Guns for a Politician

Why guns can decide a politician’s future written by NToussaint Guns are a very controversial topic these days. Many of us are concerned that the more guns that are available, the more crime there will be. Some of us also think the contrary; more guns means more people who can properly defend themselves.

Ultimately, the decision on gun laws rests in the hands of our politicians, and their opinions on these decisions may well determine whether they are trusted to hold an office or not.

– Why gun laws are so important for a politician these days

With recent terror attacks in the United States, gun laws have been put sharply in focus. The recent mass shootings in Orlando, Charleston, and San Bernadino led many to demand that guns be restricted for the public. Many were concerned that more and more deranged individuals would gain access to automatic weapons and create further bloodshed. Others contended that, were there more concealed weapon carriers in the vicinity of the attacks the attackers would have been halted much earlier.Politicians are using guns with the top choice for holster to have it with them all the time, if not they keep it in smart safe from barska to make sure it wont be found by anyone harmful. These guns doesn’t need scopes best for your rifle cause its not for long range.

These are the arguments that politicians have pick sides against right now. Their stances on guns will determine their campaign strategies, their speeches, and the following they will garner. If they make a single wrong move they risk making an impression on voters that will last for years to come. To restrict or to relax, that is the question.

– The importance of state

The risk of choosing one side or another in the battle of gun control varies greatly from state to state. If a politician is running for office in a majority Republican state, then choosing to side with gun restriction will require a very convincing platform. On the other hand, politicians in majority Democrat states will find it hard if they choose to support the relaxation of gun laws.

This leads to many moral dilemmas, especially for young politicians. Should one try to appeal to the majority even though it is against their core beliefs? A mayoral candidate might choose to support the majority opinion in order to gain a foothold when running for the higher office of governor later on. A decision like this can be successful, but the candidate’s integrity will surely be questioned in the future.

– Finding a middle ground

As a politician, you want to pick a side while at the same time avoiding the alienation of potential voters. There must be a middle ground.

Finding such a balance is the difficulty posed by gun laws today. Candidates walk a minefield of polarized voter opinions with both sides eager to paint opponents as a monster. To them, the monsters of today are the vicious tyrants of tomorrow. Politicians are shaping their very futures whenever they support or oppose open carry permits.

Even with a polarizing topic like guns, politicians can still find a stance that allows them to appeal all voters in the electorate. Sure, Texans love their guns, but with recent police shootings, they are surely more open to background checks on weapon purchases. A tactful politician can hold a stance, be it for or against gun control while avoiding portraying their opinion as for the be all and end all of the debate. The person who does this will have a much smoother future in politics.

The reality of the times is that gun laws are at the forefront of the political scene. No candidate can avoid picking a side. Politicians must decide their opinion on guns early on, and no matter what that opinion is they must be tactful in stating it. Voters are polarized and one statement on guns can greatly impact the future of a politician.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *