In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Voters Responsive to Stronger Gun Laws
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Candidates Again Find Voters Responsive to Stronger Gun Laws
7/1/2002
Feature Story
by Dick Dahl
Fresh evidence from several mid-term election campaigns is suggesting that candidates who support stronger gun laws are finding the issue to be an effective one in their quests for votes.
In fact, the news shouldn't be so surprising since the issue did play well in the 2000 general elections. But the scapegoating of gun control by some Democrats as the reason why Al Gore failed in his presidential bid has taken some unwarranted hold, so some of the recent developments on various campaign trails are providing a reminder of the issue's strength in many jurisdictions.
In a recent Pennsylvania Democratic gubernatorial primary battle, former Philadelphia mayor Edward G. Rendell, a strong gun-control candidate, coasted to a victory over Robert P. Casey Jr., who had received substantial support from the National Rifle Association. The NRA "failed miserably" in that effort, according to Tom Maher of the Edison Group, a New Hampshire-based political consulting firm. Maher said that Rendell's message on guns was received well in even strongly Republican suburban areas like Montgomery County outside Philadelphia.
Gun-violence prevention has arisen as an issue in several other races that are attracting nationwide attention. In Michigan, for instance, incumbent four-term Congresswoman Lynn Rivers has found that her longstanding support of gun control is one of her best weapons in an uphill battle against fellow incumbent John Dingell to gain Democratic Party primary endorsement for the state's 15th Congressional District. The latest polls show Dingell, the longest-serving member of Congress, with a 10-point lead among likely Democratic primary voters in a redrawn district with the two incumbents. But recent polls also show that the more that people know about Rivers' longstanding support of stronger gun laws, the stronger a contender she becomes. An independent poll conducted by EPIC/MRA May 29 through June 3 described both candidates basic positions on guns -- Rivers' favoring "stronger gun control laws to make it more difficult to obtain guns," and Dingell's reputation as a "strong gun rights advocate" who has served as a member of the National Rifle Association -- and then asked respondents their reactions. Rivers outpolled Dingell 44 percent to 29 percent on the gun issue, with the remaining 27 percent saying the issue wouldn't influence their vote.
As Rivers spokesman Matt Burgess told Join Together Online, the importance of the gun issue in that race cannot be overestimated. "It's actually the biggest issue in the race," he said.
Besides his advantage in seniority, Dingell also has more money and the support of labor unions, which is always an enormous factor in Michigan. But as Luis Tolley, director of state legislation for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, points out, the evidence from the polls provides reason for optimism. The polls show that likely voters favor Rivers not only on the gun issue, but also on abortion (Rivers is pro-choice, Dingell pro-life) and the environment. "The question," says Tolley, "is whether or not she'll have enough money to put her message on the air and make the distinction between his record and hers. If she's able to do that, it's definitely winnable for her."
Dingell's strongly pro-NRA voting record includes a no vote on the assault-weapons ban in 1994 and on the final version of the Brady Bill in 1993. He also cosponsored legislation that would have repealed the assault-weapons ban seven months after it was passed. However, campaign watchers say that Dingell has taken an interesting tack in his race against Rivers: He's backed away from his ties to the NRA and has been touting the few times he's voted the other way, as he did with an earlier Brady Bill conference report that was filibustered to death in the Senate.
A similar dynamic involving a candidate trying to deflect attention from his past as a strong NRA supporter is happening in Maryland, where Republican Robert L. Ehrlich is trying to soften his reputation as a darling of the gun lobby in his gubernatorial race against Democrat Kathleen Kennedy Townsend.
"What's interesting in both those races, Michigan and Maryland, is that both Dingell and Erlich are trying to present themselves as moderates," says Tony Orza, director of government relations and legislative counsel for the Brady Campaign. He also suggests that candidates like Dingell and Erlich who change their tune on guns be given some credit for doing that. "You hear stories about people running away from the issue," he said, "but you never read stories that people are running toward the issue."
Another high-profile race in which guns are a campaign issue is the California governor's race, in which incumbent Democrat Gray Davis has recently come hard out of the box with TV ads in metropolitan markets touting his strong record on gun laws. His opponent, Republican William Simon, is backed by the NRA.
Other contested races in which guns have surfaced as a campaign issue include the Oregon Senate race between Democrat Bill Bradbury, who says he supports stronger gun laws, and Republican incument Gordon Smith, who has voted the NRA way; and Michigan's Ninth Congressional District race between NRA-backed Republican incumbent Joe Knollenberg and Democrat David Fink, who has been campaigning on a pledge to get guns off the streets
From the NRA perspective, meanwhile, the organization's top priority this year is to win back the Senate by targeting several Senate races involving incumbent Democrats. They include Sens. Jean Carnahan of Missouri, Timothy P. Johnson of South Dakota, and Paul Wellstone of Minnesota.
The degree to which the gun issue achieves overall prominence in this year's elections remains to be seen. The Brady Campaign's Tolley points out that the swing seats in both the House and Senate tend to be in rural districts and rural states, where gun-control candidates traditionally fare less well than in urban and suburban areas. But as pollster Celinda Lake recently wrote in a letter to the Capital newsletter The Hill, gun control has broader appeal than is commonly believed. She said that candidates "would be wise to ignore the view that gun control is a political loser, and instead listen to their constituents."
"If gun control really cost Al Gore the presidency in 2000, why did he win the critical battleground states of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, all states with high rates of gun ownership and NRA membership?" she wrote. "Moreover, why did Gore win 500,000 more votes than Bush?"
Maher, the political consultant, says that "conservatives would like people to think there are only a hundred or so districts" where candidates can run on gun control on the premise that it's political suicide in rural areas and that in the suburbs the support is too thin. "But I think there's plenty of evidence to show that that's not true," he said. "Gun control can stand alone as an issue; it doesn't have to coattail with something else. Our challenge is to show that you can come out with a strong and articulate message on gun control and win."
Candidates Again Find Voters Responsive to Stronger Gun Laws. Feature article, Join Together Online (www.jointogether.org), July 1, 2002.
http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/features/reader/0,2061,552306,00.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
7/1/2002
Feature Story
by Dick Dahl
Fresh evidence from several mid-term election campaigns is suggesting that candidates who support stronger gun laws are finding the issue to be an effective one in their quests for votes.
In fact, the news shouldn't be so surprising since the issue did play well in the 2000 general elections. But the scapegoating of gun control by some Democrats as the reason why Al Gore failed in his presidential bid has taken some unwarranted hold, so some of the recent developments on various campaign trails are providing a reminder of the issue's strength in many jurisdictions.
In a recent Pennsylvania Democratic gubernatorial primary battle, former Philadelphia mayor Edward G. Rendell, a strong gun-control candidate, coasted to a victory over Robert P. Casey Jr., who had received substantial support from the National Rifle Association. The NRA "failed miserably" in that effort, according to Tom Maher of the Edison Group, a New Hampshire-based political consulting firm. Maher said that Rendell's message on guns was received well in even strongly Republican suburban areas like Montgomery County outside Philadelphia.
Gun-violence prevention has arisen as an issue in several other races that are attracting nationwide attention. In Michigan, for instance, incumbent four-term Congresswoman Lynn Rivers has found that her longstanding support of gun control is one of her best weapons in an uphill battle against fellow incumbent John Dingell to gain Democratic Party primary endorsement for the state's 15th Congressional District. The latest polls show Dingell, the longest-serving member of Congress, with a 10-point lead among likely Democratic primary voters in a redrawn district with the two incumbents. But recent polls also show that the more that people know about Rivers' longstanding support of stronger gun laws, the stronger a contender she becomes. An independent poll conducted by EPIC/MRA May 29 through June 3 described both candidates basic positions on guns -- Rivers' favoring "stronger gun control laws to make it more difficult to obtain guns," and Dingell's reputation as a "strong gun rights advocate" who has served as a member of the National Rifle Association -- and then asked respondents their reactions. Rivers outpolled Dingell 44 percent to 29 percent on the gun issue, with the remaining 27 percent saying the issue wouldn't influence their vote.
As Rivers spokesman Matt Burgess told Join Together Online, the importance of the gun issue in that race cannot be overestimated. "It's actually the biggest issue in the race," he said.
Besides his advantage in seniority, Dingell also has more money and the support of labor unions, which is always an enormous factor in Michigan. But as Luis Tolley, director of state legislation for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, points out, the evidence from the polls provides reason for optimism. The polls show that likely voters favor Rivers not only on the gun issue, but also on abortion (Rivers is pro-choice, Dingell pro-life) and the environment. "The question," says Tolley, "is whether or not she'll have enough money to put her message on the air and make the distinction between his record and hers. If she's able to do that, it's definitely winnable for her."
Dingell's strongly pro-NRA voting record includes a no vote on the assault-weapons ban in 1994 and on the final version of the Brady Bill in 1993. He also cosponsored legislation that would have repealed the assault-weapons ban seven months after it was passed. However, campaign watchers say that Dingell has taken an interesting tack in his race against Rivers: He's backed away from his ties to the NRA and has been touting the few times he's voted the other way, as he did with an earlier Brady Bill conference report that was filibustered to death in the Senate.
A similar dynamic involving a candidate trying to deflect attention from his past as a strong NRA supporter is happening in Maryland, where Republican Robert L. Ehrlich is trying to soften his reputation as a darling of the gun lobby in his gubernatorial race against Democrat Kathleen Kennedy Townsend.
"What's interesting in both those races, Michigan and Maryland, is that both Dingell and Erlich are trying to present themselves as moderates," says Tony Orza, director of government relations and legislative counsel for the Brady Campaign. He also suggests that candidates like Dingell and Erlich who change their tune on guns be given some credit for doing that. "You hear stories about people running away from the issue," he said, "but you never read stories that people are running toward the issue."
Another high-profile race in which guns are a campaign issue is the California governor's race, in which incumbent Democrat Gray Davis has recently come hard out of the box with TV ads in metropolitan markets touting his strong record on gun laws. His opponent, Republican William Simon, is backed by the NRA.
Other contested races in which guns have surfaced as a campaign issue include the Oregon Senate race between Democrat Bill Bradbury, who says he supports stronger gun laws, and Republican incument Gordon Smith, who has voted the NRA way; and Michigan's Ninth Congressional District race between NRA-backed Republican incumbent Joe Knollenberg and Democrat David Fink, who has been campaigning on a pledge to get guns off the streets
From the NRA perspective, meanwhile, the organization's top priority this year is to win back the Senate by targeting several Senate races involving incumbent Democrats. They include Sens. Jean Carnahan of Missouri, Timothy P. Johnson of South Dakota, and Paul Wellstone of Minnesota.
The degree to which the gun issue achieves overall prominence in this year's elections remains to be seen. The Brady Campaign's Tolley points out that the swing seats in both the House and Senate tend to be in rural districts and rural states, where gun-control candidates traditionally fare less well than in urban and suburban areas. But as pollster Celinda Lake recently wrote in a letter to the Capital newsletter The Hill, gun control has broader appeal than is commonly believed. She said that candidates "would be wise to ignore the view that gun control is a political loser, and instead listen to their constituents."
"If gun control really cost Al Gore the presidency in 2000, why did he win the critical battleground states of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, all states with high rates of gun ownership and NRA membership?" she wrote. "Moreover, why did Gore win 500,000 more votes than Bush?"
Maher, the political consultant, says that "conservatives would like people to think there are only a hundred or so districts" where candidates can run on gun control on the premise that it's political suicide in rural areas and that in the suburbs the support is too thin. "But I think there's plenty of evidence to show that that's not true," he said. "Gun control can stand alone as an issue; it doesn't have to coattail with something else. Our challenge is to show that you can come out with a strong and articulate message on gun control and win."
Candidates Again Find Voters Responsive to Stronger Gun Laws. Feature article, Join Together Online (www.jointogether.org), July 1, 2002.
http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/features/reader/0,2061,552306,00.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Comments
6/28/2002
Email
Print
Subscribe
Press Release
Contact:
Naomi Seligman
Violence Policy Center
1140 19th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-822-8200
www.vpc.org
Today's (Wednesday) Washington Post story, "Domestic Abusers Bought Guns," unequivocally demonstrates that law enforcement officials need more time, not less time, to ensure that domestic abusers are prevented from purchasing firearms in connection with background checks required by the Brady Law. In response to the story and the important information contained in the General Accounting Office (GAO) report, the Violence Policy Center (VPC) issued the following statement:
"The Violence Policy Center has consistently opposed efforts to shorten the time provided in the Brady Law to complete background checks from the current three business days. Although an overwhelming majority of background checks are completed within minutes, a sale may be delayed for up to three business days when there is a question whether someone is actually prohibited from purchasing a gun.
"However, in 1999 the NRA first proposed slicing the time for researching criminal histories from a maximum of three business days to 24 hours, which would virtually guarantee that domestic abusers and other criminals would get guns. The McCain-Lieberman gun show legislation also proposes to shorten the time to 24 hours for certain background checks.
"The VPC supports the GAO's recommendation to give law enforcement sufficient time -- and in no event less than three business days -- to complete background checks. As the GAO report documents, a large percentage of background checks needing additional time involve domestic violence offenders, and a disproportionately high percentage of domestic abusers were allowed to purchase guns because law enforcement ran out of time to finish their background checks.
"The GAO report also documents that there are serious policy reasons for preserving three business days, although that is not even enough time in many cases to complete the process when domestic violence crimes are involved. Three business days is more than just a minor detail and it should not be traded away for minimal political gains, especially when the lives of women and children are at stake."
http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/alerts/reader/0,2061,552279,00.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878