Today’s Provocative Question, Fandango asks:
Do you think that there is any chance that the U.S. Congress will ever take decisive, bipartisan action to pass and enact nationwide common sense gun laws to try and stem the tide of mass shootings, or is the best that the American Congress will ever do is to send thoughts and prayers to the families of loved ones killed in mass shooting incidents?
You have three types of politicians:
- Politicians who want to do something
- Politicians who don’t want to do something
- Politicians who might want to do something, if only they had a fair wind behind them.
That first group are in the bag. Forget ’em.
The second group… well, you just gotta hope that few enough people vote for these guys that their voice is small. Otherwise, the US is fucked. The rest of the world will watch it implode and think “thank god that’s not us”. Which is, basically, what we do at the moment.
The third category is the most imteresting. Maybe, just maybe, it holds the balance of power?
By “a fair wind”, what I mean is a situation where they could vote with their conscience without any fear of backlash. Especially, from sponsors.
My conclusion here is that the USA should somehow adopt publicly-funded campaigns, to sideline donors. As in, as long as they have enough public support, politicians don’t need to worry about their funding next time around. Enough? I don’t really know how this would work – a party that attracted maybe 20% of the vote last time around is eligible to be funded this time around? Straight away that’s not perfect because you just barred any new parties. But, you know, there are plenty more intelligent people than me, who could be thinking about this.
And something with teeth to back that up. Penalty, disqualification?
I’m under no illusion how difficult this will be, especially since we’re talking constitutional changes here, so the bar is that much higher. But, where there’s a will… Otherwise, see (2).
Very succinct analysis.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks Sadje. This is US Politics 101. We should probably all have a solution in us.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t think anyone has a solution to this problem. Not one that they will agree on.
LikeLiked by 2 people
we don’t need everyone, just 2/3
LikeLiked by 1 person
2/3 rd people who are not beholden to the gun lobby.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Another difficult question with no easy answers. I’m afraid the short term answer is no. The gun lobby in America is just so powerful that it Trumps everything. (No pun intended).
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s the answer. Sideline the lobby.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It could be…
LikeLiked by 1 person
So many beautiful dreams here, but Americans aren’t going to hand over their guns or stop buying and owning guns. The politicians aren’t going to overturn the 2nd amendment–or even try. I don’t want a gun, and I’ve never owned one, but I’ve hit so many walls trying to convince others that they don’t need their gun rights to be safe and free. I wish I held the belief that change could be possible. Maybe small strictures on the types of guns, age limits might pass or even the amount, but honestly, it would be better to just use metal detectors and strict punishments for gun crime because the bullets will continue to fly there—the wild, wild west. Hope I never have to live this frightening reality.
LikeLike
I suspect you are right but we can’t just accept that there cannot be change. But we need to think it through because I don’t think change starts with trying to ban guns.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very wise. Maybe, more gun training and honest teaching about guns and safety in schools, instead of just trying to not address that there is an issue.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think you’re right, I think it opens a can of worms. Teaching-wise I think it also opens up teaching people the value of life. And that probably means looking at things like tv and computer fames etc. Minefield.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“…the USA should somehow adopt publicly-funded campaigns, to sideline donors. Prior to 2010 there were strict limits on political donations, but in a Supreme Court case, Citizen United, the court allowed Political Action Groups (PACs) and “Super PACs” to make virtually unlimited and anonymous political donations.
LikeLiked by 2 people
This I think is the problem. The US has set up so many barriers to controls (of all kinds, not just guns), that I think people can just run riot. I think that mass shooting are the inevitable flip-side of the society that the US has chosen.
LikeLiked by 2 people