Giffords shooting: the sheriff who turned the focus on rightwing rhetoric
Clarence Dupnik, the Pima county sheriff, claimed ‘vitriolic’ US political debate had contributed to the tragedy
By Jon Henley/The Guardian
Few outside his home state will have heard of Clarence W Dupnik before this weekend, but if world reaction to the Arizona shootings has focused on inflammatory rightwing rhetoric, it is largely down to the Pima county sheriff’s pronouncements.
A local law enforcement officer for more than 50 years, Dupnik turns 76 tomorrow and, it seems, no longer feels a need to mince his words. On Saturday he condemned “the anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country”. The next day he called Arizona the “tombstone of the United States” because of its lax gun laws, and berated those who “try to inflame the public 24 hours a day” with “rhetoric about hatred, mistrust, paranoia of how government operates”. On Fox News and ABC today he again claimed “vitriolic rhetoric” had contributed to the tragedy.
For some on the left, the generally genial sheriff is the hero of the hour, daring to say what many believe. For others, on the right, he is the villain of the piece, trying to exploit a mass murder for political gain.
Dupnik says he was “very angry at the time I said those things, and I’m still angry”. The fact that the congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, still critical in hospital, and judge John Roll, who died, were friends undoubtedly fuelled his anger, but nothing in the veteran lawman’s recent past suggests he is likely to apologise.
This article appears in Jan 6-12, 2011.
I’m just glad the shooter was not a Hispanic person.
Yeah, no doubt.
One thing I don’t get about people who are getting their panties in a bunch over what Dupnik very aptly stated is that he was referencing “rightwing rhetoric”. I don’t recall Dupnik singling out the right wing, or tea party, or any party for that matter. I do recall him mentioning talk radio and 24/7 news channels, but I don’t recall the right wing association.
Sure one could jump to assuming he meant right wing but I don’t recall him saying that. Of course, if the shoe fits and all that but the shoe really fits a lot of folks and I think that was the real message. It wasn’t specifically political, it was human and wise. I for one am quite happy Dupnik had an opportunity to share his opinions and that it has been globally heard.
That’s not jumping to the conclusion that he meant the right; that IS the conclusion. Kyle, McCain, Brewer, Arpio, and Dupnick are all having these “senior moments” that are disturbing and disappointing.
good for dupnik! i’m so so glad he said what he said. i remember listening to the press conference on the radio, thinking he was talking the only sense i’d heard all day. in an attempt to be “pc” a lot of people have said “let’s not politicize this,” and it’s troubling that people are afraid to point out right and wrong in this matter. wrong: a political environment in the us where gun culture is praised (even metaphorically) as a solution to our differences; right: toning it down. who knows at this point what loughner’s actual motivation was…but it’s obvious to any sensible person that gun rhetoric and violent metaphors aren’t as taboo as they should be.