Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Will gun control be the new “gay marriage” issue that divides us?

To watch the superficial evidence around us, along with assorted polls, the public is more accepting of the concept of gay couples being able to marry. Even those people who are appalled at the concept seem to be conceding – on some level – that the battle is lost and it eventually will become legally acceptable everywhere.
EMANUEL: The 'face' of gun control?

Which means we now need a new “issue” that divides us as a society and gets everybody all ticked off into a frenzy. A new dividing line that cannot be crossed!

AND I’M SUSPECTING that it’s going to be firearms and gun control.

I look at the situation in my home state of Illinois, which is the only state that tries to completely restrict the ability of people to carry firearms in public. Some other states have such harsh restrictions on who can get the permits letting themselves carry a firearm that they might as well just ban them like we do.

But the ideologues always like to claim Illinois is the exception. And now, they have a federal Appeals Court panel saying that Illinois’ restrictions are too harsh.

They have to go!

THE ILLINOIS GENERAL Assembly has six months to figure out a new law that will let people have permits allowing people to pack a pistol in a shoulder holster, or a purse, for their personal protection.

The firearms proponents are taking this as justification that they were right all along, and that Illinois is going to have to start doing away with its restrictive attitude – brought on largely by city officials in Chicago.

These NRA-types were the ones who were constantly demonizing former Mayor Richard M. Daley and weren’t the least bit sorry to see him go.

And I’m sure they’re equally appalled by Mayor Rahm Emanuel. Who is turning out to be equally hard-headed with regards to the issue.

HE’S MADE IT clear the city will cooperate with any effort by the state Attorney General’s office to appeal the Appeals Court ruling – even though Attorney General Lisa Madigan herself has been reluctant to say she would take such action.

And on Monday, Emanuel took aim (yes, it’s a tacky use of  cliché) at the NRA types. Speaking to the new graduating class of the Police Academy, Emanuel said he wants both state and federal laws banning assault weapons.

He also said he wants a “vote of conscience” by the Congress on some sort of action in response to the shooting of schoolchildren in Connecticut.

He’s out for the kill against the weapons with their large magazines that are capable of taking out dozens of people in a matter of seconds! He’s looking to assess blame against people for the rising level of violence in our society.

AND HE’S POINTING the finger at the very people who last week probably thought they were getting a legal victory that would let them start chipping away at gun control measures in general!

It isn’t going to be that simple.

The firearms proponents (who like to think they’re portraying the views of hunters and ‘sportsmen’ who enjoy the technical abilities of certain firearms) are going to find a stone wall more impenetrable than the one many of them probably fantasize about building along the U.S./Mexico border when it comes to this issue.

Much of the opposition isn’t going to die down.

I’M ALSO NOT convinced that in six months, Illinois will be in contempt of a federal appeals court for not being able to come to some conclusion on what should be done with the “concealed carry” aspect of the whole firearms debate.

A part of me wonders if the tactic by which the entire 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (based in Chicago) could be asked to review the opinion reached by a three-member panel – of whom two agreed and one dissented – could wind up turning back this fight.

Or are we destined to have a new issue that will arouse the anger of just about everybody – albeit in differing fashions – whenever it is brought up for discussion?

And if the ideologues can come up with a catch phrase anything along the lines of "Adam and Steve" in terms of complete vapidity when they talk about firearms?


No comments: