The Issue
The debate over gun ownership is centered on the Second
Amendment to the Constitution, which protects "the right of the people
to keep and bear arms."
Gun control advocates believe that right does not extend to
ownership of military-style firearms that are otherwise known as
assault weapons. They point to incidents such as the Columbine high
school massacre in April 1999, which resulted in the deaths of 14
students (including the two gunmen) and a teacher, in support of
banning assault weapons. They also support measures intended to curb
gun-related violence, such as mandatory child safety locks, background
checks on those wishing to purchase a gun, limits on the number of guns
a person can buy and raising the age limit for gun ownership.
Gun rights groups, led by the
National Rifle Association,
argue that these and other proposals infringe on the constitutional
rights of law-abiding citizens. They maintain that bans on the sale of
certain types of weapons have not proved effective in reducing violent
crime, and that proposals for stricter background checks at gun shows
are designed to eliminate gun shows themselves. Some gun manufacturers
have volunteered support for safety locks, but the NRA has criticized
safety locks for placing an undue burden on gun manufacturers without a
proven benefit to the public.
How it May Affect You
At the forefront of the debate over guns is the assault weapons
ban that went into effect in 1994. The ban, which was part of a larger
anti-crime bill passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton that
year, applies to 19 specific models of semi-automatic firearms and to
other guns with assault-weapon features. The ban expired Sept. 13,
2004, and gun rights groups were pressing Congress to allow the ban to
lapse. Gun control advocates responded with a massive public relations
campaign encouraging voters to tell their elected representatives that
Congress should renew the ban.
The issue has become a hot potato in a presidential election
year, with President Bush and Sen. John Kerry taking positions designed
not to infuriate voters on either side of the debate. Bush said he
supports an extension, but gun control advocates accused him of failing
to pressure Congress into action. Kerry announced his support for
extending the ban, even as his campaign sought to boost the Democratic
presidential nominee's credentials as a gun owner and hunter.
Republican congressional leaders say the ban was allowed to
lapse because gun control advocates in the House and Senate did not
have enough votes to extend it. They may be right. Most Republicans in
Congress oppose an extension, and Democrats were far from united in
support of preserving the ban. Democrats representing rural areas kept
mum on the issue, perhaps mindful of their constituents' sensitivity to
gun control measures. In addition, some Democrats believe their
support of the assault weapons ban cost them control of the House and
Senate in 1994, and that the gun control issue hurt Al Gore's standing
in key states during the 2000 presidential election.
The Money
If lawmakers are guilty of tiptoeing around gun control issues, it is because the NRA and other gun rights groups wield an
enormous amount of influence in Washington. The source of that influence is money. Gun rights groups have given
more than $17 million in individual, PAC and soft money contributions to federal
candidates and party committees since 1989. Nearly $15 million, or 85 percent of the total, has gone to Republicans.
The National Rifle Association is by far the gun rights lobby's biggest donor, having contributed
more than $14 million over the past 15 years. Gun control advocates, meanwhile, contribute far less money than their rivals --
a total of
nearly $1.7 million since 1989, of which 94 percent went to Democrats.
The leading contributor among gun control advocates is the
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun
Violence, formerly known as Handgun Control, which has given $1.5 million over the past 15 years.
If gun rights groups have a substantial advantage in campaign contributions, they dominate gun control advocates in the area
of
lobbying. The NRA alone spent nearly $11 million lobbying
elected and government officials from 1997 to 2003. But it wasn't the gun rights lobby's biggest spender. That
was
Gun Owners of America, which spent more than $18 million on lobbing over the same period.
By contrast, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence spent under $2 million on lobbying from 1997 to 2003, and the
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence spent $580,000.
The National Rifle Association has an additional advantage over
all other groups in the debate. As a membership organization,
the NRA can spend unlimited funds on communications to its 4
million members that identify pro-gun candidates. Those
members also contribute millions of dollars in limited donations to
the NRA's political action committee, which runs ads aimed at
the general public that expressly advocate the election or defeat
of a federal candidate. Since 1989, the NRA has spent more than
$22 million on
communications costs and independent expenditures, with more than
$18 million spent in support of Republican candidates.
Analysis of Prior Congressional Vote
The Center did the following analysis of votes on gun control
proposals that Congress considered after the Columbine massacre in
1999. The results shed light on the relationship between campaign
contributions and the way lawmakers voted on the issue.
Senate:Just weeks after the Colorado school shooting,
Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), approved immediate floor
consideration of S. 254, the Senate Juvenile Justice Bill. The bill,
ultimately amended to include tough provisions on background checks and
safety locks, was approved by a vote of 73-25.
However, senators voted three times on proposed background
checks at gun shows, first voting against a three-day waiting period,
then approving a 24-hour waiting period, then giving final approval to
the mandatory three-day background check. [see
Senate vote chart]
House: The House rejected legislation loaded with gun
control provisions similar to those approved by the Senate. However,
House Republican leaders split the gun debate into two separate pieces
of legislation –- one focusing on youth culture and violent crime and
another specifically dealing with gun shows. Among the more contentious
points of debate, gun-rights backers passed an amendment limiting gun
show background checks to 24 hours, rather than the Senate-approved
mandate of three days. The provision meant that if a background check
on a potential gun buyer was not completed within 24 hours, the sale
would be approved automatically. Discontent with that amendment –-
among gun-control advocates who viewed it as too weak and gun-rights
advocates who thought it went too far –- led to the bill's demise.
The House voted 218-211 in favor of the amendment that would
limit background checks at gun shows to 24 hours. In a 193-235 vote,
lawmakers voted down the amendment that would have mandated a three-day
waiting period. The House vote to kill was 280-147.