Heavy Lift to Pass New Assault Weapons Ban says Clinton

[Animal Mother]

I was reading an article about Hilary Clinton's recent trip to Mexico and came across this interesting quote:

Michell said,

"She talked about what we can do back home on the demand side.  I asked her about that but also what we can do about guns.  They acknowledge that their first choice would probably be a reinstatement of the assault weapon ban but they're not going to take on that political battle against the gun lobby.  She (Clinton) has a record of being against those assault weapons and so she said, 'look she's not going to sugar coat it.  'It's a heavy lift' was her term for what the politics would be to go up against the gun lobby right now with every thing else on the economic side that Barack Obama has on his plate."

http://www.examiner.com/x-5890-Obama-Administration-Examiner~y2009m3d26-War-on-Mexican-drug-cartel-wont-include-ban-on-assault-weapons

There is bit more detail in the video that accompanies the article, but what I find interesting is that they would openly admit that if not for the power of the NRA, they would be pushing hard for a reinstatement of the AWB.  In my heart of hearts, I know that is what they want, but to actually go out and say it publicly...well, I hope the NRA grabs those sound bites and broadcasts it from the rooftops, it'll be a great way to get some fund-raising dollars flowing in.

I do think that they are politically smart not to push the AWB under the guise of helping Mexico.  The idea that you would be able to successfully push a new AWB through by using Mexico with all the political baggage Mexico brings along all by itself is pretty stupid.  Not even the Dems are dumb enough to try that yet. 

It does concern me that the administration is openly stating that they want a ban though...if they have the opportunity to push it successfully they will.  They will probably wait until we have another mass shooting, its how all the other restrictions were passed in the U.K. and Australia.  We have to keep the pressure on them no matter what happens. 

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

That about sums it up, doesn't it?  They want a new assault weapons ban, but they can't so long as we're ready to stomp 'em for trying.  The moment we let up they'll move in for the kill.

[vaskidmark]

While I'm glad for all the NRA does, we need to keep in mind that grassroots efforts contribute mightily to the effort.

A weekly email to your Congrescritter and both Senators reminding them that you are keeping an eye on them and their respective houses does wonders - even if all 3 of yours are firmly encamped on the other side of the fence.  Remember, the first order of business in Congress is to get re-elected.  Let them know it may be more difficult than they want it to be.

stay safe.

skidmark

[MechAg94]

IMO, this is just one more attempt to find anything that will get traction against the gun rights crowd.  I figure they will keep looking for issues like this for the next 4 years to see if they can undermine the gun lobby.  If they think they can do it without affecting their reelection in 2010/2012, they will do it. 

[Gowen]

IMO, this is just one more attempt to find anything that will get traction against the gun rights crowd.  I figure they will keep looking for issues like this for the next 4 years to see if they can undermine the gun lobby.  If they think they can do it without affecting their reelection in 2010/2012, they will do it. 

Yes, notice the increase in gun violence news stories?  The media wing of the dnc is in full swing trying to change public opinion on firearms.  It my take them 3 years, 4 years or longer but they will keep at it.

Our biggest asset would be Wayne LaPierre visiting Washington and telling the congressmen and senators the they added 2 million more NRA members.  That is why numbers matter right now.

[longeyes]

We need $4 billion to protect the Second Amendment.  Is it not as important as "voter registration?"  Let's change the name of the NRA to ARMS.  Maybe that will help.

[Waitone]

This president is not into doing things through the legislature when executive orders and various bureaucratic plays will suffice.  The man is solidly against the second amendment and will do what he has to restrict access to firearms.  The only unknown is how he will accomplish it.

[AJ Dual]

Yes, notice the increase in gun violence news stories?  The media wing of the dnc is in full swing trying to change public opinion on firearms.  It my take them 3 years, 4 years or longer but they will keep at it.

IMO, that's a dangerous strategy for them.

I think that after VT, we've reached the mass-shooting saturation point, at least as far as media exposure is concerned. Columbine seemed to be it's peak, and even then not much if anything anti-gun was passed in it's aftermath. The Stockton CA got more done with the import bans than any of the larger, more recent shootings, IMO.

These massacres may change the views of the friends and families immediately affected by a spree shooting, but it seems to be losing traction with the American populace overall. Perhaps subconsciously more and more are beginning to understand it's the price paid for life in a free society.

Polling data after VT was soundly on our side too. Something like 60%+ felt that new gun laws would not prevent these kinds of killings.  And these weren't just news wbesite polls that the various gun-boards managed to "freep".  And while still shouted down, and marginalized, the "shoot back!" camp was finally heard seriously for the first time after VT. A huge step in of itself.

[K Frame]

Did anyone see the article recently from Reuters that indicates that Mexico is refusing to do combined border operations with US forces, is more or less refusing to increase inspections at border crossings, and is overall very cool towards coordination with US border agencies?

Why do I get the impression that Mexico doesn't want to solve this problem at all.

They want someone else to solve it for them, and that someone else is the United States?

[HankB]

Why do I get the impression that Mexico doesn't want to solve this problem at all.

They want someone else to solve it for them, and that someone else is the United States?

Mexico is afraid of two things:

1. Effectively coordinated border security won't just stop the flow of guns south, it will stop the flow of illegals north.

2. Many of the guns used by narcogangs - even if American made - came though government sources; Mexican army, Bolivian army, Panamanian army, etc. Public revelation of this would be bad PR.

[AJ Dual]

Did anyone see the article recently from Reuters that indicates that Mexico is refusing to do combined border operations with US forces, is more or less refusing to increase inspections at border crossings, and is overall very cool towards coordination with US border agencies?

Why do I get the impression that Mexico doesn't want to solve this problem at all.

They want someone else to solve it for them, and that someone else is the United States?

Who says Mexico sees it as a "problem"?

Mexico is a multi-tiered race/class system, and it's one that's much worse than the issues the United States had/has. Those of native and mestizo blood, and the smattering of blacks, either of Texan or Mexican slave descent/Spanish speaking Caribbean nations, are definitely considered lesser people in Mexico than the more European descended Castile Spaniards.  Mexico uses the fact that they abolished slavery in Mexico before the Civil War did in the United States, and historical the perception of America as an expansionist bully in the Southwest as a whitewash to gloss over their own deep-rooted racial and socio-economic problems.  And they further consider the advances made since the 1960's in America mostly as window-dressing.

Mexico is using the United States in two ways: Firstly as a social safety-valve for their underclass, if those Mexicans bound and determined to be productive had nowhere to escape, pressure for real reform and civil rights in Mexico might become untenable for the current status-quo. Like much of the Third World, clear deeds to property and business ownership in Mexico is difficult to navigate, often the process is filled with graft and corruption, and it makes social advancement and the handing down of generational wealth difficult. Secondly, Mexico is then further using those illegal immigrants working in the U.S. as an unfunded social welfare program. Every dollar an illegal sends home, is fifteen Pesos the Mexican government does not need to spend, or need the economic activity for that person to earn it at home.