A compassionate and
tearful President Obama minced no words following the Sandy Hook, Connecticut
school massacre and demanded action. Though Obama did not specify what action
he had in mind, the action that has and will again spark colossal debate is how
to crack down on the manic and senseless gun violence that has caused
indescribable pain and suffering for so many victims, and now those victims are
the innocent of innocents, elementary school children, their teachers, and
their grieving parents, relatives, and friends.
The usual suspects
were quick to pounce with their by now silly and facile, "guns don't kill,
people kill" pap line. New York City
Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has long loudly called for Obama and Congress to
enact new and tougher gun control laws, quickly jumped back into the gun
control fray and made the same call again. As the names and faces of the children and the
others gunned down in the horrific school massacre become known, a legion of
voices will also demand that gun control be shoved back on the White House and
congressional table. This is where things again will get thorny.
The assumption is that
the NRA and the gun lobby is so all powerful, and financially well-heeled, that
it can beat back any congressional move to impose tougher restrictions on gun
access. It's certainly done a masterful job at that. The NRA did not issue an
official statement on the massacre, other than a terse one liner that it would
wait until all the facts are in. But that didn't stop other gun control opponents who worked the blogs and
websites vociferously denouncing calls for tougher gun laws, and geared up for
a round of talk show appearances to tout their view.
But the NRA's
money, political clout, and the saber rattle of gun control opponents is only
part of the reason that tougher gun control laws, no matter how many heartbreaking
massacres occur, face a hard uphill climb. The tip off on that came during the
recent presidential election. Obama and Romney were briefly challenged by
Bloomberg and gun control advocates to advocate and propose new gun curbs. This
was prompted by the Aurora, Colorado theater massacre. They demurred. The issue quickly dropped off the political
radar scope. The reason for the dodge had nothing to do with Romney's
well-known NRA membership and opposition to tougher gun control laws. Nor did
it have anything to do with Obama's seeing the issue as an unnecessary wave of
the red flag in front of millions of gun owners in what was then thought to be a
potentially close presidential reelection
battle.
Both simply
recognized that gun ownership is a fact of American life and a rigidly
protected constitutional right. During his stint in the Illinois legislature, Obama's
major concern was cracking down on illegal gun sales, and the spread of and
access to semi-automatic weapons. This does little to keep guns out of the
hands of loose screws such as alleged Aurora shooter James Holmes and alleged
Sandy Hook school shooter, Adam Lanza. In the White House Obama has simply
followed the precedent of nearly all presidents and that's to leave tougher
restrictions on gun sales and trafficking to the states. Some states have
passed laws that ban assault guns and high capacity ammunition magazines, limit
the number of gun sales, require child safety locks on new guns, and outlaw the
sale of cheap handguns.
The huge drawback
to the state by state gun action is that it does not significantly limit the
massive trafficking in guns across state lines. It also doesn't begin to
address the question of how to identify and then prevent the legions of human
ticking time bombs that do not have a criminal record and for all intents and
purposes appear to be normal functioning individuals from legally purchasing
and even stockpiling weapons, and that includes weapons of mass destruction.
Ultimately only Congress can pass a uniform federal standard to restrict the
manufacture, sale and transport of guns.
This is where the fight begins and
unfortunately has quickly ended. The
first ending was Congress's failure to reauthorize the 1994 Assault Weapons
Ban which expired in 2004. Congress has been virtually mute on any gun curbs in
the years since then. This did not mean that gun control bills weren't written
and introduced. They were in every Congress session. But not one piece of gun control legislation
made it to the House floor. The 112th Congress was no different.
None of the proposed gun control curbs even made it out of a house committee.
This in no way means
that gun control curbs are dead in the water in perpetuity in Congress. Obama
has called tougher gun control laws "common sense." This signals that if there
is enough public outcry and push that one or more of the gun control measures
could finally make it out of a house or senate committee. Obama is not running
for reelection and does not have to look nervously over his shoulder and worry
about enraged gun owners raking him over the coals for putting his White House
muscle behind one of the bills.
That and the
eventual passage of fresh gun restrictions would at least send the right
signal that the gun lobby is not invincible and that millions of Americans want
and demand anything that will at least potentially head off the next rampage.
Earl Ofari
Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He is a frequent political
commentator on MSNBC and a weekly co-host of the Al Sharpton Show on American
Urban Radio Network. He is the author of How Obama Governed: The Year of
Crisis and Challenge. He is an associate editor of New America Media. He is
the host of the weekly Hutchinson Report on KPFK-Radio and the Pacifica
Network.
Follow Earl Ofari
Hutchinson on Twitter: http://twitter.com/earlhutchinson