Lack-of-Kennedy Effect on Gun Legislation?

Z

zoomie

New member
Teddy Kennedy authored and sponsored lots and lots of anti-gun bills. Many of them got nowhere. Will anyone take his place now or will the wave of anti bills slow (of course not stop) without his vehement "commitment?" Here are just two - one very recent and one from the beginning of his career.
Microstamping: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:3:./temp/~bdd36t:@@@L&summ2=m&|/bss/d110query.html|



Personal Safety Firearms Act of 1973

"Gun control laws in the United States are woefully inadequate. In our vast society guns should have no reasonable role....For the American family in 1973, fear, apprehension, mistrust, anguish and pain are the dreaded products of our firearms history....First, the registration of every civilian-owned gun in this country. Second, it will require all gun owners to pass stringent qualifying procedures to legally possess a gun and, third, it bans the domestic output of all hand-held firearms that are not designed for sporting purposes." - Edward Kennedy, 1973
Click to expand...

So who is the next champion of gun control? John Kerry certainly agrees with Kennedy, but doesn't seem to have the same focus on it. BHO (if he wins God forbid) can't sign legislation that doesn't get to his desk, so who will do his bidding in the Senate without Teddy?
 
"So who is the next champion of gun control?"

Dianne Feinstein will still be there, of course, and I think she even hates guns more than Ted Kennedy.

Tim
 
It's simplistic to conclude that the Democrats are united on gun control measures.
Click to expand...
And that gives me a little hope. I think the 2006 Freshman class is much less anti-gun (or at least less passionately so) and a few are even pro-gun. The latest Mississippi House Democrat, especially. The Democrats and media yelled and hollered about how it was a huge deal, but really, the "Democrat" they elected, was a DINO in many ways. (Is that a term? It is now.) I don't think the issues will split along party lines for the next 4 years like they have recently.
 
The latest Mississippi House Democrat, especially. The Democrats and media yelled and hollered about how it was a huge deal, but really, the "Democrat" they elected, was a DINO in many ways. (Is that a term? It is now.) I don't think the issues will split along party lines for the next 4 years like they have recently.
Click to expand...

Points to Zoomie for critical thinking

Wildplus1Alaska ™
 
Kennedy's Replacement

Nobody.

He was a mis-guided, but very effective legislator, especially after 1980. He had the emotional baggage to play the bleeding heart, an approach that has largely shriveled up and died.

Remember that the Cho at VT incident would have had a much bigger (and different) impact in 1987 or 1997. What happened? The NRA change in the mental health rules straightened out some things that needed done (was it perfect, no, but we got a lot out of the changes, and the banners clearly lost ground).

Our political activism (and especially our numbers) at all levels is far stronger and coordinated than it was even as far back as 1994, the last hurrah for the banners. Our Internet structure has us better organized and communicating than we have ever been - and the other side has largely given up fighting us there.

We have changed the landscape in ways I would have not even dreamed of in 1994. 48 out of 50 states with CCW, a permit (FL) that is good in 33 other states, significant reductions in gun-free victim zones, Students for Concealed Carry (who is probably more active than what is left of the Brady Bunch), presidential candidates in both parties (Richardson in the DEM, Huckelbee (and probably Thompson) in the GOP) indicating that they have CCWs, and the DC vs Heller decision.

Even the media seems to be starting to understand, abet in fits and starts.

McCarthy, Boxer, Feinstein, Lautenberg, and Kerry are past their political prime, and nobody I know of in the either party is making this issue a core political issue as they did. Schumer went out and recruited 3 senate candidates - Casey, Webb, and McCaskill - who are clearly pro-gun. The Dems who are replacing GOPers in the House are pro-gun.

Yes, Bloomie is still out there on the loose, but as long as we keep working, we will out last him. His acolytes are still there, so we must remain in a lean-forward posture. The Joyce Foundation still is tossing money around - they just gave CeaseFire in PA 350K.

Obama may be the luckest banner alive, because he - if he is smart enough to not waste his time and energy (an interesting thought) - can walk away from the issue, assuming that we get the Individual Right/Strict Scruntiny/Applies to the States outcome we are hoping for.

We still have work to do. After DC vs. Heller, we will still have to go out and smash the second system of drinking fountains. His passing will not stop our journey forward to advance freedom.
 
"Except the ones that she carries, of course."

Now hold on, Elza. My understanding is that during one of the San Francisco gun grabs she *did* turn in one of her guns.:barf:

Tim
 
It's simplistic and naive to think that the majority of DemocRATs in leadership positions AREN'T united on gun control issues.
 
I don't think anyone will be as effective as Ted Kennedy. Everyone seems to love his brothers, so his power seems to come from one big pity party.

Sen. Kennedy also seems to have no fear, and the balls and gumption to be able to push his agenda. Senators listen to him. It's a cult of personality, and none of the other Senators have that level and intensity of political power.

People look up to him because his brothers were supposedly great men. (Save the political debate for another thread.) He hasn't been so great, but people like him because of his historical connection.

He cannot be replaced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top