Eisen is a senior fellow at Brookings and a former U.S. ambassador to the Czech Republic. Sonnett is a former federal prosecutor, criminal defense attorney and a board member of Lawyers Defending American Democracy. Aftergut is a former federal prosecutor, currently of counsel to LDAD.
Shootings continue in America, including the slaughter on July 4 in Highland Park, Ill. The legislative breakthrough that happened late last month didn’t stop them.
But it was a breakthrough nonetheless, one created by Americans committed to making a better country, along with bipartisan elected officials pushed into adopting the first gun safety bill in 30 years. Few believed it could occur.
President Biden’s June 25 signature on the legislation followed a 65-33 Senate vote that included 15 Republicans. The House bipartisan vote was 234-193. The NRA could not stop it. Polling shows that Americans support it 3-1.
Texas Sen. John Cornyn, a Republican, was an unexpected lead sponsor. He garnered GOP votes to overcome the filibuster, even though his “A+” NRA rating will surely, as Politico reported, “ take a downgrade.”
Give major credit to the citizen activists who were not daunted by Congress’ repeated failures to do anything, despite hundreds of mass shootings at schools, grocery stores and hospitals.
Those activists seem to have made their mantra Winston Churchill’s words in October 194,1 amidst his country’s against-the-odds survival of relentless Nazi bombing: “Never give in, never, never ... never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.”
To be sure, the bill accomplishes far less than gun safety advocates sought. Still, the measure reverses the “anything goes,” unrestricted gun culture trend that is, literally, killing us. And perhaps with continuing gun massacres, one Senate success will inspire the next legislation so desperately needed.
As it is, the new law provides billions of dollars for state “crisis intervention programs,” state “red flag” laws, drug courts and veterans courts. The measure authorizes an “enhanced search” window to determine the background of gun-buyers between 18 and 21, and it helps close the “boyfriend loophole” allowing court-adjudicated unmarried domestic abusers to buy guns.
Here are four lessons about fighting for what seems beyond reach:
1. Commitment and persistence matter. Just look at Fred Guttenberg, whose daughter Jaime was killed in 2018 in Parkland, Fla. He became the face of the gun safety movement. The day after that shooting, a vision of his new life-work emerged: “I walked into my home that night, and ... said: ‘I’m going to break that f...ing gun lobby.’”
Along with others, Guttenberg has lived that vision. He never surrendered to the “overwhelming might of the enemy.” Determined individuals, joined by others, can bring change that most of us doubted would ever happen.
2. Organizing counts. The Senate first announced a “framework” for its package on Sunday, June 12, the day after activist and former Parkland student David Hogg had organized national gun safety demonstrations. It appears that senators did so on a Sunday because of the prior day’s demonstrations.
Hogg applauded the bill as "more than has ever been done in my lifetime on the federal level.”
3. Democracy remains alive. A pivotal moment occurred after many thought mass shootings had become so normalized that we would never cross this red-blue continental divide.
The slaughters in May in Buffalo and Uvalde, Texas, the Tulsa hospital killings and the non-stop shootings since brought us here. Sen. Chris Murphy, a Democrat and a lead negotiator, explained why: Public pressure was being put on lawmakers “at a rate that I've never seen before.”
4. Bipartisanship is possible. The Senate once got bipartisan deals via negotiations by a “Gang of Five.” Today, more mass is needed to overcome polarization. The gun bill required a Gang of 20.
Other important bipartisan legislation has been adopted on Biden’s watch – a Covid relief bill, an infrastructure bill and other smaller but still significant packages. Meanwhile, in the House, Republicans Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, along with Democratic colleagues, are leading Jan. 6 committee hearings consisting of a stream of Republican witnesses speaking out against a former president of their own party.
Bipartisanship, though difficult, is not dead. The gun bill stands out for advancing our safety. The victory rises from the ashes of tragic, needless deaths and from our compassion for the living.
Even in a polarized Congress and country, citizens can flex their muscle and fight with heart. At least so long as they speak out and follow activist leaders who “never, never give in.”
Ben Droz
Ben Droz
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally at Pinnacle Bank Expo Center on the Nebraska State Fairgrounds on October 05, 2026 in Grand Island, Nebraska.
The President Invited Iran to Bomb My Home
I was driving home to San Diego from Los Angeles on Monday night when I heard that the President of the United States had offered both cities up to Iran as bomb targets. At a rally in Nebraska, defending his war, Trump told the crowd, “let [Iran] take out Los Angeles, let ‘em take out San Diego.” It was, he said, “a very small price to pay.”
I was coming from a Bernie Sanders rally for Proposition 40, the one-time tax on California billionaires that would send 90% of its revenue to healthcare. We desperately need it to pass because, in order to give tax breaks to billionaires, Trump signed a law that will strip health coverage from 10 million Americans; this tax will make sure we can still cover Californians. Call me crazy, but I think taxing billionaires one time so we can make sure kids in California get to see a doctor is a very small price to pay. I also think that even if Trump were joking, it is indefensible to make jokes about the potential destruction of so many lives. Human life is never a small price to pay. Human life is priceless.
Plus, the reality is: here in San Diego, we’re already paying the price for Trump’s actions, and it’s not small at all. He has gutted FEMA, tried to kill climate resiliency programs, and destroyed public health standards, while his signature law is set to cut off health insurance and food support for hundreds of thousands of San Diegans. Like plenty of American cities, San Diego is already busy finding local solutions to respond to the problems this president has recklessly created.
Not to mention, at least 19 American service members have been killed in this war already. Human rights monitors have documented more than 3,600 dead in Iran by April alone. Here at home, gas is sitting just pennies below its all-time record. Taxpayers have already spent more than $45 billion on the war, while Trump’s oil and gas portfolio has grown by roughly $15.5 million this year alone. Of course anything is a “small price” to someone paying free.99 for this war, and profiting from it. Meanwhile, We the People are paying twice: first for the war, and then for the consequences of that war. But now he wants San Diego to pay a third time, flippantly offering us up to Iran.
It is worth noticing which cities he thought to name. Were San Diego and Los Angeles strategically chosen to signify something to his audience, or were they simply the first cities that came to mind as expendable places? Either way, the effect is to normalize—-and to gauge a crowd’s reaction to–the idea of massive violence in major California cities, suitable targets because of their perceived liberal lean. So what if Iran needs to bomb a little bit of America before the war can be over? Who cares, says Trump, if they target Los Angeles and San Diego?
By the way, why didn’t he offer up San Francisco, the free-love hippie-town MAGA loves to hate (and also my birthplace)? Could it be because that’s where the tech titans live? The same ones who joined Trump for Xi Jinping’s state dinner, a guest list worth a combined $2.4 trillion?
San Diego may have fewer billionaires, but it is home to more than 115,000 active-duty service members and 230,000 veterans. One in six active-duty sailors–in the entire Navy–is stationed here. So is one in four Marines. You cannot throw a rock in this county without hitting a military family: brats and spouses and veterans are among us. I got out of the Navy last year after ten years, and eight of those were here in San Diego. When Trump says “let ‘em take out San Diego,” he’s talking about the backbone of the United States military. He’s also talking about the people fighting his war.
San Diego has not been watching this war from the sidelines. Today, the USS Abraham Lincoln returns to North Island after an almost yearlong deployment to the Middle East that featured food shortages, broken toilets, and mold in the showers after 286 days at sea without a single port call. Eight sailors in the Lincoln’s strike group attempted suicide, but in August, when a reporter asked whether the deployment had gone on too long, Trump said “not nearly long enough.” Now he has told a crowd in Nebraska that we should let Iran take out the city those sailors call home. These are sociopathic sentiments.
Last week at Quantico, Pete Hegseth closed his address to the force by telling them, “President Trump has your back and so do I.” To the contrary, President Trump has put one of the biggest military towns in the country forward as a target for our adversaries. With friends like these, the “domestic” in “against all enemies, foreign and domestic” starts to sound a lot less hypothetical.
San Diego is home to Naval Air Station North Island, Naval Base San Diego, Naval Amphibious Base Coronado, the Point Loma submarine base, Camp Pendleton, and Miramar (and I have been permanently stationed at or trained at all of them). If Iran bombed San Diego and Los Angeles, aside from the devastating loss of life, it would cripple an immense share of our national security readiness.
And for what, exactly? Trump says the war is “essentially almost over with.” This is the same man who claimed in June 2025 that Iran’s nuclear program had been “obliterated,” then launched a war over it anyway on February 28. More than seven months later, he wants us to believe two things at once: that we’ve basically won, and that we might need to sacrifice an American city or two to finish winning. If the war is almost over, why does anybody need to take out San Diego?
I wonder if Trump’s endorsed candidate for California’s 48th District here in San Diego County will respond to these remarks. He recently said “no pain, no gain,” when referring to the gas prices San Diegans are paying. Jim Desmond, would you apply that same mindset if we were bombed? Or do you have the moral courage to stand up for the people you’re running to represent?
Last November, six Democratic members of Congress, all veterans, including Senator Mark Kelly, recorded a video reminding troops of their duty to disobey unlawful orders, restating the law that says so. Trump called it “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH,” and then his Justice Department went looking for an indictment, which a grand jury refused. The president treated reading the law out loud to the troops as a capital offense, but then he himself invited a foreign enemy to destroy two American cities, possibly as a punchline. Is anyone calling the latter sedition? Who is demanding accountability?
Calling our lives a small price to pay affirms a moral bankruptcy, as well as an obvious dereliction of duty to the office he holds. While we can’t impeach him or invoke the 25th Amendment ourselves, we must stop being so quiet about what we’re paying already. We can make our voices heard by calling our representatives, writing op-eds, knocking doors, phone banking, and voting in defiance of the man who threatens the safety of our city. Ballots are already arriving in mailboxes. Vote, and vote yes on 40 (and no on 41 and 42).
Trump has been harming our cities for a while, but now he is inviting our military adversaries to join him in the harm. If we have any self-respect as Americans, we must not tolerate our leaders disregarding the dignity of lives in this way. We must fight for our home.
Julie Roland was a Naval Officer for ten years, deploying to both the South China Sea and the Persian Gulf as a helicopter pilot before separating in June 2025 as a Lieutenant Commander. She has a law degree from the University of San Diego, a Master of Laws from Columbia University, and is a member of the Truman National Security Project.