Is there common ground for supporters of gun rights and gun control to stop random, senseless shootings in this country? Perhaps. Hours after the awful shooting at Seattle Pacific University, Mayor Ed Murray appeared on campus and said, “Once again the epidemic of gun violence has come to Seattle — the epidemic of gun violence that is haunting this nation.” Other politicians, activists and liberal clergy echoed his words. It will surprise the mayor and many other people to learn that gun violence isn’t rising in America, it’s falling. In fact, it’s plummeting. Gun deaths are down nearly 40 percent in the last 20 years, despite an increase in population and a rise in gun ownership. The Bureau of Justice Statistics points out an even more dramatic number: Non-fatal gun crimes free-fell 69 percent during that same period. But mass shootings have increased. Depending on how you define them (attempted vs. actual), they have doubled or tripled in the last decade. Why are random shootings with multiple casualties up while overall “gun violence” is way down? Let’s broaden our focus. Read The Full...

Commentary: The public isn’t excited about his opponent. But McGinn has a bigger problem than Ed Murray.   By John Carlson October 22, 2013. Here is something you don’t often see in American politics. An incumbent politician with views largely matching his constituents is seeking re-election. Unemployment is low — in fact it’s two points lower than the state average, and two-and-a-half points below the national rate. The city’s fiscal condition is stronger than the day he took office, and his administration has been free of any substantial scandal. On paper he should be cruising to re-election. Instead, Mike McGinn will be lucky to reach 40 percent of the vote. Last month, Survey USA released a poll showing state Sen. Ed Murray leading Mayor Mike McGinn by more than 20 points, 52-to-30. After a month of furious, energetic campaigning by McGinn, topped by two impressive debate performances, another poll last week showed nearly identical results: 52-to-32 percent. With Election Day about two weeks out, less than a third of the electorate is committed to the mayor’s re-election. A smaller sample by KIRO-TV in early October showed McGinn closer to Murray but with only 29 percent of the electorate committed to him. The Strategies 360 PR firm independently conducted a similar poll in mid-October showing McGinn with 34 percent support. Politicians with re-elect numbers this low are usually under federal indictment. Someone find a bugle and start playing “Taps.” It’s not like opponent Ed Murray is lighting the world on fire. “Murray-mania” is not sweeping the city. Why would it? The state senator’s views are only marginally different than McGinn’s. He’s not flashy, never has been. TV is not his friend. He is articulate but not eloquent. He is a solid but plodding legislator — a classic workhorse rather than a showhorse, who deserves a place in state history for guiding into passage not one but three landmark civil rights laws expanding liberty for gay citizens. But much of Murray’s appeal seems to come from not being Mike McGinn. And you can’t fault McGinn’s campaign team. They are doing the best they can with what they’ve got. So, if it ain’t the economy, if the city isn’t cratering fiscally or drowning in scandal, what is it? McGinn’s supporters blame “smears” from jealous, nettled, city council members or business groups. But even if it were true, why are the smears sticking? After all, the mayor has both a clear record to run on and the bully pulpit of his office to generate media coverage and rally supporters. He’s plenty capable of defending himself, with a competent campaign team and some influential backers. So why is he losing so badly? Because...

Every once in a while there comes an issue that clearly defines the differences between the two major parties.  One of them is what to do about Detroit, the largest American city to officially declare Bankruptcy.  A Quinnipiac University poll shows a clear majority of 57% opposing a bailout, while just 33% support it.  But look at the breakout by party:  Only 35% of Democrats oppose a bailout, while a majority, 51%, support the idea.  Republicans?  73% reject the idea of a bailout, while only 18% favor it. So what about Independent voters?  They lean with the conservatives, with 65% opposing any bailout while just 28% supporting one.   There is a long list of cities and counties that would quickly que up for a federal life raft if a precedent is set by providing one for a city that ignored warning after warning about reckless spending, outlandish catering to govt. unions and stubbornly stood by policies that grew the crime rate and city income tax rate while shrinking the population of wealthy and middle class residents of all races. Why underwrite this mismanagement with public...

Everything I initially wrote about the Trayvon Martin killing was based on network news reports. And it was almost entirely wrong. In my KOMO radio commentary of March 23, 2012, I said the following about the killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman: “Thinking of 17-year old Trayvon the way we’d think of our own kids is exactly how to view this tragedy. Read the full article at Crosscut.com by clicking...