Implored by President Obama to "examine their conscience" on the issue of gun control, the gun lobby will instead keep doing what it's doing and work to protect the second amendment, or its expanded vision for that amendment (depending on your perspective). After the shooting of 27 people in Newtown, Connecticut, politicians quickly spoke up and expressed outrage and their desire to "do something" about the violence. Rather than proceed with inquiries into the situations and unique characteristics of American life that seem to increasingly be driving people to commit such violent acts, they instead focused on limiting gun ownership.
It's a natural response, when you think about it. It doesn't actually make sense, but it's a much simpler to simply attack gun ownership than to admit that there's something wrong with the very fabric of the nation. This is doubly true for politicians, who understand more than most - and connive to benefit from - just how broken this country is. So, rather than do something good, politicians said, "let's go after those guns."
Now, with things becoming a bit quieter, it appears as though the appetite to do anything meaningful - even as it applies to curtailing gun ownership - is waning. David Keene, president of the National Rifle Association, noted recently that he didn't think Congress had the "muscle" to pass new gun legislation. He added, "When a president takes all the power of his office, if he's willing to expend political capital, you don't want to make predictions. But I would say that the likelihood is that they're not going to be able to get an assault weapons ban through the Congress."
If such a ban were to occur, it's quite likely that the political party that makes it happen - presumably Democrats in this case - will pay a steep price in the mid-term elections, just as they did after a 1994 ban went into effect via a Democratic Congress. Democratic Congressmen may say they don't like guns - but one thing they hate much more is having to actually work for a living. With that said, you can expect them to try to keep their current "jobs" in Congress.
It's a natural response, when you think about it. It doesn't actually make sense, but it's a much simpler to simply attack gun ownership than to admit that there's something wrong with the very fabric of the nation. This is doubly true for politicians, who understand more than most - and connive to benefit from - just how broken this country is. So, rather than do something good, politicians said, "let's go after those guns."
Now, with things becoming a bit quieter, it appears as though the appetite to do anything meaningful - even as it applies to curtailing gun ownership - is waning. David Keene, president of the National Rifle Association, noted recently that he didn't think Congress had the "muscle" to pass new gun legislation. He added, "When a president takes all the power of his office, if he's willing to expend political capital, you don't want to make predictions. But I would say that the likelihood is that they're not going to be able to get an assault weapons ban through the Congress."
If such a ban were to occur, it's quite likely that the political party that makes it happen - presumably Democrats in this case - will pay a steep price in the mid-term elections, just as they did after a 1994 ban went into effect via a Democratic Congress. Democratic Congressmen may say they don't like guns - but one thing they hate much more is having to actually work for a living. With that said, you can expect them to try to keep their current "jobs" in Congress.
