The media is now calling this a tipping point: this sea change in American public opinion about gun ownership.
The statistics appall most other nations. It is estimated there are over 300 million guns in private possession in the US, more than that country’s population. This vast armory includes semi-automatic handguns with extended magazines as well as assault rifles that everywhere else are reserved exclusively for military use.
With increasing regularity the past few years, deranged gunmen attacked soft targets: schools, churches, moviehouses and shopping malls. In all these incidents, the victims were unarmed and unprepared for the burst of violence inflicted. Among the recent victims is a US congresswoman who was shot in the head and miraculously survived but only with the best surgical intervention.
Efforts by a number of states to restrict gun possession were all struck down as unconstitutional. The Second Amendment to the US Constitution, put in when the nation was still very much a frontier society, guarantees the right of citizens to bear arms.
The National Rifle Association (NRA) has been a powerful lobby insisting on the right to bear arms, posing legal challenges in courts against every effort to restrict that right and pressuring legislators against enacting restrictions. The NRA, which represents all gun owners, is one of the most powerful political lobbies in the US.
Last week’s slaughter of children in Newtown, Connecticut sent emotional shockwaves through the breadth of American society. This has to be the last straw.
The gunman who walked into an elementary school and began shooting at children (after murdering his own mother) carried two semi-automatic handguns and an assault rifle. Until he finally tired of the slaughter and decided to shoot himself, the children stood no chance against a deranged mass murderer.
Over the past few days, consensus for stricter gun laws appears to have congealed.
President Obama, who avoided challenging the powerful gun lobby through his first term, indicates he will use the powers of his office to alter prevailing policies on gun possession. Clearly shaken by what happened in Newtown, Obama wants a ban on the sale of assault weapons to civilians.
Heretofore, the best the states could do to restrict gun sales was to require waiting periods before acquiring a gun and the scan potential buyers for histories of mental instability. We know, from the case of that gunman at Newtown, that neither works very well. The guns used to slaughter children were all owned by the gunman’s mother, a person with no police record, no history of mental illness and otherwise a model citizen. The guns, however, fell into the wrong hands.
We have heard erstwhile congressional spokesmen for the gun lobby change their positions over the past few days. Retail chains purveying powerful weapons have voluntarily taken those weapons off their shelves. Several funds have withdrawn their investments in gun manufacturers.
Analysts are describing an “inflection” in public opinion about gun ownership. We hope that “inflection” lasts until substantial legislation is won restricting public access to high-powered weapons. The outdated constitutional guarantee produced such an incredible proliferation of weapons American society is now at the mercy of its most deranged.
Gwen
The President suspended Cebu Governor Gwen Garcia for six months for “grave abuse of authority.” Strangely, the complainant in that case, involving delay in the release of funds for hiring staff, passed away last year. The only witness sustaining that case relies on hearsay.
The period of suspension covers the electoral campaign. That makes this decision susceptible to speculation about electoral play. Replacing Governor Gwen is her vice-governor, who happens to be the sister of Cabinet Secretary Rene Almendras.
Having reached her term limits, Gwen is seeking a congressional seat. She is up against a Liberal Party candidate. Her brother is likewise locked in an electoral battle with the LP bet for the province.
Sure enough, the UNA spokesman publicly speculates on what appears to be a systematic effort to politically disable influential provincial players standing outside the fold of the ruling party. The decision to suspend the Cebu governor comes on the heels of the appearance of “whistleblowers” alleging involvement in illegal gambling of Pangasinan Governor Amado Espino.
Espino is an influential member of the Nationalist People’s Coalition (NPC), a party nominally aligned with the pro-administration bloc. At the provincial level, however, Espino squares off against LP contender Hernani Braganza, said to be a close ally of DILG Secretary Mar Roxas.
The two instances involving provincial kingpins may, of course, be purely coincidental. It may also be purely coincidental that the two governors are facing LP-affiliated adversaries. It may, indeed, be purely speculative to say that the powers of the executive branch are being misused for electoral advantage — although this administration has been criticized for nursing a distinct “somos o no somos” attitude towards political groups not under its complete sway.
This is electoral season, however. In this country, electoral politics is waged pretty much like war, where everything is justified to win advantage over adversaries.
If, however, a pattern of misusing executive powers to achieve partisan ends becomes clearer in the coming weeks, the uneasy balance might be tipped. A generally loyal (and bland) “opposition” could take a sharply more confrontational posture. The Binay-led UNA will have to undertake a more determined defense of its allies against clearly underhanded moves by the administration or risk losing the confidence of its own partisans.
If, indeed, the moves against provincial kingpins is motivated by partisan ends, the coalition boundaries might become more distinct. The attempt to preempt electoral outcomes by means of persecution could backfire.