The shooting of five policemen in Dallas during a protest rally against police brutality that took place in Minnesota brings back horrific memories to this southern conservative city.
The city of Dallas, best known for slaying one of the most popular US Presidents, is once again in the limelight, a tainted city. Over 50 years ago, Dallas became the centre of America’s shame; though much has changed, the shooting in Dallas in a series of shootings is a reminder that not everything has changed. The state of the union is not well.
The politics of gun control and gun reform is in a downward spiral and is in a permanent state of stagnation. There is always a moment in time when change is possible but should be swiftly acted upon, or else the moment could be lost. This is the case with gun-control legislation, a political opportunistic moment has presented itself twice in the last couple of months first with the shootings in Orlando and now Dallas.
The political elite, while trying to balance the enablers and constraints, have tried to enact effective gun reform policy over the years. It has to a certain extent deterred gun violence but not enough, as recent events have shown.
History of Legislation on Gun Control
In looking at the trajectory of the gun-control reform, it is almost always a knee-jerk reaction to a terrible incident. After the violent assassinations of President Kennedy, Sen Kennedy and Rev King, President Johnson in 1968 passed the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), without the support of the National Rifle Association (NRA). In the 1980s, in the aftermath of the assassination of John Lennon and another attempt to kill President Reagan, focus was again shifted on the need for reform.
In 1986, Congress passed the Firearm Owners Protection Act; the act was supported by the NRA and gun rights advocates as it protected gun ownership rights and reversed many of the provisions of the 1968 GCA. This was followed by the enactment of the 1993 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act; it established a system of checks, the national background check system to prevent certain restricted individuals from owning, purchasing, or transporting firearms.
In 1994, the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB), which banned semi-automatic weapons, was passed after the school shooting in Stockton, California. This reform, along with others on the domestic front, contributed to the end of the Democrat’s 40-year reign over Congress. However, this ban expired in 2004.
Politics Over Gun Violence
In 2013, after the Sandy Hook shooting, President Obama signed Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) that extended checks for gun owners. In the aftermath of the Orlando shooting, a vote-to-ban firearms failed to even take place. The legislation had a certain amount of bipartisan support. This prompted Democrats in Congress to stage a ‘sit-in’ as a sign of protest, a tactic used by both parties in the past.
The question is that in spite of the passage of numerous pieces of legislations, an increasing rate of incidences still persist. In the aftermath of the Orlando shooting, the Republicans responded by stating that they would introduce measures countering the Democrat-introduced legislation in an effort to curb gun violence.
The NRA Lobby
The congressional connections to the NRA (though not directly responsible) does in fact play a role, in the manner in which legislators, especially the Republicans act on certain pieces of legislation. However, the NRA that was once politically advantageous to many Republicans looks more like their ‘Achilles heel’, given the current scenario.
The Republicans mostly support gun ownership as they are firm advocates of the second amendment, which has been misconstrued most of the time. The NRA is one of their biggest campaign contributors that donates millions of dollars every year to the Republican lawmakers.
Though the NRA most commonly is made up of members of the Republican party, they find support with the Democrats as well. The NRA was not always this politically powerful, the switch occurred in 1977; the NRA went from being a largely apolitical gun-safety organisation to a politically active one.
The Republican-NRA connection has made political careers, and also has the ability to break them, especially with the current scenario with the
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), Sen. Rob Portman (R- OH), Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis) and
Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) , Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), having an uphill battle
against Democrats.
Is Gun Reform Viable?
Given the timelines of the various legislative reforms, most of it has been introduced by the Democrats. The Orlando shooting and now the Dallas shooting has incited the Democrats, who are more than willing to take on the mighty NRA. The Republicans and the NRA argue that the Democratic proposals wouldn’t stop many terrorists and insufficiently protect gun owners’ rights. Speaker Paul Ryan stated after the Orlando shooting that Republicans “know that there is an issue” involving gun purchases by people on terrorist watch lists.
In the final analysis, is gun reform viable? Given the political climate and the locking of horns between the democrats and republicans, it won’t be easy and the possibility of it happening before President Obama leaves the White House is slim indeed. Conversely, this may also be the perfect opportunity to act given the severity of the issue and the inevitable public outcry, especially in an election year.
(The writer is a doctoral candidate, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University. This is a personal blog and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)
Also Read:
As Terror Rages Globally, Be Sure to Stand With Secularist Faith
Dallas Shooter Wrote Messages on Garage Wall in Blood Before Dying
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)