SocraticGadfly: We as a nation and the Democratic Party have gone BACKWARDS on gun control

September 13, 2019

We as a nation and the Democratic Party
have gone BACKWARDS on gun control

The AR-15, 25 years ago, was specifically listed as among weapons banned under the Bill Clinton era Federal Assault Weapons Ban.

Last night, at the third Democratic debate, Robert O'Rourke called for AR-15s, and other guns, to be banned again. And Democrat senator Chris Coon went apeshit.

Coons said he is working with Republicans to pass more modest gun control measures.

Judging by the rest of The Hill's story at the second link, his measures are modest indeed, and like Winston Churchill's one famous putdown in the House of Commons, Coons surely has much to be modest about.

A "notification" when someone banned from buying guns tries to buy one? We should have that already in place federally and in all 50 states.

Here's Coons on O'Rourke:
“I don’t think having our presidential candidates, like Congressman O’Rourke did, say that we’re going to try to take people’s guns against their will is a wise policy or political move,” Coons said.

Whether or not it's a wise political move (and it may be more that than you think, Coons), it's a good policy move — with some editing.

Let's start with the ban part of O'Rourke's call being THE POLICY 25 years ago. A buyback is the logical next step forward off that. That said, given the current Supreme Court, a mandatory buyback would almost certainly be found unconstitutional. But legislation on a Cass Sunstein "nudge" angle could sweeten the pot for buybacks. As part of a new assault weapon ban, declare that the use of a weapon on an assault weapons ban list for any crime automatically federalizes the crime, or even federalizes it and enhances it one felony degree. Or something similar.

That said, and sorry, fellow ardent gun control advocates, I think a mandatory buyback would be unconstitutional, but not on Second Amendment grounds. I think it would be deemed ex post facto legislation. I would consider it that. I do also think a mandatory buyback might lead to other, violent, problems.

But, back to Coons.

Besides, you're almost certainly being played by Pat Toomey and other Rethuglicans anyway, Coons.

To a man, or woman, GOP Congresscritters are either scared shitless of the legendary power of the NRA (which ain't necessarily reality any more) or else, like, say, Dan Crenshaw here in Tex-ass, or Briscoe Cain at the state level, really are gun nuts.

These are the same people who just say "enforce the current laws better" then work to carve out loopholes in those laws that people like eBay use.

Stop following the Overton Window, Chris. 


That said, Beto having quote-printed T-shirts for sale shortly after the debate, and having his website updated to show Trump as white nationalist, shows this was all a canned, packaged plan.

THAT that said, how much actual lifting did Bob on a Knob do on gun control when he was in the House? He was kind of a ConservaDem on many issues himself. And, Puff Hoes reminds me that he refused to campaign for Gina Ortiz Jones, or more, refused to campaign against travel buddy Will Hurd, last year. That could be seen as somewhat of a gotcha.

OK, his gun ratings? Both the NRA and the even more nutbar (yes, true) Gun Owners of America ranked Bob very lowly, but neither one ever gave him a zero. And, if he really thought gun rights were this ardent of an issue 12 months ago, he would have done more for Jones and against Hurd than just sharing a donor contacts list.

1 comment:


You are quite prompt and prolific I see.
I am considering writing on my blog The PLAS Place about O'Rourke's quote.
I believe the solution to gun violence is more along the lines of Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence by James W. Prescott (who I met once and later corresponded with) and The Sexual Revolution by Wilhelm Reich. Needless to say the Trobriand Islanders do not have a gun violence problem.
Not Beto O'Rourke's quote. Actually if you want more violence, exponentially so, just start doing exactly that; the stereotypical confiscation of guns en masse. And don't forget the black helicopters.
I read the Second Amendment. It seems fairly simple and clear in the King's own English to me. "...shall not be infringed..." So, perhaps criminal court cases in which juries refuse to convict ANY gun violation may lead to genuine change.
To be clear, I grew up in a house with no guns. No military or hunting talk, no gun safety or discussions of the second amendment or what to do if the government gets so oppressive as to confiscate guns en masse. While I appreciate my parents, this was clearly a mistake too far in that direction.