At least for now, we seem to have pushed Bloomberg back, so there are gun control supporters in Vermont and New York City now who are very sad pandas. Bloomberg doesn’t have the ballot to use in Vermont, so he had to try for a traditional attack through the legislature. Fortunately for us, and unfortunately for him, in this kind of fight it’s our grassroots advantage can trump his pocketbook, because all that is required is direct action. When it comes to a fight that involves buying support from low-information voters, Bloomberg’s money is Â more useful. Nonetheless, they say they aren’t going away:
â€œWe have a very long view on this,â€ Braden said. â€œTwo years ago, there wasnâ€™t any way any gun provision would be debated. This is a long-term campaign to really change the conversation, so we can pass legislation to keep guns out of the wrong hands.â€
It looks like they might still get a felon-in-possession law in Vermont though.
He said many of his constituents who oppose expanding background checks support the mental health and felon provisions.Â As for requiring Vermonters who are conducting private gun sales to go to a gun dealer for a background check, Sears said his constituents have been more consistently opposed.
But I thought 92% of gun owners supported Bloomberg proposal?
UPDATE: Think Progress are sad pandas too, but this time because when gun control comes threatening, it strengthens the hand of gun rights groups more than it does gun control groups.