CNN Contributor Avlon Invokes Reagan in Pro-Gun Control Column
John Avlon again attacked conservatives, this time on the gun rights issues, in a Thursday column on CNN.com. Avlon bashed the "bumper sticker policies" and the "reason-free activist crowd" of Second Amendment activists. The Daily Beast writer also invoked Reagan's past support of gun control measures in another attempt to sever today's conservative activists from the former president's legacy.
The "no labels" CNN contributor began his column, "Why is NRA spurning Obama move?", with a lament over the status quo over the gun control, particularly in the wake of the Tucson shooting earlier in 2011:
Two months after the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, talking reasonably about gun policy remains a third rail in American politics. That's despite this fact -- more than 2,400 Americans have died of gunshot wounds since the rampage in Tucson, Arizona. That is four times the number of American soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan last year, combined. As Americans, we react forcefully to crisis and conflicts -- but we have a hard time focusing on more slow-moving problems, such as the daily blood drip-drip of gun violence.
Who does Avlon see as "talking reasonably"? President Obama and his pro-gun control allies in Congress, of course, along with Michael Bloomberg. As his title hinted, the side that wasn't doing this are the NRA and other gun rights supporters:
...President Obama wrote an op-ed for the Arizona Daily Star, in which he proposed strengthening the National Instant Criminal Background Check System and called for a depolarization of the gun policy debate. The administration signaled that it wanted to meet with the National Rifle Association.
The NRA's response was to flatly turn down any administration requests to meet. Its director, Wayne LaPierre, declared, "Why should I or the NRA go sit down with a group of people that have spent a lifetime trying to destroy the Second Amendment in the United States?"
Incredibly, one of the few new solutions to gun violence in the U.S. proposed by the NRA in a written response to the president was for "the national media to refrain from giving deranged criminals minute-by-minute coverage of their heinous acts." Apparently, if we just ignore gun violence, it might go away....
"Too often, any serious discussion about guns devolves into ideological arguments that have nothing to do with the real problem," New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg pointed out at a Washington press conference this week with members of his coalition, Mayors Against Illegal Guns. "We also know from experience that we can keep guns away from dangerous people without imposing burdens on law-abiding gun owners."
As part of that effort, Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Carolyn Maloney, both of New York, have proposed measures to strengthen the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, much along the lines the president proposed.
Both earlier and later in the column, the Daily Beast columnist did his best to paint Second Amendment activists as extremists:
Instead of facing facts and figuring out where constitutional common ground might be, we see a rush to bumper sticker policies, like Texas' new proposal to allow students to carry concealed weapons on college campuses, which took another step through the state Legislature yesterday . I can't imagine what could possibly go wrong with that plan....
Second Amendment activists should feel secure about the individual right to bear arms, given a string of recent Supreme Court decisions striking down strong gun restrictions in Chicago and Washington. Obama has even signed legislation into law which loosened existing gun laws, by making it legal to bring firearms into federal parks.
But gun debates, like so many culture war wedge issues, are often reason-free zones among the activist crowd. Last year, I interviewed protesters at a Second Amendment rally in a park outside of Washington for The Daily Beast, and pointed out that the only reason the rally was possible was the aforementioned legislation signed by Obama.
"As far as Obama signing anything, I think that's just a ploy," a protester named Randy Dye told me. "I think he's just trying to appease us for today. But down the road, I still feel that our Second Amendment rights are going to be threatened."
These fears have been systematically stoked by the fear-mongering-for-fun-and-profit crowd. Glenn Beck has told his listeners that Obama "will slowly but surely take away your gun or take away your ability to shoot a gun, carry a gun."
Near the end of his piece, Avlon used his example from Reagan in an attempt to further club today's conservatives, particularly the NRA:
Divisions are often inflamed for narrow partisan reasons -- but it wasn't always this way. The NRA has been a proactive partner of some government programs in the past, like Project Exile, which moved the prosecution of crimes committed with an unlicensed gun into federal court. The pilot program in Richmond, Virginia, succeeded in cutting the "gun carry" rate among criminal suspects in half within two years.
If that example doesn't carry weight with conservatives today, then perhaps this testimonial will. Ronald Reagan backed the Brady Bill and signed a 15-day waiting period for handgun sales when he was governor of California. In a New York Times op-ed piece from 1991, he wrote, "Critics claim that 'waiting period' legislation in the states that have it doesn't work, that criminals just go to nearby states that lack such laws to buy their weapons. True enough, and all the more reason to have a Federal law that fills the gaps."
The CNN contributor did something similar in a July 27, 2010 column where he claimed that "Reagan...would have a hard time getting the GOP nomination today" due to the supposed extremism of the Tea Party movement.
CNN once turned to Avlon for his designated "winguts" on the left and the right, but he has consistently proved to be tougher on conservatives than liberals with his appearances on the network and with his contributions to their website. He cannot legitimately put himself in a "no labels" category with that kind of track record.
- Matthew Balan's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
Margaret Hoover's
Submitted by d1carter on Fri, 03/18/2011 - 6:41pm.
Margaret Hoover's metrosexual....definitely not a conservative.The difference is I still
Submitted by Newsbusterbrown on Sat, 03/19/2011 - 6:30am.
The difference is I still enjoy looking at Margaret Hoover.“There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right.” - Ronald Reagan (1964 Republican Convention)
It is a right protected by the Constitution
Submitted by c5then on Fri, 03/18/2011 - 6:41pm.
All of this is nothing more than trying to figure out a way around the constitution. Why not pass a federal law that makes the commision of any crime using a fire arm a felony punishable by life in prison? Why not punish the criminal instead of villianizing the implement that was used? Almost all the 2400 injuries attributed to "guns" that are mentioned are related to gangs/drugs. Maybe we should disband the ATF and reassign the agents to gang task forces?Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
Even better, c5, would be
Submitted by MikeB on Tue, 03/22/2011 - 11:26am.
Even better, c5, would be federal law wherein a crime where the perp had a firearm in his/her possession, but did not discharge the firearm would incur a mandatory life sentence without parole, AND the perp's family had to supply all the perp's food, prison uniforms, expenses for medical care, and any incidentals, WITHOUT any assistance from the taxpayers. However, if the firearm were discharged, even if no one was wounded or killed, the punishment would be mandatory death from firing squad. The sentence would be carried out without regard to the perp's age, gender, mental condition, national origin, race, or state of inebriation.
I would even go so far as to impose the latter penalty even if the firearm discharged belonged to the victim of the crime and was fired by the victim. The perp still gets to spend time in front of a firing squad.
The NRA knows that people are
Submitted by Ashrak on Fri, 03/18/2011 - 6:44pm.
The NRA knows that people are finally figuring outthat the organization is more on government's side than it is on the peoples' side. The NRA is taking an opportunity, as many more will do in the days to come, to pile on Obama in order to make themselves look better.
Right now, the NRA says it won;t even sit at the table with Obama and crew to discuss their intended infringements. Yet, here in Illinois, the NRA is doing exactly that very thing with Illinois state government. As the NRA asks people in other states to support legislation eliminating permission slip structures, it asks people here to support creating permission slip structures.
The NRA here is actively supporting fingerprinting, multiple permission slip and state mandated training courses all of which are fee based. When it comes to the "training", it is a Pelosi style, Gotta pass it to see what is in it" deal. The "rules" about "training" can only be made after the legislation becomes law.
It is quite ridiculous, really.
I love how this article mentions SCOTUS decisions, but leaves out the tiny tidbit that Obama was exactly WRONG on one and was silent on the other. Also absent is the fact that his two Supreme Court picks despise the Second Amendment. One even lied, demonstrably, in her confirmation hearing. Sotomayor said she accepted Heller and then voted against it in McDonald.
I would offer that comparisons of gun rights during Reagan's time and gun rights today presents something of a false premise. What happened in Heller was historic and a game changer of the highest order. What was done there cannot be undone and the progressives are just going to have to accept that.
Fear mongering ??
Submitted by Maytag on Fri, 03/18/2011 - 6:58pm.
They take cheap shots at Glen Beck, but they can never prove him wrong on major points.Obama on the other hand is pretty much a truth parser across the board. Why would NRA meet with duh one, when they try to ban guns, the grabbers and msm wil just say but,but the NRA was at the table. While I am having doubts about where the NRA is going and am sending money to WGO instead, I do think if they are right most of the time .I have no use whatsoever for the NRA
Submitted by Dave. on Fri, 03/18/2011 - 7:10pm.
I dropped my membership way back when they went along with the so-called "assault" weapons ban - the one where Dianne Frankenstein selected the models to be banned from a catalogue - her only criteria being that they looked "scary."
Any organization purporting to uphold our Second Amendment rights and would willingly go along with something as stupid as that doesn't deserve a penny of my money.
As for John Avlon, there is no end to the psychobabble the commie gun-grabbers will come up with to try and get people to go along with the idea that the federal government has the legal authority to regulate firearms in any way, shape, or form.
They do not.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Dave:
Submitted by stratman on Sat, 03/19/2011 - 1:13am.
Ruger also made a bad decision in the 90's. Both Ruger and the NRA paid for their indiscretions with lost sales and membership.
strat,
Submitted by Dave. on Sat, 03/19/2011 - 1:29am.
And Ruger has been off my shopping list ever since.
I don't do business with those who make nice with the gun-grabbing Devils.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Does not fly
Submitted by Jerry Mack on Fri, 03/18/2011 - 7:30pm.
John Avlon claiming that he is a no name voter is like putting wings on a Turtle.Lawrence O'Donnell: The Book Of Revelation Is Fiction
Submitted by im41 on Fri, 03/18/2011 - 8:28pm.
85% of Americans believe in God in one form or another, and O'Donnell thinks it is cute to make fun of them. This is why MSNBC has ratings lower than Leave It To Beaver re-runs.
Hey, dont be hard on the Beaver,,,
Submitted by brutony1 on Sat, 03/19/2011 - 2:56am.
He can STILL garner good ratings, much better than these liberal assholes! And where does it talk about Marg Hoover? I didnt see her name in the article. If she did say negative things about guns, then she will get a spanking from me!When will liberals WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE! -Me
UN Treaties
Submitted by dmacleo on Sat, 03/19/2011 - 9:51am.
while appearing to appease with the parks issue he and Clinton are also working with the UN on their small arms treaties. this is where the danger lies.Most of the "arguments" of
Submitted by MikeB on Sun, 03/20/2011 - 10:44am.
Most of the "arguments" of the gun-grabbers would be amusing if they weren't so serious. They argued that sawed-off shotguns were not protected by the 2nd amendment, since they were not fit weapons for a militia. Then they turn around and want to keep automatic weapons away from citizens. Why? Are not automatic weapons fit weapons for a militia? Does not the military use automatic weapons? I believe their argument is that automatic weapons are not appropriate for hunting or home protection. I can guarantee you, a sawed-off shotgun would work very well for home protection. I know consistency is not a strong suit (it's not even a sun-suit) of the left, but come on!