Another Political OUTRAGE!

10 kids die DAILY from GUNS yet 188 Republicans and 42 Democrats killed a trigger lock mandate that would save them. Our lawmakers have once again sold out to the special interests that fund this bribery. That is, they vote the way the interest group wants to the exclusion* of the greater public interest (in this case FOR the gun lobby and AGAINST innocent children) and thereby get money and power in return.

[*This is the key part of the equation that makes such vote-peddling rise to the “bribery” level. There are undoubtedly examples where the public interest position dovetails with the moneyed one, but this is clearly not one of them].

Sure both parties are guilty; but for the past 25 years it’s been pretty much a Republican show, and they have received the lion’s share of the political grease, perhaps 75% to 25% in keeping with the famous Enron donation percentage. But why quibble, this blatant abuse is a key reason that so many Americans: 1) distrust our political system, b) hold those running it in such low esteem and c) refuse to vote in elections that they view as an exercise in futility.

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, the Colorado Republican who made this proposal, said that locks on weapons don’t prevent the slaughter of children, they only make "personal protection more costly." In a piece of convoluted logic that is totally ignore the facts, she continued, "Many things around the home are dangerous when used without proper instructions or supervision. But it is not the government's job or responsibility to mandate every conceivable protective mechanism imaginable."

So tamper-proof aspirin bottles are well within government’s rightful sphere of consumer protection, but GUNS are not?!

If this wolves-guarding-the-henhouse system of ours is “democracy” then why kill so many Americans and Iraqis to force same upon them?

Rfd 7/10/06

PS This is NOT a gun-banning argument. I would stand by the NRA should a real threat materialize to ban guns. But reasonable restrictions, safety measures, etc. that better protect the public are just and right. They are not the “give ‘em an inch they’ll take a mile” step to gun elimination.