You're missing the main idea. It's very important among many politicians to be seen as doing something. Whether or not it's practical, whether or not it's legal, whether or not it has any chance of working...those things don't matter. What matters is that a politician's peers see him as doing something.The anti gunners in congress and the administration want it both ways. They want to impede or prevent law abiding citizens from buying guns while at the same time refusing to prosecute those felons who attempt to buy guns.
It's gotta play well on the 6:00 news.
Most gun control laws aren't about fixing problems. They're about the person proposing and pushing them getting his 15 minutes on the news for doing something. Once that 15 minutes is up, they could care less, until next election, when they can use it as a resume builder.
When I heard about the Tuscon shooting, my knee-jerk response was, "oh ____, here it comes." Instead, I was pleasantly surprised to see 99% of the media agree with you. The Loughner conversation wasn't about gun control, it was about our society's failure to identify and treat mental illness. Apparently, the President missed that whole thing.Loughner isn't a gun problem; but rather a mental health problem
That's what it comes down to now. Americans, for the most part, don't want a conversation about gun control. I don't think we're in a position to lose anything by not bothering to participate in this particular "conversation."
Heck, I don't think the President wants a "conversation." He just wants to be seen as doing something.