[Vision2020] Senators Bearing Arms

[Art Deco]

  [image: The New York Times] <http://www.nytimes.com/>

------------------------------
March 8, 2013
Senators Bearing Arms By GAIL
COLLINS<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/gailcollins/index.html>

Whenever talk turns to gun control in Congress, lawmakers feel compelled to
mention their love of weaponry.

“I’m probably one of the few who have a pistol range in my backyard,” said
Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont on Thursday, as he led a meeting of the
Judiciary Committee on gun legislation.

“I have an AR-15,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, referring to the nation’s
best-known assault weapon.

“I’m not going to do anything illegally with it,” Graham added. There were
no audible sighs of relief from the audience, but I am sure everybody was
glad to have the reassurance.

People, do you think Congress is actually going to do anything about gun
violence in the wake of the Newtown shootings? Judiciary is going to vote
on two big proposals next week: a ban on assault weapons and an expansion
of gun purchase background checks. If the Democrats stick together, the
bills can pass on a party-line vote. But to go any further, they need
Republican support, and there wasn’t a whole lot of it in evidence this
week.

Senator Dianne Feinstein, the chief sponsor of the assault weapons ban,
seemed less than optimistic. “I want to thank those who are with me,” she
said. “I don’t know that I can convince those who are not, but I intend to
keep trying.” She looked exhausted. At one point, she referred to Richard
Blumenthal of Connecticut as “Senator Delvanthal.”

“Senator Feinstein has been consistent. She is sincere, and she has the
courage of her convictions and what more could you ask,” said Graham. This
may have been an attempt at consolation. Perhaps he was only being
incredibly patronizing by accident.

The public’s interest in reducing gun violence may not have abated, but
some of the lawmakers seem to be trotting backward. After Newtown, Senator
Joe Manchin, the conservative Democrat from West Virginia, said: “I don’t
know anyone in the sporting or hunting arena that goes out with an assault
rifle.” He told CNN that he wanted to create a “dialogue that would bring a
total change,” adding, “and I mean a total change.”

Manchin now says that anybody who took that to mean he was favoring some
kind of ban on assault weapons totally misunderstood him. “I said
everything should be on the table,” he explained in a phone interview.
“Everything *is* on the table. I don’t agree with the things on the table,
but they still have the right to put them on.”

On the plus side, the Judiciary Committee approved a modest bill raising
the penalties for “straw purchasers” — people who buy guns in order to give
them to someone barred from making the purchase, like convicted felons or
Mexican drug runners. One Republican, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, voted for it.
However, Senator John Cornyn of Texas expressed concern that it would “make
it a serious felony for an American Legion employee to negligently transfer
a rifle or firearm to a veteran who, unknown to the transferor, suffers
from post-traumatic stress disorder.”

Personally, I would rather not have American Legion employees negligently
transferring guns to anybody. But then I am not trying to run for
re-election in Texas without being primaried by the Tea Party.

The best hope for serious change involves fixing the background check law
so that people who buy weapons at gun shows, online, in flea markets and
other nonstore venues are included. Bipartisan negotiations seemed to
fizzle this week, but Manchin, who was among those backing out, expressed
confidence that something could still be worked out. And the assault
weapons bill might have a little better chance if it was less complicated.
(Feinstein’s bill lists 157 makes and models of guns that are prohibited.)
It might be easier to just go with the part banning magazine clips that
allow shooters to fire off 15, 30, 100 or more bullets without reloading.

You may be wondering what conceivable argument gun lovers could have about
hanging on to those monster bullet clips. For the answer, let us turn to —
yes! — Lindsey Graham. The senator from South Carolina wanted to know what
people were supposed to do with a lousy two-bullet shotgun “in an
environment where the law and order has broken down, whether it’s a
hurricane, national disaster, earthquake, terrorist attack, cyberattack
where the power goes down and the dam’s broken and chemicals have been
released into the air and law enforcement is really not able to respond and
people take advantage of that lawless environment.”

Do you think Graham spends a lot of time watching old episodes of “Doomsday
Preppers?” Does he worry about zombies? That definitely would require a lot
of firepower.

We should forgive every lawmaker who will go on the record as saying they
refuse to support gun control because of the zombie threat. Otherwise, it’s
pretty inexcusable.


-- 
Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
art.deco.studios at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20130309/d7a9a07f/attachment-0001.html>