In the wake of the mass shooting in Las Vegas, much of the political world’s attention was trained on the rifle accessory known as a bump stock. The Las Vegas shooter had 12 rifles fitted with the device which allowed him to shoot his weapons as though they were full auto. Even the NRA had called for greater regulation of the devices. But many in the liberal media, as demonstrated by CNN’s Inside Politics panel on Sunday, questioned if it meant anything and whined that gun control wasn’t advancing fast enough.
Host John King seemed excited by the fact that House Speaker Paul Ryan was open to the idea of having some form of regulation on bump stocks. “The NRA's position, the Trump administration can handle this administratively, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms can issue a new regulation that makes the stocks illegal, let's not have new legislation. Democrats say, oh, no, let's get this on the books,” he added.
But The Washington Post’s Karoun Demirjian fretted that an ATF regulation would just be removed later. “The only reason to be really afraid of the law at this point would be that it is going to be – potentially create momentum for the people that are pro-gun control to say: “Look, we’ve got something.” Because it has been years since they have had any sort of a win on that,” she seemed to lament.
She proceeded to rattle off most of the gun control proposals liberals have been itching to get into place to restrict the Second Amendment:
Even though this is a win that everybody agrees is something that should be done, there are some people concerned about that that means for the next thing down the line, do you then go to semi-automatics, will you then get the background check legislation that Democrats have wanted for a long time, or the law that would prohibit suspected terrorists—if you’re on the watch list, from being able to get your hands on a gun.
But what Demirjian failed to mention here, but brushed off later, was that Pelosi and the Democrats were hoping for just such a slippery slope. She also failed to point out that background checks were already mandated by federal law, there was no gun show loophole, and online gun sales must be shipped to federally licensed gun dealers. That’s not to mention that even the liberal ACLU was against using the terror watch and no-fly lists because they’re amassed in secret and absent of any due process.
“But by and large, if you look at the polling, there is not a whole lot of debate in the American public about wanting a little bit more gun control,” CNN correspondent Abby Phillip chimed in. “It would actually be fairly easy for them to do this basically getting the last vestiges of machine guns off the streets, say they have done something, and then move on.”
But the fact of the matter was, even though a bump stock regulation was warranted, it wouldn’t be so easy to enforce. Since the devices were made of plastic it meant they could just be 3D-printed.
The existence of bump stocks was new to most people, but CNN White House Correspondent Sara Murray whined that they should have been banned sooner. “Frankly the big opportunity to do something like this was in the wake of Sandy Hook,” she spat, seemingly forgetting that the shooter, in that case, didn’t use a bump stock and that the Obama administration ATF okayed the devices.
“And Washington made it very clear there was no appetite to do any kind of real gun control. So however they approach this, sure, it might be a political win for both sides, but it is still very narrow,” Murphy continued. “We're not talking about significant broad gun control.”
King noted that Republican Steve Scalise, who himself was recovering from an attempted assassination at the hands of a Bernie Sanders supporter, was iffy on a bump stock ban. Demirjian bemoaned about how “This is going to be so strange seeing Scalise basically versus Gabby Giffords for the next several months on this and it is going to be sad and depressing to watch.”
“Nobody is proposing an Australian style gun confiscation ban sort of a thing. It is background checks, it is the terror watch list, it is not anything more than that for years,” Demirjian then claimed. But that’s not true. After the Sandy Hook shooting, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein proposed an assault weapons ban while New York State passed a similar ban with no grandfather clause turning many residents into criminals overnight.
And before the panel changed their topic, Demirjian shared some advice with the Democrats:
You don’t build momentum if you don’t have the opening step. And Yet Democrats are wanting to pile on more and Republicans are afraid they’re going to pile on more. There is a solution in there: Don’t right now and wait until the next thing.
Clearly, she and the rest of the panel were hoping for that at the very least.
Transcript below:
CNN
Inside Politics
October 8, 2017
8:17:28 AM Eastern(…)
JOHN KING: That does make it significant. The Republican Speaker of the House, a gun rights advocate, saying we have to do something, but the question is how? A lot of Republicans are saying, and we'll get to the NRA in a minute, the NRA's position, the Trump administration can handle this administratively, the bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms can issue a new regulation that makes the stocks illegal, let's not have new legislation. Democrats say, oh, no, let's get this on the books. Even though you have more urgency this time, more bipartisan urgency this time, might it still collapse?
KAROUN DEMIRJIAN: We were talking about Obamacare a minute ago and what the President can, and is doing, when it comes to what the executive orders and the regulations are. Regulations can be undone in the future. That is potentially a problem. If the Republicans are fairly serious about not wanting the automatic weapons, that's been a position they held for a very long time. The only reason to be really afraid of the law at this point would be that it is going to be – potentially create momentum for the people that are pro-gun control to say: “Look, we’ve got something.” Because it has been years since they have had any sort of a win on that.
Even though this is a win that everybody agrees is something that should be done, there are some people concerned about that that means for the next thing down the line, do you then go to semi-automatics, will you then get the background check legislation that Democrats have wanted for a long time, or the law that would prohibit suspected terrorists—if you’re on the watch list, from being able to get your hands on a gun.
(…)
KING: “Didn't say ban, we didn't say confiscate.” They want the ATF to issue a regulation. And that seems to be -- very politely worded. That seems to be a marker to some Republicans in congress, let us do this our way, do not bring a bill to the floor.
ABBY PHILIP: That's true. But I think this issue is actually really not that great politically for Republicans. I mean, I know the NRA is breathing down their necks. But by and large, if you look at the polling, there is not a whole lot of debate in the American public about wanting a little bit more gun control. It would actually be fairly easy for them to do this basically getting the last vestiges of machine guns off the streets, say they have done something, and then move on. I think that it is an opportunity for them to do it. I'm not sure they will, but it is a relatively easy thing, probably the easiest thing that has come across their desk in over a decade on this issue, and there is not very much debate about it.
(…)
SARA MURRAY: But, you know, frankly the big opportunity to do something like this was in the wake of Sandy Hook. And Washington made it very clear there was no appetite to do any kind of real gun control. So however they approach this, sure, it might be a political win for both sides, but it is still very narrow. We're not talking about significant broad gun control. And I think many people in Washington feel like the moment to look in the mirror and say: “Is this what we want to do? Is this the direction was want to go?” was after Sandy Hook and people didn't do that.
(…)
KING: But listen to his[Paul Ryan’s] number three, Steve Scalise, just recovered from a life-threatening gunshot wound. Remember at congressional baseball practice? He says slow down, everybody.
(…)
DEMIRJIAN: This is going to be so strange seeing Scalise basically versus Gabby Giffords for the next several months on this and it is going to be sad and depressing to watch. … Nobody is proposing an Australian style gun confiscation ban sort of a thing. It is background checks, it is the terror watch list, it is not anything more than that for years. And so the idea of the slippery slope is the fear and frankly, I mean, yes, Nancy Pelosi has said “We want background checks too.” Other Democrats have said we shouldn't let this go forward. They should take a note, from the lesson of immigration reform, which is that when you for sometimes too big you might miss the little thing you can get, what they're grappling now with DACA.
(…)
Similar situation. You don’t build momentum if you don’t have the opening step. And Yet Democrats are wanting to pile on more and Republicans are afraid they’re going to pile on more. There is a solution in there: Don’t right now and wait until the next thing.
