Senate Blocks Drive for Gun Control

Article review

Weisman, J. (2013). Senate Blocks Drive for Gun Control. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/18/us/politics/senate-obama-gun-control.html?_r=1&

Jonathan Weisman, author of the article, studied journalism and African History at Northwestern University. Weisman’s professional career includes time at Education Week, CQ, USA Today, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal where he did most of his work covering politics and the White House. Today he is a congressional correspondent for the New York Times, where he reports on issues that take place in Congress. He lives in Washington DC with Wife, Susan and two small children. In this paper I will summarize the article and give an analysis of the topic of gun control and the decision the senate was faced with to either expand it or leave the current amendment in place.
Article Summary Weisman reports on the senate’s decision to block several methods to expand gun control. In the wake of the violent shooting that left 20 children dead in Newtown Connecticut, The Senate was challenged with the decision to increase gun control in order to help prevent this tragedy from ever happening again. 90 percent of Americans want gun control however, “A bipartisan compromise to expand background checks for gun buyers, a ban on assault weapons and a ban on high-capacity gun magazines all failed to get the 60 votes needed under an agreement between both parties”,(Weisman 2013 para 2). Survivors and those affected by those who were harmed by gun violence were appalled at the decision made by the senate. President Obama also commented on the decision by the senate calling the day “a pretty shameful day for Washington”. Those who opposed gun control said they chose not to base their decisions off passion, despite the fact the victims and family of victims were gathered in the senate gallery and the many gun rights control calls made by members of the National Rifle Association (NRA) to the Senate. Speeches from both sides of the Senate over the debate stirred up emotions. Gun rights advocate, Senator Harry Reid stated “I choose to vote my conscience, “because, if tragedy strikes again — if innocents are gunned down in a classroom or a theater or a restaurant — I could not live with myself as a father, as a husband, as a grandfather or as a friend knowing that I didn’t do everything in my power to prevent it.” (para 20).Despite Mr. Reid’s effort to touch the heart of those opposed to passing the bill, the decision to ban assault weapons and magazines that carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition and to do background checks on all wanting to carry a weapon failed. Gun rights lobbyist had proven to be more persuasive as the assault weapons vote was 40 in favor and 60 against. The magazine ban fell with 46 in favor and 54 against. The defeat left Senators on both sides disappointed with the outcome. However, President Obama state “the effort is not over”, and others in alliance with the expansion of gun control will not let this issue go to rest.
Critical Reflection The central purpose of this article was to reveal to the reader the division the senate faced in deciding whether to expand gun control in the United States and how that decision was made. What was due to take a few weeks’ time to reach a decision, Senates leaders decided to instead hurry the process. The Senate’s procedure used for these votes was that of a bipartisan compromise. There was a 60 vote threshold needed to overcome the filibuster, which is a method of delaying the legislative process. Once the decision was made and Senate announced the block for gun control, those affected by fire-arm violence and those for expanded gun control were devastated by the defeat. The tone of this article was impassioned as Weisman began it with an emotional starter, providing the small children that died in the shooting as opener to a heart wrenching debate over gun control, or the lack thereof. Weisman exposed how the discussion of gun control in our senate is merely too divided to reach any kind of solution that would prevent another shooting from occurring at a school again. The article provided insight on the thought process those in the Senate developed while making their decision. Weisman stated, “Opponents of gun control from both parties said that they made their decisions based on logic, and that passions had no place in the making of momentous policy”. Throughout the article, Weisman appears to draw the audience in as he frequently features statements from those who were for the expansion of gun control in this piece of literature. To shed light on how devastating the news of the Senate’s decision was to some, Weisman added, “Lori Haas, whose daughter was shot at Virginia Tech, and Patricia Maisch, a survivor of the mass shooting in Arizona, shouted together, “Shame on you.”(Weisman, 2013 para 6)
Those opposed to gun control appeared to be more like aggressive bullies in this article.
“The National Rifle Association mobilized members to blanket the Senate with phone calls, e-mails and letters. The group also spent $500,000 on Wednesday alone, on an advertising campaign criticizing “Obama’s gun ban” and using Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, a deep-pocketed gun control advocate, as a foil. “Tell your senator to listen to America’s police instead of listening to Obama and Bloomberg”. (Weisman, 2013 para 18)
Despite the bickering from NRA and the emotion from fire-arm violence victims made their decision. The assault weapons vote was 40 in favor and 60 against. The magazine ban fell with 46 in favor and 54 against. Apparently not persuaded by those for gun control, the judgment to remove substantial new gun restriction from the bill fell to the recycle bin as the Senate chose to move on to other issues deemed to be more important at the time, such as Interstate sales tax measures. “Democratic leadership aides said the effort could be revived if a public held accountable groundswell demanded it. ‘The world is watching the United States Senate, and we will be, said Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, who helped lead the gun control effort”. (Weisman 2013, para 26)
Further Research Gun politics has been an overwhelmingly controversial issue in the United States for the past several decades. The disagreements regarding both the restriction and availability of firearms in America has been characterized by a difference between the Second Amendments, right to bear arms and the Constitutions responsibility of government to prevent fire-arm related crimes. One of the first major victories for gun rights advocates at the federal level came in 2004, when the Assault Weapons Ban was scheduled to expire by its own terms. Efforts by gun control advocates to extend the ban at the federal level failed. Two later attempts to reestablish the ban also failed. The NRA opposed bans on handguns in Washington D.C. and San Francisco, while also supporting the 2007 The School Safety and Law Improvement Act also known as the NICS Improvement Amendments Act (H.R. 2640)), which strengthened requirements for background checks for firearm purchases. After further research here is a breakdown to how each new Gun measure considered by the Senate was either passed or failed. Require checks for online sales and sales at gun shows, but not sales between neighbors and family members failed 54-46. Substitute for back ground check bill that increases enforcement and reporting on mentally ill people failed 52-48. Renew and strengthen a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines failed 40-60. Limit magazines to 10 rounds failed 46-54. Make straw purchasing and trafficking a federal crime failed 58-42. Reauthorize and approve mental health programs passed 95-2. Impose penalties on states releasing gun ownership data passed 67-30. Allow only a judge to deem veterans mentally incompetent to own a gun failed 56-44
Conclusion
Weisman provided several accounts on the reaction to the Senates decision to not expand gun laws in America. Weisman focused primarily on the emotional side of the Senates bipartisan decision. Since the article was written there has been no further expansion to control of firearms in America. The Second Amendment stands as the right to bear arms, and there have been few adjustments to changing it in order to prevent fire-arm crime.