It's been a little baffling but a lot of pundits seem to have a big issue with the Dems' gun control push since Orlando.
Matt Yglesias notes:
"All the liberal writers I follow think this “no gun list” bill is garbage but Dems have learned nobody cares what writers think. Sad!"
https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/745717108533780481
This is certainly an almost universal view among the liberal writers I've seen.
Ryan Cooper:
"The horrific shooting in Orlando, Florida, has solidified the emerging consensus that the Democratic Party needs to make gun control a major part of its political platform. Most recently, this took the form of a filibuster by Senate Democrats, led by Connecticut's Christopher Murphy, to force a vote on expanding the background check system and creating a new watch list that would allow the attorney general to halt gun sales to anyone who has been the subject of a terrorism investigation."
"Democrats will almost certainly lose these votes, but they are still important in what they signal about the developing Democratic thinking on gun policy — and the results are not encouraging. The background check expansion is fine (if fairly small beer), but the creation of yet another extremely broad terrorist watch list indicates a disturbing willingness to throw principle and quality policy over the side in favor of posturing and symbolism."
http://theweek.com/articles/630908/how-democrats-cynically-abandoned-all-principle-guns
Here's what I don't get. If Cooper agrees that they will lose these votes-this was from a few days ago; they have lost in the Senate though Susan Collins has now put forward her own compromise bill-then where is the problem?
Isn't it a good thing that at least the gun control issue is getting traction? I mean the fact that Collins is coming forward with her own bill signifies that the Dems have finally found a good crowbar to unjam the opposition to all gun control measures.
At least now the GOP is acknowledging a problem. Now Cooper and other liberal pundits don''t like it because the Dems are framing the gun control measures as being about terrorism.
For instance, this Vox piece argues that the Dems should not talk about terrorism but rather domestic violence.
"The national debate over gun control has reached something of a breaking point in Congress since Omar Mateen killed 49 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando earlier this month. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) led Senate Democrats in a 15-hour filibuster last week until Republicans would agree to take a vote on gun control measures. Rep. John Lewis(D-GA) led Democrats in a sit-in on Wednesday to make the same basic demands."
"These efforts are probably doomed to fail, at least in the short term. But it’s still worth discussing the actual policies that Democrats are willing to halt congressional business in order to demand votes on."
"The most prominent, and most controversial, proposals seek to ban people suspected of terrorism from buying guns — for instance, by turning the no-fly list into a “no-gun list.” But the problem with these ideas, many critics argue, is that they would probablyviolate people’s due process rights and set a dangerous precedent — especially for Muslims who are more likely to be racially profiled."
"To be clear, actually solving America’s gun problem would take much more radical action than Congress seems willing to contemplate. But there are better and worse ways to try to at least reduce the likelihood of gun violence."
"So here’s an idea. If we don’t like egregious civil liberties violations, but we still want to curb mass shootings by banning certain people from owning guns instead of banning guns themselves, we shouldn’t focus on suspected terrorists. We shouldn’t focus on people with mental illnesses either, since there’s no good evidence that this would help."
"We should focus on domestic abusers."
http://www.vox.com/2016/6/22/12005186/guns-terrorism-domestic-violence-orlando-congress
So we see that Emily Crockett like Ryan Cooper says the bill will won't go anywhere but it will do these terrible things to civil liberties.
So which is it? If it won't go anywhere it can't do any harm.
Matt Yglesias notes:
"All the liberal writers I follow think this “no gun list” bill is garbage but Dems have learned nobody cares what writers think. Sad!"
https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/745717108533780481
This is certainly an almost universal view among the liberal writers I've seen.
Ryan Cooper:
"The horrific shooting in Orlando, Florida, has solidified the emerging consensus that the Democratic Party needs to make gun control a major part of its political platform. Most recently, this took the form of a filibuster by Senate Democrats, led by Connecticut's Christopher Murphy, to force a vote on expanding the background check system and creating a new watch list that would allow the attorney general to halt gun sales to anyone who has been the subject of a terrorism investigation."
"Democrats will almost certainly lose these votes, but they are still important in what they signal about the developing Democratic thinking on gun policy — and the results are not encouraging. The background check expansion is fine (if fairly small beer), but the creation of yet another extremely broad terrorist watch list indicates a disturbing willingness to throw principle and quality policy over the side in favor of posturing and symbolism."
http://theweek.com/articles/630908/how-democrats-cynically-abandoned-all-principle-guns
Here's what I don't get. If Cooper agrees that they will lose these votes-this was from a few days ago; they have lost in the Senate though Susan Collins has now put forward her own compromise bill-then where is the problem?
Isn't it a good thing that at least the gun control issue is getting traction? I mean the fact that Collins is coming forward with her own bill signifies that the Dems have finally found a good crowbar to unjam the opposition to all gun control measures.
At least now the GOP is acknowledging a problem. Now Cooper and other liberal pundits don''t like it because the Dems are framing the gun control measures as being about terrorism.
For instance, this Vox piece argues that the Dems should not talk about terrorism but rather domestic violence.
"The national debate over gun control has reached something of a breaking point in Congress since Omar Mateen killed 49 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando earlier this month. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) led Senate Democrats in a 15-hour filibuster last week until Republicans would agree to take a vote on gun control measures. Rep. John Lewis(D-GA) led Democrats in a sit-in on Wednesday to make the same basic demands."
"These efforts are probably doomed to fail, at least in the short term. But it’s still worth discussing the actual policies that Democrats are willing to halt congressional business in order to demand votes on."
"The most prominent, and most controversial, proposals seek to ban people suspected of terrorism from buying guns — for instance, by turning the no-fly list into a “no-gun list.” But the problem with these ideas, many critics argue, is that they would probablyviolate people’s due process rights and set a dangerous precedent — especially for Muslims who are more likely to be racially profiled."
"To be clear, actually solving America’s gun problem would take much more radical action than Congress seems willing to contemplate. But there are better and worse ways to try to at least reduce the likelihood of gun violence."
"So here’s an idea. If we don’t like egregious civil liberties violations, but we still want to curb mass shootings by banning certain people from owning guns instead of banning guns themselves, we shouldn’t focus on suspected terrorists. We shouldn’t focus on people with mental illnesses either, since there’s no good evidence that this would help."
"We should focus on domestic abusers."
http://www.vox.com/2016/6/22/12005186/guns-terrorism-domestic-violence-orlando-congress
So we see that Emily Crockett like Ryan Cooper says the bill will won't go anywhere but it will do these terrible things to civil liberties.
So which is it? If it won't go anywhere it can't do any harm.
They dismiss it as mere symbolism. But that's what you need sometimes. To make gun control a priority, you need some symbolism.
If the measure won't even pass as the pundits point out, where is the problem? It's simply a matter of putting the gun control debate back in on the radar screen again.
As for domestic violence, of course that's part of the problem as well. When you look at what happened in Orlando it was many things at once:
1. Mass shooting 2. Hate crime 3. Terrorism 4. Domestic violence
Here's the problem: the GOP doesn't care about any of these except 3.
If you aren't talking about terrorism, then they just dismiss it as 'not serious.' Trouble is the GOP runs Congress.
So how do you get them to take gun control seriously. If you talk about 4 as Ms. Crockett says Democrats should do then the GOP will say:
Can you believe these Democrats! ISIS keeps striking the homeland but all these Dems want to do is talk about domestic violence!
But if you hit the GOP as being weak on ISIS, this puts them in a box.
The Dems are accusing the GOP as being so absolutist on letting everyone have a gun that this even trumps-or should I say Trumps-even their focus on terrorism.
That the liberal pundits refuse to even see this, shows their limitation. They only focus on ideas. Ideas are important, but they are not sufficient without implementation.
It's a stark contrast. While the liberals on the sidelines carp, the Dems have galvanized many Americans. Last night, some regular folks came by and protested on the steps of the capital with the Dems in solidarity.
Jeremy Bird:
"Inspired by everything about #NoBillNoBreak - the American people are with you, @HouseDemocrats."
https://twitter.com/jeremybird/status/745832638301278210
To move the Overton Window you don't always have to have the perfect bill and sometimes mere symbolism can be powerful.
If the measure won't even pass as the pundits point out, where is the problem? It's simply a matter of putting the gun control debate back in on the radar screen again.
As for domestic violence, of course that's part of the problem as well. When you look at what happened in Orlando it was many things at once:
1. Mass shooting 2. Hate crime 3. Terrorism 4. Domestic violence
Here's the problem: the GOP doesn't care about any of these except 3.
If you aren't talking about terrorism, then they just dismiss it as 'not serious.' Trouble is the GOP runs Congress.
So how do you get them to take gun control seriously. If you talk about 4 as Ms. Crockett says Democrats should do then the GOP will say:
Can you believe these Democrats! ISIS keeps striking the homeland but all these Dems want to do is talk about domestic violence!
But if you hit the GOP as being weak on ISIS, this puts them in a box.
The Dems are accusing the GOP as being so absolutist on letting everyone have a gun that this even trumps-or should I say Trumps-even their focus on terrorism.
That the liberal pundits refuse to even see this, shows their limitation. They only focus on ideas. Ideas are important, but they are not sufficient without implementation.
It's a stark contrast. While the liberals on the sidelines carp, the Dems have galvanized many Americans. Last night, some regular folks came by and protested on the steps of the capital with the Dems in solidarity.
Jeremy Bird:
"Inspired by everything about #NoBillNoBreak - the American people are with you, @HouseDemocrats."
https://twitter.com/jeremybird/status/745832638301278210
To move the Overton Window you don't always have to have the perfect bill and sometimes mere symbolism can be powerful.
No comments:
Post a Comment