The debate over getting on a firearm remains one that will probably never find a common denominator in the United States. For supporters of the Second Amendment, this is a right guaranteed by our Founding Fathers, while supporters of the Arms Control would like to impose greater restrictions on the costs of weapons. In the decades since, the debate over arms control has become a hot political issue, one that has been adopted by legislators on both sides.
On Tuesday, Republican Rep. Thomas Massi (@RepThomasMassie) of Kentucky – a well-known supporter of the Second Amendment – tweeted a simple but direct question, “What legislation for the Second Amendment do you want the House to pass when Republicans repeat the majority?”
The response was immediate, with many gun rights groups and supporters calling for the abolition of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Weapons and Explosives (ATF), and even the repeal of the National Weapons Act of 1934 (NFA).
The latest law – the first federal legislation that imposed any such restriction on the types of weapons that can be owned by private citizens – I will not do on automatic weapons like machine guns, or short-barreled rifles and shotguns, but it places many restrictions. On the costs of such Iryatian vessels.
None of the calls seem realistic, but this is hardly the first time there has been such a call to cancel the ATF and thus cancel the NFA. The first effort to repeal the 1934 law came in March 1939 in a case heard by the Supreme Court. In the United States v. Miller, 307 U.S.C. 174, the court found that ownership of a double-barreled shotgun was unprotected under the Second Amendment.
It did not put the issue to bed. In fact, even today, the case is cited in the ongoing debate over American weapons, as two parts support his position.
Although subsequent efforts were made to abolish the NFA, none of them gained much momentum. Even if Republicans succeed in bringing back the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, it is unlikely that such legislation will come out of the Vida for a floor vote, just as it is likely that additional weapons control measures will not see momentum.
In this case, Representative Massey seems to have used social media as a platform to show his commitment to the second amendment, but also to control the narrative. Legislators on both sides of the aisle can use social media to show very public support for their cause – knowing that it is unlikely that much will come of it.
Gun control support fades
Support for controlling Nashkasht is declining, which is also a delay in Massey’s tweet so prominent this week.
According to the Quinnipiac poll from last month, forty-seven percent of registered voters supported calls for more arms control, while 48 percent opposed – the lowest level of support for arms control since the end of 2015 in the annual Quinnipiac poll. In addition, a Gallup poll from
November also found that fifty-two percent of Americans were strictly legalized than firearms sales, but that dropped to nearly fifty-seven percent in 2020 and four percent in 2019. This was the lowest level of support in 2019. Gallup’s annual survey since 2014.
However, not everyone who responded to Representative Massey expressed a desire to reduce restrictions on gun owners.
There were also many who called for even greater restrictions on the Second Amendment. As with many issues that divide the nation, a tweet is unlikely to change anyone’s mind. However, the echo cell of social media can be clear where everyone stands on this politically charged issue.
