The other day, the gunners descended on the New Mexico Capitol, the Roundhouse, and demanded that the legislature enact no more gun restrictions, no matter what. They pretty much got their way, too, as the committee considering a bill that would require background checks for all gun sales and transfers, including private ones between individuals, tabled the measure as it could not pass out of committee. The committee vote was tied, and at least for now, the measure is dead.
Meanwhile, the measure by secessionist Republican Nora Espinoza to make a felony of enforcement of Federal gun law in New Mexico doesn't seem to be going anywhere, although it is widely supported by gunners and it mirrors similar legislation introduced in Wyoming, Tennessee, Texas and so on.
The hot button notion of civil disarmament is hardly considered at all in New Mexico as the gunners really have the upper hand, and no one wants to cross them for fear of triggering something unpleasant. The implicit threat of mayhem from the gunners is, I believe, what has long prevented any sort of civil disarmament movement or legislation, and not just in New Mexico. It's nationwide.
When a member of Congress is shot down, as Gabby Giffords was in Arizona two years ago, and Congress fails to act at all on the matter of excessive gun violence in this country, you pretty much know they are in fear for their lives should they do anything to cross the gun fanatic community. The fact that a few are only now raising their voices and proposing legislative responses to the violence is hardly a badge of courage.
The idea that the excess of gun violence in this country is somehow protection from tyranny is one of the most absurd arguments there is, especially given the nearly complete abrogation of the other provisions of the Bill of Rights since the advent of the so-called Glorious Global War on (or of) Terror.
Tyranny in America -- though it may be "soft" at this point (well, depending) -- is a fact, and the gunners, for the most part eagerly support it now as they have from the outset. They aren't worried about preventing tyranny at all, they just want to be sure they are the ones to impose it.
And they're getting their way.
The excess of gun violence, in the United States which I have characterized as equivalent to that of a nation experiencing a civil war, is part of the process of tyrannizing the population: it's the tyranny of fear, fear of mayhem, chaos, random massacre and slaughter, fear of your neighbor, fear of strangers, fear of authority, fear piled upon fear. It is quite deliberate in my view.
More guns and more gunners simply leads to more fear and more violence. Guns pervade poor neighborhoods where often gun violence seems to be out of control -- and fear is rampant. Is it unintentional? I think not. The more fearful the downtrodden are, the easier they are to control. Yes?
The fact is, the High and the Mighty among us live in fear of gun violence just as everyone else does, but they believe they have the means to protect themselves from the random mayhem that afflicts everyone else. Barricades and armed guards and gate keepers and law usually keeps the gunners away from the rich and the powerful, but there have been exceptions. Oh, the assassination record shows there have been many enough exceptions, but the exceptions have typically been due to... strategic and ideological issues shall we say. Stray from the path of Righteousness and watch out...
Civil disarmament is another kettle of fish, to be sure, and it can't realistically take place until the civil war is ended. That may not happen in our lifetimes.
To end the civil war, either the combatants have to tire of the conflict or a faction has to declare or believe its victory.
The United States is the victim of an ongoing class war with many, many aspects, including the drug war. All of these aspects of the class war/civil war are meant to ensure that the People stay divided and thus more easily exploited and controlled. Random acts of murder, mayhem, and massacre certainly haven't hindered division and control of the masses, have they?
Consequently, though there will be continual hearings and debate over "gun rights" and "gun issues," I don't expect anything significant to be done. We are likely to stay on this path for another generation or two, simply because doing anything about gun violence can be destabilizing to those who benefit and profit from it...
The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing is about to begin... Gabby Giffords vs Wayne LaPierre. Fireworks are guaranteed, eh?