Pro-gun Dems talk gun control; GOP largely silent
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada. / Brendan Hoffman/Getty Images
As lawmakers continue to grapple with the aftermath of last week's mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., a handful of pro-gun Democrats are beginning to speak out in favor of stricter gun laws - but Republicans remain all but silent on the matter.
Amid national attempts to piece together a coherent picture of what led 20-year-old Adam Lanza to allegedly open fire on an elementary school last Friday morning, a number of liberal Democrats are resuming longstanding calls for the tightening of gun laws.
On Monday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., introduced legislation to restore the Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004; Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., meanwhile, announced plans to reintroduce a high-capacity magazine ban. President Obama, too, signaled a renewed commitment to strengthening gun-related laws in remarks last night honoring the victims of the massacre.
- Poll: Support for stricter gun control at 10-year high
- Pro-gun Sen. Joe Manchin calls for "action" on gun violence
- Ct. school shooting has two senators promising new round of gun legislation
Perhaps more significant, however, is a new sense of openness to tighten laws among some pro-gun and moderate Democrats, few of whom have previously expressed an eagerness to take on the famously powerful pro-gun lobby.
Earlier today, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., the National Rifle Association-backed hunting enthusiast and conservative Democrat, expressed the need for a "common sense" discussion about gun laws with groups like the NRA.
"I want to call all our friends in the NRA, sit down and have this - bring them into it. They have to be at the table. We all have to," he said. "This has changed the dialogue and it should move beyond dialogue -- we need action."
Bloomberg: Time to pass assault weapons ban
A series of similar calls have since trickled in from pro-gun Democrats: In remarks on the Senate floor today, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who has a "B" rating from the NRA and is generally considered pro-gun rights, called for Congress to engage in a "meaningful conversation and thoughtful debate about how to change laws and culture that allows violence to continue to grow."
"I think part of the healing process will require Congress to examine what can be done to prevent more tragedies," he said.
"Enough is enough," added Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., in an interview with Richmond, Va., CBS affiliate WTVR. Noting his own "A" grade from the NRA, he added: "I think most of us realize that there are ways to get to rational gun control. There are ways to grapple with the obvious challenges of mental illness."
Others expressed regret at their own refusal to address gun control in the past.
"I have been largely silent on the issue of gun violence over the past six years, and I am now as sorry for that as I am for what happened to the families who lost so much in this most recent, but sadly not isolated, tragedy," said Rep. John Yarmuth, a Democrat from Kentucky, in a statement. "Like so many Americans, when I was growing up I thought guns were the things that protected us from the bad guys -- the outlaws, the Nazis, the Red Menace, and the gangsters. Now I know, through painful history, that guns are much more likely to be used by the bad guys or the mentally unstable against the rest of us."
In the face of the recent violence, in which 20 children were shot dead at Connecticut's Sandy Hook Elementary School, gun control advocates have led a renewed push for legislative action. And evidence suggests many Americans would support such measures: A White House petition urging the Obama administration to immediately press Congress for tighter restrictions on gun ownership earned more than 150,000 signatures in three days. Meanwhile, reflecting a reversal from many past surveys, a new Washington Post/ABC News poll indicates that people viewed the recent shooting as endemic of a troubled society - not just a troubled individual.
Still, passing new legislation through Congress promises to be a major challenge for advocates. Republicans have for the most part remained silent on the subject, and have shown little willingness to take a stand against the gun lobby.
In remarks on the Senate floor today, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., expressed sorrow over the shootings and lauded Mr. Obama's remarks about the "singularity of parental love," but declined to reference the possibility of legislative action. When asked shortly thereafter if he thinks it's time to debate gun laws, McConnell ignored CNN reporter Lisa Desjardins, who recorded and posted his non-response online.
NBC's David Gregory faced similar troubles this weekend, when trying to book pro-gun senators for his show, "Meet the Press": All 31 senators on record as pro-gun rights refused to appear.
"We reached out to all 31 pro-gun rights senators in the new Congress to invite them on the program to share their views on the subject this morning," he said. "We had no takers."
CBS News' Bob Schieffer noted he and his "Face the Nation" staff ran into similar roadblocks as NBC.
"Members, as we found out this weekend when we tried to get guests to come on and talk about this on 'Face the Nation,' people are just reluctant to even discuss it," Schieffer said on the program Sunday.
Even the Obama administration is declining to say what action, specifically, the president wants to take on gun control. In a White House briefing today, spokesman Jay Carney spoke of the subject in vague terms only, and argued that gun control is "part" of the solution, "but it's far from all of it."
The power of the pro-gun lobby -- and specifically of the NRA -- is widely credited with the staunch opposition that nearly all gun control measures have faced in Congress in recent years. According to the Sunlight Foundation, the NRA spends 66 times what the Brady Campaign spends on lobbying, and 4,143 times what the Brady Campaign spends on campaign contributions. Since 2011, the NRA spent at least $24.28 million: $16.83 million through its political action committee, plus $7.45 million through its affiliated Institute for Legislative Action."
Popular in Politics
- For GOP, scandals could be an electoral plus - or minus 311 Comments
- IRS targeting overlooked biggest soft money groups
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice" 328 Comments
- Republicans use IRS scandal to tar Obamacare
- Romney condemns "breach of trust" in Washington
- Where is the Benghazi cover-up Republicans promised? 405 Comments
- Ousted IRS chief: "I did not mislead" the American people 261 Comments
- Why Obama should worry that current scandals might impact 2016 241 Comments
When will people wake up. The guns did not march in and start shooting. The shooter was a complete idiot like a mad dog. The ones we should be unhappy with are the law makers. Just think, had the staff of that school been trained in gun safety and were able to carry a firearm in school, they could have most likely saved many lives by taking the shooter out quickly. No we do not need more gun laws, bad guys do not obey them anyway. We need responsible people with gun training, carrying guns. This is the same case throughout the history of all mass murders. Place guns in the hands of trained responsible people , you will see crime and killing go down, not up.
The right wingers, conservatives and Republicons have many very dangerous ideas like this.
gay marriage not big deal and finally talk about Gun cONTROL
This entire thread is pretty much made up of rude statements about anybody in a different political party. I'll be the first to admit that I'm not innocent, as I've made argumentative comments as well. Why is it that most Republicans on here hate and demean Democrats? Why is it that most Democrats here are doing the same to Republicans? We're adults who are resorting to name-calling instead of focusing on the larger issue.
It makes no sense to hate somebody who has a differing opinion than you. It's offensive to lump everyone in a political party together, as if every single one of them is the same, and make incredibly rude statements about them? Why are people on here calling people stupid for having their own opinions.
One thing I love about America is that we have the right to express our opinions. Unlike some countries, we have the right to free speech. So, yes, technically you have the right to act like a ten-year-old and resort to name-calling. But why?
Our politicians considering changing gun laws is something adults should be able to have a reasonable discussion about. I don't see why it involves childish statements. It's understandable that this horrific tragedy in Newton can bring up some strong opinions for or against gun control. However, it's not understandable why this tragedy is simply becoming liberals vs. conservatives... and comments to reiterate that everybody who doesn't agree with you is 100% wrong and that their opinions aren't valid. It's sickening that this is what we're doing during the aftermath of this awful tragedy.
Don't fool yourself. Today's military would smash anything you might get your hands on at Wally World.
What the 2nd Amendment IS good for, is the right of a civilian to protect his property, family, and life if under attack by anyone.
I don't understand why people bring up "Hunting", 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. You use a 30 round mag to defend your home from looters. Remember the LA riots? Remember Katrina? Police wasn't around. You think a rioter is going to let you use a tool to discharge a 10 round magazine like Cali requires?
Fix the mental health system, and raise handgun purchases to 25yo or older, and fix the private purchase loophole, but leave the AR-15 and any other American made weapon alone.
the 2nd was not nto ndefend a persons personal property but as a whole hence the word Militia <free State> not individual sportsman hunters(conservationist) Militia organized military
not Disorganized gun carriers can't have a "well regulated "anything if you don't know, who, what, and where,
you have a right to own a car but it is regulated right to where you can .cannot park it yet that doesn't seem to stop people from buying cars now does it??
This would be true, if they were fighting an individual or a small group of people, and is especially true overseas. What many seem to forget is that if there were ever a real "falling out" or rebellion in the U.S., it will be happening in this country - not in some desert 10,000 miles away.
Military bases that are surrounded and largely staffed by civilians who reject the federal government's ideas would likely fall into the hands of any rebellion relatively quickly; not to mention the defection of soldiers whose hometowns are being targeted by the military in "retaliation". Factories sympathetic to the cause of one side or another would no longer produce food, equipment, or other goods for that side. Trade would stop. Both sides would suffer in their ability to even feed themselves.
That, my friend would be the likely outcome of a true civil war. It would be just like the last one - brutal and bloody.
And BTW, you can have strong gun regulations and still have guns. If you are a responsible owner than why should you care about regulation? In fact you should welcome it.