WASHINGTON — Advocates for stricter gun controls have more money this year, more energy, the president’s backing, and the national outrage over the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre on their side. But there already is a sense in Washington that they will have to settle for more modest gains in the months ahead than an assault weapons ban or sharp limits on magazine capacity.
Just how much the shootings last year in Newtown, Conn. — as well as the mass shooting in a movie theater in Aurora, Colo. — have changed the political climate will be tested Thursday when the Senate Judiciary Committee reviews a series of proposals to curb gun violence.
Comments
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed...
that pesky consitution...
Regulation for public safety is not infringement. Do fire regulations limiting building occupancy numbers unconstitutionally limit your right to assemble? Do noise limits free speech? No. They regulate activity in a civil society.
Kate, what a silly response! Unless you have been living under a rock somewhere, political protests occur OUTDOORS, your "fire regulation" example is ludicrous at best.
Noise limits? Are you kidding me? Maybe in this crazy state they have some noise regulation when people assemble to protest, but I have lived many other places, and have never seen one. When was the last time you heard of a protester being arrested for violating a "noise regulation"? You make me laugh.
And yes, "regulation" for public safety IS an infringement. What part of "shall not" do you fail to understand?
If you do not like the 2A, then work to change it, not "regulate" it.
The Senate should pass a bill that restricts assault rifles and limits magazines and dare the House to defeat it. Let those who are in favor of mass killings stand up and be counted. One more issue which eventually will lead to repudiation and demise of the Extreme Right.
The lemmings of the left are lining up all right.
But remember, one day "they" will take away a right you cherish.....and there may not be decent folk left to defend you......
Forward, comrade, forward...
thecpt: the 'lemmings" have already lost one of their rights, they missed it. Now, anyone with secretive service protection can declare a "free speech" zone around themselves and silence protestors. No more shouting nasty things at anyone who has a SS detail.
But hey, that is "regulation" for you. Pretty soon, that "free speech zone" will get bigger and bigger. Everyone will still have their right to free speech, just nowhere to excercise it, sort of like what they want to do with the 2A.
I really dislike underhanded, sneaky, slimey, slithering types.
Let's see if I got this issue straight:
20 children are killed by an insane person.
No one wants to discuss security in schools cause first Clinton suggested it, but then the NRA did, which makes it an awful idea.
Victims are paraded all over the place for maximum dramatic effect.
Anyone who owns a rifle capable of holding more than 10 rounds is supposed to somehow feel they are guilty of something.
80 million gun owners should agree that "regulations" should be passed on the 2A, no wait, 300 million Americans should agree to that, not just gun owners.
The SH victims are somehow corelated to gun crime in general.
Gun owners should believe that no one is going to take their guns away. Yet NY is already demanding that certain rifles and magazines either be destroyed or sold out of state. Linsky wants "assault" rifles stored at gun clubs. Strange, if my rifle is at the gun club, it is not in my possession.
Gun control advocates want to have tighter background checks, but claim this is not a national registry, or will not lead to it. Yet, I live in a state where every gun I own is, in fact, registered. Should this state decide that what I own is illegal, it knows where to go to confiscate them. Why do I not trust anyone who mouths this stuff?
I live in a state where the AG has decided to "control guns" by implementing a "consumer protection" scheme.
The state I live in never rescinded it's AWB, even though all studies indicated that it did absolutely nothing in terms of gun crimes. The gun haters still cling to the claim that somehow it has reduced gun violence in this state. Even though the trend in the state has followed the national trend.
No, I don't think we need any further gun laws. In fact, I think the ones in this state need to be fixed. They are broken. Gun owners in this state are determined to be "suitable" by a Police Chief. Just what is "suitable"? A white person? A male? A friend of the Chief? Someone who dresses "appropriately"? It makes me sick.
This comment has been removed.
Guns don't kill people,people kill people with guns because they are mentally ill sick people. Why don't we work on the real problem which is we have enormous numbers of crazy people walking the streets of America. It is time to invest in mental health solutions to either educate the crazys or lock them up, like we used to do. We closed most of our mental instutions many years ago and we are paying a huge price for doing that today.
They said that they were too expensive to operate. They also said that banks are too big to fail or jail. That is why we spend $83 Billion dollars a year bailing out big banks. Wouldn't that money be better spent curing the mentally ill or locking them up! We will never stop the killing with guns until we solve these other problems.
How sick are the "macho man" gun enthusiasts who feel the need to clean out the local gun stores because questions are being asked?
PV, it wasn't the "macho man" types who cleaned them out. There were a whole lot of people who had never owned a gun before in their lives buying, they are afraid it will become impossible to buy one with new legislation.
I personally watched two "macho men" women walk in a store to buy AR15's and handguns, because they felt they had better do it "before a politician says I can't".
Most of you gun haters like to do that "male" stereotyping, but the fact is, the largest growing segment of the firearms industry is young women, not men. Of course, that does not fit your needs, does it?
This comment has been removed.
Chuck Schumer the #2 senator is backing off this issue which tells me that not much is changing. We should take any small gains whether it is background check or no longer selling vest penetrating bullets and run with it as that is the best we will get until the next tradgedy. People outside of the Northeast do not feel as we do, justt look up the NRA's ratng for Senators. It is not a D or R issue.
This comment has been removed.
Yup, Dugie says it all, they count on tragedies rather than working on real solutions to the problems. Once they have banned all guns, and the killing continues, they will stand there with stupid looks on their faces. Then they will try to figure out some more laws.
Does the law against murdering another human being actually stop anyone from commiting murder? Think about it. Parents murder their children with fists, feet, clubs, poison, you name it. Criminals kill to protect their identity during a crime, it is better to kill than be caught. Criminals use anything at hand, knives, clubs, tire irons, etc.
Murder existed long before guns, and it will exist after they are banned. The only difference is that the weak will not be as able to protect themselves from the stronger thugs in our society. Guns are a great equalizer. A housewife can protect her kids from assailants she would otherwise not stand a chance against.
But the liberals are willing to take away a means of self protection and they will prance around bragging about how they "protected the children" while children will continue to die as victims of crime.
Gun control advocates like myself are not going away. Even if this effort does not produce strong gun control legislation this time around, we will not let up. I refuse to have our society held hostage by the NRA under the guise of a so-called "well-regulated militia". These are weapons of mass destruction, designed to kill our fellow citizens.
Folks who believe in the constitution like myself are not going away. Even if this does not prevent liberal facists from trying to steal our rights, we will not let up. I refuse to have our society held hostage by the facist liberals under the guise of "we know better than you how you should live, and eat, and what you can buy and what you cant". Liberals who hate the constitution are trying to destroy our nation, and enslave our fellow citizens.
Yes, Kathode, those guns are designed to kill your fellow citizens. I purposely bought a few that are especially good at killing human beings. The only human being they will kill is the one who threatens my life or a member of my family.
Go ahead, you may use your baseball bat against two or three home invaders, hope they are not armed, for your sake.
You will also find that some gun owners are willing to die for what they believe in. I know that many gun haters are hoping that the police do their dirty work for them if they ever get their insane gun control laws passed. Good luck.
But notice that the Globe says nothing about controlling the REAL weapons of mass destruction, namely Iran's missile and nuke program. Iran is alos manufacturing Plutonium, which can spread radioactivity world wide. That's beacause the White House is saying nothing. And NOBODY believes the Obama rhetoric of "All options are on the table". Actually Iran's leaders and Israel's believe that Obama's military options will either stay on the table or even go under the table....And since the Administration says nothing about Iran, neither does the Boston Globe. ..That's the marching orders from Obama to the Globe.
And with regard to domestic gun control, the Globe corrsspondent hopes you won't notice:"— "even if Democrats win passage in the Senate — would not get far in the Republican-controlled House"..The Globe correspondent is ready to say NOTHING if the Senate Democrats not only do not pass their own gun control bill, but if as is more likely, Harry Reid doesn't even call for a vote on it. The Globe hopes you won't remember that Ted Kennedy opposed gun control legislation in the Senate. Because Senate Democrats might lose elections.