WASHINGTON - After the slaughter last month of 20 schoolchildren at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., cynics said the response wouldn’t be any different from those to the many mass killings that came before. After the tiny caskets disappeared, so would the shock, the grief and the resolve. Emotion, after all, is no match for the National Rifle Association.
What the cynics didn’t take into account is that Sandy Hook changed the one person who matters more than almost any other: the president. And he can count on the support of the one group that has more authority than almost any other: the parents of the children who died.
If Bill Clinton found his voice after the Oklahoma City bombing, Barack Obama found his after the Newtown shootings. The day he delivered his remarks at a memorial service there, Obama had sat in an empty theater, working on his speech and watching the dress rehearsal of his daughter Sasha’s Christmas pageant, which he would miss.
He was a father, not a president. He took Newtown to heart. After mentioning guns only rarely in four years, he announced on Jan. 16 the biggest battle against gun violence in decades. That which he could do on his own by executive order, he would. The rest of the fight he would take to Congress.
Of course, taking on the gun lobby isn’t exactly courageous. The public is on the side of more regulation: According to a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, 88 percent of respondents favor background checks on people buying guns at gun shows, 76 percent support checks on buyers of ammunition and 71 percent back a new federal database that would track all gun sales. Some 65 percent also support banning high-capacity magazines.
When will it dawn on the majority of the nonviolent millions that just because our politicians do, we ourselves don’t have to stand helpless at the savage slaying of schoolchildren? Life doesn’t go on for them. It shouldn’t be the same for us.
We’ve conceded so much to the NRA largely because cowardly members of Congress have. If you’re a lobbying group and can plausibly threaten a single member of Congress with defeat, hordes of others will cower in fear — and that includes Democrats. The most intense emotion in Congress right now isn’t remorse over the lost children but fear of losing your seat.
Maybe the president could garner some support among members of Congress by showing them that support of reasonable regulation may help them stay in office. He has a vaunted political organization that is at least the equal of the NRA. Promise to mobilize it to save those who vote for his proposal. Split the NRA leadership from its members, the way workers were separated from union bosses. Make the NRA even more Republican and rural, and increasingly marginalized. Defeating a congressman because he supported gun regulation should be like defeating someone because he supported seatbelts or a smoking ban on airplanes.
The Founders had gun laws so intrusive that, were they running for office today, the NRA wouldn’t endorse them. Gun ownership was denied to slaves, free blacks, and any white man who refused to swear loyalty to the Revolution. Those given ownership had to report for frequent musters of the citizen militias, at which their guns were inspected.
And these were muskets, not Bushmaster rifles. Even Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, in affirming the individual right to bear arms under the Second Amendment, noted that there is considerable room to regulate that right.
Before the president announced his actions, the NRA released an ad that targeted his daughters, whose school has armed guards — the implication being that the president doesn’t want your children to be as safe as his. This is one of those moments to wish that the cool Obama could be more like hot-tempered New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. When a voter once asked Christie where his children went to school, he shot back: “None of your business.”
Fortunately, there are many more parents (about 149 million) than NRA members (about 4.3 million). Obama should pack the gallery at next month’s State of the Union with parents who have lost children to gun violence. He should keep their sons and daughters vivid in our memories, as he did at this week’s announcement, with stories about their passions for painting and bike-riding. He should campaign for gun control the way he did for health-care reform.
The bereaved parents of Sandy Hook have joined together as a group called Sandy Hook Promise. At its founding, David Wheeler asked, “What is it worth doing to keep a child safe?” On Dec. 14, the Wheelers lost their 6-year-old son Benjamin. In the immediate aftermath, Wheeler and his wife comforted their surviving son, Nate, with the assurance they would do anything to protect him — and then realized they should make the same promise to Ben.
Like other children that day at Sandy Hook, Ben probably thought that Mom or Dad would be there any moment to rescue him. The least the rest of us can do is be there now.
Margaret Carlson is a Bloomberg View columnist.
Comments (101)
Add commentJB, did you miss your tolerance class?
You just resorted to Troll-type name calling!
Awwe poor little troll
Must be past it's bed time!
be careful
Some take 1/2 a viagra so they don't pee on their shoes. If they take a whole one look out! Especially after 4 hours. Forget going to the Dr. Go downtown!!
Twist429
"Maybe he should have tried fixing the financial problems first before passing the healthcare bill that is going to cost this country."
Rising healthcare costs and the nation's financial issues are inextricably tied together. The healthcare bill will save this country in the long term as we continually make changes as we did with the original Medicare bill.
Republicans had control of all the branches of government and never addressed our country's abysmal health care system. When the full effects become known to the American public it will become as popular as Medicare and Social Security, even tho Republicans have also not liked those programs from their inception either.
Drudge Report? Sorry, but I find that source very unreliable, and very biased against Obama and others also agree:
Richard Siklos, an editor of Fortune magazine, called the Drudge Report a "conservative bullhorn", the Los Angeles Times labelled Drudge a "well-known conservative warrior",the New York Times referred to him as a "conservative muckraker", and Glenn Greenwald called him a "right-wing hack".
Now I understand why you post what you do since you admit to reading the Drudge Report.
I did read the Wall Street
I did read the Wall Street Market watch article some time ago, but did read it again. It is the ole government stats deal where you don't count a President as accountable until the 2nd year as that is when the fiscal year starts.
The reason people don't believe it is because it is just more
government shuffling around with the numbers. The bottom line is what it is. He began his time when he was sworn in and that is what we go by. No excuses.
When you read the May article posted, you may also read through the comments.
See What Happens?
See what happens when conservatives are shown the facts and have nothing to back up their false statements?
They resort to accusing me of Troll-like statements - false, since they do not know what troll-like behavior is.
They resort to pee-pee and Viagra references - juvenile.
They say it is past my bedtime - again, juvenile.
You guys really are pathetic in your juvenile responses.
Bond lady
I don't just get my info from drudge, that's the point. I can read between the lines can you? I also watch msnbc when I want to see the far lefts play book, they can't even hide it on there. Do you even know how drudge works? It is a website that posts links to other news websites. I can jump to those stories and read between the lines. Not all of us blindly listen to the dribble that is thrown at us as you clearly do. FYI the first start of this recession started after Fanny and Freddie failed, remember the housing collapse? Who start that great program of selling loans people couldn't afford?
Bond
All you do is try and say who's news is better then who's how playground bully like of you. You are the definition of a troll. Think your the only one who knows how to look it up?
Ole Government Stats Deal
Yep, those ole unreliable government stats. When they do not corroborate your prejudices then you poo-paw them. Just like when the unemployment stats came out below 8% right before the election Jack Welch said they were not to be believed.
That is the problem with conservatives, facts and statistics are not to be believed when they go counter to their prejudices. Sad commentary.
Be proud
Of your presidents near 8% unemployment and over 8% for how long? Stats to be proud of bondo
You Don't Know The Definition
Twist429 try to learn what an Internet Troll is, not what you think it is. Did I post incendiary opinions? No, I countered your false statement about Obama's spending, with corroborating evidence. That is not trolling.
Very hard to debate people who refuse the accept the data, facts and statistics.
Have you taken a close look
Have you taken a close look at how they do figure the unemployment numbers?
I think maybe we just know that the government has different methods of getting to the right bottom line.
The so-called CBO only figures with the information that they have been given. If they are given incorrect or fudged info., then that is what you get.... an incorrect answer.
I would think most thinking people would have that figured out by now.
How many people are unemployed? How many have stopped looking? How many should be in the workforce?
The same with that so-called cut ... If they say "cut", it is only a cut in the increase. It is not a real cut. I think conservatives just know more about how they always (no matter who) play with numbers.
I looked on Drudge, is Gaga not going to be at the big dance? The articles linked the Los Angeles times, Reuters, MSN, NBC, and a survey linked to NBC/WSJ. They are all links. I think the liberals quoted just want to be linked to for their articles.
No
But you throw out the condescending garbage about how I get my news. That is inflammatory. Get it?
"He began his time when he was sworn in and that is way it is
"The reason people don't believe it is because it is just more
government shuffling around with the numbers. The bottom line is what it is. He began his time when he was sworn in and that is what we go by. "
Conservatives may not believe it, but that does not make it false. The first year of a new President's term is working with the prior President's program. You may not believe it, but it is still the truth.
Denying science, facts and reality seems to be a conservative trait.
What about
The other 3 years?
internet troll
Look it up on Wikipedia for a long definition.
Trolling is really fishing from a boat while moving with the appropriate bait and hoping for a walleye or northern.
It is just not worth arguing about, life is to short.
Sadie, Stop The Conspiracy Theories
"The so-called CBO only figures with the information that they have been given. If they are given incorrect or fudged info., then that is what you get.... an incorrect answer.
I would think most thinking people would have that figured out by now."
Do you know crazy you are sounding? BTW - this is not trolling, it is stating the fact that what you are saying has never, ever been proven.
What do read? What do you watch? What do listen to?
Good gravy, every other
Good gravy, every other President started his term on the day he is sworn in and so did this one. He takes possession,.
If a new President takes over a company on another one's fiscal year, guess what? the new president is responsible from the day he starts We are not stupid, we know all your junk, but the fact remains, day one is day one.,
Wild 2
Col 1
When we bought our business, we started with the previous owners mess, We knew it on day one. It was his budget, we inherited it and we took possession.
Not Inflammatory, Factual
As Harry Truman said "I never did give anybody hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell."
What you view as inflammatory I view as telling the truth. Drudge is a very conservative, right wing media source who has on many occasions been shown to be inaccurate. Want examples?
Congressional Budget
Congressional Budget Office.-I heard it out of a Directors mouth, I think on C-Span
Example: If you have someone do your taxes and don't have or give them all the information, then your tax return will be incorrect.,
So now, you think that I sound crazy.
I've worked with numbers all my working life.
You need the correct information to process.
It may be that the numbers given are an estimate and that is the best they can do. Then the CBO is also an estimate.
It is the same with all the politicians not just your favorites
(I have no favorites). Well, I do like Paul Ryan.
What, where and how I read and listen is my business.
I don't care about trolls. Ok bond is not a troll.
Bondo
What about CNN I get my news from them too, not just drudge
Pointless Exchange
You guys have your preconceived views/opinions and no amount of information will ever change your views.
I am just happy that your views are the minority views right now. It might change some day but right now your views did not convince the American public.
I look forward to the next 4 years and I expect positive changes rather than the doom and gloom from your side.
Adios muchachos, on to the next topic.
We can't be trolls, like Bond!
He says we don't know how to be them, but she does!
Excellent!!!!
Aitkin Age blog
Recommended by a poster on here.
Thanks for leading me to this.
Very moving.
http://www.messagemedia.co/aitkin/opinion/blogs/wayne_halverson/article_...
Another look at the NRA by a local writer.
Yeah but, you and Wayne
sit in your little world southie. Why don't you repost Bob Ihde's letter? You know, the one that shows that putting police in the schools to make the kids safer was championed by Bill Clinton and cheered on by Pelosie, Schumer and Feinstein? That their districts reaped millions from it and over $753,000,000 was spent on it? That those same liberals screamed at Bush for taking "COPSin schools" out of the 2005 budget?
You lose again, Lefter, go hug Wayne.
Hmm Ya hit 27000
Last night F&B. Me thinks you should get a night out with that bond thing & the Dispatch picking up the tab??? Hee Hee. Will ya tape it??
PD. Good post. Where ya been??
southie
I read you are going south. Good time to go,
have a safe trip.
Aitkin Age rules of conduct
I read Halvorson's piece too and found it moving. I'm glad President Obama is pushing on gun reform. I also noticed the Rules of Conduct on this blog. Maybe we could improve the dialogue by following these here in the Dispatch comments...especially #4.
1
Keep it Clean.
Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
2
Don't Threaten or Abuse.
Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. AND PLEASE TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
3
Be Truthful.
Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
4
Be Nice.
No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
5
Be Proactive.
Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
6
Share with Us.
We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.
Gun control
In my opinion, the NRA and Fox News are blowing Obama's gun control proposal WAY out of proportion and playing on people's emotions to take another swing at Obama. Obama's proposals are NOT taking anyone's guns away. People need to check out the real facts and proposal on www.WhiteHouse.gov instead of listening to Fox news. The proposal has some very good common sense regulations such as better background checks for those purchasing guns. Maybe we should just let anyone drive cars without getting a license? There has to be some regulation when it comes to public safety.
Gun control
In my opinion, the NRA and Fox News are blowing Obama's gun control proposal WAY out of proportion and playing on people's emotions to take another swing at Obama. Obama's proposals are NOT taking anyone's guns away. People need to check out the real facts and proposal on www.WhiteHouse.gov instead of listening to Fox news. The proposal has some very good common sense regulations such as better background checks for those purchasing guns. Maybe we should just let anyone drive cars without getting a license? There has to be some regulation when it comes to public safety.