The Good Guy with a Gun (Jim McGill series Book 6) Page 27

  She asked the majority leader. “Have you heard about Cool Blue, Dick?”

  He blinked twice this time. Clearly, he hadn’t heard.

  “It’s a new progressive party being formed by Putnam Shady and Darren Drucker. I’ll tell you all about it after I’m done speaking to the country.”

  Leaving the poor man on tenterhooks, she took her place behind her desk.

  The president was given her cue and she reacted not by speaking but by signing the Farm Bill into law. She used just one pen to do it. She intended to donate the Mont Blanc to the Smithsonian. With any luck, it would become an object of historical significance.

  That task accomplished, she looked at the camera and said, “My fellow Americans, I’ve just signed into law what is commonly known as the Farm Bill. Over the next five years, this legislation commits our country to spend nearly $1 trillion on crop insurance subsidies, price supports and other benefits to support the agricultural sector of our economy.

  “There’s a good deal of debate as to whether this is a prudent measure to guarantee abundant, moderately priced food supplies or a vast giveaway to large corporations. I’m not going to get into any of that right now. Instead, I’m going to talk about a $2 billion spending provision in the bill that has nothing to do with farming or food. This money is intended, instead, to build a federal prison in Alaska.

  “You might ask what prison construction has to do with agricultural legislation. The answer is, nothing at all, but sometimes that’s just the way things get done in Congress. You have to graft somebody’s pet project onto a completely unrelated piece of legislation if you ever hope to have a chance of getting the money for your own pet project.

  “For more than ten years now, the senior senator from Alaska, Thomas Hale, has sought the funding to build a federal prison in his home state. Up until now, Alaska has sent people convicted in federal courts to prisons in Washington state. The reason was, this was a more cost effective way of dealing with these prisoners. Alaska’s population is as small as its size is great.

  “Nonetheless, Senator Hale wanted a federal prison for his state. He argued that his constituents’ tax dollars should be spent at home where they would create high-paying jobs with benefits. He said that even if his state didn’t provide enough local convicts to fill a new prison, Alaska could house surplus inmates from other states, relieving their prisons of overcrowding. It would be a win-win situation. Getting a federal prison became Senator Hale’s pet project.

  “Just recently, in the wake of the tragedy at the Winstead School, it has also become my pet project, too. I worked behind the scenes to make the new federal prison in Alaska a reality. And as you’ve just seen, with a stroke of my pen, I created that reality.

  “At this point, you might well ask what does a school shooting in Washington, DC have to do with building a new prison in Alaska? It might seem as irrelevant as putting the money for prison construction into the Farm Bill. Well, here’s the thing. Not all that long ago, there was a program called Project Exile. It was a program started in Richmond, Virginia that shifted prosecution of illegal gun possession by convicted criminals from local courts to federal courts.

  “The reason for doing that is federal court sentences tend to be longer than those handed down in state courts and criminals can be incarcerated far from home, far from their families, friends and comfort zones. Working with Attorney General Michael Jaworsky, I intend to nationalize the concept behind Project Exile.

  “The federal government will ask all fifty states to shift the prosecution of any felon found to be illegally in possession of a gun or any person falsifying information to obtain a gun or any person furnishing a gun to a felon to a federal court. If a person is convicted in a federal court of any of those crimes, he or she will be sentenced to a minimum of five years imprisonment, and that sentence will be served in the new prison that will be built in Alaska.

  “When the experts look at the effectiveness of how we punish criminals, their two main areas of concern are incapacitation and deterrence. Incapacitation is simply the length of time a criminal is incarcerated instead of being out on the streets committing his or her crimes. Deterrence is harder to measure. It begs the question of how many would-be criminals are dissuaded from starting lives of crime. The exact number, of course, can never be known.

  “But my considered opinion is that the prospect of serving time in a remote area of Alaska will prove daunting to more than a few young people tempted to take a wrong turn in their lives. And the fact that a federal sentence would take them so very far from home for a longer time than they presently have reason to expect will, I think, also make them think long and hard before turning to a life of crime.

  “I know that there will be critics of my plan, and they will condemn it in the harshest terms. That, of course, will be the height of irony because it is usually Democrats who are mocked as being soft on crime. What I intend to do is to use our laws and our resources to launch the greatest assault on drug dealers, street gangs and any other predators who either use guns or furnish them to criminals that our country has ever known.

  “I’ll be blunt about this. Anyone who criticizes my plan had better have a clearly reasoned response and a better alternative or I’ll be the one calling them out for being soft on crime. I intend to make the streets of the United States, from our biggest cities to our smallest towns, safer than they’ve ever been in our history.

  “Achieving that goal will be a great victory on its own, but it will also be a stepping stone to adding a measure of reason to another ongoing debate. Once the chance of accidentally being killed in a drive-by shooting, becoming the victim of street gang vengeance or having your home invaded by thugs with guns is made remote, our fear will diminish and we can have an intelligent debate about another subject of critical importance.

  “That being, just what kind of firearms should be available to the American people? After all, Abel Mays wasn’t a drug dealer or a street criminal. He was a physical education teacher and a football coach. By all accounts, he was accomplished at both of those demanding jobs. But when an element of competition was introduced to recruiting the best high school football players and he came out on the short end of the contest, Abel Mays snapped.

  “Worse than that, he had easily available to him what until recently was considered a weapon of war. And so Abel Mays made war on the players who’d spurned him and the coaches who had recruited those young athletes away from his team. Abel Mays brought such horrifying firepower with him to the Winstead School that he killed four other young men whose only mistake was to stand with their teammates and coaches in confronting the shooter who had come to their school.

  “For all we know, Abel Mays had no intention of killing the young men whom he had never met. Maybe they just got in his way. To him, they were nothing more than collateral damage. But to the mothers and fathers and wives of all the boys and men who were killed last Saturday morning on the football field at the Winstead School, they were among the most important people in their families’ lives.”

  The president had tears in her eyes now.

  But the set of her jaw showed an iron determination.

  She said, “These abominations must stop.”

  She took a moment to compose herself before resuming.

  “Neither the Second Amendment nor any other articulation of our rights as American citizens is absolute. Nothing in the Second Amendment provides for the right to manufacture, sell or import firearms. Nothing in the Second Amendment construes the bearing of arms as the equivalent of a right to amass a personal arsenal. Nothing in the Second Amendment says you have the right to bear arms without creating a public record of the firearms you own. Nothing in the Second Amendment provides for the right to make war against the government of the United States. Nothing in the Second Amendment provides for the right of one American to make war against his fellow Americans in school buildings, shopping malls, movie theaters or any public place at all.


  “If I thought it would do the least bit of good, I would submit legislation to Congress that would allow firearms manufacturers to operate only under the license of the federal government; that would allow firearms to be bought and sold only through retail outlets that were licensed and closely monitored by the federal government; that would end the importation of any firearm that ought to be limited to the military.

  “The prospect of these actions would terrify some Americans. They fear their government, in part, because they’ve been taught to fear their government by those who would manipulate them for cynical political purposes. The truth is, our government is not some distant, alien force; it is the tangible expression of who we are as a people.

  “The preamble to our constitution starts with the words, ‘We the people,’ not we the government. Our Declaration of Independence says ‘Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.’ The United States is the world’s oldest constitutional democracy. From the local level to the federal level we hold our elections with clockwork regularity. If you want to make a change, you cast your ballot, having worked to persuade as many others as possible to cast their ballots the same way.

  “So if you fear your government, you really fear your friends and neighbors. You also fear the soldiers, sailors and marines who fought to give us our independence and who, along with their brothers and sisters in our air force, have kept us a free nation for more than two centuries. If you really think the armed forces of the United States would turn on their fellow Americans and oppress us, shame on you.

  “For all our strengths, we are far from perfect. I spoke conditionally of the kind of legislation I would like to see passed because I know such legislation currently stands no chance whatsoever of being passed by Congress. The sad fact is, there are too many cowards, careerists and ideologues in Congress to pass any meaningful gun law reforms.

  “Some polls show ninety percent of the American public favors criminal background checks on all gun purchases. Other polls show lesser but still overwhelming numbers of Americans favor background checks. I would sign such legislation in a heartbeat. But Congress has yet to act. The very branch of government that is supposed to write laws to protect us refuses to do so.

  “That is a disgrace. The members of Congress who cower before the gun lobby and the ideologues who think the sacrifice of human life on the altar of their extremism is an acceptable price to pay are disgraces to the offices they hold.”

  The president paused momentarily to let the sting of her condemnation be felt.

  “The only thing left for me to do is to follow the advice my husband, James J. McGill, offered to us all yesterday. We have to make Congress irrelevant until it has no choice but to be responsive. I will be traveling to every part of our country in the coming days, weeks and months to tell you of my ideas and the ideas I’ve heard from valued advisors, such as a suggestion I recently heard as to how we can quickly make our schools safer.

  “I’ll also listen to your ideas. Together we’ll build a consensus as to just what we want done. Then we’ll present Congress with a package of legislation that a strong majority of the American people not only favors but demands. Congress will either respond affirmatively or the voters will replace its intransigent members come the next election.

  “Thank you for your time. May God comfort all of us who have lost loved ones to violence and bless us all without exception.”

  After the president finished speaking, the TV commercial featuring the gun-death victims at the Winstead School aired. It also was put on YouTube and went viral in minutes.

  SNAM Washington Bureau

  Monty Kipp was the former Washington bureau chief for WWN who ran afoul of McGill when, in a drunken moment, he let slip to White House Press Secretary Aggie Wu that he harbored the ambition to get a topless shot of Patti Grant to sell for £1 million to a London tabloid. McGill, in response, had invited Kipp to see a demonstration of his shooting prowess at a government firing range in Virginia.

  McGill’s hands had been a blur, drawing his weapon and firing it. Blighter was a crack shot, too. Then he’d taken Kipp to a gun-cleaning room where he’d fieldstripped and cleaned his weapon, never needing to look at the work he was doing.

  He’d stared at Kipp the whole time.

  Telling him he’d heard what Kipp wanted to do: photograph the president in dishabille, publish the picture and cause his wife great humiliation. All for Kipp’s base amusement and financial gain.

  As McGill had reassembled his Beretta, Kipp had stood there paralyzed, all but unable to breathe. When McGill had slapped a full magazine back into the weapon Kipp had squeezed his eyes shut, waiting for the end.

  “Mr. Kipp,” McGill had said.

  He’d opened one eye.

  “My wife is never going to appear on page three of any tabloid anywhere in the world, is she?”

  “No, never.”

  “Because I’d hate to think what might happen if …”

  McGill hadn’t needed to complete the threat. Kipp, though a naturalized American citizen, had beat a quick retreat to his native London. He’d even left WWN to take a job with Satellite News UK. After six years, he felt — hoped — he was safe and returned to America as the Washington bureau chief for Satellite News America, SNAM.

  Now, he was sitting in front of a camera with Auric Ludwig.

  The two of them had agreed to postpone Ludwig’s live interview until after the president had finished speaking. They wanted to speak to at least a part of her audience as well as SNAM’s usual viewers. Ratings, after all, were king.

  Watching Patricia Grant speak, Kipp thought she looked as smashing as ever. A bit older certainly. The presidency had that effect on everyone, but through some personal magic the brush of passing years had only painted more depth into her beauty. She still made Kipp’s pulse race.

  He continued to wish he could see her … no, he’d best not go there.

  McGill undoubtedly was still up to making short work of the likes of him.

  For that matter, how would McGill react to a political assault on the president?

  Surely, that would be in bounds. Wouldn’t it? Kipp felt a chill run down his spine.

  Had he just made another terrible mistake?

  Before he could give the question a moment’s thought, the red light on the camera came on and he and Ludwig were ready to speak live to the American people. A self-professed atheist, Kipp nonetheless said a silent prayer that McGill wasn’t watching. Would never see his interview with Ludwig.

  The producer’s voice in Kipp’s earbud said, “Haven’t suffered a stroke, have we, Monty?”

  Kipp bestirred himself, forced the facsimile of a smile onto his face.

  “Good morning, America. Monty Kipp here. Like many of you, Mr. Auric Ludwig, CEO of FirePower America, and I have just finished watching the president speak of many things: the legislative process, prison construction, scouring the country’s streets of criminals and how she intends to preside over a national discussion to change the country’s gun culture.”

  Without waiting for his cue, Ludwig jumped in.

  A move that irked Kipp.

  “Listen, Monty,” Ludwig said. “There is and will always be only one gun culture in our country: complete and total freedom. The American people will never stand for anything less.”

  Ludwig had his chin thrust forward and his complexion was edging from its normal red to purple. Kipp knew he had a script to follow, but Ludwig’s deviation from it brought out the trouble-maker in him, a trait once pricked was all but irrepressible. If he did go off-script, though, he’d have to do it in a way that produced bigger than expected ratings.

  He’d either get the big numbers or he’d get the sack.

  Ah, well. He’d always loved to gamble, too.

  Kipp took the plunge and picked up on Ludwig’s assertion. “So you’re saying, Mr. Ludwig, that you disagree with the president’s
statement that no right, even those provided in the Constitution, including the Second Amendment, is absolute. Is that right?”

  “The Second Amendment is absolute.”

  Kipp strived to look reflective, rested his chin on his right hand.

  While posing that way, he actually came up with some thoughtful questions.

  Provocative ones, too, naturally.

  He said, “At the end of her remarks, the president asked for God to comfort all those who had lost loved ones to violence. That, of course, would include her. She lost her first husband, Andrew Hudson Grant, to violence. He was killed by a rocket-propelled grenade. Under your absolutist view of the Second Amendment, should anyone in America be able to buy a rocket launcher? Are rocket-propelled grenades included under the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms? If not, how can that right be, in your words, complete and total?”

  Ludwig stared at Kipp. Those questions hadn’t been ones they’d rehearsed.

  Nonetheless, the producer’s voice coming through his earbud told him, “Say something, Mr. Ludwig.”

  The problem for Ludwig was, none of the companies for which he fronted manufactured rocket-propelled grenades. He wasn’t at all sure they’d wanted to be associated with such weapons. Of course, if they wanted to branch out that way in the future …

  “Come on, Mr. Ludwig,” the producer said.

  Ludwig said, “I was speaking in terms of more common firearms, for the time being.”

  Kipp did his best to keep the glee he felt off his face. “I see. So, at the moment, you wouldn’t advocate that the wealthier folk among us use tanks and attack helicopters to protect their estates?”

  “You’re being ridiculous now,” Ludwig said, his voice turning surly.

  “Not at all,” Kipp said. “I’m simply trying to understand whether the Second Amendment is indeed absolute or if it has limits. If, say, a Texas billionaire chose to protect his ranch, which is the size of some small countries, with as much military hardware as he could afford to buy, should he be allowed to do so?”