Just one day after 14 people in San Bernardino, California, were murdered by terrorists armed with assault rifles, the United States Senate voted on a bill that would have allowed the attorney general to deny the sale or transfer of a firearm to anyone on the terrorist watch list.  If you knew nothing about our nation’s politics on gun ownership, you would be forgiven for assuming that a bill like this would pass on an uncontested, unanimous vote.  There is universal condemnation of terrorism, and it would seem utter common sense to try to prevent terrorists from acquiring weapons designed to kill scores of people within seconds.  One poll of North Carolina Republicans put support in favor of the measure at 86 percent. 

A casual observer would have been shocked to learn that not only did the bill fail, it didn’t even garner close to the votes needed for passage.  Only 45 senators voted for the measure, with one Democrat and one Republican voting opposite their party’s traditional stances on gun rights. 

Advertisement:

Even if you think the “deny potential terrorists assault rifles” bill was largely political theater, it’s important to remember that such theater usually ends with Congress going along with the script.  Deceptively edited videos of Planned Parenthood workers nearly force a shutdown of the entire federal government, widespread fraud at VA hospitals creates a media firestorm and results in bipartisan reform, and 9/11 rescue workers get healthcare benefits only after Jon Stewart shames politicians into voting for it.  Again, you may think that there are policy reasons against using the terrorist watch list to determine who can or cannot own a firearm, but far more flawed legislation has sailed through Congress on the strength of a national tragedy. 

This is not the case with mass murder perpetrated by terrorists with assault rifles.  Congress will mobilize to create agencies and departments to address the threat of terrorism, it will authorize unfettered mass surveillance of Americans’ emails and cellphone conversations, and it will send hundreds of thousands of Americans across the world to fight and potentially die to prevent any further attacks at home.  Congress will even forgo obvious concerns of constitutionality, as was the case with the original Patriot Act.  But when Congress is faced with the demand that the individual’s interest in owning a firearm be balanced against society’s interest in protecting itself from continual and routine mass murder, Congress will not bat an eye, even when first-graders are purposely targeted and murdered at their schools. 

To blame all of Congress, though, would be misguided.  While in the past rural Democrats tended to support gun rights measures, the Democratic Party as a whole has united in emphasizing greater regulation and oversight of gun sales and ownership.  Those in Congress who would erect no further barriers to potentially dangerous individuals attempting to buy assault rifles are now near universally Republican.