Former governor and Democratic presidential candidate John Hickenlooper announced his gun plan last week. Not long ago, it would have been a wish-list for gun-control advocates. Hickenlooper is still a moderate; now, this is the middle ground in his party, if not in America.
Hickenlooper said he will raise the age for all gun purchases to 21 years; create a national gun license, which must be renewed every five years; nationally limit magazine capacities; ban “weapons of war”: make it illegal to store guns anywhere but in a locked, tamper-resistant container; prohibit concealed-carry reciprocity between states; fund federal research on gun violence; remove liability protections from gun makers and dealers; and provide grants to states to implement Extreme Risk Protection Order, or “red flag,” laws in every state, similar to what Colorado passed this year.
How is any of this moderate?
Also near the bottom of the pack of two dozen contenders in the Democrats’ 2020 race so far is Sen. Kamala Harris of California, who is not otherwise an extremist in most things. Yet she said in late April, “Upon being elected, I will give the United States Congress 100 days to get their act together and have the courage to pass reasonable gun safety laws. And if they fail to do it, then I will take executive action.” This was interpreted as Harris threatening to confiscate guns, rightly or wrongly. Hickenlooper is taking a somewhat softer line.
All of the Democratic candidates who pledge to do more about guns are bumping up against the limits of executive authority, the Second Amendment and, if they make it through, a Republican candidate for re-election who is solidly in the National Rifle Association, pro-gun camp. It is a high-stakes game. They might as well play to win something.
