Rep. Melissa Hortman's Assassination: Outrage Is Not Strategy-Why Pushing Bans Turns Moderate Voters Off, and We Can't Afford to Do That

The Jack Hopkins Now Newsletter #373

Have you ever screamed into the void after hearing about yet another mass shooting, or the recent political assassination of Rep. Melissa Hortman, thinking: "Just ban the damn guns already!"

If so, you're not alone. It's a natural emotional reaction—anger…grief…desperation.

But here’s the thing: that instinctive outcry…as righteous as it feels…isn’t a strategy. It’s a vent. And venting is for pressure cookers…not public policy.

In this issue of JHN, I’m not going to insult your intelligence with empty slogans. I’m not going to trot out tired political talking points.

What I am going to do is walk you through what works…what doesn’t…and why—despite the very real need for smarter gun laws—a full-blown gun ban is a fantasy that distracts from real…winnable battles.

THE EMOTION VS. THE STRATEGY

Let’s start with a story.

In 1996, a gunman walked into Port Arthur, Tasmania, and killed 35 people. The Australian government reacted swiftly, buying back 650,000 firearms and instituting sweeping bans.

The program is often hailed as a model of success—and in some ways…it was.

But here’s the nuance most advocates don’t mention:

Australia already had far fewer guns and gun deaths before the ban. And according to a 2016 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association, the post-ban decline in mass shootings was significant—but its overall impact on gun-related homicide and suicide wasn’t as dramatic as often claimed.

Meanwhile, back in the U.S., we have more than 400 million firearms in private hands. That’s more guns than people.

Unlike Australia, where gun ownership was relatively niche..in America…it’s a cultural pillar—woven into rural identity…self-reliance mythology…and in many cases… legitimate security concerns.

You can’t ban your way out of something soaked into the soil.

THE DATA YOU'RE NEVER SHOWN

Let’s look at hard numbers—but not in the way that makes your eyes glaze over.

Mass shootings are horrifying—and yes, they’re increasing. But here’s what few politicians will tell you: mass shootings account for less than 1% of all gun deaths in the U.S.

Suicide is the real killer—making up over 54% of all gun-related deaths.

That’s more than 24,000 lives a year…quietly lost in bedrooms and basements. Gun bans don’t solve that. Smart mental health policies and safe storage laws do.

And what about crime in cities like Chicago? Here’s where things get even more frustrating.

Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws on the books—but guns flood in from neighboring Indiana…where regulations are lax.

In 2022…nearly 60% of guns used in Chicago crimes came from out of state.

You can scream "ban the guns" all you want in Illinois…but as long as there’s a highway into Indiana…it won’t matter.

THE PROHIBITION PARALLEL

Remember Prohibition?

In the 1920s, America tried to rid itself of the scourge of alcohol. What happened? An explosion in black market crime. Speakeasies. Mob violence. A culture of defiance. And, ultimately, repeal.

Now imagine a modern-day version of Prohibition—but with guns.

Banning guns in a country with 400 million of them is like trying to put toothpaste back in the tube with a crowbar. It’s not just ineffective. It’s dangerous.

Take Mexico, for example. Gun ownership is heavily restricted there. There’s one legal gun store in the entire country.

And yet, Mexico has one of the highest gun homicide rates in the world.

Why? Because cartels don’t care about laws. They import military-grade weapons from black markets—including some sourced from the U.S.

So ask yourself this:

If we suddenly declared all guns illegal in America…do you think the cartels and traffickers would go out of business? Or would they step in to fill a billion-dollar black market overnight?

You know the answer to that question, and it’s not the answer you wish was true.

THE SWISS EXCEPTION

Let’s look at Switzerland—a country often left out of the debate. It has high gun ownership. Mandatory military service. And low gun crime.

Why? Because guns are treated with responsibility…training…and tight regulation.

They have universal background checks. Psychological evaluations. And most importantly: a cultural expectation of accountability.

You don’t need a ban. You need a system.

WHAT ACTUALLY WORKS

If you’re serious about reducing gun deaths, here’s what works—backed by real data:

Red Flag Laws:

These allow law enforcement or family members to petition courts to temporarily remove firearms from someone deemed a risk. In Connecticut…after they passed one…firearm suicide rates dropped 14%.

Universal Background Checks:

States with comprehensive background check laws have 10% fewer gun homicides and 46% fewer gun suicides, per Everytown Research.

Safe Storage Laws:

When guns are locked up and stored safely, accidental shootings among children drop dramatically. In one study, safe storage practices reduced youth firearm deaths by 78%.

Community-Based Violence Intervention Programs:

Cities like Oakland and Richmond, California…have used these programs to cut gun homicides by 30–50%—without banning a single firearm.

These aren’t bans. They’re systems. Thoughtful. Targeted. Effective.

THE POLITICAL BACKFIRE

There’s another issue no one wants to talk about: a sweeping gun ban is political suicide.

In 1994, Bill Clinton’s administration passed the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. It cost Democrats the House.

When Beto O’Rourke declared, “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15,” gun sales skyrocketed.

Bans don’t just mobilize opposition. They radicalize it.

So what happens next? Nothing. Gridlock. And more dead Americans.

THE MIDDLE PATH MOST PEOPLE ACTUALLY SUPPORT

Here’s the biggest myth in the gun debate: that we’re a nation hopelessly divided.

In reality, polling consistently shows overwhelming majority support for common-sense gun regulations:

• 88% support universal background checks

• 75% support red flag laws

• 70% support safe storage laws

But support for total bans? That drops fast. Only about 19% of Americans support confiscation or outright bans on all guns.

So why not start where we agree?

THE EMOTIONAL COST OF FALSE HOPE

Every time a mass shooting happens…we grieve. And in that grief, we cry out for something big…sweeping…permanent.

The murder of Representative Melissa Hortman and her husband wasn't just a tragedy—it was a seismic wound to the heart of democracy. She spent her life fighting for justice…equity…and a better future for the people she served.

We cannot let her voice fade into the static of partisan shouting. Honoring her memory means rising above emotional gestures and fighting for laws that actually save lives.

We owe it to her—and to every victim—to think clearly…act strategically…and refuse to settle for symbolic wins that don't move the needle.

Melissa Hortman believed in the hard work of governing. She was the kind of leader who rolled up her sleeves…showed up for her constituents…and stayed laser-focused on results.

Her death leaves a void—but also a mandate. If we truly want to honor her…we must commit ourselves to solutions that live beyond the news cycle…beyond the rage…and beyond the hashtags.

Let her legacy be a compass—not just for what we feel, but for what we do.

A ban feels like the biggest stick we can swing. But when it fails—or stalls in Congress—we lose hope. We lose momentum.

That’s the real cost of this all-or-nothing thinking. It paralyzes progress.

Imagine instead if we won smaller, smarter victories—saved 10,000 lives here…5,000 there…500 tomorrow. That’s real.That’s movement.

A TALE OF TWO PARENTS

Let me end with a story.

Two parents. Both lost a child in a school shooting. One poured his grief into demanding an end to all guns. His movement fizzled—too extreme for most Americans.

The other fought for red flag laws and safe storage campaigns in her state.

Five years later…gun deaths among teens in her region had dropped 30%.

Both had the same pain. One got catharsis. The other got change.

You tell me: Which one do you want to be?

Democratic Leadership:

If Democratic leadership are serious about regaining—and keeping—control…they must abandon the addiction to “feel-good” issues that generate social media applause but hemorrhage votes in the real world.

There’s a brutal truth here: passion doesn’t always equal persuasion.

For every voter energized by a symbolic stance or a bold ideological slogan…there are two more who tune out…feel alienated…or quietly drift to the other side—not because they love Republicans…but because Democrats seem out of touch with their daily lives.

Winning elections isn’t about moral purity or scoring points on Twitter/X. It’s about building majority coalitions. That means focusing on what unites working- and middle-class Americans—not what divides them.

When Democrats lead with policies that improve lives—economic fairness…healthcare access…public safety…clean governance—they win.

But when they chase emotionally satisfying but polarizing cultural battles…they risk looking like a party that governs Instagram comments instead of households.

If the goal is power that can actually change lives…then strategy—not sentiment—must lead.

Our focus must be on winning elections: if we can’t do that, we’ll never get the chance to do anything else.

I’ll be back soon…with even more!

Jack Hopkins Now is a reader-supported publication. If you believe in smart, strategic change—backed by facts and free of fluff—consider becoming a paid subscriber.

▶️ It helps keep this work independent, fearless, and focused.

You get more than posts—you get power tools for fighting smarter.

Warmly,

Jack

SOURCES

• JAMA: "Changes in firearm mortality following the implementation of gun control laws in Australia."

• Everytown for Gun Safety: "Impact of Background Checks and Red Flag Laws."

• CDC WISQARS: Gun violence statistics (2019–2022).

• Pew Research: "America’s Complex Relationship With Guns."

• RAND Corporation: Gun Policy in America Initiative.

• National Institute of Justice: "Impact of Community-Based Violence Interventions."

• The Washington Post: "Where Chicago’s Illegal Guns Come From."

• WHO: "Global Gun Deaths by Country"

• Harvard School of Public Health: "Means Reduction and Suicide Prevention"

Additional:

• After the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, Democrats lost the House—proof that perceived overreach can cost controlohiocapitaljournal.com+15time.com+15brennancenter.org+15ohiocapitaljournal.com+4scholarship.depauw.edu+4ojp.gov+4.

• In 2013 Colorado, Democratic lawmakers sponsoring stricter gun laws were swiftly recalled—showing how quickly moderates can desert perceived ideological extremes .

• Polling finds only about 20% of Americans back handgun bans, even Democrats are drifting away—so less than a fifth of the electorate will turn up for all-out prohibition talk .

• Pew data reveals stark partisan divides: Democrats strongly support bans, but Republicans and independents resent them—polarizing messaging narrows your coalition .

If you want real change—lasting change—ditch the fantasy.

Pick up a smarter weapon: strategy.

Because in this war, slogans won’t save you. But systems…just might.