In the wake of the Aurora, CO shootings Friday morning the nation stands poised for a major shift in public sentiment towards gun control. While Supreme Court decisions in the last decade have rewritten the Second Amendment and eroded the government's power to regulate ownership of handguns, there is no such restriction on reinstating the assault weapons ban. Due to cowardice in Congress, the ban expired in 2004 and efforts to renew it have always failed to reach the floor for a vote.
There is little doubt that the weapon used in Friday's assault, which the killer purchased legally in the days before his attack, would have been outlawed if the ban had been in place. The AR-15 rifle, which reportedly killed and injured most of the victims, is a modified version of the US military's M-16 assault rifle, and the 100-round capacity drum magazine the killer attached to the gun would be classed as a "large capacity ammunition feeding device" specifically outlawed by the legislation.
President Obama endorsed a renewed assault weapons ban during his 2008 electoral campaign, but a widespread, and false, belief that he covertly seeks broad gun control has hampered his ability to advocate effectively for the law since taking office. The National Rifle Association and its allies have succeeded in neutralizing any measure to restrict gun ownership in the United States, regardless of of how heinous the weapon or moderate the restriction proposed.
Mitt Romney, who has endorsed the assault weapons ban in the past, is uniquely situated to lead on the issue today. As the undisputed anti-gun control candidate for president, he has unique moral authority to articulate what millions of Americans today undoubtedly know to be true: assault weapons have no place in civilian society.
Will Romney challenge his base, and more importantly his funders, to take a courageous stance? Hey, I'm running for office, for Pete's sake!