As the nation reels from the recent shooting at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, we realize how important the issue of gun control is. Lives are literally at stake, and a politician’s stance on the issue is a strong indicator of one’s deepest morals. Regrettably, Kirsten Gillibrand has done a complete 180 on the issue of gun control and a slew of other important issues. Having represented a conservative-leaning House district, she’s been given an A+ rating by the National Rifle Association, has slept with guns under her bed, and voted to ban all gun registration and trigger-lock laws in the District of Columbia. This record in itself appalls me, as hundreds of children and innocent Americans are accidentally killed by firearms each year, and hate-filled individuals can walk into memorials and murder innocent people. But what Gillibrand has done since then really brings me to question her morals.
One day this February, the guns were no longer under Gillibrand’s bed. Not only that, but she voted against a gun rights amendment in DC, and went on to introduce strict anti-trafficking laws for firearms. What happened to turn this A+ NRA congresswoman into a progressive gun-control advocate? Put simply, she was in an election, and she wasn’t doing too well. Facing stiff competition from Democratic contenders, Gillibrand decided her gun-toting ways were no longer politically viable, and quickly discarded them.
From The Hill: On Thursday, Gillibrand voted against a gun rights amendment relating to firearms in the nation's capital. The amendment passed, 62-36, and is now attached to the D.C. voting rights bill. That vote is an about-face from the position Gillibrand took in the House, when she backed a 2007 bill introduced by Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.) that sought to"restore Second Amendment rights in the District of Columbia."
While I agree with Gillibrand's newfound positions on gun control, I simply can't trust her change of heart. She has made it perfectly clear that her morals and core beliefs go just as far as her poll numbers and not a millimeter farther. And I'm just not willing to put my faith - and my vote - behind her when she could just as easily swing back the other way after she gets elected to a 6-year term. New Yorkers deserve a Senator who we can believe in, and Kirsten Gillibrand misses that mark by a mile.
Comments are closed on this story.