Successful recall elections in Colorado

Against all odds in a history making pair or recall elections, CO State Senators John Morse and Angela Giron were told to go back home Tuesday, September 10th.  While some media outlets have cast this as an NRA victory and presented their best imitation of Republicans (e.g., accusing the other side of menacing and intimidation a'la the Black Panther Party; Lord knows no one ever loses such an election because their positions are unpopular), the message seems clear; some citizens of Colorado think that their state legislators should be listening to them and not to people from Washington, D.C. and New York City.  And while some, including Giron, note that "I think it's a lot about Democrats vs. Republicans, and has grown very partisan" there are reports that large numbers of democrats signed the recall petitions that prompted this election.  T the level of legislators, perhaps this is a partisan issue; it certainly would seem so.  But at the grassroots level, it is good to know that rights can transcend such petty partisan divides.  Still, it is not unexpected that gun control advocates would impugn the motives of any and all who opposes them, from citizens to law enforcement officials.

Yes, this is a victory for a more expansive right to keep and bear arms than those who wish to assert control over freedoms they themselves do not appreciate, gun control advocates, would prefer.  But the results also make it even more clear that "representative government" is an expectation of the people, that they elect representatives to represent them, not to pursue agendas of their own or others device.  For instance, Morse not only failed to listen to his own constituents, but was reported to have told legislators in his party from other areas to ignore their constituents expressions of concern over gun control legislation as well.  It would seem his constituents were not particularly enamored with this approach or his position.  It is uniquely American that when legislators do not listen to their constituents, they are held to account for it.  We should all applaud that!

This was cast as a local fight that was serving as a proxy for national level discord and indeed it was.  It is clear that both sides of this argument had decided that they needed to "stand their ground" in these locales.  But the data are in; it is time that anti-gun advocates realize that they need to be anti-crime advocates, that citing criminal acts like the Columbine and Aurora shootings as a reason to tell law-abiding citizens what they may and may not do is a non-starter.  Law-abiding citizens desire to exercise their rights unencumbered by restrictions meant to deter criminals (who, the history of gun control has shown, will not be deterred by law) and have no interest in being told whether they have that right or not by those who represent them.  They desire their opinion to be heard and considered when such issues are debated.  Dismissing them, their rights and their opinions is done at the peril of such pompous legislators, those who know better than those who elect them.  One would hope that those at all levels of responsibility will come to focus on crime and punishment rather than rights and limitations.

I can't call it a shame that Bloomberg's investment did not pay off; thankfully for him he has money to waste.  That one man with enough money might have been able to make a decision for millions who toil every day to survive is as un-American an idea, a nightmare, as I can think of.