Gun Politics New York

Chuck speaks. At the 2:47 mark he talks about gun control.

The Hill reports on gun control in the Democrat Party platform:

“… The draft language of the Democrats’ 2012 platform … argues that current safeguards protecting the public against gun violence are insufficient and urges “an honest and open conversation about firearms.”  The document also calls for “reasonable regulation” governing guns, including laws banning assault weapons and requiring all gun sellers — not just licensed dealers — to perform background checks on potential buyers …”

Like the GOP platform, the platform is written by party functionaries and is completely unenforceable.  It does show a mindset of what the Democrats consider their voter base.

“… Most of the gun language in the Democrats’ draft platform mirrors what was in the 2008 document, but the call for an “open conversation” about gun control — something that’s been all but absent for years on Capitol Hill — is a new addition.  The provision marks a subtle shift in messaging for Democratic leaders who have been reluctant to press for tighter gun control — or even hold hearings on the subject — for fear of a political backlash …”

Well, guess what?  This is going to cause some political backlash.

No matter how you cut it, the American public is in no mood for more gun control.  What point is there in antagonizing an organized constituency (NRA, etc.) when the general public already thinks the President has done a lousy job at running the country?  It’s not as if Obama can afford to turn more voters against him.

Furthermore, what point is there in pandering to the kook fringe which have no ability to generate any sort of money/votes around their issue?  They don’t even talk about organizing a GOTV effort; it’s just lots of whining about neither party adopting their issues.

The right is upset with House Speaker John Boehner for telling the truth:

“… “Have you ever met anybody who read the party platform?” Boehner said at a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor. “I’ve not met ever anybody … It ought to be on one sheet of paper … That way Americans could actually read it …” …”

And he’s right.  It’s 62 pages long.  Other than party groupies who is going to take time to read it?  Certainly not the voters.  There is a reason political ads are short and to the point.

“… Every four years, grassroots activists from around the country who have won seats as delegates at the Republican National Convention develop the party’s national platform … Some activists work for months just to win the right to attend the convention so they have a chance at influencing a platform that officially defines the principles and policy positions for which the party stands …”

That’s great.  The problem here is, like the Libertarian Party’s platform, is that there is no way to enforce it.  There is no litmus test or oath of loyalty required to join a political party and there is no mechanism to punish candidates and officeholders who do not follow the party platform.  NRA reps. can go on and on about the pro-gun parts of the platform, but it is nothing more than the GOP pandering for the gun vote.

Chris Cox interviews Mitt Romney in the latest NRA magazines.  It’s the same thing they did with John McCain back in ’08, trying to make him more palatable to the membership which, given the reaction I saw Romney get at the ’08 and ’10 annual meetings, does not consider him a friend.

The interview must have been carefully scripted by either NRA and/or Romney’s campaign and comes across to me as a lot of hot air.  The one good thing out of it is Romney said he would sign the reciprocity bill.  They should have just printed that and saved six pages of newsprint for something else.