Sunday, April 14, 2013
Sunday Question for Liberals
On the gun bill: should Democrats attempt to pass whatever they can, no matter how little, as long as it's marginally better than the status quo -- or should they give up on it if it's not substantive enough? If the latter, what would constitute enough?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I believe enhanced background checks are the minimum for a deal. Any more is gravy. Any less is worthless.
ReplyDeleteIf we care about anything more than symbolism here, we shouldn't settle for less than universal background checks. Failing to do that while merely closing the gun-show loophole will solve nothing and make it harder to pass universal checks later on.
ReplyDeleteStill, liberals can't just kill it now without looking silly. The ideal is that the GOP scuttles it and the Democrats campaign on the issue in 2014. If the GOP suffers a midterm defeat, maybe they'll be chastened into passing real reform. (Unlikely, I know. But this bill is so meager that there's hardly anything to lose.)
Passing a gutted, ineffective bill will just enable gun safety opponents to claim that registration doesn't work. Better nothing.
ReplyDeleteElsewhere on the intertubes today, folks were talking about increased penalties for repeat straw-sellers at gun shows, and for local permit holders who might also be doing a high volume of sales to the unqualified.
ReplyDeleteAre these in the current bills, I have no idea. However, if the D's really think they can't get anything that's going to make a difference, this would seem to be a good point to make a stand on, force the R's to vote against it, IF they decide they'd rather not have a nothing-burger bill.
In general, these kind of tactical questions are almost always a 50-50 proposition, unless you have sure knowledge of some tactical situation you think you can surely exploit, you're always going to be pleasing some folks and irritating others -- among your supporters and the supporters you wish to gain -- whether you go with a watered-down bill or decide to make a stand on principle.
Passing watered-down gun control is a route to failure. It will stop literally nothing, and when the next atrocity happens, the cry will go up, "look what gun control couldn't stop." It's set up to fail.
ReplyDeleteI would go with it. There are (so far) provisions for making straw purchases a felony and some other things that don't get much attention. Also there will be votes on amendments to include an assault weapons ban, etc., but don't expect them to go anywhere. The assault weapon ban is the real window dressing, though, unless it's substantially different from the last one. Connecticut had its own assault weapons ban based on the former national one, and the gun used at Newtown was legal under it. I would have preferred limits on magazine size. (As someone said, mass murder should be hard.) I imagine the provision allowing private sales without background checks will grow into a major loophole, but I don't know what can be done about it. I'm open to ideas.
ReplyDeleteSomething that should be looked at is removing all the restrictions on ATF or giving jurisdiction over guns to the FBI. Currently, NRA-inspired laws require weapons regulation to remain within ATF, while other NRA-inspired laws restrict what ATF is allowed to do. (Then they accuse ATF of not doing its job when tragedies occur.) The NRA likes to say there are plenty of gun laws on the books now; the problem is that half of them negate the other half.
The problem for Democrats is that they haven’t been bargaining for what they really want, which is gun registration. Now that they have a reasonable prospect at ending the gun show loophole that they’re always talking about, it’s occurring to them that it will be ineffective at actually controlling gun crime.
ReplyDeleteThe Senate bill contains things that are good for gun owners -- those who don’t mind making another sacrifice to the bureaucratic gods will probably support it. But Democrats would be left with a victory that does nothing tangible for their cause.
Yes, I'd take what we can get now. To be gruesome, two things we know for sure: there will be more mass killings and more short-lived outcries, because the gun safety people never have stamina; the NRA will successfully work to undermine enforcement (denying money in appropriation bills, seeing that ATF doesn't have a confirmed leader, etc.)
ReplyDeleteThey should try to pass a real bill with teeth, let Republicans obstruct it if that's what they choose to do, then use it as a campaign issue until eventually the politics of the issue changes enough to pass a real bill. Passing a worthless, ineffective bill for the sake of passing something would be... worthless and ineffective.
ReplyDelete