美国有线新闻 CNN 2013-02-09

搜索关注在线英语听力室公众号：tingroom，领取免费英语资料大礼包。

"Thank you for inviting⁶ me here today, this is an important conversation for our children, for our communities, for Democrats⁷ and Republicans, speaking is difficult, but I need to say something important. Violent is a big problem, too many children are dying, to many children, we must do something. It will be hard, but the time is now. You must act, be bold, be courageous⁸, Americans are counting on you. Thank you."

Well, she spoke from handwrite note which were posted on the facebook page, the gun reform group, that she and her husband, former astronaut, Mark Kelly, founded. He also testified along with the National Rifle Association's Wayne LaPierre and others, commander Kelly at one point answering Mr.LaPierre's claim that background check don't need to be made universal.

"My wife would not be sitting in this seat, she would not have been sitting here today. If we had stronger background checks."

On the NRA position, though, and it's shared by many people that criminals would still be able to get and use firearms tha banning high capacity magazines would similarly not work, nor would with reinstating the ban on semiautomatic weapons. Such as the one used in Newtown, Aurora⁹ and elsewhere. Now there is just one problem, both sides on the gun debate, use the assault weapons ban, which was in effect from 1994 to 2004 to make there case. Listen.

"Independent studies, including one from the Clinton justice department, prove that it had no impact in lowering crime."

"The department of justice report assault weapons as a percentage of gun, of gun traces, which shows the 70% decline."

"While arm security works, gun bans do not."

"I've been as law enforcement for nearly 35 years, I've seen an explosion of fire power since the assault weapons ban expired, victims are being riddled¹⁰ with the mutiple gunshots."

"To reenact a law that according to the Department of justice did absolutely nothing to reduce gun violence."

"The 1994 assault weapon ban did not stop columbine, the justice department found the ban ineffective."

You might hear all those sides and say to yourself, all both sides can not be right. The problem is there is really no clear cut way of telling who is, not just because each side accuses the other of cherry picking the data. The real problem is that there simply not enough good research to draw solid conclusions. Take a look at where the nonpartisan congressional research services, concluded in a November report on the existing body of knowledge, and they quote, "none of the existing sources of statistics provide either comprehensive, timely or accurate data with which to assess definitively¹² whether there is a cause of connection between firearms and violent  And a big reason for that scarcity¹³ of good research, well, Congress under pressure from the gun lobby doesn't pay for it. Take a look from 1993 through 1996, Congress allocated¹⁴ about $2.5 million dollar annually¹⁵, so the Centers for Disease Control, the CDC, could study gun violence. But since 1996, the money has dried up, averaging just $100,000 a year over the last three years and a budget of nearly $6 billion. Now, having said all that, the lack of definitive¹¹ research has not stopped policy makers¹⁶ and community members from doing what they can with what they've got in the struggle against gun violence and learning as they go. Few know that better than long time New York City police commissioner¹⁷ Ray Kelly who joins me now.

分享到：