Democrats can feel self-righteous about suggesting more half-measures which won’t meaningfully change anything vis-a-vis gun violence in this country. Even if Democrats got the mainstream reforms they bandy about. 1. Guns would still be widely available. 2. Morons would still be committing these acts.
No but we also shouldn't pretend act like these events will go away if we do or act so tediously sanctimonious all the time.
Would not bother me. That’s what it will take to bring about meaningful change in the future. How many of the Democratic members of Congress are supporting this?
Because the barrier to change the constitution is impossibly high and they know getting a favorable interpretation from this SCOTUS is even harder, no professional in politics would bother pursuing abolition of the Second Amendment. They have limited time and resources with which to serve their constituents, and there is fruit hanging much lower on the tree. It would be foolish and irresponsible for a politician to tilt at a windmill like this. So, instead they aim for perhaps less effective but more attainable incremental changes like background checks or assault weapon bans. These won't solve the problem but arguably could slightly reduce the frequency of tragedies. Which I suppose is better than nothing at all, or worse: increase the proliferation of guns and increase the frequency. But for me as a voter, I think it's useful to say the thing that I want just to keep it sharply in focus, even if it's unattainable. I can settle, meanwhile, on incremental change but incremental changes should be in alignment with the ultimate goal. Instead of fatalistically throwing up your hands and saying these incremental changes won't solve the problem, figure out what will solve the problem and take whatever scrap of progress you can get to get you closer to it.
We know doing nothing hasn't worked and instead, the gun problem is getting worse. I supported reasonable controls (longer wait periods, increased background checks, stricter limits on the size of magazines) that supported by the vast majority of Americans. Gun nuts have successfully resisted the reasonable controls ("what good would they do?"). So I am now moving towards supporting more drastic approaches... soon up to and including the second amendment.
I totally disagree. You should say what you mean especially if believe it will save many lives for future generations. Even if it's not expedient. You also have to shift the overton window. Some people are going need to say, "Hey, look this is how we actually solve this even if you don't want to hear it." How has incrementalism worked out these last 15 years?
What's interesting is seeing people like you blame DeSantis, as if, trashy people at the beach shooting each other with hand guns has anything to do with DeSantis or the GOP. This could just have easily of happened if Obama, Santa Claus or the Man on the Moon was governor of Florida. There's no reason to even believe at this time that any proposed mainstream Democratic legislation would have prevented this shooting. It's just partisan, sanctimonious and self-righteous hackery.
I guess we can disagree. I'd point out though that the steady prolife campaign of chipping away at abortion rights was mostly not succeeding until wildly succeeding.
