MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Congress, Obama Each Reach for New Gun Laws in Wake of San Bernardino

As usual, none of the piggybacked proposals would have affected the tragedy, even if you believe laws are unbreakable.

The political talk, and attempted action, can come hot and fast regarding guns when someone misuses them in a horrible way that makes national news, as in San Bernardino yesterday.

The Searcher / Foter.com / CC BYThe Searcher / Foter.com / CC BY

From Congress, The Hill reports:

Senate Democrats are planning to offer a series of gun control amendments during the Thursday vote-a-rama on the chamber’s highly anticipated budget bill.

A group, led by the chamber's No. 2 Democrat Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), announced Thursday that they would be forcing votes on measures such as universal background checks, just one day after 14 people died in a massacre in Southern California.

“Enough is enough. Senate Democrats are not waiting one more day. Today’s the day we act,” Schumer said at a briefing, flanked by a half-dozen other vocal gun control advocates.

“The entire country will know where every member of the Senate stands on tightening background checks, on keeping guns out of the hands of terrorists and on strengthening and improving mental health in this country,” he continued.

The amendments will be offered as part of the GOP reconciliation bill that intends to repeal major pieces of ObamaCare and defund Planned Parenthood. 

The special budget bill has been months in the making, giving Republicans their first chance to send an anti-ObamaCare bill to President Obama’s desk. 

Now, the Republican senators' votes on the gun control amendment votes — as well as their positions on ObamaCare — will likely become fodder for the upcoming campaign season.

There is no reason to believe, given what we know now, that any of those laws would have had any effect on preventing yesterday's crime, even if one believed that laws were impossible to break. And the politics of guns even after public massacres isn't as solid as Schumer thinks in support of these sort of clearly feckless "tougher laws."

And President Obama, strongly desiring that California's already existing universal background check laws go national, doesn't think he even needs to care about Congress, as the Los Angeles Times reports today:

White House officials have been trying to draft an executive order that would effectively reinterpret existing law to require all or most [gun] sales to go through the background check system.

But despite Obama's visible frustration with the lack of action on guns, figuring out a solution has proved complicated. Many had expected the White House to announce plans for an executive order in time for the anniversary on Dec. 14 of the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school in Connecticut. That now seems less likely.... White House officials and their allies continue to see expanding the background check system as the most promising avenue to reduce at least some of the deaths caused by guns.

But not this one, or any of the mediagenic horrible mass gun killings of recent times. Still:

"That work includes looking at the gun show loophole,” said one White House official involved in the work. “But taking administrative action in this space is enormously complicated, with complex and intertwined policy, legal and operational considerations to take into account."

"That process,” the official said, “is very much underway."

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • AlmightyJB||

    "none of the piggybacked proposals would have effected the tragedy"

    That is not their actual purpose.

  • Seamus||

    Indeed. Only after these proposals have been tried and (inevitably) found useless, the Obamas and Schumers will be able to say, "I guess we tried everything else. We have no choice now but to confiscate everyone's guns."

  • JWW||

    That won't work either, but the left won't care anymore because they will be busy doing things to the disarmed citizenry that they would not have had the confidence to do without taking away everyone's guns.

  • Ben Bradley||

    none of the piggybacked proposals would have effected the tragedy

    Occasionally mispellings can be humorous.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The amendments will be offered as part of the GOP reconciliation bill that intends to repeal major pieces of ObamaCare and defund Planned Parenthood.

    So, pointless.

  • sasob||

    Isn't that the bill that Obama had already promised to veto?

  • Juvenile Bluster||

    Most Dems, including Obama, don't really care about gun control, except as a political wedge to gain votes for 2016.

  • JeremyR||

    I disagree. They want to take away people's guns. They just know they can't do it ordinarily, so they want until there is some event that they can use to try to convince people to give up their guns.

  • Notorious UGCC||

    "Sorry, Farmer Bob (or Farmer Arlene) who lives in a rural area remote from the latest police station...sorry, old black woman living in a bad neighborhood, sorry hunters, some weirdbeard and his wife just committed a terrorist atrocity, so we're going to take your guns. I hope you understand.

    "We're just trying to get some votes here!

    "Though I'm not sure how this will appeal to voters."

  • Notorious UGCC||

    nearest police station, not latest

  • Ben Bradley||

    Obama is in full legacy-building mode. He doesn't give a damn about gaining votes for anybody else.

  • Lee G||

    Please, die on this hill.

    (metaphorically speaking of course, for all you overly excited AUSA's out there)

  • Rasilio||

    But when will Chuckie enact common sense Moob control legislation?

  • Derp-o-Matic 5000||

    Alt-text: "Take that, Constitution! And that! And that!"

  • Mtch Connor||

    It is so funny to watch this president and a bunch of bumbling idiots in congress come of with yet another "No Guns allowed" law.

    One would think that after so many of these mass-murders that no law will stop people from obtaining or building a firearm.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    Nobody wants to mention that murder is at an all-time low.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....78520.html

  • Vampire||

    "That work includes looking at the gun show loophole,” said one White House official involved in the work."

    What about closing that fast and furious loophole? Or the one where ISIS wound up with all kinds of weapons that mysteriously look exactly like the stuff the US military uses.........Oh wait, that doesn't count, nor does the blowback that's cost many lives while they try and save face for creating boondogles everywhere they intervene.

  • DesigNate||

    Bush did it first. /shriek

    Which one? Doesn't matter.

  • Notorious UGCC||

    Again, are they saying that someone who passed the background check for being a government health inspector might fail the background check to bear arms?

  • DesigNate||

    They're implicitly admitting that it's easier to become a government asshole who determines if a place is sanitary enough to eat than it is for that same person to get a gun.

  • Notorious UGCC||

    Yeah, logic isn't really their strong point.

    Feeeeeeeeeeeeeelings, wo wo wo wo feeeeeeeeeeeeelings....

  • Jen G.||

    I think what they are admitting is that working for the government should disqualify you from passing the background check.

  • Seamus||

    Where's Tony? He usually can be counted on to jump into these discussions and say something amusing about the myopia and selfishness of those of us who refuse to join in supporting Our Leader's great ideas for the common good.

  • Old.Mexican||

    Congress, Obama Each Reach for New Gun Laws in Wake of San Bernardino


    "Because," replied the scorpion to the frog, "that is what I do."

    There is no reason to believe, given what we know now, that any of those laws would have had any effect on preventing yesterday's crime,


    Stop pretending the Marxians care one tittle about the effectiveness of gun laws. When the Marxians like the president and his minions talk about "sensible gun regulations" or gun control, they're really referring to gun proscription. They know perfectly well that tougher gun laws are ineffective - they're not idiots. They just think we are.

  • Rockabilly||

    Looking for more 'communist sense' gun laws chip chip chipping away.

  • RightNut||

    Many had expected the White House to announce plans for an executive order in time for the anniversary on Dec. 14 of the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school in Connecticut.

    Nice of Obama to give the GOP an early Christmas present.

  • MSimon||

    The California solution that will make all heads explode.

    Arm health and safety inspectors.

  • Win Bear||

    "This tragedy should not be misused for cheap political purposes. I therefore introduce a bill that..."
    -- Obama

  • Jen G.||

    “But taking administrative action in this space is enormously complicated"

    I.e. Even we think the Supreme Court would consider what we do unconstitutional

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online