While trawling my Twitter feed, I saw an article on one of the world’s most delicious delicacies: foie gras. As of July 1, California law decrees that foie gras is verboten. While it might not seem obvious, there’s a strong parallel between California’s goose liver prohibition and those whose goal is to roll back Americans’ Second Amendment rights . . .
Like gun control advocates, animal rights lobbyists are nothing if not vocal in demanding that something must be done (SMBD). This emotion-based outcry appeals to a certain breed of politician: elected officials who specialize in doing something that gives the appearance of doing something without actually doing anything.
The Golden State’s recently enacted ban on foie gras is a perfect example. The politicians choose to deal with the issue of “geese being force-fed” because it’s an emotional issue that affects a small minority of people. The gustatory “one percenters.” The pols plucked at the low-hanging fruit and made a symbolic gesture.
The anti foie gras law gives the appearance of something being done about animal cruelty without actually changing the way the vast majority of animals reared for food are treated. Truth be told, most of the meat that people eat in California will continue to come from animals that live in squalor and misery during their short lives.
You want cynical? Dealing with the substantive issue of “concentrated animal feeding operations” (CAFOs or factory farms) would jeopardize one of the politicians’ sources of re-election funds. So the supposedly anti-animal cruelty pols are benefitting from CAFO contributions.
What does this have to do with gun control? When Little Johnny Who Really Was An Angel is shot dead while trying to hijack a car at gunpoint, the Brady campaign and their compliant politicians immediately jump at the chance to pluck at the low-hanging fruit. They want to restrict your ability to own a firearm.
They don’t want to deal with the substantive issues of broken families, chronic poverty, institutional racism, lack of educational opportunities, lack of employment opportunities and so on. They’d rather use the blood of a child as an excuse to pile on even more laws infringing the rights of law-abiding citizens. Grappling with the substantive issues underlying gun violence would alienate their base.
This SMBD hypocrisy isn’t about liberals versus conservatives. It isn’t east coast versus west coast versus flyover country. And it isn’t even vegetarian versus carnivore. This is about blatant and cynical political opportunism.
We who cherish our gun rights must face down the opportunists who demand that something must be done about guns. We must continue to punish politicians who cave-in to emotional appeals. Because without those opportunists something would not be done. Our rights would be protected rather than abridged.