Over one hundred days have passed since the terrible shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut and finally, Congress is preparing to vote on a new bill regarding gun control. Since the shootings in Connecticut and Aurora, Colorado, gun advocates and lawmakers have argued over the most efficient and logical way to tamper gun violence. Most arguments have focused on the quality and frequency of background checks for purchasers and the legality of assault weapons, machines often used in the military to ensure mass killings. Alternatively, the head of the National Rifle Association, Wayne LaPierre, has argued that the real issue is the country’s mental health policy rather than the danger of guns. LaPierre claims that background checks are a hassle for those who abide by gun laws, but is there really an effective way to document all mental health patients in the country, let alone a way to determine which of these patients would use a gun illegally?
The time passed since the Newtown shootings has seemingly reduced the urgency of the gun control argument, but New York City’s Mayor Bloomberg’s recent ad blitz on gun control on several red and swing states has brought the issue back to light. Although some citizens of those states argue that Bloomberg doesn’t understand the role of guns in rural areas and criticize his past of creating seemingly overbearing laws on large drinks and sugary foods, Bloomberg’s success may lie in his ads’ abilities to pressure leaders of these states to promote gun control, even if they have not done so in the past. Other pressuring strategies involve rich donors claiming that they will not support Democrats in approaching elections unless they promise to support gun control. Although Congress has dropped the ban on assault weapons and magazine size limitations from the bill, universal background checks remain and will be voted on in the weeks to come.
Sources:
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/29/what-now-for-gun-control/?ref=michaelrbloomberg