 |
| Senator Dianne Feinstein |
Senator Feinstein from California, the author of the bill admits that, "The road is uphill. I fully understand that,"however, Democrats are optimistic that they will get a some sort of the bill through that will impose tighter regulations on guns.
The vote in the committee followed party lines and passed on a ten to eight vote. Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader from Nevada has to allow the bill to come to the floor. He has promised that by mid-april, the floor will vote on some sort of bill that addresses the committees wishes, although specifics of this bill and how much of a say on it the committee will really get are unknown.
Do you think any progress will be made on this issue? Do you think this is a good first step or a futile attempt to accomplish something that is unable to be accomplished with this Senate?
3 comments:
Sadly, I fear this bill will die off due to the NRA's efforts to fight it every step of the way. Republicans will most likely filibuster the Democrats' effort and a successful vote for cloture seems improbable.
It's been nearly twenty years now since Clinton's assault weapon ban was passed in 1994, yet very similar legislature seems doomed to fail today. So what's changed? There is at least a reasonable possibility that public opinion will shift in reaction to recent mass shootings.
I suspect that the success of the ban in 1994 may have a lot to do with the surge in gun-related homicides during the 90's. While mass shootings are widely publicized, I'm hypothesizing that Americans may not have as many first-hand experiences with gun experiences that would encourage them to support and assault weapon ban today. Still, I'm starting to get the feeling that our nation has made little, if not negative, progress on this subject.
People may oppose gun control, but only certain aspects of it. Adding thorough background checks may only make it more inconvenient for someone to acquire a gun, but it can serve as a deterrent for those who can't be bothered. And that's not an inherently bad thing. The less avenues that are available to acquire guns, the less people will have them.
Considering the irony that gun sales go up following mass shootings, I doubt we'll see any significant change in the way the public thinks about these incidents. Urban people are probably more in favor of regulation, but urban people are also more likely at risk of gun violence. It's just another American anomaly.
Assault weapons bans should be kind of unquestioned though. I don't mean to try and solve this issue, but just intuitively it seems impractical to allow civilians to buy them. At least, with the relative ease that they can be acquired now.
As Andrew mentioned, I have serious doubts that the bill will be survive the process. The NRA and Republicans will do whatever they can to prevent the bill from passing. The "power of the purse" is quite a formidable force indeed.
While public opinion has shifted in favor of increasing gun bans, it is not so overwhelming that I would bet the bill passes. The NRA has been stubborn about continuing the right of Americans to own guns despite the recent shooting incidents.
James also points out that gun sales suddenly go up after shooting. Obviously, this is not a good sign that Americans will strongly support the bill. The idea that Americans should be allowed to own guns will not go away even after multiple shootings because it is ingrained in the American culture of freedom and liberty.
For the bill to pass, the American attitude and culture has to change first. I'm not sure if such a bill will or will not work, but the American people need a different view on guns or else this could end up like prohibition. Of course, I could be wrong as future events come up. Let's see.
Post a Comment