by Joseph P. Tartaro | Executive Editor
Once again, as has happened after numerous violent crimes over the years, the left-wing and the anti-gun leadership are attempting to leverage tragedy for political and financial gain. It’s a methodology that they have practiced for over 40 years, and they are back at the well again. I suppose we could call their methods the practice of victimology.
Sometimes it works!
In the 1960s, the anti-gunners on Capitol Hill and the White House, as well as many state houses, breathed life into their floundering gun ban agenda by hitching it to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Rev, Martin Luther King Jr. and Sen Robert F. Kennedy. Many observers noted early on that the politicians’ fears of armed African-Americans in an era of civil rights struggle were the real reason behind their drive for massive new federal gun control legislation. However, the anti-gunners kept everyone’s attention on the high profile violent deaths of major public figures, making them the central victims.
They didn’t get everything they wanted, but the Gun Control Act of 1968 became a benchmark for them, whether they came from the political left or right.
Then, in the 1970s, the National Council to Control Handguns moved to exploit a personal tragedy once again by hiring a nominal president by the name of Nelson T. “Pete” Shields, a DuPont Chemical executive whose son had been one of the victims of the notorious Zebra killers out in California. Shields could claim to be a gunowner and hunter while he publically pushed for a number of gun control proposals, especially those that would ban so-called Saturday night specials. Meanwhile, the anti-gun group changed its name to Handgun Control Inc. The proposed legislation targeting what they claimed were “small, unsafe and cheap handguns” at that time was actually so broad a handgun ban that it would have banned hundreds of high quality guns, including any Model 1911 pistol and the ubiquitous Smith & Wesson Chief’s Special, relied on in those days by most of the nation’s plainclothes police.
As a footnote, it should be recorded that the anti-gun crowd were unsuccessful in passing their handgun ban bill, but they made a lot of press and they raised a lot of money.
In the early 1980s, Handgun Control decided to kill two birds with one name change and the hiring of Sarah Brady as president and chief spokesperson. People were often confused by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence name change, wondering whether the Brady was Sarah or her husband Jim, who was permanently injured when shot by the man who was attempting to assassinate his boss, President Ronald Reagan. The name change allowed the anti-gun group to excise the word “control” from their corporate moniker, while exploiting the victimhood of the Brady family and the failed presidential assassination attempt. “Prevent gun violence” was a more acceptable phrase than “control,” and has since been replaced with “gun safety.”
The election of President Clinton, with the Democrats in control of both Houses of Congress gave the anti-gunners the opening they needed. Clinton managed to jaw-bone enough congressional votes to pass a controversial crime bill that included the ban on military look-alike firearms and magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds. But first he got the waiting period background check bill passed, which became known as the Brady bill. Fortunately, an amendment in the bill made it possible to take advantage of relatively new technology so we could transition to the National Instant Check system rather than wait five business days for each new or used gun purchased.
It should be noted that President Clinton’s right hand man in those days was none other than Rahm Emanuel, now the mayor of Chicago. He is often credited with the political advice to “Never let a crisis (tragedy) be wasted” if you want to advance an agenda.
And let’s not forget the name and thematic changes brought to the public debate by media billionaire Michael Bloomberg.
Bloomberg’s first gun-control effort was launched in 2006 as Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG). Following reports of criminal impropriety by many of the mayors, which was well publicized by the Second Amendment Foundation and other pro-gun groups, and the defections of others, MAIG re-emerged in 2014 as Everytown for Gun Safety (EGS). At the same time, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America (MDA), founded in 2012, became part of EGS.
Along the historical way, a separate group known as the Million Mom March, a national organization that had serious financial problems after its original much publicized debut was absorbed into the Brady Campaign in 2001.
To the casual observer it would appear that the gun grabber movement has been overloaded with organizations that exploit the victims of tragedy, but apparently there is always room for at least one more.
Sticking to the victimology formula for whatever success they could achieve, the anti-gunners launched another group after then Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head in Tucson and miraculously survived another group was formed.
It was first called Americans for Responsible Solutions, because Giffords and her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly, were reported to be gunowners themselves seeking a “middle way” in the gun rights debate.
But on October 9th, as the anti-gun crowd was mobilizing swiftly to exploit the bloodshed of the Oct. 1 Las Vegas massacre, Americans for Responsible Solutions joined the name change game to put center focus on Gabby Giffords, the victim, herself.
The new name is “Giffords: Courage to Fight Gun Violence.”
According to an online announcement by Kelly, “Giffords is now poised to not only mobilize lawmakers and the constituents they represent in support of safer gun laws, but also to challenge the gun lobby’s extreme agenda in court and research, write, and defend the laws, policies, and programs proven to reduce gun violence and save lives. So the fund-raising has moved into high gear.”
The blood of the victims of the madness in Las Vegas has hardly cooled but the anti-gun politicians and the gun-grabber groups are all circling like vultures to gain not only as much of their agenda as they can, but to thwart any congressional moves to alleviate the burdens imposed on gun owners over the years.
