More Gun Grist
A new poll, a report from Chicago and a New York Times editorial all make for more gun grist, but not for any good answers.
More Gun Grist
John Baer, Daily News Political Columnist
Another day, another load of grist for the gun debate.
A new Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday shows Pennsylvanians support a variety of gun control measures from background checks to a ban on some weapons and ammo magazines.
Here are the highlights:
- 95 – 5 percent for requiring background checks for all gun purchases;
- 60 – 37 percent for a nationwide ban on the sale of assault weapons;
- 59 – 39 percent for a nationwide ban on the sale of magazines with more than 10 rounds.
But The New York Times on Wednesday reports that Chicago, which bans gun shops, assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, has a gun-violence epidemic that led to more than 500 homicides last year and 40 so far this year.
Gun rights supporters point to Chicago as an example of how strict gun laws don't work. Gun control backers say Chicago is an example of why stricter national -- not just local -- gun laws are needed.
And as the gun debate locks in place in Congress, The Times (a long-time advocate for tougher gun laws) offers an editorial outlining various proposals, explaining how difficult they will be to pass and suggesting the outcome relies on "how demanding the public is for credible action."
All of this sets up a test for democracy, and for the attention span of the public and the political process.
What people say they want from their government is very often very different from what people get from their government.
In Pennsylvania, no matter which political party holds the governor's office or the Legislature, any substantive change in gun laws is an automatic, high-capacity NO.
And in Washington, where the only real interest in Congress is guaranteeing reelection to Congress, any "credible action" will be determined by individual members' reelection prospects, not by broad-based polls and certainly not by editorials.
- They must have different guns out there. They dont seem to kill nearly as many people. Maybe Philly and Chicago should pass laws making their citizens buy those?
— tr88 - Yes we should ban weapons based on how they LOOK. That is all the "assault weapon" ban is about. Simple COSMETIC changes that make the weapon no more lethal than any other rifle. Of course the American sheeple are too busy watching American Idol and texting on their new iPhones to bother to get educated on any issue.— Larry Cheswald
- hockeyray: Yes, keep making excuses for the animals in all these urban areas that can't settle disputes without killing each other. You liberals love to disparage rural areas and yet, even awash with firearms, they don't seem to be killing each other. Why is that?— Larry Cheswald
- Why are all the gun owners I see on the news short old white guys?— Jeff West
- Because their the most dangerous Jeff.
- Tr88 is a dope.....don't pay him any attention.— The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine
- Just keep trotting Old Wayne out there, really helping your side!— gibby58
- Even though some of these gun control measures are common sense, I doubt they'll have effect on gun violence in America. I'm sure the shootings in Chicago, Philly, Camden, etc aren't being committed by licensed gun owners. It's just more feel good legislation.— LouDiamondPhillipsheadScrewdriver
John is the author of the book "On The Front Lines of Pennsylvania Politics: Twenty-Five Years of Keystone Reporting" (The History Press, 2012). Reach John at baerj@phillynews.com.
