From Our Inbox

Newtown, politics and gun control

 

If you’re thinking that last week’s tragedy in Newtown, Conn., makes it likely that Congress will soon pass stricter federal gun laws, remember this: People thought the same thing in 2011, after a gunman shot into a Tucson crowd, killing six and injuring others, including Gabrielle Giffords, one of the House of Representatives’ own members.

Public support for gun control tends to swell after a mass shooting. But then, just as quickly, it tends to ebb, and opponents are happy to wait the process out.

Tougher gun control laws face an array of obstacles. The National Rifle Association and its allies are still a powerful lobby. The fervor for more regulation is almost exclusively among Democrats; the Republican majority in the House is still solidly opposed. And there’s that inevitable erosion of public attention once the heartbreaking images of funerals fade.

But it’s possible that the latest round of calls for regulation could end differently, and not only because the murder of 20 young children is so horrifying.

This time, the debate will take place in a very different political landscape, and that’s probably more important, in Congress’ calculations, than the emotional impact of the Newtown murders.

Consider the differences between today and last summer, when there was a brief clamor for stricter gun laws after a gunman killed 12 people in an Aurora, Colo., theater. Back then, it wasn’t clear whether President Obama could win a second term, and it seemed likely that the GOP would retake the Senate. Congressional Republicans saw no reason to compromise, and Obama didn’t have political capital to waste.

When the president was forced to talk about the issue in an October debate, he began this way: “I believe in the 2nd Amendment. We’ve got a long tradition of hunting and sportsmen and people who want to make sure they can protect themselves.”

But on Wednesday, when he announced that he was directing Vice President Joe Biden to bring him proposals for quick action against gun violence, Obama’s tone was different. For the first time, he made gun control a formal part of his second-term agenda. “I will use all the powers of this office to help advance efforts aimed at preventing more tragedies like this,” he said. “We won’t prevent them all, but that can’t be an excuse not to try.”

On Election Day, when Obama won handily, it wasn’t votes from gun owners that put him over the top. Instead, the president won by mobilizing a Democratic majority among groups that are overwhelmingly in favor of gun control: women, suburban voters and Latinos.

The most important number in this week’s polls on gun control isn’t the spike in overall support for more regulations — 54 percent in a Washington Post/ABC News poll this week, the highest in five years; that was to be expected. More important, as Greg Sargent pointed out in the Post, is the demographic breakdown of that support. Democrats, college-educated voters, women and minorities favor stricter gun regulations by significant majorities. Opposition to gun control is concentrated among white men, especially white men who didn’t go to college.

Those demographics have several political consequences.

First, the opponents of gun control are mostly voters Obama and his party have already lost to the Republicans, so by being cautious on the issue, Democrats aren’t gaining much. (Democrats representing districts in the South and the Mountain West are likely to still tread carefully.)

©2012 Los Angeles Times

Read more From Our Inbox stories from the Miami Herald

  • We don’t understand female politicians

    In 2012, the number of women serving in the U.S. Senate reached a historic high: 20 out of 100. And so we continue to debate about the low representation of women in political office, and the debate continues to hinge on the differences between men and women: Some argue that women are unsuited for political office because they’re naturally less assertive and dominant than men; others claim that women are better suited for modern leadership roles because they’re more compassionate than their male peers.

  • Why you’re mad at the NSA

    “What’s really going on here?” That’s the question I typically ask students to kick-start a discussion about some aspect of American intelligence at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, where I teach a graduate course on the subject.

  • Assault in the military, or assault on the military?

    There is an iconic scene from one of my favorite movies, A Few Good Men, in which an enraged colonel Jack Nicholson cuts down major Tom Cruise with five fierce words: “You can’t handle the truth.”

Miami Herald

Join the
Discussion

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

The Miami Herald uses Facebook's commenting system. You need to log in with a Facebook account in order to comment. If you have questions about commenting with your Facebook account, click here.

Have a news tip? You can send it anonymously. Click here to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Miami Herald and el Nuevo Herald.

Hide Comments

This affects comments on all stories.

Cancel OK

  • Videos

  • Quick Job Search

Enter Keyword(s) Enter City Select a State Select a Category