Health & Fitness
Gun Control And The "Evil Other"
Activists want to blame faceless entities for the defeat of legislation that they support, but the real culprit is the new libertarian movement among voters.
I remember the first amendment that I brought up for a vote during my freshman year in the Iowa Senate. I think it garnered 11 out of 50 possible votes.
That's when I learned one of the more valuable lessons in the Senate: you must learn how to lose.
It's not an easy thing to learn. But a legislator must learn it. Because for each victory, a legislator is going to suffer a number of defeats. It's part of the process. If you don't learn it, you can't remain a legislator for any extended period of time.
Advocates of more gun control measures have suffered a loss. And they are mad. Many of my Democratic friends are blaming the National Rifle Association.
But the fact is that the American people are skeptical of the impact of any new gun control laws. Legislators won't support new gun restrictions because they are afraid of getting voted out of office.
That's hard for gun control supporters to take--that most of their friends and neighbors don't support more restrictions on guns. So an "evil other" must be identified. I've blogged numerous times about the "evil other." It's easier for activists to blame a faceless entity with vague, nebulous powers to stop legislation than to admit that their friends and neighbors just aren't with them. In this debate, the NRA fills that role.
But what intrigues me the most about the last couple of years of political debates is the libertarian movement among the populace.
This movement causes heartburn among the bases of BOTH parties. Those who oppose same-gender marriage are frustrated. Those that support gun control are frustrated. Even folks like me who oppose abortion can't get much traction due to this rising tide of libertarian-leaning voters.
Combine court rulings and popular sentiment toward limited government and demographic trends which indicate that younger voters oppose government involvement and I don't see a return to an activist government movement such as was popular in the 1960s. Maybe Bill Clinton was just ahead of his time: NOW, the era of big government is over.