How Arizona happened

Behind the assassination attempt that shocked America

by Michael Petrou and Luiza Ch. Savage on Tuesday, January 18, 2011 11:57am - 33 Comments
Tragedy in tuscon

Tom Willett/Getty Images

In recent weeks, after she was one of only a handful of Democratic moderates to win re-election amid the great Republican party wave, congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who represents a conservative district in Arizona, told friends that bipartisanship in Washington was getting tougher and that middle-ground voices like hers were being drowned out by the extremes. A high-energy motorcycle aficionado whose youthful looks and sincere manner made her seem younger than her 40 years, she had received death threats, and her constituency office door had been vandalized, possibly shot in.

A former Fulbright scholar, Arizona state senator, and CEO of a tire business founded by her grandfather, Giffords was a rising star in the Democratic party, which she joined after switching from the Republicans in 1999, and was starting to garner national attention. Centrism has long been part of her politics. During the 2006 congressional campaign that sent her to Washington, she wrote a letter to constituents aimed at garnering the votes of independent voters and centrist Republicans. “Growing up, my mother was a Republican and my father was a Democrat—so I learned about ‘bipartisanship’ from an early age,” Giffords wrote. In the House, she was a member of the conservative Democrat “Blue Dog Coalition.” She sought out a middle ground on various issues: she was for tougher border security, but supported immigration reform that would provide undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship. She voted for health care reform, but this month voted against Nancy Pelosi for minority leader.

Her dependence on conservative voters made her a prime political target for the Republicans. In March, Giffords’s district appeared on an online map posted by Sarah Palin of 20 congressional races where Democrats in previously Republican districts had voted for health care reform. They were marked with gun-sight crosshairs. On Twitter, Palin tweeted: “Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: “Don’t Retreat, Instead—RELOAD!” Later, Giffords’s Republican opponent, a former Marine named Jesse Kelly, advertised a “Target for Victory” campaign event at a shooting range. “Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office,” he asked his supporters. “Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly.” The violent imagery worried Giffords during an MSNBC appearance: “We need to realize that the rhetoric, and the firing people up and . . . for example, we’re on Sarah Palin’s ‘targeted’ list, but the thing is, the way she has it depicted, we’re in the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that, they’ve got to realize that there are consequences to that action.”

But for all that, Giffords was neither bitter nor combative. She did not raise her voice. Perhaps befitting the wife of an astronaut, her attitude was one of calm determination. One of those with whom she shared her concerns, congressional analyst Norman Ornstein, told Maclean’s they talked “all about the coarsening of the discourse, and the danger it poses to the republic.”

Danger, indeed. Last January, Sharron Angle, a Tea Party-backed candidate for the Senate in Nevada, told a radio host that “if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies,” and talked of “taking out” her opponent, Democratic Sen. Harry Reid (the Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms). Protesters attending town hall meetings on health care reform in 2009 had carried guns, and a man carrying an assault weapon got within a city block of a presidential speech in Phoenix. The tone continued to concern Giffords. On the night of Jan. 7, she sent an email to a friend, Kentucky’s departing Republican Secretary of State Trey Grayson, to congratulate him on his new position at Harvard University. “After you get settled, I would love to talk about what we can do to promote centrism and moderation,” she wrote in an email obtained by the Associated Press. “I am one of only 12 Dems left in a GOP district (the only woman) and think that we need to figure out how to tone our rhetoric and partisanship down.”

On the morning of Saturday, Jan. 8, the woman described by many as a voice of reason was gunned down during a meeting with constituents outside a supermarket in Tucson, in a horrific shooting that left her fighting for her life after suffering a bullet wound to her head. Six other people died in the attack, including nine-year-old Christina Green, a Grade 3 student born on Sept. 11, 2001, who had recently joined her school’s student council and was brought to the meeting by a neighbour so she could meet a real politician. John Roll, the state’s chief federal judge, was killed, as was Gifford’s director of outreach, Gabe Zimmerman, and three retirees. Another 13 people were injured. The alleged assailant, Jared Lee Loughner, 22, an erratic loner who had exhibited clear signs of mental illness that had terrified his teachers and classmates at Pima Community College, was captured on the scene while attempting to reload his Glock 9 mm semi-automatic pistol.

It was a shooting that shocked the country, and plunged the United States into a debate about America’s pervasive gun culture, how a deeply troubled individual could so easily fly under the radar and obtain a weapon, and whether the tragedy could transform the increasingly bitter and volatile discourse that has marred American politics—or only make it worse.

Jimmy Luu, receptionist at the Nails Arts salon in Tucson, thought the first shots were firecrackers. Then he heard screams and saw people running through the parking lot in front of the Safeway supermarket, where Giffords was holding one of her regular Congress on Your Corner events. He was afraid one of those running toward the salon was the shooter. His manager locked the door, and everyone ran into the back of the shop.

Fifty metres away, inside the Beyond Bread deli and bakeshop, milling customers and the clatter of plates drowned out the pistol shots. A woman burst through the doors, wide-eyed and hyperventilating. “I thought she was sick,” Elaine Navarro, an employee at the deli, told Maclean’s. “My manager said, ‘Get her a chair.’ ” Navarro fetched one. She asked the woman if she needed water. The woman didn’t answer. She gathered herself and shouted: “Call 911. There’s been a shooting at Safeway.”

The attack was both an attempted political assassination and a mass murder. Giffords was shot first, through the head at point-blank range. She is now in critical condition. The gunman, Loughner, then began shooting at everyone around her. Also among the dead were Phyllis Schneck, a great-grandmother, Dorothy Morris, 76, who died despite her husband’s attempts to shield her with his body, and Dorwin Stoddard, also 76, who threw himself on top of his wife, Mavy, when the shooting started. She was shot three times in the leg but survived.

It appears Loughner specifically targeted Giffords. The FBI says it has recovered from a safe in Loughner’s home an envelope with Giffords’s name written on it, and the words: “I planned ahead” and “my assassination.” Court papers say the envelope also contains “what appears to be Loughner’s signature.” Also in the safe was a letter addressed to Loughner from Giffords, in which she thanked him for attending a constituent event in 2007.

Bookmark and Share
  • http://classicpocketknife.net Classic Pocket Knife

    One of our darkest days. God Bless.

  • http://www.cmatalks.blogspot.com Karen

    The Editors of this magazine are absolute idiots some days! Surely the authors of this journalism didn't write the by-line?

    "Behind the assassination ATTEMPT that shocked America."

    Come on now folks! This is a firing crime. There's news and then there's packaging. The person who zipped up this bag needs to feel the cattle prod…

  • http://www.cmatalks.blogspot.com Karen

    Newsflash: Loughner assassinated a Judge. OK folks? No-one has evidence yet to say whether his target was one or TWO public figures? The journalism is PERHAPS at fault for the lax by-line because of this line: "John Roll, the state’s chief federal judge, was KILLED". While that line supports the thesis that Loughner's crime was "an attack was BOTH an atempted assassination AND a mass murder". This is substandard writing and quite frankly in this information age it's unacceptable. And that's why I didn't complete reading this article past the first page view online….

    • snaarvark

      sounds like an approach a reasonable adult would take…

    • jdude

      You sound angry. I have a suggestion, click the little 'X' in the upper right hand corner of your screen. Problem solved.

      Oh, maybe I should point out your excellent grammar skill(z): "And that's why I didn't complete reading this article past the first page view online…. "

      Have a nice day.

  • anonymous

    When Sarah Palin's church was set ablaze, it was widely reported as arson. When the people were killed in Tucson, it was widely blamed on Sarah Palin. The punditry in this country is kind of asymmetrical, if you get my drift (I'm an American).

    They can't un-ring the bell. They stated the political motives. Now they want to quickly make laws restricting certain liberties based on a misrepresentation of the acts of an insane man. All the other talk now looks like rationalization confirming their bias. Too bad, maybe some good regarding mental health could have come from this. But the last paragraph of the article probably sums it up.

    As a sidelight, the Pima County Sheriff's Department recently arrested a liberal activist (wounded in the shooting) for threatening a Tea Party spokesperson. As far as I know, the Sheriff has not blamed the media, and the activist is being held for psychological evaluation. I wonder how the Sheriff got that idea to do that.

    • Lisa

      he got the idea to do that because that guy made what most reasonable people believe to be a death threat against a specific individual, with countless witnesses. And since the guy had just been shot, he may well have been subsequently ranting like a crazy person a/k/a demonstrating possible post traumatic stress disorder. time for a psych eval.

      Loughner, by contrast, never directly threatened anyone (as far as anyone knew, at least according to what's come out so far). He showed overt suicidality in September on Myspace, but apparently no one was reading it. He wrote about killing "pigs" in December, and "see you on national TV!", but again no one was reading. Had either the college or his parents taken the step of petitioning for a mandatory eval (which could have led to court mandated outpatient treatment, even if he didn't meet the standards for involuntary hospitalization), maybe, just maybe someone would have been looking into what he was up to online. A blogger googled him and got his myspace within hours of the shooting. Yet he's living with his parents, is unable to function in a work environment, unable to function in a school environment, at this point genuinely disabled, he has zero social life, spouts all this nonsense, and the don't even think to look him up online. The story of the shooting is not in his delusional rants, but in his "normal" statements that were interspersed with the gibberish. His illness–whatever it proves to be–caused the failure, the isolation, the alienation and resentment that led him to want to "go out with a bang" and make others pay for it. It's his NON-delusional postings that show why he wanted to kill. Between what he posted in the spring in the forums, and his myspace in Sept-Dec, it was a clear escalation of suicidality and intended criminality. These were what he rationally concluded as his life options back in the spring. The third options was "career/job," meanwhile he was itemizing 65+ fruitless job applications, so there went option #3. He was really quite rational about it. But again, no one was reading.

    • Esteban

      My testicles are asymmetric.

      Republicans and their idiotic rhetoric caused this shooting. Liberals need to grow a pair call it as it is. If the shoe was on the other foot, you would not expect conservatives to be this benevolent.

      • Darden Cavalcade

        A lot of press sources, including this article, refer to the liberal rhetoric that infuriates conservatives and contributes to the fouled political atmosphere in the US. And yet there still is no evidence that Loughner was interested in the Liberal-Conservative rhetoric or that it affected him in any way. His political opinions were a bizarre as the rest of his ideas.

        Public institutions require leaders who are committed to public safety on-and-off their premises. After Columbine, after Virginia Tech, after Fort Hood, administrators and security offices cannot give people like Loughner a pass.

      • Guest

        There is no evidence, not that a liberal would be acquainted with the meaning of the word that Loughren had any political intent. Such political leanings as he had in his life were of the leftist persuasion e.g. a friend described him as a liberal pothead, he was a registered Democrat until he switched to Independent, his favorite reading included the communist manifesto. There was also some personal contact with Congresswoman Giffords that may have left Loughren with a personal grudge in his disordered mind.

        What does it say about the Left that it a) tried to transform the square peg lefty/crazy person/killer into a conservative? When that failed, they switched to Plan b) blaming his crime on prominent conservatives and conservatives in general. The same people who were absolutely deranged in their criticism of the Bush administration had the nerve to lecture critics of the Obama administration on civility! A clear example of the Left's hypocrisy "civility for thee, not me" is Democrat Senator Cohen's disgusting comparison of Obamacare opponents to Nazis and the Holocaust that he had the nerve to make AFTER his President's call for civility in discourse! Think that might inspire a wingnut to violence?

  • Philanthropist

    The shooter was not politically motivated, just a nut. The hateful rhetoric coming from the media is the only 'political' story in this whole incident, leftists will use any excuse to attack anyone who disagrees with them without regard for the real victims, it's pathetic and disgusting.

  • SunshineCoaster

    Portions of this article seem to suggest that a major portion of the gun violence could be sorted out by offerring adequate mental health services and restricting guns sales to disordered individuals. Then it goes on to say that about 25% of Americans have some sort of mental disorder and "offers the shocking estimate that “individuals with mental illnesses are probably responsible for approximately 10 per cent of homicides in the United States". Assuming these numbers are correct, simple math tells us that 90% of homicides are committed by healthy individuals who represent only 75% of the population. So the real focus here should be on how healthy people use or abuse firearms, rather than the individuals who happen to have mental disorders. In other words mentally disordered people are not responsible for gun violence out of proportion to their percentage of the population. Guns are the problem not mentally disturbed people.

    • Darden Cavalcade

      I didn't go back to look at the numbers, but I seem to recall the author saying roughly one-third of firearm deaths in the US are suicides. Is suicide proof of mental imbalance?

    • Guest

      Most gun deaths in the USA are perpetrated during crimes, the largest number black on black, second largest number black on white crime. (See John Lott's books for documentation). If you doubt this, look at the gun deaths in Toronto, in the relatively gun free zone of Canada. The overwhelming majority of both perpetrators and victims are black, involved in gangs, guns, drugs. Want to touch that with a ten foot pole?

      • SunshineCoaster

        Please read the article. It says "According to the most recent annual data, in 2007 31,224 people died in the U.S. of gunshot wounds—12,632 of them murdered (other causes of death included suicide and unintentional deaths)." This directly contradicts your statement that most gun death in the USA are perpetrated during crimes, unless you consider suicide a crime. You might be referring to homicides, but even then you would be incorrect, since so called crimes of passion such as murdering your wife during an arguement are not related to the criminal activity you are describing.

        I agree that gangs and drugs are violent and involve the use of guns, but in our society this source of death by guns is not the majority. The majority of deaths by guns in Canada have no connection to the criminal element and are committed using legally owned guns. The connection you are trying to make to black people and guns does not exist in the official statistics, but only in propaganda you might receive from the Harper conservatives.

  • Lisa

    "Nonsense, responded gun lobbyists—a better armed citizenry is the answer, not a bigger problem. 'It didn’t sound like there was anybody able to take action,' said Larry Pratt of the Tucson shooting."

    Pratt might want to get better informed; and it would be great if journalists would correct this kind of ignorant opinion if they're going to publish it. There WAS a wannabe vigilante on the scene, and by his own admission, he NEARLY SHOT THE WRONG GUY. In a split second decision he refrained from shooting and ended up with, again, the WRONG GUY, up against a wall. He nearly had shot the person who had gotten the gun away from Loughner. Don't remember his name, but it was reported and he was interviewed (though surprisingly, it got little coverage). That's all we need, a parking lot full of self important testosterone impaired nuts crossfiring so by the time the cops get there, nobody even knows who the real problem is.

    • Darden Cavalcade

      His name was Zamudio and he was one of the two men who physically subdued Loughner. When asked why he didn't shoot Loughner, he replied that it wasn't necessary. That isn't a crazed response. It is the perfect response.

      He drew a firearm as he lay on top of Loughner, because a bystander made the mistake of picking up Loughner's firearm. Zamudio did not know whether this was another shooter. There was nothing about his behavior that suggested that he was a vigilante. If I'm not mistaken, President Obama mentioned him at Arizona University.

      [BTW. NEVER pick up a firearm at the scene of a shooting. If you wish to control it, put your foot on it..]

    • Jan

      I saw the interview. He followed a representative of the NRA who was trying to make the case that is everyone had a gun, the shooter would have been stopped earlier. I can't believe anyone who doesn't see the potential for disaster with this kind of thinking.

    • Filthie's Thunderbox

      He put his hand on his holster. That is not almost 'shooting the wrong guy'.

      For me, I am just fine with the idea of liberals shooting each other. I am not fine with them redefining 'civility' as censorship, which is exactly what these cretins are trying to do.

  • http://sweetbearies.com Bearie

    I feel bad for Congresswoman Giffords and all the people were killed and injured. All the arguing here is really pointless when the issue at hand is innocent people were hurt. Bickering is a waste of human time and emotions. Do something positive instead.

  • chet

    This was the greatest example of a political rorchach test one could imagine.

    A completely insane man, who wasn't even operating on assumptions of our sane world (let alone fine political distinctions), committed a horrid act from which the world could fill in the blanks, based not on facts, but on their own biases, predispositions, and the very political hatred being decried as causing this.

    The political hatred focused on Palin in the last year by the left was a sight to behold.

    That this murder was pinned on her by the deranged left was not surprising.

    A new low, yes.

    Surprising, no.

  • chet

    So we are now in a world,

    where pinning a murder on one's political foes without any evidence whatsoever (and in fact much evidence which positively contradicts the allegation),

    is the new "civility" which we should all strive for.

    A new "civility" where conservative's comments are policed to the umpteenth degree, and spurious correlations are sought to be drawn, while the "correct" side of the debate is left with free reign, such that Obama suggesting a "gun" be brought to a "knife fight" with the left's political opponents, is put aside as harmless rhetoric.

    • Guest

      Hypocrisy is the Left's oxygen. Hard on the heels of the Dem President who has done nothing but heightened political tensions with his rhetoric (e.g. calling Republicans the enemy while addressing a Hispanic audience) belatedly calling for civility after Tuscon, a Dem senator (Cohen) has just likened Republican opposition to Obamacare to Nazis and the Holocaust. Gee, no criticism from his fearless leader for inciting hate. Oh, that's right. Obama and his Dem thugs bring a gun to the fight, while Republicans are supposed to bring one sided civility.

  • Tony, SFO-YUL

    Was this shooting something that really “shocked the country?” Doubtfully so.
    Until the American people are willing to change their pro-gun culture, gun violence will be an everyday occurrence in the USA and the mayhem will continue.

  • Trudeau lover

    The lefty media and the left in general love to spread the hate and continue to polarize political debate. The same lefty media types and their followers who blamed Palin for the massacre, then attacked her for not answering to the scurrilous unfounded, preposterous accusations, than turn around and attack her for speaking out against the attacks on her integrity. It seems the left are more concerned with witch hunts and ideological public lynchings than they are about the victims, and see a tragedy like this as an opportunity to spew their warped agenda. Loughner was a liberal pot head who hated Christians, laughed at aborted babies, never listened to talk radio, hated George Bush and cited "Mein Kampf" and the Communist manifesto as his favourite reading material. Is that why Loughner committed this brutal, vicious act ? Because he's a brain washed lefty? NO! All indications point to a seriously deranged, mentally ill individual who was completely irrational and disturbed. The lefty media continue their narrative of hate and intolerance against Palin, and Conservatives in general, while willfully ignoring the facts as they become available. The lefty media do more to polarize political discourse and divide and isolate the public than any other source out there. How are nations producing such low life, sick, deranged minds within the media is almost incomprehensible. The lefty media won't be happy until they incite people to tear each others throats out.

  • Lance Irvine

    Another lefty inventing a myth that "right-wing" rhetoric was involved, even if indirectly, in the AZ shooting, on no better grounds than the use of a "in our gunsights" metaphor common to most political discourse. Currently the union opposing building a Walmart in New York is promoting a demonstration by posting the address of the owner covered by–wait for it–a gunsight.

    This is from the left media which campaigned against Bush-Hitler and where many liberal writers and talk radio hosts mused publicly on how nice it would be if Bush, Cheney and Limbaugh were to die.
    Of course, since the Left has a monopoly on truth and virtue, how can they be wrong?

    • Guest

      Actually, the Left made a movie debuted at the Toronto Film Festival of their wish fulfilment with George Bush assassinated, using real footage of the real president. Just imagine the media din if someone had made such a movie using Obama footage for the full measure of the Left's hypocrisy. They cross the line into hatred constantly and then have the chutzpah to project their own derangement onto the right.

  • dick

    apparently canadians havd as many dumb right wing ignorants as america does

    • weed

      stupid is as stupid does

    • Guest

      apparently (sic) canadians (sic) havd (sic) as many dumb left wing dicks as america does
      to whom punctuation, capitalization and spelling are strangers.

  • Trudeau lover

    Thanks for you're thoughtful contribution to the debate, dick,weed. The reason of unreason, brought to you by the dickweeds on the left.

  • http://www.scribetranslation.com/ French translator

    May God Bless America indeed.

  • http://wordsworthsharing.com Tom_Hartley

    Robert Brady is calling for a new law against hate rhetoric which, combined with revamping gun laws, will help make America to become a safer place. Though I hate guns I respect the rights of those who wish to own them. So more restrictions instead of a total ban sounds fair to me (especially considering the 1.3 million US citizens who have died from gunshots compared to half a million Americans soldiers killed back to and including the Civil war!). As for free speech lovers, I am one, but I cannot yell fire in a theater, I cannot present 'obscene' material in public, etc. I accept limitations on my freedom as part of my social contract as a citizen in a nation. As a negative liberalist, I think that government best that governs the least. That said, laws are necessary, and we need a few more. Perhaps we can relax a few other laws as a way to balance the equation, just to appease the Republican types :) I am still incensed at Tom Flanagan's supposedly tongue-in-cheek call for the assassination of Assange, and hope the RCMP soon complete their investigation and conclude he exceeded his rights to free speech. And Brady will get my support as a Canadian concerned about the state of American politics. I do want want the best of US politicians running for cover (even if only at the behest of their spouses http://www.rollcall.com/news/-202271-1.html) leaving office to pursue what are likely to be better paying jobs in the private sector. That will leave the political scene in a sad state.

From Macleans