“What if it were the other way around?” That’s a common refrain in politics. How would you treat this information were the parties reversed, or if the name of the country or religion or president were different? And while that can get tiresome, it’s sometimes important to bring up.
For example, if a person where you work said to you, “I’m really worried about coming to the office now that employees with badges can bypass the security line, because people who work on the left side of the office are unstable and might shoot me dead,” what would you take them to mean?
Would you think your colleague was suggesting a coworker might bring an outsider past security who might commit violence?
Would you think they were expressing general safety concerns about no one in particular?
Or would you think, as they said, they were accusing specific employees of being unhinged and set on violence?
A lot of my Republican colleagues glorify violence and proudly display the firearms they have in their offices, so it just makes me nervous that we could have a workplace violent event. They’re not the most stable people.
That’s what California Democrat Rep. Eric Swalwell said last week to Raw Story. He was asked very specifically about removal of the metal detectors that lawmakers walk through to go to the House floor.
He deliberately and explicitly referred to his “Republican colleagues” in his response, saying they have firearms and aren’t stable. Not their constituents or friends, but they themselves.
That’s a serious accusation. A sitting Democrat Representative said he is afraid that, without metal detectors, Republican Representatives may shoot him and others, might commit murder on the floor of the U.S. House.