The mere mention of firearms these days brings a blackened mood over the Statehouse, such as in this century-old postcard |
Our state legislature is really a stubborn lot!
Just
one day after the Illinois House of Representatives rejected a bill that would
have permitted for a “concealed carry” law that would give great discretion to
local police to decide who actually gets a permit to carry a pistol on their
persons, the same legislators knocked down a measure that would have ensured
just about anyone who wanted such a permit would be able to get it.
SO
ONE DAY after the National Rifle Association types were able to crow about how
they knocked down their dreaded bill, their fantasy bill got knocked down for
the count.
Which
means that what we have in Illinois is a situation where everyone is digging in
their heels on the issue of gun control measures. They’re using their political
powers to ensure that the other side doesn’t get what they want.
“Victory”
is being defined as the opposition losing!
And
the rest of us are confused about what will wind up happening.
BECAUSE
WE’RE IN the situation where a Court of Appeals for the Midwestern U.S. (and
based in Chicago) has given Illinois until mid-June to come up with a law that
permits some people the ability to carry a pistol in public for their own
defense.
If
the court winds up having to get involved because the political people weren’t
able to pull their heads out of their behinds, then we’re truly going to get a
situation that everybody hates.
I
suppose it’s possible that the next month-and-a-half could see our government
officials come together and reach some sort of negotiated deal that could be
approved prior to the state Legislature’s scheduled adjournment at the end of
May.
Soon to be a common Illinois sight? |
Then
again, it’s always possible that the Chicago Cubs could play far above their
abilities and actually win a championship of sorts. In short, fat chance!!!
ANYBODY
EXPECTING SERIOUS compromise is missing the point of our modern-day government
structure with all of its politically partisan leanings.
It’s
kind of like the redistricting process, which in most decades winds up being
resolved with a random lottery because the two sides can’t even come close to
negotiating a serious deal on legislative and congressional boundaries.
The
lottery process was written into the Illinois state Constitution on the theory
that the randomness of it all (with one side getting absolutely nothing) would
be so scary that it would force people to talk.
Instead,
the natural greed of political officials makes them like the option of getting
everything (with their opposition getting nothing) that they don’t even try to
talk.
THAT
IS THE same mindset at work here. Everybody is holding out for what they want –
which in many cases seems to be ensuring that the opposition gets stuck with
something they detest.
Such
as the plans being put forth by the firearms advocates who think they’re making
significant progress by including a few places (such as government buildings)
in which people could not bring a pistol – even if they have a permit.
I
can’t help but notice they insist that CTA trains and buses NOT be included on
any exempted place. As in they WANT the ability to have a pistol on them if, by
chance, they happen to be riding the “el.”
I’m
sure they’ll give some jibberish about wanting to protect themselves from
potential muggers. Although it strikes me more as the mentality of those people
in other states who persist in carrying a holstered pistol while visiting a
Starbucks franchise.
THEY
JUST WANT to get in the face of people they see as different from themselves.
It’s the bully mentality at work.
This
may well be less about the firearms themselves and more about payback for the
current partisan situation where the two-thirds of Illinoisans who live in the
Chicago area predominate over the one-third that lives in the rural parts of
the state.
After
seeing the NRA-preferred measure go down to defeat Thursday, an NRA spokesman
told the Chicago Sun-Times, “Chicago’s not going to get their own permitting
system.”
Will we hate it as much as these boundaries? |
Is
this really about the rural parts of the state asserting themselves on this
issue out of some sense of political payback for the election results of 2010
and 2012?
YES,
I’LL ADMIT to being wary of the firearms advocates and their interests – mainly
because too many of the ones I have met seem to be a little too eager to have a
legal justification to shoot someone else!
But
I’m also aware of the definition of “compromise” and realize it means getting
only a part of what we want – instead of seeing the results of a political
stalemate, doing nothing and getting stuck with something we all despise.
Just
think! We in Illinois could get stuck with a “concealed carry” practices that
causes as much bickering as the redistricting process does.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment