(Unsigned) Editorial: No sign? No dine
You know what this is all about, right?
It's probably not going out on a limb to predict that the state House of Representatives, following the lead of the Senate, will override Gov. Phil Bredesen's veto of the guns in bars bill this week.That's because most people are not against it.
Two statewide polls show Tennesseans are strongly opposed to the idea, but the National Rifle Association, which won't rest until there are guns in every honky-tonk, biker bar and strip club, has threatened legislators' re-election efforts if the legislation fails.Link, please. No? Ok, I'll just take your word for it, being the bastion of responsible journalism you are.
Please tell me, if Tennesseans are so strongly opposed to this, how does the NRA come into play? The NRA doesn't appoint politicians, Tennesseans vote them in. If Tennesseans are so displeased with this bill, nothing the NRA says and does will keep the voters from ushering in a changing of the guard next time they vote.
Unless a developing lawsuit by restaurant servers is successful, Tennesseans will soon have the right to pack heat in any restaurant or bar that serves alcohol and doesn't explicitly forbid it.
Nice use of the hyperbolic "pack heat", there mister/miss unsigned editorial person. Make sure you don't go into detail about it (person carrying can't drink, etc), it would ruin your alarmist tone.
The bright side is that people have the right to show their displeasure with this new policy in two ways. First, don't patronize restaurants and bars without signs in the window barring entry to armed patrons.
That cuts both ways, as restaurant owners have already begun to find out.
As foolish and irresponsible as this law is, it does make this small gesture of respect for private business rights. Restaurateurs don't like the stigma that a no-weapons sign carries, but it could become a kind of welcome mat for diners who prefer gun-free dining.
It could also create a "victim disarmament zone", letting criminals know where the guns are not.
There's another way for Tennesseans to register their displeasure with guns in bars.
An election in the fall presents an opportunity for voters to send a message to lawmakers that there are consequences for their actions.
I already addressed elections, so, instead I'll say this: There's also a way for Memphians to register their displeasure with bigoted newspapers - don't buy them.
Hell, they're only good for the coupons, and you can get those online.
.
4 comments:
So are they now claiming that there aren't guns in every "honky-tonk, biker bar and strip club"? Because I thought that was why they needed all these gun prohibitions.
I am so proud of Memphis for going to the mat on this one. New Orleans has a gazillion "we know better than you about gun safety" groups that "buy-back" guns with no questions asked. Home invasion crimes increase dramatically when the buy-backs are scheduled. The law-evading folk have to steal a new supply to turn in for cash.
Good point about letting the thugs know where guns aren't.
Please tell me, if Tennesseans are so strongly opposed to this, how does the NRA come into play? The NRA doesn't appoint politicians, Tennesseans vote them in. If Tennesseans are so displeased with this bill, nothing the NRA says and does will keep the voters from ushering in a changing of the guard next time they vote.
Actually, there's nothing at all contradictory about this. Generally speaking, there are relatively few people who feel strongly about the issue one way or the other. Most of the "muddled middle" is mildly opposed, but it's not the sort of opposition that's likely to lead to electoral action, of the "vote the bums out" sort.
People tend to vote based on issues they care deeply about, and for most people, this isn't one of them. So yeah, they're mildly opposed, but not so opposed that they'd boot their rep for supporting it.
If you put it to a statewide referendum, there's a fair chance it would lose, because a referendum singles out the issue; but in a general (candidate) election, you can't separate that issue from others.
(Of course, on any referendum, the people who feel strongly about the issue in question turn out in larger numbers, so even that isn't necessarily reflective of the public mood.)
All that said, public opinion is really hard to get a bead on. Close to two thirds of Americans supported a public option in health care, provided you didn't actually use the words "public option." So I always take opinion polling with plenty of salt.
Hi, Tom, thanks for playing!
You're 100% right. My comments were addressing the tone of the editorial, not reality.
I'm not sure a referendum would lose, but that's just another "what if", anyway.
There's been talk of a Memphis area blog meet in the near future, you should come.
Post a Comment