“Everything is connected; and in the financial and political arenas, this connection is one single, solitary strand: Money.”
-When we talk about enemy, it might be prudent to understand whom the enemy really is- and start to engage them on their field of play. Such fare might successfully determine our quality of life, and perhaps even the outcome of certain, current issues… Such as gun control.
Have a car? Pay insurance. Have a fast car? More insurance. Boat? Insurance. House? Insurance. House with trampoline or pool? More insurance.
The Magnificent Plutocracy built upon speculation and liability. Sometimes it might be useful to let someone with more firepower fight our battles for/with us (no pun intended).
"The biggest fear is that in the rapidity of our hyper-culture, gun ownership and use will proliferate (already is), concern will wane, and then in short order, another massacre will occur."
Like much of the nation, I was horrified at the events in Connecticut, if not more so; it certainly darkened my Christmas.
And since that time, I have read many articles and heard many debates regarding the Second Amendment, assault weapon magazines, the definition of ‘armed militia,’ mental illness, even teachers carrying firearms. Of course the solutions offered are divided along party lines, and subsequently, with a diminishing prospect of any effective change.
What a misguided waste of time. When might realize that it is not about mandate, discourse, dogma, moral duty, or The Constitution? Ultimately, it is about… Money.
And this influence will more than likely ‘arm’ the NRA to successfully stall any life-saving legislation. I have heard many positive suggestions, yet none that emphasize the true roadblock to change- being those solutions based on a truth that our decision makers more fully understand: Money.
And before continuing, let me say that my take on this problem is very general, possibly misinformed, and surely misguided.
It is a bit unnerving to me that I can take twenty minutes to shop for shoes or a brief case on the internet, and then receive advertisements of these items on multiple pages for weeks after my search. It is not uncommon for me to receive an endless plethora of loan offers, so predicated by criteria that I am not even aware of.
It is NOT unnerving to realize that such data could be applied to prospective massacre killers. For instance, if someone conducts various searches for information about assault weapons, coordinated with required medical data and reported purchases of weapons (gun shows are a problem)- such a collection of filtered data could be an effective way of flagging potential assailants. As it is, 75% of the states do not even conduct mental illness checks on gun buyers. And no government presently connects (compiles) this data that might reveal such individuals. Why not? The availability of such data is surely there, ready to be purchased with Fed dollars from the same data-mining firms that conduct business with the banking industry.
And where would the money come from?
Elevate taxes and require insurance on all firearms, based on the grade of weaponry and quantity of bullets purchased on a yearly basis. Subsequently, with the gains from these proceeds, require insurance companies to acquire this data, and further, to require mental health checks substantiated by medical certificates from qualified physicians. Concerned with liability, insurance companies would surely employ these measures anyway.
Successfully making such insurances profitable enough for carriers to vigorously pursue, it would be quite entertaining to watch the insurance lobby battle it out with the gun lobby. Who do you think would win? We all know. And lawyers? The ABA certainly wouldn’t have trouble with such policies considering the prospect of increased, lucrative legal activity. And if one were to successfully dangle such a carrot to the legal industry, perhaps we might ‘suggest’ that they relent on reviewing tort reform. Hmm… I’m out of my mind.
Regarding the initial passing of the insurance bill by doubtful legislators, the amendment would need to be part of a package inclusive of enticements targeting Senate and House members- additionally predicated by pressure from corresponding local governments and municipalities. Might we mandate that bullets also be taxed at a high federally set rate, only available for purchase through police departments and sheriff offices? The proceeds of these taxes would be given to the corresponding municipalities and state governments- to spend on earmarked allocations from infrastructure maintenance to state and local government employment.
Although the battle would be a tough one in many districts where there are sizeable populations of gun rights advocates, the tax revenues of state bullet distribution at preset federal levels, allocated to state and municipal governments- would be a strong enticement to adopt such legislation. It would also bolster police activity in evaluating the users of such weapons.
These are just three examples that might have extremely positive effects to the health and security of American society, using the example of gun legislation.
Why the prospect of success? Because we will no longer engage in actions based on issues such as the Second Amendment, the common good, or moral responsibility- issues that are perceived of as ‘less important’ to those that make the decisions. Frankly, the vast majority of the true decision makers don’t give a damn about what they see as such ‘trivial’ issues.
No, we will learn to speak the language long understood by the true players in this sick game: The language of money.
Part of article MONEY!- To be published late January.
M. Martin, Assoc Editor, DowntownLALife.com