Machin-Toomey Analysis

In December 2012 a terrible event took place in the United States in the town of Sandy Hook. Twenty-six people lost their life’s, twenty of whom were children, when a gunman entered the Sandy Hook elementary school. The country was devastated at the event, and in response a bill, the Machin-Toomey bill, was created. Despite the recent tragedy, however, bill did not pass, for it was opposed by a very strong opponent: the NRA. Each side waged a battle against the other by using different techniques to either promote or oppose the bill. Taking the concepts problems and solutions, developed by Stone in Policy Paradox, the debate that took place over the Machin-Toomey bill can be better analyzed, and be given a clearer understanding of just how it all played out. To begin with let’s take a look at what particularly the Machin-Toomey bill involved. The bill itself was not what the opposition painted it out to be. After the shooting at Sandy Hook, the President, some Congressmen, like Machin, and portions of the public wanted to see something done …show more content…
Mainly those in opposition of the bill used two of Stone’s concept: Powers and rights. As discussed in the last paragraph, the right to bear arms is very important to many people throughout the country. To reiterate, even people who are not necessarily pro-gun would oppose the bill if they see the threat of rights being infringed upon. The opposition to the bill used the argument that if the bill were passed it will only lead to more restrictions on guns, and eventually the government would attempt to completely abolish the right to bear arms. This is scary to think about in a way, because the right to bear arms has always been a reassurance. By no means are we going to revolt against the government any time soon or at all, but the idea of having that ability to bear arms against them if we needed to reassures some