46 Senators and the threat to Democracy
I’d like to put aside for a moment the second amendment debate and the delusion some have that this right for all people is in someway being threatened. Something bigger is happening and did happen yesterday when 46 Senators voted against the majority sentiment in this country. The corporate control of our democratic system has arguably never been so openly and obviously displayed.
What we saw was 46 people acting out of self preservation and completely ignoring the core of what their job actually is and what Democracy is largely based on; Majority rule. Despite something making you uncomfortable, or going against your individual beliefs and views of how the country should be run, if you are part of the minority of this country on a topic you do not get to hold the rest of us hostage until you get what you want. Or at least that is the theory and ideal. Yesterday, 46 senators went against the majority and pandered to a very small, very rich group of people; Gun manufacturers and those lobbying for them.
And now for the gun reform debate.
The majority used to win in this country. The majority wanted this law to pass. For those cheering at yesterday’s outcome, sorry if it bothers you and your friends, but you’re in the minority. A democratic system always disappoints some of us. If buying your next gun is a little more time consuming or requires you to fill out some extra paper work, but we have a chance of preventing a few more potential threats I think that’s a pretty fair compromise. Your inconvenience does not trump a step towards kids in a school not getting shot the next time.
In the Old West people were allowed to walk around with guns and a fight ended with someone shot dead. An argument for arming more people to keep us safe didn’t work then and all they had were six shooters. Why on earth would we go back to that world? Arming teachers in schools was an attempt at rolling back the clock to this Old West world. It was an attempt by gun companies through their lobbying groups to sell more guns to a new market and a stepping stone to having government subsidize the manufacturing of guns. Teachers need guns now. It’s the law. Well, we need help manufacturing all of those weapons to appease your new law. Government, give us money. Same as the oil industry, but that’s another debate. The NRA is in the business of helping gun manufacturers sell more guns. Simple. If you follow the N.R.A. and believe that your best interests and freedom are what motivates them you have fallen victim to a powerful and proven successful propaganda tactic. Distract people with fear so that we can secretly pursue our true agenda.
We used to be a country of debate and compromise. There used to be smart people on either side coming to a fair compromise. Now its a small group and ridiculous somewhat new government rules that prevent democracy from actually functioning. NOTHING about this law was changing the 2nd amendment. The argument has been made that this will not protect us all or prevent criminals from getting guns. Well, that wasn’t the point of it at all! This was not trying to protect everyone in every scenario. Trying to make everyone safe is a fool’s errand. It was a starting point to stop the guy next door with mental issues or a criminal history from amassing an army’s worth of weapons in his basement. If you are mentally stable with a clean record guess what? You get to keep living and buying guns almost exactly the same way you’re used to. Isn’t the minor inconvenience you might feel at your next gun purchase a reasonable compromise if we have even a 1% chance of stopping another mass shooting? What exactly is the downside?
Is the opposition’s stance based on the ability to defend ones self takes unlimited and unquestioned access to any and all weapons at any time without question? If that’s the case, I won’t even bother debating you because that’s insanity and just coming from some weird mental desire of bigger, better, more destructive. See a therapist.
This law was rolling us back to a time where we had more rational guidelines and rules for owning a gun and a time when we saw far, far less mass shootings in this country. Coincidence? Hmm. This whole “From my cold dead hands” attitude is a disease on this country. It’s based on such irrational thinking and it’s leaving us where? Doing nothing. Government is not about I don’t like that so I’m not going to vote for it. Neither side in government gets everything they want. This world of zero compromise just leads us down a road where even if something passes it is diluted to the extent of being ineffective. The majority used to win in this country. The majority wanted this law to pass. And I’m talking about this one specific thing. The intention was not to completely alter the face of guns in this country. This was a minor change with the hope of adding some stability to how guns are acquired and handled by citizens. Can we focus on this one specific thing first and compromise and deal with other conflicting views another time? We do not have to bring in the BIG picture of every issue every time some change is on the table. Nothing gets done that way. An all or nothing government fails.
It took having a family member come out as gay to change many conservatives stance on gay marriage. Will it take them losing a loved one to a gunshot before they realize how wrong they really are?
