It’s December 28th, the last Friday of 2012, and a cold chill has descended upon American politics once more. President Obama met with Congressional leaders in a last-ditch attempt to reach a deal averting the fiscal cliff. But do they truly want to avert the cliff before the new year? Jim O’Neill at Goldman Sachs says nope. There was late word that the Senate passed a $60 billion Hurricane Sandy relief bill; the House vowed to ignore it. And work continued on a comprehensive farm bill for 2013 and beyond.
With all those headlines, it’s easy to forget that the debate to regulate and restrict the sale of firearms has arguably moved front-and-center following the tragic shooting at Newtown, Connecticut. So, how’s that going everyone?
Reinstating the Assault Weapons Ban
Dianne Feinstein vowed to bring a bill reinstating the assault weapons ban to the Senate floor at the beginning of the next Congress on January 3rd.
The Economics of Gun Control
Brad Plumer of the Washington Post weighed in on the “economics of gun control.” Shorthand: are there societal or social costs imposed by gun owners on the rest of society? What about imposing taxes on gun sales?
Mandatory Insurance for Gun Owners?
The Atlantic, among others, mused about requiring first-time or “risky” gun owners to purchase insurance. Surely, a $50,000 premium on owning an assault weapon might deter the sale?
NRA gun plan a ‘dumbass idea’
Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter thinks the NRA’s plan for armed guards in every American school is a “dumbass idea.”
On assault weapons
It’s clear that assault weapons are a bad idea. Civilians don’t need them. Hunters don’t need them. Many gun owners don’t see them as necessary. Should they be banned? Maybe. I think such a ban should be decided on a state-by-state basis, as is the standard now. Renewing the federal assault weapons ban would only serve to stoke partisan tensions in Washington – and across the country – even further.
Furthermore, a federal assault weapons ban alone wouldn’t come close to solving the problems of recurring gun massacres. Rather, politicians and policymakers should focus on restricting access to individual components of the gun ownership process. They can start with banning the sale of high-capacity (10+ rounds) magazine/ammo clips. That sends a strong message that violence cannot and will not be tolerated, while protecting the Second Amendment.
Secondly, lawmakers should move to close the gun show loophole. You cannot walk away with any firearm without any waiting period for any reason. It’s irresponsible and absurd. They should also require background checks on every firearm purchase to prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands. There’s nothing wrong with being careful.
I certainly think there needs to be a broader discussion about violence in the media and violent culture. But there also must be a substantial discussion on the state of mental health services throughout the Republic. Everyone should have adequate to mental health services. It’s clear that we’re falling short on mental health access. Only certain healthcare plans cover these services. (Of course, you actually need healthcare to access these services – but that’s another debate)
No matter what approach lawmakers choose to take, it’s clear the American people want to see some action taken. There cannot simply be a discussion, followed by kicking the can down the road. We’ve reached a crossroads and can and should pass common-sense solutions that Democrats and Republicans alike can support. That shouldn’t be controversial.