Email
Print
FeedAnd they wonder why we don't trust them…
Politicians wonder why we sportsmen don't trust the words from their mouths. Mitt Romney tries to portray himself as an outdoorsman by hanging out with Jeff Foxworthy drinking beer and eating catfish. Just come on out and say, "Hey, I'm a pilgrim when it comes to outdoor sports but I support you guys and will do nothing to jeopardize your sport."
Not that long ago in my home state of Minnesota, Gov. Mark Dayton, vetoed a bill that would have modified the legal definitions of self-defense allowing someone facing a serious threat in their homes, cars, boats tents, and travel trailers to use a firearm to thwart an attacker. His reason for the veto was that law-enforcement people did not support the bill. Not all of them were against it though, since the bill was sponsored by the chief-of-police in Lake Crystal who is also a legislator.
This is what I don't get. Politicians all over the country are crying that partisanship is dead. Parties won't work together to further the common good. If only the legislatures could work together for some common sense legislation. Can't we all just get along.
So a bill comes along that makes a lot of sense to a lot of people and low and behold, it has bipartisan support. It would seem the only people against this are a bunch of progressives that live in the city that have never held a gun in their hand but were born with the understanding that firearms are bad. Oh yeah, and those law-enforcement people with the exception of the bill's sponsor.
From what I've seen in the past, the law-enforcement groups never support less restrictive gun measures because they don't want to risk some nut going vigilante on them and not getting prosecuted if what they did was stupid. But to say all law-enforcement individuals are against an expanded Castle Doctrine is a bogus statement. It's more likely 50/50 which is typical of most government edicts.
The problem for Dayton is he campaigned on a pro-gun message espousing his love for hunting and his prowess with guns. A lot of voters believed him and voted for him because they thought he would be a moderate Democrat that would stick up for their second-amendment rights. Now that constituency is gone. It disappeared like a puff of smoke from the end of a muzzleloader.
Every politician I've ever met was incapable of understanding why they receive such low ratings, why no one trusts them, why people actually use derogative terms to describe them. These are just a couple examples. You have politicians posing as sportsmen. You have a governor vetoing a bill that a majority of people in the state supported, has members of both parties on board with it, fits with his campaign rhetoric, and yet when it's time to ink the measure, it gets killed like a non-suspecting raccoon that has wandered in front of an SUV. And they wonder why we don't trust what they say. It's because politicians seem to want you to love them for what they say, not what they do.
