Why gun control has no shot

[Justin]

Why gun control has no shot

Governor's effort to pass new restrictions runs into organized and effective opposition, as usual

Sunday, November 25, 2007
By Gary Rotstein, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

State Rep. Dan Frankel took note of the e-mails he received last week concerning a package of gun control bills emotionally endorsed by Gov. Ed Rendell.

Unofficially, the count was about 1,000 to 10, with the gun-rights lobby winning that grassroots campaign just as it succeeded in rebuffing Mr. Rendell's efforts to sway the House Judiciary Committee.

It didn't matter that everyone knew in advance the Squirrel Hill Democrat supported the bills. In nine years, he's yet to be on the winning side of any significant legislation opposed by the National Rifle Association and other gun-rights lobbyists. And, with their continued strength in hunting-happy Pennsylvania, there's no telling when -- or even if -- he'll ever be.

"There's no political penalty for those that don't support [gun control] measures, but there is a political penalty if they do," Mr. Frankel said of the impressive political activism that continues on behalf of sportsmen and other gun owners in Pennsylvania.

"We know based on independent polling that most Pennsylvanians support stronger gun control laws," he said. "The question is where on those persons' priority list of issues does gun safety rank, as opposed to where on the list of the gun advocates. ... The other side are single-issue voters and that carries a lot of weight."

The strength of the gun rights movement can be seen and heard in the woods of Pennsylvania tomorrow for the opening of deer season. The state has nearly 1 million licensed hunters, second only to Texas. About one-fourth of them are NRA members, putting Pennsylvania among its top three states for both total and per-capita membership.

An estimated one of three Pennsylvania households owns a gun or rifle, and 415,075 firearms were purchased or transferred in the state last year.

Pennsylvania has long been a challenge for gun-control advocates, going back to the defeat in 1968 of incumbent Democratic U.S. Sen. Joseph Clark. The gun issue was in the forefront of the election, won by Republican Richard Schweiker, after the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy. Mr. Clark was a former Philadelphia mayor, like Mr. Rendell.

In his unusual House Judiciary Committee appearance last week, Mr. Rendell unsuccessfully urged approval of bills that would limit handgun purchases to one a month; permit local gun ordinances tougher than state law; and require that lost or stolen guns be reported to police within 24 hours. Such proposals have failed to win support for years, last year losing by 2-to-1 margins on the floor of the full House during a special legislative session on guns and violence.

House Judiciary Chairman Tom Caltagirone, D-Berks, said the committee's defeat of the proposals was a foregone conclusion, but he brought them up at the governor's request.

"I told him pointedly, 'Governor, I do not have the votes.' He said, 'Let me worry about it, and let me talk to the committee,' " Mr. Caltagirone said afterward. As to whether passage of such bills is possible in the future, Mr. Caltagirone, a 31-year lawmaker who voted for them, predicted, "It ain't gonna happen."

Mr. Rendell has been a proponent of tougher gun restrictions for years, and his committee appearance came after a spate of shootings of Philadelphia police officers, one of them fatal. The one bill he sought that cleared the Judiciary Committee would impose a mandatory 20-year jail sentence for anyone convicted of shooting at a police officer, even if the shot misses.

The governor, while discussing the slain officer's funeral with reporters, said he was "disappointed but not surprised" that the other measures were either defeated or tabled. He said he wants to "galvanize" the public on the issue.

"This is a marathon, not a sprint," Mr. Rendell said. "We are not going to go away."

But a leading opponent of such measures, Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, R-Cranberry, questioned the governor's timing. He noted that House Democrats had suffered negative publicity recently over the attorney general's investigation of their payment of bonuses to staff members. Because the governor's committee appearance was so unusual, he won news media attention for several days on the gun control issue.

"Many of us suspect that the governor and Democratic leadership were really looking for an issue to take front page headlines away from the bonus pay investigation," Mr. Metcalfe said. "If the governor were serious about addressing violent crime, there's many things we can do using the laws that are on the books."

Mr. Metcalfe and activists on the pro-gun side criticize proposals like the ones rejected by the Judiciary Committee as intrusive measures that would miss their target.

"Each time you pass a gun control law, the only universe of people you affect is the law-abiding gun owner," said national NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam. "Criminals by definition break the law. Passing a law such as one-gun-a-month is not going to deter criminals who intend on robbing or murdering or raping."

California, Virginia and Maryland have monthly gun purchase limits. South Carolina was the first to enact such a law in 1975, but repealed it three years ago. The limits are primarily aimed at "straw buyers" -- those who seek to obtain guns in mass quantities for illegal resale in cities with tough controls or for resale to criminals who cannot clear background checks and make legitimate purchases.

Analysts say such restrictions may hurt gun traffickers more than gun-toting criminals, but the laws' success in doing even that is questioned. South Carolina's repeal came after analysis showed that nearly 30 years after the restrictions were passed, the percentage of guns originating in South Carolina used in New York City crimes was about the same as before.

Little change foreseen

While Pennsylvania and many states did enact tougher background checks for purchasers in the 1990s to supplement federal regulations, few have enacted any new restrictions this decade, said Daniel Webster, co-director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research.

"In states where it's politically possible to do more on regulating guns, they've done most of what they can do," he said. "Generally speaking, the status quo rules."

In addition to the vigilant NRA, which on its national Web site immediately posted information about the House Judiciary Committee's votes and each committee member's position on them, a newer coalition of smaller gun-rights organizations adds to the effectiveness of the gun-rights lobby. They banded together two years ago to win legislative compromise on how gun owners would be affected by a new law concerning protection-from-abuse orders, and were also active on last week's votes.

"We are more organized now than we've ever been in Pennsylvania," said Kim Stolfer, legislative committee chairman of the Allegheny County Sportsmen's League, which is part of the coalition.

He and others attribute that effectiveness, in part, to Mr. Rendell. They say the more attention received by gun-control efforts, the more lobbying the gun-rights movement knows it needs to do. While challenging the merits of individual pieces of gun-control legislation, they often cite wider concern about losing their Second Amendment right to bear arms. It's common for groups representing rifle-toting hunters to take dead aim at bills whose focus is criminals with handguns.

"You're worried about the domino effect," explained Melody Zullinger, executive director of the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs, which encompasses about 100,000 members. "If the camel's head comes through the door, you're worried about what's going to follow."

Though there's nothing to indicate they need to worry about any impending success by gun-control advocates, conflicting trends make it hard to predict the issue's future. The number of hunters in the state is down more than 300,000 from a high of 1.3 million in 1981-82. Nationally, about one in three households possess a gun, down from one in two 30 years ago.

At the same time, political influence in the Legislature has gradually shifted from the cities to suburban and rural areas -- where pro-gun sentiments are stronger. While mayors of mid-sized cities such as York, Allentown and Bethlehem have joined the anti-gun lobbying, many legislators view the topic as a Philadelphia issue that does them no good to support.

Phil Goldsmith, president of CeaseFire PA, part of a national gun-control organization, agreed with Mr. Frankel that little may change in Pennsylvania until anti-gun forces can become as politically effective as the NRA.

He also agreed with a statement by the governor that their side needs to get bills voted on by the full Legislature, not just committees, so gun-control proponents can target lawmakers up for re-election who are on the record opposing them.

"We have our great role model out there in the NRA. They know how to do their job and mobilize people," Mr. Goldsmith said.
Harrisburg Bureau Chief Tom Barnes contributed to this story. Gary Rotstein can be reached at grotstein@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1255.


source:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07329/836651-85.stm


It disgusts me to read what's in red. I wish these self serving politicians of today actually did their job with some regard to our constitution, regardless of political repercussions. But I guess politics is the nature of our government, so it will only get worse in the future.

[N3HCP]

It seems to me that the system (for once) may actually be working the way it was designed. We, the people, have spoken and our elected representatives have done our will.