What Happened to Gun Violence in the 1990s?

A new report by Pew Research Social & Demographic Trends finds that gun violence decreased dramatically between 1993 and 2010 — “the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew” — but almost all of that reduction took place in the 1990s.

“There is consensus that demographics played some role: The outsized post-World War II baby boom, which produced a large number of people in the high-crime ages of 15 to 20 in the 1960s and 1970s, helped drive crime up in those years… It is less clear, researchers say, that innovative policing strategies and police crackdowns on use of guns by younger adults played a significant role in reducing crime.”

“Some researchers have proposed additional explanations as to why crime levels plunged so suddenly, including increased access to abortion and lessened exposure to lead… Crime reductions took place across the country in the 1990s, but since 2000, patterns have varied more by metropolitan area or city…  there is good evidence of a link between firearm ownership and firearm homicide at the local level.”

Beware Slippery Slope Arguments

Cass Sunstein: “The problem with slippery-slope contentions is that despite their occasional rhetorical force, they are often silly… The claim is that if you undertake Reform A, you will probably end up undertaking Reform B, as well, not because of logic but because of the likely unfolding of events… In many cases, however, your support for Reform A doesn’t commit you to support Reform B… If you favor background checks for gun purchasers, you can also believe that the Second Amendment provides firm protection for the right to own guns.”

“When opponents argue against Reform A by saying it will lead to Reform B, it is often best to assume that the slippery- slope argument is merely a rhetorical move. It isn’t the real reason they oppose Reform A.”

12 Easy Ways to Cut Crime

Dylan Matthews comes up with twelve policies that governments could enact to reduce crime without getting into a fight with gun rights advocates.

Some highlights: “Economics, criminology and public health literature are rife with studies finding that raising the price of alcohol reduces violence, not to mention other causes of injury and death… Foster care for young delinquents… There’s some reason to believe that high-quality preschool programs reduce crime rates among their participants… Mentees in Big Brothers / Big Sister programs were found in a randomized evaluation to be 32 percent less likely to have hit someone in the past 12 months… Quasi-experimental trials in Britain have found that even something as simple as lighting the streets at night can reduce crime rates considerably.”

Obama Can Look for Crumbs or Go Big

John Cassidy lays out President Obama’s two possible strategies as he continues to pursue his second-term legislative agenda, which includes a stalled gun control bill, immigration reform, climate change, and the budget.

“The first strategy would involve continuing to search for legislative deals with the Republicans on issues like the budget, and, where they aren’t possible, using executive orders to advance a progressive agenda in modest ways… The new standards for fuel economy that Obama introduced in his first term show that such changes can have a significant impact. But incrementalism would be the order of the day.”

“The second strategy would be more ambitious, and riskier. It would involve finally abandoning efforts at bipartisanship, declaring war on the Republican obstructionists, and going all out to overturn their majority in the House in November, 2014… The anger Obama exhibited following the Senate votes on gun control showed another side of his personality—a tougher, more combative side, a part of him willing to label his opponents scoundrels and liars.”

Obama Pushes Forward With Gun Control Alone

New gun control legislation may be stalled in Congress, but The Hill reports that the Obama administration “is pressing ahead with new regulations to bolster the national criminal background check system.”

“The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) filed a notice Friday afternoon initiating a rulemaking process aimed at removing legal barriers that are keeping states from sharing records with the National Instant Criminal Background System (NICS). The database is designed to keep guns out of the hands of felons, drug abusers, the severely mentally ill and others who are prohibited from owning firearms.”

“Many states have declined to release certain information to the system, citing restrictions under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) that prevent them from sharing medical records. The law was designed to protect the privacy of individual health records… In particular, the agency is considering enacting ‘an express permission in the HIPAA rules for reporting the relevant information to the NICS,’ according to the notice.”

Just How Dead is Gun Control?

The New York Times looks at the only two successful amendments to the gun control reform bill: “one that would address mental health care, and another that would penalize states that divulge information about gun owners except under very specific circumstances like a criminal investigation.”

“Both passed overwhelmingly, the only two gun-related measures to clear the Senate’s 60-vote threshold for passage… Despite the push from proponents of stricter gun regulations, the amendments that received the most support in two days of voting were not the ones that tightened restrictions on weapons purchases, but the ones that loosened them.”

Poisoned well: “Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, is preventing his colleagues from quickly taking up another matter because he objected when Democrats asked for a routine unanimous consent agreement to dispense with the gun bill. He said Thursday that he would not cooperate because Democrats refused to put his background check bill, which is opposed by gun control groups, up for a vote.”

Is There Any Middle Ground in the Gun Control Debate?

In the wake of the Senate’s rejection of watered-down new gun regulations, Jeffrey Goldberg believes that if “such a reasonable and incremental gun-safety measure, proposed in a spirit of total respect for the Second Amendment, is considered to be too extreme by the NRA…and if the NRA is still so powerful that it can defeat a proposal supported by a large majority of Americans, then why not have an actual debate about the Second Amendment?”

“I understand that opening this debate wouldn’t result in any amendments being passed. The move would fail, and fail again, and again after that. But over time — sometimes decades — attitudes about important social issues do change. Women did get the right to vote. Black people, too. Gays are gaining the right to marry. And cigarettes were popular once, until they weren’t. A discussion about the Second Amendment would put on the table the issues that Congress, under pressure from the NRA, simply won’t address.”

Gun Control Crashes and Burns in Senate

Despite an extraordinary effort by President Obama to mobilize public and congressional support for a set of gun control reforms already watered down from prior proposals, the Washington Post reports that “every major proposal he championed fell apart on the Senate floor.”

“First, just four Republicans joined the majority of Democrats in a 54 to 46 vote for the Manchin-Toomey background-check proposal, leaving supporters short of the 60-vote threshold required for approval… In other votes, just 40 senators supported the assault-weapons ban and 46 supported limiting the size of ammunition magazines. In addition, an NRA-backed measure that clarified gun-trafficking laws fell short, with just 58 votes, stunning Democrats.”

“More senators, 57, voted for a provision that would greatly expand gun rights — allowing people with permits to carry concealed weapons in their states to carry them nationwide — than supported expanding background checks.”

Senate Rejects Background Check Compromise

Politico reports that the firearm background check compromise negotiated between Sens. Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) failed to gain the necessary votes in the Senate, throwing the gun regulation reform effort into disarray.

“The vote was 54-46, with only four Republicans crossing the aisle and voting with the Democrats in favor of the bipartisan proposal by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.). Sixty votes were needed… Reid switched his vote to “no” at the last minute, allowing him under Senate rules to bring up the measure again.”

President Obama will deliver a statement at 5:30 PM ET on the vote.

Has Obama Become Irrelevant?

Ramesh Ponnuru notes that while President Obama may have won reelection in 2012, he has been mostly sidelined in the major policy debates of his second term.

“His campaign for new gun regulations is fizzling out — and not, primarily, because of opposition from the Republican House or filibuster threats from Republican senators… Liberals can celebrate the rapidly increasing support for same-sex marriage. Most of the action on that issue, though, is taking place in state legislatures, referendums and the courts… The main policy achievement that liberals have made since the election was the tax increase at the start of the year… But the most powerful force in that debate was inertia, not Obama.”

“On immigration, the budget and other issues, the president will, of course, have influence: Senate Democrats won’t want to break with him in public. There is, however, essentially no chance that he will veto anything that the Democratic Senate passes, and thus Republicans can safely pay him little attention on many issues.”

Background Check Deal Remains in Flux

The New York Times notes that the deal on gun sale background checks — negotiated between Sens. Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) —  may not be able to muster enough support even after significant concessions by reform advocates.

“Among the 16 Republicans who joined 50 Democrats and two independents in voting last week to proceed to consideration of gun legislation, roughly seven have already decided not to support the measure. Another half-dozen Republicans who voted to proceed on the bill remain ambivalent.”

“Should the background check amendment fail, a broader package of new gun legislation would continue to the Senate floor, but wounded.”

Meanwhile, the Washington Post reports that the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arm became the first gun rights group to come out in favor of the background check compromise, although the National Rifle Associated remains adamantly opposed to the measure.

What’s in the Gun Control Bill?

Gun control legislation avoided a filibuster in the Senate yesterday, beginning debate on the first comprehensive gun regulation overhaul in almost a decade. The Nation digs into the various provisions in that bill and what is likely to change over the course of the debate.

“The marquee feature of this gun control package is to require a background check for virtually every gun transaction: commercial, private, online, or in person, with very narrow exceptions… Republican Senator Pat Toomey and Democratic Senator Joe Manchin… agreed to allow record keeping, and to expand background checks to gun shows, online purchases, and any other commercial sale that advertises. It appears they will propose language that widens exemptions for personal and family sales, however, to go far beyond the narrow restrictions described above.”

“The Hadiya Pendleton and Nyasia Pryear-Yard Anti-Straw Purchasing and Firearms Trafficking provisions of this bill would make it a felony to be a straw purchaser, meaning that a person buys or even conspires to buy a firearm for someone other than him or herself who is prohibited from owning it. It would subject that person to up to 15 years in prison, or as high as 25 years… Similarly, gun traffickers face much tougher penalties under the legislation.”

“If enacted, the bill would re-authorize through 2023 a Justice Department program that expired in 2009, which gave school districts grants to develop security plans. It would provide $40 million annually for school districts to develop and implement safety plans, up from $30 million the last time the program existed.”

Gun Control Clears First Hurdle

USA Today reports that the Senate has voted 68-31 on a vote to begin debate on new regulations for firearms, “breaking a threatened filibuster from conservative Republicans who wanted to draw out debate on a measure that they say threatens their Second Amendment rights.”

“The vote was just the first step in what could be a weeks-long saga fraught with procedural perils and subject to a barrage of amendments from both sides. But it ensures an open debate on gun control for the first time in nearly a decade.”

Senators Reach Deal on Background Checks

Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA) “unveiled a bipartisan deal to expand background checks for commercial gun purchases… The Manchin-Toomey proposal would require background checks for sales at gun shows and online, but it will exempt personal transfers from such checks,” according to Politico.

“When a sale occurs, the buyer and seller would meet at a federally licensed dealer, who would conduct the check. The dealer — not the government — would keep control of the sales record, as has been the process for the last four decades.”

US News & World Report notes that the deal “hasn’t won the praise of pro-gun groups or turned the tide so far on GOP senators who vow to filibuster gun legislation.”

“The legislation will be the first amendment Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will take up when the Senate convenes for a procedural vote Thursday. Other amendments that are expected to be introduced are a ban on high-capacity magazines and an assault weapons ban.”

Gun Control Won’t Stop Another Newtown

Kathleen Parker believes that the “biggest obstacle to the Obama administration’s push for tighter gun control may be its own best argument: Newtown. This is because nothing proposed in the gun-control debates would have prevented the mass killing of children at Sandy Hook Elementary School, and everybody knows it.”

“Universal background checks are a perfectly good idea, except that they won’t stop the burglar who recently cleaned out our house of all our legally purchased rifles and shotguns… Banning assault weapons and large magazines is appealing. But… many popular firearms, from ranch rifles to handguns, are, like the AR-15 used at Newtown, semi-automatic… Limiting the size of magazines also seems like a common-sense solution. Then again, maybe a killer simply would carry several small magazines and swap them out, as Eric Harris did at Columbine High School in 1999.”

“This is not to say we should do nothing. But, lest we delude ourselves, whatever we do we will do because it makes us feel better. Perhaps that is enough.”

The Wall Street Journal reports that Sens. Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Joe Manchine (D-WV) are “poised to unveil on Wednesday a bipartisan deal expanding background checks for gun sales.”

Whither Gun Control?

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has joined a group of 13 Senate Republicans “threatening a filibuster to oppose a cloture vote if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid moves a gun bill to the floor this week,” reports Politico.

“Reid has promised to move a gun bill to the Senate floor this week, but it’s unclear which one. It depends on whether Democrats can strike a deal on background checks on gun sales — otherwise, they may settle for a less strict bill that includes some form of background checks, increase penalties for gun trafficking and increase school security.”

“In order to get around the filibuster, Reid has indicated that he would file a cloture motion, which would require a 60-vote margin to move the bill.”

Jennifer Rubin: “As on immigration, the urge to rush legislation, the contents of which are unknown to most of the Senate, is a grave error. It makes for bad legislation and it will alienate senators based on process who might actually be allies on some substance.”

Gun Control Reaches Key Moment

The New York Times reports that with Congress back in town after a holiday recess, gun control legislation is approaching a critical moment and “the focus is on efforts by Senators Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, and Patrick J. Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania, to try to find a compromise on expanding federal background checks for would-be firearms buyers.”

“The two have been discussing a possible measure that would expand background checks to gun show purchases and online sales – a more narrow field than most Democrats want. The measure would also maintain record-keeping provisions that law enforcement officials find essential in tracking criminal gun use.”

The Washington Post sees the prospects of a deal brightening.

States Wrestle With New Gun Regulations

In the wake of the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut last December, the broader federal push for new gun regulations has been accompanied by similar pushes by various states.

The Associated Press reports that Colorado, which also suffered a mass shooting in 2012, has become the second state to enact legislation in the wake of Newtown.

“Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper signed bills that require background checks for private and online gun sales and ban ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds… The bills’ approval came exactly eight months after dozens of people were shot in Aurora, and a day after the executive director of the state Corrections Department, Tom Clements, was shot and killed at his home… Both bills take effect July 1. People who currently own larger-capacity magazines will be able to keep them.”

Meanwhile, the New York Times looks at problems that New York is having in implementing its new gun regulations, the first passed after Newtown: “The gun-control law, approved in January, banned the sale of magazines that hold more than seven rounds of ammunition. But, Mr. Cuomo said Wednesday, seven-round magazines are not widely manufactured… As a result, he said, he and legislative leaders were negotiating language that would continue to allow the sale of magazines holding up to 10 rounds, but still forbid New Yorkers from loading more than 7 rounds into those magazines.”

Government Funding Bill Headed for Final Approval

The Senate comfortably passed a continuing resolution to keep the government funded through September and provide flexibility to certain agencies in implementing the sequester cuts, sending the stop-gap measure to the House of Representatives for final approval, according to Reuters.

“If approved by the House as expected, the measure pushes the next critical fiscal deadline to late July or early August, when the next increase in the federal borrowing limit will be needed.”

The gap between fiscal fights could provide lawmakers with the breathing room necessary to address other major issues in the pipeline, including comprehensive immigration reform and new gun regulations.

Push for Assault Weapons Ban Comes Up Short

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) will bring forward for debate a gun regulation reform package in early April — four months after the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut — and the Washington Post reports that the legislation will not include a controversial ban on assault weapons pushed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).

“Still up for consideration are three other bills approved last week by the Senate Judiciary Committee: bipartisan legislation to make gun trafficking a federal crime, a bipartisan measure to expand a Justice Department grant program that provides funding for school security, and a Democratic proposal to expand the nation’s gun background check program. Reid is working to determine whether to merge the three bills into one comprehensive package or to hold separate votes on each measure.”

David Weigel notes that this comes as no surprise: “There had to be some sort of assault weapons ban push for the same reasons the ‘fiscal cliff’ negotiations started with Barack Obama offering Republicans basically nothing. It was a negotiating position… And now that’s over, and we can focus on the possibility of a background checks bill.”

Huffington Post: “Legislation to limit the size of ammunition feeders was part of Feinstein’s bill as well. And as of now, lawmakers are expected to separate that measure from the assault weapons ban so that it can be considered individually… Whip counts weren’t clear as of Tuesday afternoon, but the expectation is that it will be difficult to muster up 60 votes for the measure.”

Wisdom of Gun Control Depends on Where You Live

Reihan Salam: “Strengthening police protection in high-crime neighborhoods in dense cities is and ought to be a high priority, not least because it promises significant economic dividends. But low-density regions will never achieve the same levels of police protection found in urban areas, for the simple reason that it is impracticable for law enforcement officials to traverse long distances at extremely high speeds.”

“The subjective experience of many Americans in low-density regions is thus that they are the first line of defense against any number of threats. This is one of the fundamental reasons why national efforts to regulate firearms will always be contentious.”

Why We Don't Go After Background Check Cheats

Brad Plumer notes that while “nearly 80,000 Americans were denied guns after providing false information about their criminal histories during the background check,” federal prosecutors rarely charge those people.

“Groups like the National Rifle Association…say these expanded laws are likely to be ineffective so long as the government doesn’t even prosecute existing violations.”

“But there was an explanation… these specific types of prosecutions were largely a distraction… there was little point in going after people who had already failed background checks — since they were unable to buy guns anyway.”

“Justice Department officials have also said that these crimes are inherently difficult to prosecute, because it’s tough to prove that someone was knowingly and deliberately lying on his or her form.”

High-Capacity Magazine Ban Gains Speed

As lawmakers continue to hammer out new gun regulations in the wake of the school shooting in Newtown, the New York Times reports that limits on the number of rounds that a magazine can hold are gaining support.

“A growing number of lawmakers say they see a distinct difference between limits on magazine sizes, which they would support, and an assault weapons ban, which they would not… many lawmakers, gun violence experts and victims argue that large-capacity magazines, which gun rights advocates say are convenient for target shooting, increase carnage in shootings.”

“President Obama has called for a maximum magazine capacity of 10 rounds… But gun experts say that standard may be unrealistic, because many handguns are designed to carry more than 10 rounds.”

Chart of the Day

– Business Insider provides the 30 charts that accompanied the White House live stream of President Obama’s State of the Union address, including this one highlighting the impact of the Violence Against Women Act on intimate partner violence.

Wonkblog has a series of charts providing context and more detail for many of the issues addressed in the State of the Union.

Reactions to the State of the Union

Below is a roundup of reactions to the policy proposals in President Obama’s State of the Union address. Check back throughout the day for updates and additional commentary.

Chris Cillizza: “Obama’s decision to save his remarks on guns until the end of the State of the Union, and to aggressively urge a vote on all of his gun proposals were, by far, the boldest portion of his speech… Obama’s comments on guns will be the lasting legacy of this speech and a sign that his past pledges to use all of his political power to bring about measures he believes will curb gun violence was not simply rhetoric.”

New York Times Editorial Board: “What is required to move the country forward is political will, which has been missing for too long. While many of the president’s proposals were familiar, and will probably be snuffed out by politics, his speech explained to a wide audience what could be achieved if there were even a minimal consensus in Washington.”

National Review Editorial Board: “His speech gave every indication that he remains a hostage to the superstition that we can spend our way to national prosperity — or that we can pass laws that will force employers, pharmaceutical manufacturers, and other businesses to spend our way to prosperity for us. That has failed for four years because it is bad economics and wishful thinking.”

Ron Fournier: “Rather than go big and bold, President Obama settled Tuesday night for incremental and pragmatic… The agenda he discussed Tuesday night was a mixture of old proposals and new ones fashioned on the cheap, bowing to the obstinacy of his GOP rivals and the brutal fiscal reality of the times.”

Greg Sargent: “the most important ideological moment in the speech came when he challenged the idea that reducing the deficit is good for the economy and renewed the push for more stimulus spending… We needed Obama to renew the case for more stimulus spending — while skewering the idea that reducing the deficit alone is good for the economy.”