The Deadly Myth of Gun Control in Electoral Politics

[russ1943]

May 9, 2009
EDITORIAL OBSERVER
By DOROTHY SAMUELS
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/09/opinion/09sat4.html?pagewanted=print

"Enactment of the original 1994 assault weapons ban cost Democrats control of Congress.
In this season of successive mass shootings, that erroneous conventional wisdom should not go unchallenged. Michael Wolkowitz, board chairman of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, calls the paralyzing myth of ’94 “the single biggest obstacle” to tightening the nation’s lax regulation of guns.
The notion that gun control was responsible for the Democrats’ debacle 15 years ago was floated by Richard Gephardt, the former Democratic House leader, and other pols and commentators after the ’94 election. But it was Bill Clinton who gave it current credence. “The N.R.A. could rightly claim to have made Gingrich the House speaker,” Mr. Clinton wrote in his 2004 autobiography, pumping up the gun lobby and, not incidentally, himself by attributing the body blow to his party to his principled leadership on guns.
It is hard to make a case that the assault weapons ban was decisive in 1994.
The law certainly enraged many N.R.A. members and might explain the loss of certain Democratic seats. However, there were other major factors in the Democrats’ 1994 loss, starting with perceived Democratic arrogance and corruption (overdrafts at the House bank came to symbolize that).
Add to that voter unhappiness with Mr. Clinton’s budget, his health care fiasco, the Republican Party’s success in recruiting appealing candidates, and that ingenious Republican vehicle for nationalizing the elections known as the “Contract With America.” The contract, by the way, did not mention guns.
............Mr. Henigan also points to the stunning defeat four years later, in 2000, of prominent Republican senators running with strong N.R.A. backing, including John Ashcroft in Missouri, Spencer Abraham in Michigan, and Slade Gorton in Washington.
Those who blame the assault weapons ban for the Democrats’ defeat in 1994 also tend to finger gun control for Al Gore’s loss in the 2000 presidential race — especially his failure to carry his home state of Tennessee.
But Mr. Gore’s bigger Tennessee problem was his failure to seriously compete there by providing adequate resources to answer N.R.A. distortions, for instance, and matching George W. Bush’s numerous visits. Largely obscured by the 2000 presidential drama was the loss in Florida’s Senate race of an N.R.A. stalwart, Bill McCollum, to a consistent Democratic supporter of gun control, Bill Nelson."


There are views other than those repeated on this board.

[X_Digger]

1. Whistling past the graveyard

If we can't trust our own president, who was at the center of all things (D) at the time, who are you going to trust?

Truth is, if Gore had carried TN or WV, we'd be saying 'former President Gore' instead of 'former President *'

The '94 AWB enraged more than the 2.5 million NRA members (at that time I think they had that many, fuzzy recollection). They pissed off the 60 million firearm owners who might one day want to have a small to medium caliber modern rifle.

[billyoc]

2. Step up, try your luck. What's the worst that could happen?

:rofl:

[gorfle]

9. Exactly.

Gun Control is the one issue that could give the Republicans a rally point. Right now they are foundering. Let's leave it that way.

[beevul]

3. Color me shocked...

You disagree with Democrats Clinton and Gephardt...

And yet you swallow hook line and sinker, the things that the REPUBLICAN FOUNDED REPUBLICAN LED brady bunch says.

"There are views other than those repeated on this board."


I'll say.

[spin]

4. Bill Clinton makes a lot more sense than the Brady Campaign...

what do they know about winning elections?

[friendly_iconoclast]

5. "what do they know about winning elections" We could maybe find out..

Do they endorse anybody? Now, there's one metric worth checking out.

[pipoman]

6. For every claim by Brady that the NRA lies..

Brady has 10 lies of their own in their propaganda. To site Brady as a credible source is no less dishonest than claiming the NRA-ILA as a source of fact.

[virginia mountainman]

7. I read that article the other day..

It is "wishfully thinking" of the highest order.

I vividly remember members of my own family, TURNING on us because of all that gun control bullshit. Not to mention friends, and neighbors.

Go ahead, grasp at straws, to push an abhorent anti civil rights agenda.

After all, they don't call gun control a "The Silent Killer of Democrats" for nothing

I mean why would REPUBLICANS Like;

Sara Brady
Paul Hemike
Mike Bloomberg
Caroline McCarthy {ex Rethug);

Want Democrats to take a stance that is nearly certain to loose elections??

[benEzra]

8. That's the same damn thing the MSM said in 1996, and 1998, and 2000, and 2004.

Keep trying, it'll work out, right? Says those who believe outlawing the most popular civilian rifles in America should be Priority One for the party....

The author of the above piece is apparently under the mistaken impression that most gun owners are hunters, and care primarily about hunting guns. The fact that Gore wanted to outlaw AR-15's and other "assault weapons," and guns with post-1861 magazine capacities, wasn't an "NRA distortion"; Gore PROMISED to do so, and made it a major theme of his message to gun owners, while at the same time promising to protect "huntin' gunz".

Problem is, only 1 in 5 U.S. gun owners hunts, and of those who do, many/most also own guns the Bradyites wish to ban, and Gore cosponsored legislation to do just that.

BTW, the NYT author is just rehashing talking points written by A GUN BAN LOBBYIST. Did you miss this part after all the "AWB wasn't an albatross" paragraphs?

The notion that gun control was responsible for the Democrats’ debacle 15 years ago was floated by Richard Gephardt, the former Democratic House leader, and other pols and commentators after the ’94 election. But it was Bill Clinton who gave it current credence. “The N.R.A. could rightly claim to have made Gingrich the House speaker,” Mr. Clinton wrote in his 2004 autobiography, pumping up the gun lobby and, not incidentally, himself by attributing the body blow to his party to his principled leadership on guns.

It is hard to make a case that the assault weapons ban was decisive in 1994.

The law certainly enraged many N.R.A. members and might explain the loss of certain Democratic seats. However, there were other major factors in the Democrats’ 1994 loss, starting with perceived Democratic arrogance and corruption (overdrafts at the House bank came to symbolize that).

Add to that voter unhappiness with Mr. Clinton’s budget, his health care fiasco, the Republican Party’s success in recruiting appealing candidates, and that ingenious Republican vehicle for nationalizing the elections known as the “Contract With America.” The contract, by the way, did not mention guns.

Mr. Clinton’s successful 1996 re-election campaign actually stressed his gun control achievements. James and Sarah Brady spoke in prime time at the ’96 Democratic convention, and Clinton campaign ads trumpeted his role in enacting the assault weapons ban and the ’93 Brady law requiring background checks for gun buyers.

So notes Dennis Henigan, a lawyer with the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, in his forthcoming book, “Lethal Logic,” about the harmful fallacies that have come to define the gun control debate.

Of course, lobbyist Henigan fails to note that Clinton's opponent Bobdole carpet-bombed gun owners, endorsed the Brady Campaign AWB, and the NRA's slogan in 1996 was "elect a Clinton-Proof Congress," which they did...