Gun Control: It's a Loser, Mr. President
When a lawmaker confronts a given issue, it's in their own interest and the interest of their constituency to do a cost-benefit analysis. Is it worth the fight? Will there be sufficient policy upside to spending political capital in pursuit of reform on a given issue. Back in 2009, I didn't think cap and trade was worth the risk. The public only cares about climate change in the abstract, so if lawmakers were to ask for financial or lifestyle sacrifice from the masses in pursuit of keeping the planet livable for the human race a little longer, it would be far more sacrifice than the public was willing to endure. And even for those who believe it's worth the political risk to save the planet, how much can be gained when the rest of the globe refuses to play along, including the world's primary polluters in South and East Asia?
Just as big of a loser in the cost-benefit analysis of public policy pursuits in the issue Obama is currently putting front and center on his political agenda, and that's gun control. In the abstract, I'm torn on this issue personally as the libertarian in me believes law-abiding citizens should not be penalized for gun ownership. On the other hand, the gun rights crowd presents such delusional, immature, and unpersuasive arguments on their own behalf, they make themselves impossible to defend. No sane person's interpretation of the Second Amendment justifies limitless weaponization with no regulations whatsoever. Still, the gun fetish has consumed the good sense of many millions of Americans, and there will undeniably be political retribution for crossing them.
Knowing that, what is there to be gained by making permanent enemies out of millions of gun fetishists by passing the legislation currently on the table? As far as I can tell, only hypothetical scenarios where a few maniacal killers could be denied access to the weapons they used in their massacres....or possibly fewer dead bodies in specific incidents where mass shootings occurred. Would it be worth it for Obama and the Democrats to throw away their entire second-term agenda for that? In my mind, it's an unequivocal no, even though I don't disagree with specific legislative goals of toughening background checks, or banning assault weapons or high-capacity ammunition clips.
Gun control advocates will undoubtedly point to public opinion polls showing majority support for all of the initiatives Obama is currently pursuing, but there's no other issue in which the tyranny of the minority will ultimately win the day to the extent that it does on guns. The majority that supports gun control is a mile wide and an inch deep, and the issue is extremely low intensity for just about everybody on the gun control side of the persuasion. But when it comes to the gun rights crowd, there is no higher priority in life for them than firearms lawlessness. And the lopsided intensity on the side of the gun rights crowd means huge financial contributions to gun-rights candidates and special interests, along with a full-throttle turnout at the polls in future election cycles by people convinced ATF agents will soon be going door to door to take away their hunting rifles. That makes them putty in the hands of monsters like the Koch Brothers and Paul Ryan, the scorpions who will ride on the backs of gun rights supporters across the river to political power, only to sting them just as they get to the other side.
Even after a decade of surrendering the gun issue to the NRA, the Democrats were still getting hosed on the issue among voters who obsess about firearms lawlessness. But there was a narrow window in 2006 and 2008 where Democrats were making a dent in winning back some of this demographic that had migrated to the GOP during the Bush years. While they never liked Obama, Congressional Democrats and candidate Hillary Clinton were viewed by many as acceptable. That's why it's so distressing to see Democrats go down this road again, with a hint of arrogance following their impressive 2012 election win, as there is so much at stake politically to sacrifice it all for gun control.
And it's too late to put this genie back in the bottle as Obama and the Democrats are tagged with the stigma of gun confiscators at this point, and that will be the case even if all the gun control legislation currently proposed goes down in flames. Millions of voters who would be receptive to the Democrats' message on saving Social Security and Medicare, or on pressuring the business community to reverse decades of wage and benefit declines amidst an increasingly stratified income disparity in this country, will tune all of that out and hitch their wagon to those shouting the loudest about guns. However strongly you may feel about imposing some needed regulations on gun ownership and possession, will it be worth it to surrender the country to monsters like the Koch Brothers and Paul Ryan to get it done? Because that seems like the inevitable outcome of awakening this sleeping lion.
Just as big of a loser in the cost-benefit analysis of public policy pursuits in the issue Obama is currently putting front and center on his political agenda, and that's gun control. In the abstract, I'm torn on this issue personally as the libertarian in me believes law-abiding citizens should not be penalized for gun ownership. On the other hand, the gun rights crowd presents such delusional, immature, and unpersuasive arguments on their own behalf, they make themselves impossible to defend. No sane person's interpretation of the Second Amendment justifies limitless weaponization with no regulations whatsoever. Still, the gun fetish has consumed the good sense of many millions of Americans, and there will undeniably be political retribution for crossing them.
Knowing that, what is there to be gained by making permanent enemies out of millions of gun fetishists by passing the legislation currently on the table? As far as I can tell, only hypothetical scenarios where a few maniacal killers could be denied access to the weapons they used in their massacres....or possibly fewer dead bodies in specific incidents where mass shootings occurred. Would it be worth it for Obama and the Democrats to throw away their entire second-term agenda for that? In my mind, it's an unequivocal no, even though I don't disagree with specific legislative goals of toughening background checks, or banning assault weapons or high-capacity ammunition clips.
Gun control advocates will undoubtedly point to public opinion polls showing majority support for all of the initiatives Obama is currently pursuing, but there's no other issue in which the tyranny of the minority will ultimately win the day to the extent that it does on guns. The majority that supports gun control is a mile wide and an inch deep, and the issue is extremely low intensity for just about everybody on the gun control side of the persuasion. But when it comes to the gun rights crowd, there is no higher priority in life for them than firearms lawlessness. And the lopsided intensity on the side of the gun rights crowd means huge financial contributions to gun-rights candidates and special interests, along with a full-throttle turnout at the polls in future election cycles by people convinced ATF agents will soon be going door to door to take away their hunting rifles. That makes them putty in the hands of monsters like the Koch Brothers and Paul Ryan, the scorpions who will ride on the backs of gun rights supporters across the river to political power, only to sting them just as they get to the other side.
Even after a decade of surrendering the gun issue to the NRA, the Democrats were still getting hosed on the issue among voters who obsess about firearms lawlessness. But there was a narrow window in 2006 and 2008 where Democrats were making a dent in winning back some of this demographic that had migrated to the GOP during the Bush years. While they never liked Obama, Congressional Democrats and candidate Hillary Clinton were viewed by many as acceptable. That's why it's so distressing to see Democrats go down this road again, with a hint of arrogance following their impressive 2012 election win, as there is so much at stake politically to sacrifice it all for gun control.
And it's too late to put this genie back in the bottle as Obama and the Democrats are tagged with the stigma of gun confiscators at this point, and that will be the case even if all the gun control legislation currently proposed goes down in flames. Millions of voters who would be receptive to the Democrats' message on saving Social Security and Medicare, or on pressuring the business community to reverse decades of wage and benefit declines amidst an increasingly stratified income disparity in this country, will tune all of that out and hitch their wagon to those shouting the loudest about guns. However strongly you may feel about imposing some needed regulations on gun ownership and possession, will it be worth it to surrender the country to monsters like the Koch Brothers and Paul Ryan to get it done? Because that seems like the inevitable outcome of awakening this sleeping lion.
posted by Mark at 1:17 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home