Ed.: 022018f – Words: 809 – Audio: N/A

Post Introduction-

Listen to the kids, for starters.

The public is a broad generic term to include anyone and everyone.  For this particular issue it means those against gun controls and those for gun controls and everyone in between, and those just plain apathetic and passive in their passions.  In another more specific sense, the public includes all Americans (although the public is not comprised of only Americans).  So what do we do with that knowledge on this gun issue?

Obviously there is a public outcry (a measure usually assigned by the media, but that is not to say it’s fake by any means; the media reports.) for some sort of gun control.  No question there are some, a minority, in the crowd who would love “no guns”.. but that’s not going to happen for many reasons.  Yet, the anti-gun control “public” enjoy using that singular reason for promoting fear that the nation is just an inch away from losing one of the Bill of Rights.. and of course, the demise of American democracy as we know it.  While most of the “public” acknowledges that scenario is nonsense given there’s no history in this country pointing toward any sort of changes to the Bill of Rights, and the fact that many Americans do own guns who might favor gun control, the anti-gun control “public” hangs on to that reasoning in large part pushed by the NRA.

[NOTE: Obama signed a directive to put some restriction with someone with mental health problems from purchasing a weapon.  Trump reversed it simply because he’s got his own mental issue with anything “Obama”.  Anti-gun proponents classified Obama’s directive as.. “Obama tried the kill the Second Amendment and Trump saved it.”]


My Recommendation..

If you are an anti-gun control proponent…

You might want to consider adapting your objection and convey to the NRA and your elected officials that the mood of the nation just might start to sway in some direction you may not wish.  That perhaps you might want to make some compromises in cooperating with some gun control in order to change the growing populist feeling that the gun lobby and political right wing conservatives are dead set against any gun control.  Perhaps showing some contribution toward mental health policies; push such action with the NRA.  The idea is that it makes good sense to show the gun control “public” the anti-gun control “public” also favors humanity, and protecting our children.  Drop the “give the liberals an inch and they will take away our guns” nonsense.  Likely more liberals own guns than conservatives anyway.  One thing is for sure.. there are more gun owners in all of Congress than just with republicans in Congress.

Show cooperation to the greater picture… protecting our schools and public places from mental cases, and show some compromise to gun control measures that make sense.


If you are a gun control proponent….

The young Emma Gonzalez, a student survivor in the Florida shooting, who was so articulate in front of the media a couple days ago, made an excellent suggestion.  Essentially she suggested that if a politician accepts NRA contribution money then that politician does not get elected.  Maybe someone will think of a catchy phrase to represent that opinion on a baseball cap.. but the point being is that if this single idea spreads further the GOP, and the gun lobby, is going to suffer in the next two elections.  There’s no question that Trump’s appalling performance in his first year, and expected to continue, along with whatever the Mueller investigation turns up during the coming year, the GOP majority in Congress will go adios amigo with the gun control movement.

If the elected official, or the candidate, accepts NRA contributions, they don’t deserve your vote.  If between now and the election the NRA and the gun lobby begin to show a sincere effort to be human beings and support mental health initiatives and can compromise on some gun control measures.. then it’s up to you if they’ve earned your vote.


Also… it might be a good overall strategy to hit on your state elected officials in the legislatures rather than focus on Washington.  Many gun control efforts have been tackled by various states, some effective, some not so effective.  But the point is, it’s easier (in theory) to change your own neck of the woods first because state politicians represent more your local feelings… it’s more grass roots.  If enough voters can change their respective states to make more gun control efforts then ultimately the political mood could flow into Congress.  For example, if changes to the federal database don’t happen, then perhaps those changes can be added on the state level.  Obviously, there is still the scrutiny of the state and federal Supreme Courts, but by that time you’ve sent the message to Washington.