A couple of weeks ago, it seemed like the US Senate might actually respond to the will of the overwhelming majority of Americans when it comes to sensible gun control. It seemed as if the Senate, the more deliberative body of Congress, would pass a bill that would at the very least help to prevent some felons and violent individuals from easily acquiring guns.

But yesterday, the Senate voted 54 to 46 on an amendment requiring background checks before a gun could be purchased, falling six votes short of the 60 needed to prevent a filibuster. The proposed legislation’s other amendments — banning high-capacity magazines and assault weapons suitable for military combat — were also defeated.

The Senate’s decision drew a swift and angry response from President Obama who referred to it as a “shameful day.” In a news conference after the vote, Obama said the National Rifle Association had successfully convinced some conservatives that the law would lead to a national registry for gun owners, even though the law specifically stated the opposite.

Hints of trouble surfaced when Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida made a whirlwind press tour last Sunday on all of the news shows. When asked about whether he would support universal background checks, he offered the obligatory sympathy to families of the victims of Newtown, Connecticut. Then he complained about the violent culture promoted by Hollywood filmmakers.

Florida should be outraged at his absurd response to such a serious problem. The citizens of Florida aren’t strangers to gun violence. But voters in many states should be outraged at the abdication of responsibility some elected officials showed concerning their chief responsibility: doing everything humanly possible to protect and ensure the safety of the American people.

The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza wrote in his column about the lessons gleaned from the Senate’s vote: as horrified as the American public is by the Newtown massacre, it is not enough to stop business as usual in Washington.

And senators, most Republicans and some Democrats, saw the 2014 election in front of them and voted for job preservation.

We also know now that we can’t depend on this Congress to work together for sensible and pragmatic compromises on virtually anything — not immigration, the economy, or a balanced approach to resolving the nation’s debt crisis.

When elected officials vote in favor of aiding felons and violent individuals in their efforts to purchase high-powered weapons of war, something has gone terribly wrong.

A dysfunctional partisan government may pose a worst threat to the American people than anything to do with the Second Amendment.

This article appears in Apr 17-23, 2013.

I was born and raised in the Rochester area, but I lived in California and Florida before returning home about 12 years ago. I'm a vegetarian and live with my husband and our three pugs. I cover education,...

8 replies on “Self-serving Senate’s failed gun control legislation”

  1. I don’t understand why the day was “shameful” or why people are all upset with Congress. I, for one, was a little worried that they might actually shave some more of our rights in the name of “safety.”

    For the first time since the sequester, I’m pretty happy with the fact that Congress worked as it was supposed to: protecting the rights of Americans. Congress isn’t always supposed to bow to the will of the majority. Sometimes Congress’ role is to maintain the rights of a minority.

    First: when was the last time Congress worked to INCREASE our rights in any way?
    The history of America in the last few decades has been one of reducing the freedoms of individuals and groups who are not in the majority or in power.
    Almost every decision of the Congress since at least 9/11 has been to reduce and restrict freedoms of Americans and other global citizens (Patriot Act to name only 1)

    Second: why write new laws when older laws could have a significant impact on the problem IF enforcement is implemented. Writing new laws isn’t the same as enforcing them.

    I don’t own a handgun. Maybe I will in the future, maybe not. That decision isn’t on my mind, BUT, the freedom to make that decision is. The Bill of Rights isn’t an a la carte menu. It exists to protect our rights and freedoms.

    We have become a nation of simpering cowards responding with panic and hyperbole at every rare, outlier event that has a negative result. Why? I have no idea except that we have also become a nation that worships its children. The “safety” of the children trumps the rights of free Americans everywhere.

    Not if I can help it. Hurrah for the Constitution. It’s not completely shredded yet.

  2. The Senate took a stand for freedom yesterday. Liberals have a lot of nerve trying to “shame” Americans into voting for laws that restrict our rights and do NOTHING to prevent gun violence. These opportunistic big government socialists got a taste of what they deserve.

    Obama wants to turn American into one giant Chicago, and many Americans don’t want that. Despite the nauseating propaganda shoved down our throats by the liberal media. So cheers to the Senate for taking a stand against this tyranny. It may have not been a good day for Obama, but it was a good day for freedom.

  3. Yikes! So if 90 percent of the country is in favor of background checks for gun and ammo purchases at conventions and on the Internet, which ARE NOT checked currently, meaning crazy people can purchase such weapons and show a up at a movie theater and kill people that could be my friends and family and that’s democracy???

  5. Yugoboy – Good news! Despite the propaganda, misrepresentations and out right lies spewing from the NRA and their right wing accomplices, your freedom to purchase a firearm is not, and never was, in danger. The Constitution, including the Second Amendment is alive and well. Only those with a fevered imagination view it as being in the slightest shredded.

    Neither Obama, nor Congress nor any state government has proposed or will propose that all firearms be banned or that those in private hands be confiscated. Your right to be shot by a friend or family member remains intact, as does the right of any citizen, law-abiding or not, to buy as much firepower as they can afford ij order to be able to and take out their wrath on innocent bystanders in schools, movie theaters and college campuses.

  6. Even commentators sympathetic to Prof. Obama are pointing out his incompetence on this one. A smarter politician would have focused on getting background checks done before the Newtown hysteria dissipated, rather than getting wrapped around the axle over bans that would never pass. Instead, thanks to his ivory tower cluelessness, the professor loses juice with nothing to show for it.

    Of course, that analysis assumes he actually wanted to get something done. The fact is Obama said nothing about gun control either time he ran for president. His histrionics on the subject now is nothing but theater. And it is a particularly execrable example of victim porn, cynically calculated to agitate his lunatic fringe base for the midterms while shaking down his Hollywood sugar daddies.

  7. MJN – My sarcasm meter jumped into the red zone with your post.

    Your point is understood, well-made even.

    However, even with the element of common-sense you bring, I can’t get worked up in favor of any additional restriction – no matter how practical, reasonable or common-sensical – to any of our freedoms.

    We have lost too many in the last few decades. Freedoms of communication (Patriot Act), against unreasonable search and seizure (TSA), loss of property to eminent domain (Kelo), federal minimum sentences and others… all these and more have led America away from being the beacon of liberty she used to be, and into the “modern” world of limited freedoms (in a macro sense) we live in today.

    We may have plenty of day-to-day freedoms left (thank God for the 1st Amendment), but in a full understanding of where we’ve been and what we’ve done, we’re less free today than we’ve been in a long, long time.

    Until we regain some freedoms for Americans who aren’t bankers, politicians or lobbyists, giving up ANY freedoms is a sacrifice no one should be willing to make.

  8. “And senators, most Republicans and some Democrats, saw the 2014 election in front of them and voted for job preservation.”

    If you want to be a newspaper pundit when you grow up, here’s a can’t-miss rule of thumb: Half the time, attack elected representatives for IGNORING their constituents’ wishes. Then the half of the time, attack them for FOLLOWING their constituents’ wishes. Heads I win, tails you lose!

    Oh, and complain about “partisanship” even when nearly a third of the majority caucus votes against its leadership (as with the semiautomatic ban).

Comments are closed.