13 other Democrats elected it. They were signed up with by Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill. On the opposing side, there were 44 Republicans, one independent and, somewhat shockingly, 15 Democrats.While the 15 Democrats who basically broke party lines and voted versus the expense did have an impact on the optics of the vote total, they didn’t entirely trigger the bill’s failure. Even if the 15 Democrats who voted against the expense had changed their votes, it would have been brief five votes to pass because it needed 60 votes total.What taken place? According to John Tures, a government professor at LaGrange College in Georgia who has studied assault weapons prohibits, the slim bulk that the Democrats held at the time played a big role in the vote.After the 2012 election, Democrats had 53 seats in the Senate, while Republicans had 45 seats and independents held 2.”We’ll keep in mind that the Democrats held a majority but it wasn’t a strong bulk so they were worried about losing seats, particularly about in red states, “Tures told ABC News.”It made them really worried about voting for
it,”he said.Of the 15 Democrats that voted versus the assault weapons restriction, a number of them hailed from typically red states like Montana, Louisiana, Arkansas, Indiana, Alaska, North
Carolina and both Dakotas. Others, like Virginia, Colorado and West Virginia, remained in swing states who could face substantial challengers. “The private members were stressed over losing their seat, and I believe that in general, that as a whole they were fretted about losing members, “Tures said.Beyond that, while there was a majority of public assistance for a restriction, that was narrow as well.
According to an ABC News/Washington Post survey drawn from April 11 to 13, 2013, 56 percent of respondents supported an across the country ban on the sale of attack weapons.More generally, 52 percent of respondents supported enacting laws to limit gun violence.Could a ban on attack weapons pass now? Popular opinion has actually moved with time, however.In a June 22, 2017 Pew Research poll, almost 80 percent or more of both gun owners and non-gun owners support background checks for private sales and at gun programs, barring individuals on the no-fly or watch lists from purchasing guns, and preventing mentally ill individuals from purchasing guns.There is more of a space between owners and non-owners when it concerns banning assault-style weapons, however even that is nearing the tipping point: 77 percent of non-gun owners surveyed supported a restriction on assault-style weapons and 48 percent of gun owners did too.The spread was similar when it comes to prohibiting high-capacity publications, with 74 percent of non-gun owners and 44 percent of gun owners in favor.And obviously, the Senate is listening.Feinstein stated on Oct. 3, two days after the Las Vegas shooting, that she was”considering “reintroducing the attack weapons ban costs, and on Oct. 4, she introduced a bill “to close a loophole that permits semi-automatic weapons to be easily modified to fire at the rate of automated weapons.