about Wednesday’s slayings is that the alleged killer, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, was all too compatible with Western Civilization.” And we have the data to back his claims.
The early findings from investigations into the potential motives of Lakanwal, who allegedly shot two National Guardsmen last month, do not gel well with the MAGA narrative that immigrants are in some way inherently dangerous criminals. Instead, what is coming to light is an all too believable American context: US imperialism-induced trauma, lack of resources, and infrastructure to assist those in need (oh I don’t know, something like Universal Healthcare?), and most likely an all too easily accessed gun, created violent conditions. These are all quite sadly the makings of a very American event. Regardless, the Trump administration is unsurprisingly using this tragedy to justify and expedite an anti-immigrant agenda they already had in motion. Everything they have to say on the matter is pure fiction. It might be tiresome, but we need to continue providing the actual evidence contrary to MAGA’s lies.
I spent the better part of 2025 engaged in a research project with the Afghan community in the state of Vermont. I conducted a large survey, a series of interviews, and a national data analysis aimed at assessing the socioeconomic well-being of Afghans in the state, four years after the US ended its 20-year occupation in Afghanistan, which led to the subsequent fall of Kabul and the largest airlift in US history. Over 200,000 Afghans most closely allied with US operations have since been resettled in communities around the US, including Vermont.
Over the course of 2025, I spent a lot of time working side by side with Afghans, in Afghan homes, in conversations around coffee tables, and at community gathering spaces, getting to know Afghan Vermonters. One can of course never generalize about the "nature" of an entire population; however, in my experience, Afghans were overwhelmingly kind, welcoming, generous, and at the risk of repeating a common trope associated with liberal-American ideology, incredibly hardworking. It feels ridiculous to even have to type these words, but at no point did I feel in danger, like I was amid "criminals," or any other ludicrous claims the Trump administration and their ilk try to place on entire groups of people, just because they have arrived from other countries. The hundreds of Afghans I engaged with always met me with a smile, offered me phenomenal tea and snacks, and were generous with their time, candidly sharing their experiences in the US.
Western civilization created the conditions in which Lakanwal suffered severe mental health issues, and once he was brought to the US, created the conditions in which Lakanwal had likely limited healthcare supports, reportedly dire economic struggles, and it is safe to assume all too easy access to a gun.
Certain uninformed parties might say, “They played you like a fool, those absolute criminals!” So, anecdotal evidence aside, and the fact that I lived to tell the tale of my experiences with these supposed criminals, we also have the data. And the data is vast.
As countless data-rich research projects, reports, policy analyses, and peer-reviewed journal article after peer-reviewed journal article show, immigrants in the US, across the board, unequivocally, are far less likely to commit a crime in the US than US-born persons. For an extensive but non-exhaustive list that just scratches the surface, see this resource I put together during the 2024 election cycle. What this data overwhelmingly show, if we can generalize anything about an entire subset of people like “immigrants” or “Afghans,” is that immigrants in America are overwhelmingly peaceful and law-abiding.
For the sake of countering one more MAGA lie that says immigrants and the services they receive are already too costly to the US taxpayer, let me point to the other endless data sets that show (time and time again) that immigrants from all backgrounds, from undocumented, to refugee, to O-1 visa holder alike, provide far more economic benefits to the US than they receive in governmental aid. Immigrants of all backgrounds, examined from many angles and subsets, pay far more into the US tax system than they receive in governmental expenditures and likewise contribute billions of dollars in spending and labor power into the US economy. Need we keep reminding ourselves that this country, after all, was built by immigrants? Correcting the past tense, this country will forever rely on immigrants in ways mainstream politicians seem to never admit.
The data I analyzed in the above-mentioned research is one more set proving this. Through a nationwide analysis of American Community Surveys, we showed that the recently resettled Afghan population in the United States (2021 and on) is already contributing far more in taxes than the costs associated with their resettlement and other support services (including SNAP, housing vouchers, Medicaid, and so on), a ratio that steadily improves each year of US residence per average Afghan household. What’s more is that Afghan spending power in the US (money left to spend after taxes) reached about $2 billion by 2023 (latest available data).
And the findings of our national data make sense given the results of the community survey we also conducted of a large portion of Afghan Vermonters. We found that Afghans in Vermont are highly employed: 73.6% of adult Afghans are currently employed, compared with the total Vermont employment rate of 65.3%. Because of systemic issues that must be addressed in Vermont and across the country, those employed Afghans tend to be paid far less than US-born workers. But even given this systemic wage discrimination, taxes paid through Afghan incomes provide a net gain to the US tax system, and their remaining earnings provide priceless benefits to their local, state, and national economies. I firmly believe that all humans, regardless of any economic benefit they may provide, deserve equal treatment, rights, and dignity, including freedom of movement to improve their lives, wherever that may be. However, for those who need the economics of it all, the truth is clear and undeniable.
In our report, I discuss the undeniable benefit Afghans have provided for Vermont and the country, explore the ways in which Afghans and New Americans still struggle in our communities, e.g. inherently lower wages than US-born people, and I provide a suggested list of policy solutions to improve Afghan and New American livelihoods here, which includes expanding free industry-specific ESL programs; streamlined credential evaluation and licensing for foreign-trained professionals; expanded access to higher education for English Language Learners; investment in affordable and flexible childcare; improved public transportation; and policy solutions at the national level that promote more streamlined pathways to Lawful Permanent Resident status for Afghans in coordination with family reunification efforts, which includes increased funding for legal aid services, to name a few.
Of course, rather than supporting immigrant communities that are so deeply important to the country, President Donald Trump is taking the opportunity to further attack them for political gain. He is twisting the contexts and conditions of last month’s violence to push his far-right agenda, cutting off services that immigrants depend on, and imposing more draconian immigration bans that smack of the purest white nationalism.
Despite these challenges, refugees and immigrants of all statuses continue to contribute significantly to US society and the economy. As the endless research continues to show, refugees and immigrants of all backgrounds are not dangerous for the country and in fact in many ways keep it running.
So, if new Americans are not the problem as the Trump administration would have us believe, then what is? We come back to Ackerman: American Imperial aggression and a violent socioeconomic landscape is the problem. American violence in its many forms destabilized Lakanwal.
The US government is now treating all Afghans like criminals, when those same individuals in one way or another, for 20 years, aided the US in Afghanistan.
What’s become clear in the early days since this tragedy is that Lakanwal struggled with mental health issues that are unsurprising given what he has gone through. If Ackerman’s math is correct, Lakanwal was recruited into one of the CIA’s now infamous Zero Unit “death squads” at the age of 15. A good portion of Lakanwal’s formative years were spent as a child soldier employed by one of the deadliest armed forces in the world, the United States, in which he likely experienced and committed violence few of us could imagine, all at the command and employ of the US government.
“When he saw blood, bodies, and the wounded, he could not tolerate it, and it put a lot of pressure on his mind,” a friend of Lakanwal told the New York Times.
As Ackerman and others are astute to point out, the long-lasting legacy of imperialism has been known to come home in the form of violence.
And whatever affordable mental health support systems Lakanwal may have had in the US, which could have perhaps mitigated the effects of his trauma, were likely minimal.
Here we find American violence in the form of neoliberal policy. Once Lakanwal was resettled in the US, he was thrust into a harsh socioeconomic climate, where many manage to get by as the above data show, but when those with physical or mental illness falter, there are few services available to support them, particularly as the Trump administration has attempted to slash as much as possible, e.g. SNAP and healthcare subsidies. These forms of violence affect everyone including immigrants and are increasingly American.
American violence rears its head again in its abandonment of those in need.
American violence also rears itself in its refusal to regulate gun control in any meaningful way. The US accounts for 76% of public mass shooting incidents around the world, the vast majority conducted by US citizens. Public shootings are an American problem, not an immigrant or Afghan problem.
Western civilization created the conditions in which Lakanwal suffered severe mental health issues, and once he was brought to the US, created the conditions in which Lakanwal had likely limited healthcare supports, reportedly dire economic struggles, and it is safe to assume all too easy access to a gun.
I firmly believe that all persons should be treated with dignity, equality, and afforded the same rights as anyone else, no matter where they come from. There is, however, a deep and undeniable irony in all this that brings to light the true inhumanity of US immigration and domestic policy. That irony rests on the fact that the US government is now treating all Afghans like criminals, when those same individuals in one way or another, for 20 years, aided the US in Afghanistan (no matter how we feel about the occupation) and are still at great risk if they are sent back. They risk death in the context of a violence made possible by the outcomes of imperial violence turned abandonment. They should have been evacuated. They should be allowed to come to the US. They should be given the resources they need to thrive here. Instead, the Trump administration is using them as a scapegoat to churn forth with its nativist, fascist immigration agenda, while it cuts resources for all "old" and "new" Americans alike. The double-edged sword of the Trump administration’s violent opportunism knows no bounds.
If Western civilization is one that commits acts of violence around the world. If Western civilization is one that places profit and corporate lobbyists over the needs of its population. If Western civilization, in the American context, continues to refuse to regulate access to guns in any meaningful way. Then November 26's shooting was an American problem, not an immigrant problem.
What has shaped how most Americans see guns is less the gun lobby’s money than the ideology that it’s been spreading for years.
“Not again,” countless Americans have said for decades after another mass shooting like the one on Wednesday, August 27 at a mass in church at a Catholic school in Minneapolis. Some experts say we should focus more on the “red flags” that potential shooters may give off so authorities could have a better chance of stopping them. Others say we need to fortify schools and deploy more armed guards to deter them.
Hardly anyone has said, however, what would work, and has been proven to reduce gun violence in every other advanced nation. To license new gun buyers and require both criminal and mental health background checks, and a permit each time they want to purchase either a semiautomatic weapon or handgun. A handful of states like New Jersey have required all these measures for decades every time to buy a handgun, and no court has ruled these regulations violate the Second Amendment.
Back in 1959, the organization that became Gallup reported 75% of Americans would not oppose requiring a permit to buy a gun. Today, however, few Americans including even gun reform advocates talk about gun permits. The reason is that Americans on both sides of our ongoing debate over guns have been gaslit and don’t know it.
There are few more powerful emotions to move groups of people at once like fear. This is where the movement for gun rights and the movement “to make America great again” meet.
The National Rifle Association (NRA), whose leadership has since been ousted over their embezzlements, and the gun industry, represented by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, have both wielded tens of millions of dollars in election campaigns. But their donations explain only part of their influence. What has shaped how most Americans see guns is less their money than the ideology that they’ve been spreading for years.
“They call it the slippery slope, and all of a sudden everything gets taken away,” US President Donald Trump told reporters during his first term after a weekend of deadly shootings in a Walmart parking lot in El Paso and on a bar-lined street in Dayton. He said it after a phone conversation with the NRA’s now-disgraced leader Wayne LaPierre. The phrase is based on the idea that gun control is just a step or two away from gun confiscation and then tyranny.
This view is taken like gospel truth among the ranks and leadership of today’s Republican Party, even though it’s a myth. Gun control has never led to gun confiscation. Communist nations like the Soviet Union and Cuba declared firearms illegal under the threat of imprisonment to compel people to turn them in. Nazi Germany seized few usable firearms from Jews, as one NRA-funded author, Stephen P. Halbrook, admitted, but only in the back pages of his book, Gun Control in the Third Reich, published by a small California think tank. Democratic countries like the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand have used buyback campaigns to voluntarily compel people to turn in semiautomatic weapons.
Democratic Party leaders and gun reform advocates are partly to blame. Despite their good intentions, they both chose to play it safe, while sidestepping the disinformation long peddled by the gun lobby. Reformers built the strongest movement for “gun sense” that this nation had ever seen after the Parkland high school shooting, which incorporated surviving students and parents from prior school shootings in Newtown and Columbine. But what its advocates failed to realize is that the movement for gun rights was even stronger.
Money on its own rarely moves people for very long. But what people may believe tends to resonate more, whether even one word of it is true. There are few more powerful emotions to move groups of people at once like fear. This is where the movement for gun rights and the movement “to make America great again” meet.
Donald Trump has flip-flopped over guns throughout his life, the last time in 2019 over better background checks after the El Paso and Dayton shootings. One doesn’t have to look back very far to find posters in online gun forums doubting his loyalty. But he seems to have proven himself to most pro-gun people today.
President Trump along with allies and followers continue to claim that he is the only one keeping tyranny in America at bay. Even as his followers, including paramilitaries like the Proud Boys and the National Front and the expanding ranks of federal immigration enforcement agents, gradually impose an armed presence loyal to the president across the land.
This is the kind of outcome that many gun rights activists have long said they feared. Considering how their alleged evidence has always been nothing more than a fairy tale may help explain why President Trump and his armed allies and troops are the ones imposing what looks like an emerging tyranny today, while our daily violence from guns goes on.
"Trump will send the military into DC to pick up litter and arrest homeless people, but won't do a damn thing to end the gun violence epidemic killing our kids," said one healthcare advocate.
Another horrific mass shooting that left multiple children dead and injured has once again ignited a wave of fury at Republican lawmakers who refuse to take action to stop gun violence.
Two children—ages 8 and 10—were killed when a shooter fired through the windows of a church at the Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis on Wednesday morning. Another 17 people, including 14 more children, were also injured in the attack before the shooter died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
Minneapolis police say the shooter carried out the attack, which is now being investigated as an act of domestic terrorism, using three weapons: a rifle, a shotgun, and a pistol.
According to the Gun Violence Archive, not even eight months into 2025, there have already been 286 mass shootings—defined as cases in which four or more people are shot or killed—in the United States just this year, averaging more than one per day.
Gun violence is the number-one killer of children in the US, causing more deaths each year than car accidents, poisonings, and cancer. The victims of the shooting in Minneapolis join the more than 800 children killed and more than 2,200 injured by firearms this year.
Like dozens of mass shootings before it, Wednesday's deadly attack has stoked calls in Minnesota and around the country from Democratic lawmakers and gun control advocates for stricter gun laws, which have been repeatedly shot down by Republicans in Congress.
"We need better laws on the books nationally," said Minnesota's Democratic senator, Amy Klobuchar. "When you have so much access to guns right now and so many guns out there on the streets, you're going to continue to see these kinds of mass shootings."
"Don't just say this is about thoughts and prayers right now," said Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey. "These kids were literally praying. It was the first week of school. They were in a church."
"They should be able to go to school or church in peace without the fear or risk of violence, and their parents should have the same kind of assurance," Frey said. "These are the sort of basic assurances that every family should have every step of the day, regardless of where they are in our country."
Congress has not passed a significant piece of gun legislation since 2022, when it passed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in the wake of the horrific school shooting in Uvalde, Texas.
That law, which was supported by just 15 Republicans, introduced some modest reforms—including extended background checks for firearm purchasers under 21, funding for state red flag laws, and the closure of gun purchasing loopholes.
However, then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) only agreed to negotiate the bill if Democrats abandoned more ambitious reforms, such as bans on high-capacity magazines and universal background checks.
Since its passage, even this watered-down piece of legislation has been fought aggressively by Republican lawmakers backed by the gun industry's lobbying arm, the National Rifle Association, who have attempted to have it repealed.
Earlier this year, President Donald Trump ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to present an action plan to reverse any law that the Department of Justice determines has "impinged on the Second Amendment rights of our citizens."
Through executive orders, Trump has rolled back efforts under the Biden administration to regulate ghost guns and enhance background checks.
The administration has also choked off more than $800 million in grants to local gun violence prevention groups and pushed for "concealed carry reciprocity" legislation, which would require all states to honor concealed carry permits issued by other states.
Instead of stricter gun control measures, Trump has personally advocated for schools to arm teachers and focus on improving mental healthcare—even as he's rolled back rules ensuring Americans have access to that care.
"Until we have more elected officials willing to place gun safety over allegiance to the gun lobby, more and more families will face unbearable suffering from random acts of violence," said Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) on Wednesday. "Congress could—and should—pass stricter gun safety laws, but continues to cave to the gun lobby."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) added: "The United States continues to be the only country where school shootings are a regular occurrence. We must stop this epidemic of gun violence and finally put the lives of our kids first."
Other advocates noted the contrast between Trump's response to the imaginary "crime wave" in Washington, DC, where he has initiated a militarized takeover, and his lack of interest in fighting America's endless wave of gun violence.
"Guns are the leading cause of death for kids in the US," said Melanie D'Arrigo, the executive director of the Campaign for New York Health. "Trump will send the military into DC to pick up litter and arrest homeless people, but won't do a damn thing to end the gun violence epidemic killing our kids."
Charles Idelson, a former communications director for National Nurses United, said: "If Trump wants to pretend he is 'fighting crimes,' stop protecting the pro-gun violence cabal."
"These laws change the nature of self-defense, turning everyday disputes into deadly confrontations," the report, compiled by Everytown for Gun Safety, says.
A new report has found that "Stand Your Ground" laws have led to an increased rate of gun homicides in the United States.
These laws allow anyone who believes they are facing the threat of death or bodily harm to use deadly force without the requirement to first retreat to safety. But according to a report released Monday by the gun control advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety, they have become a "license to kill."
Data compiled by the group shows that these laws have led to around 700 additional gun deaths each year, increasing the number of gun deaths nationally by 8% to 11%. That estimate came from a 2022 study published by the medical journal JAMA Network Open, which looked at data from 1999 to 2017.
Following aggressive lobbying by the National Rifle Association and the firearms industry, the first Stand Your Ground laws were introduced in Florida in 2005. Since then, 29 states have adopted them.
Over that time, those states have seen especially high increases in violence, with Alabama, Missouri, and Florida all having 30% or greater increases to their homicide rates.
Everytown's report details one particularly harrowing story from Florida in which Stand Your Ground laws contributed to the shooting of two children:
In October 2022, William Hale and Frank Allison drove alongside each other on US Highway 1 in Hialeah, Florida. A traffic dispute grew more dangerous as both men began driving erratically. When Hale threw a water bottle at the other car, Allison retaliated with a gun, firing a shot that hit Hale's 5-year-old daughter. In response, Hale fired all of the bullets in his handgun, striking Allison's 14-year-old daughter.
Though both men were initially charged with attempted murder, prosecutors dropped the charges against the man who fired first. Under Florida's so-called "Stand Your Ground" legal defense law, the thrown water bottle justified responding with deadly force, leading to a child being shot. In the end, with two girls wounded in a road rage tragedy, the man who started the shootout was protected by a distortion of self-defense that allows people to shoot first and ask questions later.
"These laws change the nature of self-defense, turning everyday disputes into deadly confrontations," the report says. "Far from empowering victims, Shoot First laws lower the threshold for justifiable homicide, encouraging the escalation of petty arguments and armed vigilantism."
These laws attracted national scrutiny in 2012 following the shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Florida by a neighborhood watchman, George Zimmerman, who was acquitted under the state's Stand Your Ground law.
The 2020 shooting of another young Black man, Ahmaud Arbery, in Georgia, is likewise believed to have been exacerbated by Georgia's Stand Your Ground law, though the three men who killed him were ultimately found guilty.
Stand Your Ground laws also contribute to heightened racial disparities for shooting victims, according to FBI data from 2019-23.
Justifiable homicide rates increased by 55% in states with Stand Your Ground laws, the report found. In those same states, the shootings of Black victims by white shooters are four times as likely to be deemed justified than they would be if the roles were reversed, a higher rate than in states without these laws.
In some Stand Your Ground states like Michigan, Indiana, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, and Kansas, the disparity was more than seven times greater for Black victims than white ones.
And contrary to claims that loose gun restrictions protect women, the report found multiple studies concluding that domestic violence cases in which a woman claimed self-defense were less likely to be deemed justifiable, while women convicted were more likely to serve longer sentences.
"In addition to increased risk of victimization in Shoot First states, convictions are unfairly skewed against people of color and women," the report concludes. "In the decades since the first Shoot First law was enacted, no research shows that these laws lead to better outcomes for anyone. Shoot First was created to solve a problem that does not exist—and Americans are paying the price."
Gun violence prevention groups say that the "forced-reset triggers," which allow semiautomatic rifles to fire more quickly, effectively turn rifles into machine guns.
The U.S. Department of Justice on Friday announced that it settled litigation centering on "forced-reset triggers," devices that allow semiautomatic rifles to fire faster, and which gun violence prevention groups warn effectively turn semiautomatic rifles into machine guns.
Some gun reform groups said on Friday that the move effectively legalizes machine guns.
The settlement allows the sale of forced-reset triggers. Under the terms of the settlement, a manufacturer of the device, Rare Breed Triggers, will be allowed to sell the devices but will not be allowed to design them for use in a pistol, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ). The company also agreed to enforce its patent to ward off infringement.
Under former President Joe Biden, some of the devices were classified by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives in 2022 as machine guns, which are illegal under federal law.
In 2023, the DOJ sued Rare Breed Triggers, leading to a ruling that blocked the company from selling the devices. Separately, the National Association for Gun Rights sued over the DOJ's classification of the devices as machine guns. Last year, a federal judge ruled in favor of the National Association for Gun Rights and struck down the ban.
According to the Friday announcement from the DOJ, the settlement resolves both of those cases, which were on appeal.
Brady, a gun violence prevention group, condemned the settlement and said in a statement on Friday that it "benefits the gun industry, circumvents gun laws, and paves the way for mass violence."
"The Trump Administration's secret settlement with the gun lobby to permit the sale of Forced Reset Triggers will turn already deadly firearms into weapons of mass destruction," said Kris Brown, the president of Brady. "This dangerous backroom deal is not only an astonishing abuse of power, but undermines decades of sensible government gun safety policy and puts whole communities at immediate serious risk."
"The Trump administration has just effectively legalized machine guns. Lives will be lost because of his actions," said Vanessa Gonzalez, vice president of government and political affairs at Giffords, another gun violence prevention group.
"This move puts our communities in danger. Machine guns have no place on our streets," wrote the group Everytown for Gun Safety on Friday.
The settlement aligns with an executive order signed by U.S. President Donald Trump in February, which directed the attorney general to look at orders, guidance, and other actions by entities in the executive branch to "assess any ongoing infringements" of rights under the Second Amendment.
"This Department of Justice believes that the Second Amendment is not a second-class right," said Attorney General Pam Bondi in a statement on Friday.
We didn’t march 25-years ago because we wanted to. We marched because we had to—children were dying. They still are.
I’d never seen anything like it: a mother standing quietly in the crowd, wearing a plain white T-shirt with a large photo of a young boy flashing a wide grin, a missing front tooth, and a superhero logo across his chest. Below the picture, in simple black letters, “Darius Carter 1993-1999 Forever Six.”
She was living my worst nightmare, her beautiful six-year-old son had been shot and killed. And there she was, surrounded by thousands of other moms wearing similar shirts, refusing to let her son be forgotten.
We were just feet from the massive, bright pink-and-white Million Mom March stage on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., listening to speakers demand Congress pass common sense gun laws. It was Mother’s Day 2000—25 years ago.
Darius’ mom and I stood among 750,000 parents, grandparents, and children holding signs, wearing Million Mom March shirts, and carrying photos of loved ones lost to gun violence. Across the country, hundreds of sister marches rose up in solidarity. For many, like me, it was our first protest.
Twenty-five years ago, we marched because we believed a safer world was possible.
But the Million Mom March was more than a protest. It was a collective outcry—stitched together by grief, fueled by hope, and driven by one belief: no child should die by gun violence. With Congress failing to act, mothers across the country rose up— angry, determined, demanding change.
I never imagined I would become an activist. But on April 20, 1999, I sat frozen in front of my TV, heart pounding, as the unthinkable unfolded at Columbine High School—my alma mater. My basketball coach, Dave Sanders, was killed along with twelve students.
Something inside me broke.
I went from a stay-at-home mom with a six- and two-year-old, juggling diapers, nap schedules, and tantrums, to a gun control activist with a new sense of purpose. The following year I organized and led a delegation from Oregon to the D.C. march.
The Million Mom March was a tipping point. It sparked national conversations about gun laws and helped launch a lasting movement—it later merged with the Brady Campaign, amplifying the call for reform. The march also introduced life-saving initiatives like the ASK (Asking Saves Kids) campaign, which urges parents to ask one critical question before their child visits a friend’s home: Is there an unlocked gun in the house? It’s a simple question that can prevent tragedy. Each year, unintentional shootings injure or kill an average of 363 children in the U.S.
In the 25-years since, the movement—propelled by that day on the National Mall—has helped reshaped the fight for gun safety in America. It ignited one of the first large-scale grassroots campaigns, led to the formation of Brady Campaign chapters, and paved the way for groups like Moms Demand Action. It also spurred a wave of state-level reforms: dozens of states passed child access prevention laws, expanded background checks, and enacted red flag laws—one of our most promising tools for temporarily removing firearms from individuals who pose a danger to themselves or others.
Despite the progress, the crisis has grown worse. In 2000, about 28,000 people died from gun-related injuries in the U.S.—a staggering number. Today, it’s soared to over 48,000 per year—132 lives taken every day. Gun violence is now the leading cause of death for children and teens in America, surpassing car crashes, drownings, and cancer.
So what happened? Political courage withered and the gun lobby adapted.
They pushed through PLCCA, granting themselves sweeping immunity from lawsuits. They blocked federal funding for gun violence research. And in 2008, they won a Supreme Court ruling that redefined the Second Amendment as an individual right and struck down local gun safety laws.
The COVID-19 pandemic certainly didn’t help. It created a perfect storm: fear, isolation, distrust of government, and economic insecurity, all of which led to record-breaking gun sales. Millions of first-time gun buyers flooded the market, many without proper safety training. The gun industry profited from the fear, and communities are still paying the price.
Meanwhile, untraceable ghost guns flooded our communities, and leaders in many states chose to weaken gun laws rather than strengthen them. The gun industry seized the moment, expanding its appeal.
Twenty-five years ago, the typical gun buyer was a middle-aged man, and gun ownership was in decline. Today, the industry aggressively markets to women, young adults, and even parents—selling pink pistols to moms and tactical diaper bags to dads—casting gun ownership as a form of family empowerment. As sales rose, so did deaths.
So what now? We march again—in new ways, in new places, with the same resolve.
First, we confront the gun industry’s false promises to women and families. Marketing isn’t the problem; it’s the deadly narrative that owning a gun makes your home safer. It simply doesn’t. Research shows that a gun in the home increases the risk of homicide by 100%, suicide by 50%, and unintentional death significantly. I’ve witnessed how quickly an unsecured gun can turn a moment of fear, anger, or despair into an irreversible tragedy.
Second, we shift the national conversation from gun rights to gun responsibilities. Rights come with duties. An unsecured gun doesn’t just put your family at risk—it endangers neighbors, classmates, and entire communities. Only about 6% of guns used in crimes are stolen, yet those guns are far more likely to be used in violent crimes. And nearly 74% of school shooters under 18 got their gun from home or a relative. These aren’t just tragedies, they’re preventable. Responsible gun owners lock up their firearms, store ammunition separately, and support common-sense policies like mandatory reporting of lost or stolen guns, child access prevention laws, and required training. Supporting background checks and red flag laws isn’t anti-gun, it’s pro-responsibility.
Third, gun violence groups must work together.
In 2000, there was one widely recognized national organization: the Brady Campaign. Today there are many, but they often compete for funding, attention, and influence. It’s time to align, collaborate, and focus our collective energy against a fractured gun lobby whose primary strategy remains fear and bravado. Only by working together can we create sustained lasting change.
Finally, we must elevate and invest in the next generation of activists. Today’s young people have grown up with lockdowns and active shooter drills. They understand the stakes—viscerally. Their leadership was undeniable after the 2018 Parkland shooting, when survivors organized March for Our Lives, one of the largest single-day protests in U.S. history. Those of us who marched in 2000 must now step up and mentor, resource, and amplify this rising generation. Our kids’ lives depend on it.
Twenty-five years ago, we marched because we believed a safer world was possible. I often think of Carole Price, who bravely stood on stage that day and told us about her 13-year-old son, John—shot and killed while playing at a friend’s house. “It never occurred to me to ask about guns,” she said. “I wish I had asked the question.” Then she said something I’ll never forget: “It might be uncomfortable to ask the question. But I can tell you from personal experience, it’s a lot more uncomfortable to pick out a casket for your child.”
Even now—despite the setbacks, the rising death toll, and the political paralysis—I still believe. I believe in this next generation, in the power of parents and survivors, and in ordinary people who refuse to look away. We didn’t march 25-years ago because we wanted to. We marched because we had to—children were dying. They still are.
So we keep going. Because really, what other choice do we have?
For $40 billion-worth of health cuts to come as our government wants to spend $45 billion to become Amazon-efficient at shipping human beings to foreign prisons is establishing this nation as a beacon of cruelty.
The Trump administration wants to spend $45 billion to build an inhumane deportation industry while planning to cut at least $40 billion in life-saving programs from the Department of Health and Human Services. The juxtaposition is a near-perfect gauge of how heartless our government has become in the richest nation on Earth.
For deportation, the administration virtually froths for an Amazon-like fulfillment center to robotically sort out handcuffed humans and shuffle them down the aisles onto trucks and planes.
Todd Lyons, the acting director of the Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE), recently told private security companies seeking contracts that ICE needs to be “like Amazon, trying to get your product delivered in 24 hours… trying to figure out how to do that with human beings and trying to get them pretty much all over the globe is really something for us.”
So far, all that the government is proving is how cruel it is in running roughshod over due process to separate children from parents and deport U.S. citizen children, including one with late-stage cancer.
That is really something, on many levels. One is the sheer immorality of reducing humans to shrink-wrapped products to shove onto conveyor belts and stack on forklifts. Another is that so far, ICE is as indiscriminate and incompetent as Amazon is efficient. President Donald Trumppromised “the largest deportation program of criminals in the history of America.” Border czar Tom Homan said the United States government was “targeting the worst of the worst” for deportation.
Instead, there have been notorious incidents of students being rounded up for exercising their right to free speech and deportations of untold numbers of people without U.S. criminal records. One recent notorious case is that of 238 mostly Venezuelan migrants deported to prisons in El Salvador; Bloomberg News found that only about 10% of them had a criminal record in the United States. The legality of many deportations is highly questionable, as the White House has defied court orders to turn back deportation planes and return wrongly deported people back to the United States
According to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, founded at Syracuse University, ICE issued 18,000 “detainer” requests for local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies to hold people for possible deportation in the first month of the new Trump administration. That was more than triple the detainers issued in the first full month of the Biden administration, which faced its own fierce criticism from immigration rights advocates.
ICE says detainers are mostly for people who have been convicted of burglaries and robberies, kidnapping, homicide, sexual assault, weapons offenses, drug trafficking, and human trafficking. But only 28% of people targeted by a detainer in the first month of the new Trump administration had a prior conviction in the United States, with the most frequent offenses involving drunk driving and other traffic violations.
As for the “worst of the worst,” just one half of 1% of detainers involved a convicted rapist or murderer. So far, all that the government is proving is how cruel it is in running roughshod over due process to separate children from parents and deport U.S. citizen children, including one with late-stage cancer.
That the nation would spend $45 billion on this malicious ruination of lives and destruction of families looks even more unconscionable when President Trump and Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. want to cut $40 billion from a department that says its mission is to “enhance the health and well-being of all Americans, by providing for effective health and human services and by fostering sound, sustained advances in the sciences underlying medicine, public health, and social services.”
A review of the proposed cuts—as detailed in a 64-page memorandum that was leaked to the media—shows how profoundly the Trump administration is about to betray that mission.
The administration would end the HIV Epidemic Initiative, even though nearly 5,000 people a year in the United States still die with HIV/AIDS as the underlying cause. Despite many advances in HIV treatment that allow patients longer lives, there were still 38,000 HIV diagnoses in 2022, half of them in Southern states. While 1 in 5 people in the United States with HIV are still not able to access treatment.
The administration would kill the Minority AIDS Initiative, even though the disease is rife with gross racial disparities. Though African Americans are 12% of the nation’s population, they accounted for 37% of new HIV diagnoses in 2022.
The cuts would eliminate the division of Firearm Injury and Mortality Research. In doing so, the administration is imposing an ignorance that will likely further paralyze any debate on gun control, since the division’s mission is to provide data “to inform action” on a major cause of death in the United States. Last year, then-Surgeon General Vivek Murthy issued an advisory declaring gun violence an “urgent public health crisis,” as gun deaths soared to a record 48,830 in 2021.
All this raises real questions of how people in this nation could needlessly die if the HHS cuts become real in the areas of gun safety, mental health, food safety, HIV, or nursing.
New research funded by HHS’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that emergency rooms were receiving a gunshot victim every 30 minutes in nine Southern and Western states and the District of Columbia. Even though murders have subsided somewhat from a record 21,000 in 2021 during the Covid-19 crisis, gun suicides kept rising to a record 27,300 in 2023.
Yet, HHS has scrubbed Murthy’s advisory from its website.
The Youth Violence Division would also be eliminated, even though gun deaths are the leading cause of death for youth under 18, killing 2,500 kids a year. Due to the Trump administration’s demands to end equity across all public policy, HHS proposes to eliminate the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities. More than half of Black youth who die before the age of 18 are victims of gun violence, according to the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions. Black youth are six times more likely to die a gun death than white youth.
Besides the 27,300 gun suicides in 2023, another 22,000 suicides occurred that year from other methods, primarily suffocation and intentional poisoning. About another 100,000 people died in 2022 from unintentional overdoses of fentanyl, methamphetamine, prescription opioids, cocaine, heroin, and other substances.Yet, despite the approximately 150,000 combined deaths a year from suicides and overdoses, President Trump and Secretary Kennedy propose to eliminate dozens of mental health and substance abuse training and treatment programs for children, families, people of color, people in the criminal justice system, first responders, community recovery support, and crisis response.
As if the Flint Water Crisis never happened, HHS under the Trump administration would end the Childhood Lead Poisoning Program and the Lead Exposure Registry. That is despite a 2022 study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) journal that showed half of the U.S. population was exposed to high levels of lead in early childhood, and a 2016 Reuters analysis that 3,000 communities across the nation had higher lead levels than Flint. A 2022 study found that without stronger congressional action to protect children from the brain damage of lead exposure, the nation will “needlessly absorb” about $80 billion in annual costs to the nation’s economy, double the proposed cuts to HHS.
HHS would end the direct involvement of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in routine inspections of food facilities, trusting an uneven patchwork of state vigilance on bacteria, parasites, and viruses in our food systems. Never mind that the CDC says there are 48 million cases of foodborne illness every year, costing 3,000 lives and requiring 128,000 hospitalizations. A study last year done by researchers from U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Colorado School of Public Health found that food illnesses cost the nation $75 billion a year in medical care, lost productivity, premature deaths, and ongoing chronic illnesses.
Yet, HHS wants to cut $40 billion from the budget.
The Trump administration and his so-called Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, have disingenuously stated that funding and eliminations of departments are targeting waste and fraud. One need not be a math major to see that what they propose is the opposite.
For instance, the cuts would eliminate the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, even though cancer, heart disease, and stroke kill more than 1.5 million people a year in the United States, and cost the nation hundreds of billions of dollars a year in healthcare costs and lost productivity. Many of those diseases, along with diabetes and obesity, are often preventable, and the national center has been a resource for programs to reduce smoking, promote physical activity, lower alcohol intake, and improve nutrition.
The administration wants to eliminate the National Institutes for Nursing Research and several other nursing programs. This is in the face of studies that show that lower nurse-to-patient ratios and lower patient waiting times (because of more nurses) can save a hospital a couple of million dollars a year. It is also in the face of a 2021 study that found that in New York state alone, lower nurse-to-patient ratios could save more than 4,000 lives and more than $700 million over a two-year period.
The administration is so heartless that it even wants to eliminate its program for drowning, even though 4,500 people a year perish underwater, even though it is the top cause of death for preschoolers, and even though 55% of U.S. adults have never taken a swim lesson.
All this raises real questions of how people in this nation could needlessly die if the HHS cuts become real in the areas of gun safety, mental health, food safety, HIV, or nursing. It should be unfathomable that the nation would let its guard down after Flint, risking stunted brain development in untold children.
For these $40 billion-worth of cuts to come at the same time our government wants to spend $45 billion to become Amazon-efficient at shipping human beings “all over the globe” to foreign prisons is establishing this nation as a beacon of cruelty in the developed world. The government wants a conveyor belt of deportation as it dismantles health systems in the name of efficiency.
That would be quite the fulfillment center. Immigrants are forklifted into misery. The rest of us are being carted into a cavalier world by a government that clearly does not care how many people die.
"These aren't just policy changes—they're deliberate choices that prioritize gun industry profits over American lives," said one gun violence prevention advocate.
A reported Trump administration plan to eliminate a "zero tolerance" policy for firearm sellers who violate gun safety regulations is aimed at benefiting two groups, said one gun violence prevention advocate: "The gun sellers knowingly endangering communities, and the gun CEOs getting rich off of weapons sales to criminals."
"It absolutely does not benefit the American people," said Emma Brown, executive director of Giffords.
Attorney General Pam Bondi is expected this week to announce the reversal of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) policy, which was implemented by the Biden administration to hold gun sellers accountable for falsifying records, skipping background checks, and otherwise disobeying regulations meant to keep guns out of the hands of people who pose a danger to others or themselves.
As The New York Times reported Monday, President Donald Trump plans to order FBI Director Kash Patel, the interim leader of ATF, to move toward eliminating a ban on pistol braces, which can convert handguns to weapons that resemble rifles, and a rule requiring background checks for private gun sales.
Enforcement of the rules has been down since Trump took office in January, with federal courts moving to freeze and weaken the two ATF rules.
"This administration is systematically dismantling the safeguards designed to keep weapons out of dangerous hands."
But Brown said the official repeal of the regulations would embolden "reckless" gun sellers.
"The impact here is simple: Putting gun dealers who break the law back in business will increase crime," said Brown. "Dealers who are willing to sell guns to traffickers and criminals have been given our president's seal of approval at the cost of Americans' safety."
Under the Biden administration, the rules helped empower the ATF to revoke 170 gun seller licenses—more than the agency revoked in the previous three years combined, said Giffords.
"With the reversal of the 'zero tolerance' policy federal firearms licensees who are violating the law will stay in business, allowing more illegal firearms to flow into communities," warned the group.
The gun violence prevention group Brady called the planned repeal "a gift to the gun industry," noting that homicide rates soared during Trump's first term and projecting that gun crimes will once again "skyrocket" after Bondi ends the zero tolerance policy.
"The data is clear and compelling—90% of crime guns come from just 5% of dealers," said Kris Brown, president of Brady. "By dismantling this policy, the Trump administration is deliberately empowering these irresponsible gun dealers to operate without accountability, effectively arming criminals who will use these weapons to terrorize our communities."
"This administration is systematically dismantling the safeguards designed to keep weapons out of dangerous hands," she added. "These aren't just policy changes—they're deliberate choices that prioritize gun industry profits over American lives."