“What I see us talking about in the media and on social media is this hardline, ‘Guns are evil, we need to get rid of all of them and the NRA’s evil,’ and, ‘You can pry my gun out of my cold, dead hand; don’t come after my guns.’ I think most of us are in the middle, but that’s not where the discussion is occurring. And because of that, we can’t have a sane discussion that results in sane solutions.” I like how Columbine High School English teacher Paula Reed portrays the pro-gun rights position at gunwars.news21.com. Actually, I don’t. I prefer to characterize it as . . .
“The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Seems pretty simple to me.
But not to the article’s authors, who proceed to chronicle the history of Colorado’s infringement on residents’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms with only a sideways glance at citizens who value their firearms freedom. And end like this:
Democrats have been able to increase funding, get better candidates to run and benefited from a shifting demographic. But Straayer said Republicans have contributed far more to Colorado’s leftward shift since the 1970s.
“The Republican Party, over a three-decade period of time, pretty much eliminated the moderates in the party and moved further and further to the right and made themselves less and less attractive to the moderate voter, to the swing voter, to the unaffiliated voter,” [Colorado State University political science professor John] Strayer Straayer said.
Is that true? If it is, if Colorado Republicans have alienated voters by lobbying for Constitutional rights, is it regrettable? More to the point, the film accompanying the article exhorts viewers to “come to the table” because “we have to do something.” Is there some “middle ground” where pro- and anti-gun loyalists can meet?