Tracking Your Senator On Gun Control

Has your senator given an opinion on greater gun control yet? MoJo’s Adam Weinstein is tracking them all.

Barely 48 hours after the Newtown massacre, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) announced that she’d introduce “a bill to ban assault weapons” on day one of the next congressional session. “It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation, and the possession,” she said on Meet the Press. “And it will ban the same for big clips, drums, or strips of more than 10 bullets.”

So far, only a few of her colleagues have dared to weigh in. But all of them will be under pressure to do so, and Mother Jones is tracking all of their responses—99 sitting senators*, 12 members-elect, and one member-designate.

  • Number of senators who support a ban (as of December 18): 28
  • Number of senators who might support a ban: 7
  • Number of senators who oppose a ban: 4
  • Number of senators (and senators-elect) who haven’t commented yet: 73

Here is a look at the senators who have responded so far (as of 12 p.m. EST, December 18)

If your senator hasn’t made a statement yet, you might want to send them an email.

This post was read 66 times.

About author View all posts

Steve Hynd

Most recently I was Editor in Chief of The Agonist from Feb 2012 to Feb 2013. My blogging began at Newshoggers and I’ve had the immense pleasure of working with some great writers there and around the web ever since, including at Crooks & Liars. I'm a late 40′s, Scottish ex-pat, now married to a wonderful Texan, with Honours in Philosophy from Univ. of Stirling, UK 1986. I worked most of life in business insurance industry (fire, accident, liability) including 12 years as a broker/underwriter/correspondent at Lloyd’s of London. Being from the other side of the pond, my political interests tend to focus on how US foreign policy affects the rest of the planet. Other interests include early and dark-ages British history, literature and cognitive philosophy/science.

1 CommentLeave a comment

  • Just checked out your link, and a comment at the bottom of the page hit me. It was about a requirement to insure ones’ guns. I’m assuming it would be for theft of guns which are later used in a crime(s), accidental shootings, etc.

    We know, from experience with insurance companies, that they have a strong lobby and force controls good for their industry. No insurance – no gun, similar to mandatory auto insurance. Gun owners might have to comply with storage requirements, amounts of ammo, size of clips, size and type of guns; perhaps even continuing education, as examples on how intrusive insurance requirements might become.

    It would limit some aspects of gun ownership, especially for those who collect* or feel safe only with an arsenal, as it would be expensive, but as the man said…”put your money where your mouth is.”

    Possible down side – only the wealthy could own multiple guns, while avid hunters (those who respect both guns and human life, hunt for food and do everything correctly) or those wanting one for protection unable to afford the coverage.

    *Collectors could comply by removing firing pins – a possible provision.

Leave a Reply