search
top

The Gun Battle in the States

Reuters notes that the gun control battle is shifting to the states, with a slight edge going to pro-gun bills. The New York Times does a summary of the issues, which show that it’s considerably more than a “slight edge.” It also shows that a number of those bills that were passed, that are in the pro-gun control column, are minor bills like NICS improvements…. hardly a big win on their parts.

11 Responses to “The Gun Battle in the States”

  1. Joe Huffman says:

    Your Reuters link was broken for me. This one works though.

  2. Matthew Carberry says:

    If you look at the latest Brady Ranking chart they’ve once again had to alter their metric to weight the few successful (from their POV) state laws that passed more heavily and they have added penny-ante criteria to boost points like “minimum age to purchase” which, in the states that have them, typically simply mirror Federal law.

    That along with their usual mis-stating existing state laws to try to gin up points.

    They are scrambling to show any kind of success.

    • TS says:

      We know they change the ranking system year after year. What I don’t get is why this year’s system is on the whole weighted DOWN from the previous year. They’re trying to tout gains, but their new system shows golden child California dropping from 80 to 75, has 12 states with higher scores while 38 are lower, and 12 states with negative ratings. Never underestimate their ability to undermine their own narrative.

      • Matthew Carberry says:

        Negative motivation? =)

        I’d guess the Bradys also know that the only people who pay attention to their systematic changes year by year are our side.

        Their supporters in the press and blogs don’t analyze, they respond emotionally to fresh meat. So the Brady’s get a bump of attention in the press just by putting out the rankings; the content is mostly irrelevant, although this year they did add Facebook and blog friendly graphics.

        Math-wise the folks who can use them on a local level will and those who can’t, won’t; but “big picture?” No one on their side cares in any meaningful or systematic way.

  3. Jeff says:

    The antis got huge wins in NY, CT, CO, and MD. The only big change I can think of on our side is carry permits in IL, and that was via court action and still hasn’t taken effect.

    • Matthew Carberry says:

      MD and NY, and to a degree CT were basically rolling stones downhill for the anti’s, it’s not a “big win” when a Professional team beats a JV team and passing gun control in MD and NY is the same kind of lay-up.

      CO was a win, but it has cost the anti-gun rights side credibility when they claim they can protect their political supporters, they had to have one resign rather than risk losing the Senate and the fallout still may flip the CO Senate next election and lead to repeal. At the least the recalls put the fear of the voters into anti-gun Dems in regards to further moves.

      In NY the SAFE act had to be passed by violating their own legislative rules and the backlash there has already cost Cuomo his chance at the Presidential nomination from the Dems, and may cost him his job. It has mobilized upstate like nothing in years.

      CT being the ground zero for Newton made their vote unsurprising but they are not having much luck with compliance.

      Court challenges continue against all of the above.

      Anyway, I don’t want to be a Pollyanna but “big picture” the anti’s shot their wad under about the best circumstances they could have hoped for and got nothing nationally and only limited and equivocal results on the state and local level.

      • Jeff says:

        Where do you live? Here in Massachusetts, I can’t be so cavalier about sweeping gun bans, since I might be next.

        • Matthew Carberry says:

          Alaska.

          I didn’t mean to sound cavalier, but what do you expect on a state level?

          Your “wins” are going to be holding ground; at least until you can convince your neighbors to change their minds and votes or the national scene can swing strongly enough to effect the situation from the top down.

          • Sebastian says:

            You have to convince your neighbors, yes. But you also need to convince people who might otherwise vote for the anti-gun people in power that they need to vote their gun rights, and nothing else, even if it means voting for the opposition party.

  4. Magus says:

    I have issues with the term “pro-gun control” phrase. There is nothing positive about gun control unless you’re talking about steady hands and good aim. The term “gun-control” contains all the meaning required without any modifiers. :)

  5. tincankilla says:

    i’ve been bickering all day with antis i know who are crowing about that number in the NYT. if you look at the content, you see that the NYT is stacking the “loosen” deck with procedural changes (sheriff’s must approve or deny applications within 30 days) or privacy protections (concealed carry records become confidential). they even miscategorized two altogether (MO’s imposing background checks and NC’s requirement to submit mental health data to NICS). this reads like a one-sided fundraising scorecard intended to mobilize supporters to donate.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. SayUncle » The gun rights battle - […] Has shifted to the states with much the same results as it played out nationally. […]
top