I often hear the same question asked by many people, and have heard that same question in various form for years. Why do major problems that effect U.S. citizens often take years to correct? The current long-standing issues of healthcare, the economy and immigration have recently taken a backseat to gun control in the public's interest. And most people thought that new legislation on gun control would be rapid and decisive after another school attack tragedy shocked the nation. But today any meaningful action is still struggling just to reach the formal debate stage in Congress.
I am convinced that the path to resolution of major problems in our government all end up hitting the same political and procedural roadblocks. Major problems and their solutions inevitably have economic impacts which bring out the special interest groups and lobbying organizations. So our politicians, who may already be at odds on possible solutions due to their political persuasions, are now being pressured by people (who wield political clout) with an 'un-hidden' agenda.
But the balancing force in the 'solution equation' is supposed to be provided to the elected representatives by their constituency – the desires of the people who elect them to office. And that is where I see the breakdown in the nation's ability to even approach the gun control dilemma, much less resolve it.
Numerous polls and surveys reveal that a majority of Americans consistently say that we need better enforcement of our gun laws. But there’s a problem with that: further polls show that many of those same people don’t really know what our gun laws are. A recent nationwide poll by Benenson Strategy Group highlights these inconsistencies. This poll also highlights why this issue is so contentious. Many people are being influenced by incorrect information – information that is often as not fostered by special interest groups.
A large number of those polled think that federal laws require a background check for every gun purchase and that they ban high-capacity magazines. If these Americans knew that we didn’t have such laws — laws they so fervently wish to enforce — their beliefs about the correct course of Congressional action might be very different.
The Benenson poll asked 800 voters what action they want our government to take: "enforce current gun laws more strictly but not pass new laws" or "pass new gun laws in addition to enforcing current laws more strictly." Not too surprisingly they chose better enforcement by 50 percent to 43 percent. (The remainder responded "neither" or "don’t know.")
But in the same poll, 87 percent of voters, including nearly 90 percent of gun owners, said they support background checks for all gun sales. Significant majorities of voters and of gun owners also told us they support banning military-style assault weapons along with the high-capacity magazines that enable those weapons to fire dozens of rounds without reloading. So we have a situation where people insist that the 'correct' approach is to merely enforce existing law, while at the same time favoring strong positions on things that are not covered by present legislation.
To dig deeper into this confusion, a new series of questions was introduced. The same
group of voters were asked whether or not specific laws were already on the books. Of the 50 percent of people who prefer enforcement over new laws — over half of whom are gun owners — 48 percent told us that federal laws prohibit the purchase of a weapon privately or at a gun show without a background check, while 10 percent simply admitted not knowing the rules. In other words, about 6 out of 10 people who believe we just need to do a better job of enforcing existing laws don’t realize that those laws are far weaker than they think. And just under half of those who see better enforcement as the answer don’t know that military-style assault weapons are, in fact, not illegal.
A clear majority said they believe that the sale of guns to people on the terrorist watch list is banned. Another 29 percent said they don’t know. Such sales are not banned, and the Government Accountability Office has reported that in 2010 alone 247 people on the terrorist watch list passed a background check and legally purchased guns.
Similarly, 33 percent believe that federal law requires authorities to be notified when people purchase large amounts of ammunition in a short period — also not the case — and 42 percent don’t know whether it is illegal to buy ammunition over the Internet — it isn’t.
The notion that all we need is better enforcement of our current federal laws has been a core argument of the gun lobby for years in its fight against restrictions on guns in our communities. But that argument is a straw man. It masks the fact that many Americans don’t really know what gun laws are on the books and falsely construes that to mean they don’t want common-sense gun laws passed — when they clearly do. What Americans strongly believe, and what is at the core of a true reform agenda, is that with rights come responsibilities.
We have all heard 'Guns don't kill people, people do.' Which is at least partially true. So that logic leads one to say quit concentrating on the hardware - concentrate on the people who should or shouldn't have a gun. To support that approach people echo, 'Cars don't kill people, drunk drivers do.' The same logic kicks in – it's the driver not the car.
But, I suggest that while we are concentrating on the people part of the problem, we can not ignore the hardware portion. Do you know what an assault weapon is, and is capable of? I have never heard a logical explanation why that brand of weapon should be sold in the U.S. at all. Using our automobile accident deaths by comparison – what would you say about a car that a manufacturer introduced, planning to sell 10,000 of them that had would go 185 mph and was being offered at the introductory price of $3,000, nothing down and no payments for six months. In this case would we think it was only the driver that could be a problem the traffic safety debate?
Americans don’t believe changing the rules will prevent every murder or every act of mass violence. Rules will always be broken. Some people will always cheat on their taxes. Some people will always speed. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have common-sense rules like speed limits or an income tax. Americans agree gun limits are needed, and at the very least, they expect a rational debate and a vote on it. It’s time to prove them right.
Till Next Time. Pura Vida