25 July 2013 - 8:26pm | posted by | 1 comment

“We get it. Bribes are bad”: Campaign to ‘bribe’ the US Senate on gun control hits a legal snag

Bribe the Senate, a tongue- in-cheek campaign launched in all seriousness nine days ago to get the discussion of mandatory background checks on gun purchases back on the US Senate’s agenda, has run into some legal hot water – bribing is illegal.

“Honestly, we started this whole thing with the intent to fundraise for the bribes. But the lawyers were very adamant that this was go-to-jail illegal. Not just for us, but for anybody who donated. So we had to change our approach late in the game,” said Simon Bruyn, one of the four creative behind the site.

Bruyn developed the initiative along with Emil Tiismann, Jacob Sempler and Andrew Livingston, all four of whom are creatives at advertising agency Goodby Silverstein & Partners in San Francisco.

Initially the group suggested that the American public should outthink the gun lobby and crowd-fund a little “financial persuasion” to see if senators would be willing to change their votes and actually debate gun-purchase background checks.

“It bummed us out that less than 100 days ago the country was talking about—and largely agreeing with—the idea of background checks for gun purchases. Then, the Senate refused to debate it, and it fell off the radar,” said Bruyn.

The original plan was to start collecting donations at midnight tonight, which officially marks 100 days after the Senate voted to keep background checks from even being discussed.

But, in light of some hefty legal advice, the site will now direct tweets to the six targeted senators and ask them to revisit their stance on the issue.

“We get it. Bribes are bad. You can’t pay a politician to change their vote” said Tiismann. “Next time we will form a proper political lobbying organisation so that we can collect unlimited cash in order to have a meaningful political conversation with our elected officials where we strongly express our opinions.”

“Please don’t send us to jail for this,” added Tiismann. “We’d hate to have to share a cell with a mentally-ill killer who bought his murder weapon at a gun show without a background check.”

Comments

26 Jul 2013 - 18:36
stanleyhill7355

Gun control is only going to disarm or lessen the chance that the law abiding citizen will be able to protect them self from the criminal unless you have a way to make the criminal obey laws. The criminals will all have high capacity magazines and everything else the law abiding citizen doesn't have because of the laws voted in. This is common sense. Out of more than 76,000 firearms purchases denied by the federal instant check system, only 62 were referred for prosecution and only 44 actually prosecuted. The percentage prosecuted shows that the DOJ doesn't use it anyway. Eric Holder when ask responded that they didn't have the time. I guess because of the time they used to protecting the rights of dead people voting!

0
0

Please sign in or register to comment on this article.

Latest Projects from the Profile Hub

Glasgow University College of Arts Knowledge Exchange - communications strategy

20/11/2014
The College of Arts Knowledge Exchange is a leading-edge...

In The Snow Magazine Front Cover

20/11/2014
Front cover from a fashion shoot in Zermatt earlier this...

Cuckoo Design - HeadSpace

17/11/2014
If you want to work through your brand challenges and turn...

Welsh Blood - Precious Concept

17/11/2014
Description The Welsh Blood Service organises the...

Pentland / Ted Baker – AW14 footwear photography

14/11/2014
Pentland is behind some of the world’s best-known sports,...