“I don’t think today is that day,” Jay Carney, the White House Press Secretary, said
on Friday. He was responding to a question about gun control and the
shooting in an elementary school in Connecticut that reportedly claimed
the lives of twenty-six people —including twenty children between the
ages of five and ten years old, as well as that of the shooter and,
separately, one of the shooter’s parents. (The reports about what
exactly happened are still somewhat shaky and unconfirmed. It’s likely
that, as in most situations like this, some of what we now think we know
will turn out to have been wrong. I will update this post as the day
goes on.)
Carney’s response was a predictable one. This
is the way that we deal with such incidents in the U.S.—we acknowledge
them; we are briefly shocked by them; then we term it impolite
to discuss their implications, and to argue about them. At some point,
we will have to stop putting it off, stop pretending that doing so is
the proper, respectful thing. It’s not either. It’s cowardice.
It is cowardice, too, the way that Carney and President Obama and their fellow-Democrats talk about gun control, when they finally decide the time is right. They avoid the issue as much as possible, then mouth platitudes, or promise to pass only the most popular of measures, like the assault-weapons ban. And then they do nothing to follow through.
But it is, from a purely political perspective, understandable. We are, all of us, angry now. Bewildered. And those of us who support gun control are perhaps maddest of all—right now. When it comes to Election Day, though, it’s the pro-gun people whose vote is most likely to be determined by this one issue. Those who want tighter restrictions, well, they typically have higher priorities to consider first. Put simply, supporting gun control is unlikely to help your typical politician much, but it’s very likely to hurt them. And Democrats know the numbers: they can’t lose any more white voters than they already have, especially not white voters in union families. And a lot of union households are gun-owning households, too.
No wonder, then, that Carney says today is not the day to talk about gun control. If both the Democrats and the Republicans had their way, we’d never talk about it again.
It is cowardice, too, the way that Carney and President Obama and their fellow-Democrats talk about gun control, when they finally decide the time is right. They avoid the issue as much as possible, then mouth platitudes, or promise to pass only the most popular of measures, like the assault-weapons ban. And then they do nothing to follow through.
But it is, from a purely political perspective, understandable. We are, all of us, angry now. Bewildered. And those of us who support gun control are perhaps maddest of all—right now. When it comes to Election Day, though, it’s the pro-gun people whose vote is most likely to be determined by this one issue. Those who want tighter restrictions, well, they typically have higher priorities to consider first. Put simply, supporting gun control is unlikely to help your typical politician much, but it’s very likely to hurt them. And Democrats know the numbers: they can’t lose any more white voters than they already have, especially not white voters in union families. And a lot of union households are gun-owning households, too.
No wonder, then, that Carney says today is not the day to talk about gun control. If both the Democrats and the Republicans had their way, we’d never talk about it again.
Read more:
Comments
Post a Comment
Thanks for leaving comments. You are making this discussion richer and more beneficial to everyone. Do not hold back.