OneGun wrote: ↑Thu Jul 28, 2022 8:43 am
So, politicians need to replace gun control with criminal controls. So, easy, even a caveman can understand that. Just not Democrats.
Ah, but at a time when polling numbers show that fewer than 28% of all independent voters (and 5% of republicans, though I don't know who they could be) approve of the job Joe Biden's doing and, a real shock to the dems' systems, only 19% of
Hispanics approve ("
But...but we opened the border for you people...and Jill even called you 'Tacos' to show solidarity..."), the left needs all the votes they can get. One voting block--if/when they can get them to the polls--more reliably dem than any other demographic are...wait for it...
criminals!
No self-respecting career (or wannabe career) criminal will
ever vote for a conservative, tough-on-crime candidate. Ever. Local to state to federal. That's as certain as death, taxes, and Hunter Biden doing something stupid and/or shady.
So, no, criminal control is out. Violent criminals are an important cog in the radical left's machine. The ultimate goal is to make the populous as dependent on big government as possible. Fear has always been a big Machiavellian component. Take guns out of the hands of the law-abiding citizenry, give the criminal voting block leeway to do what they do without severe prosecution and punishment, and you instill a perpetual fear and dependence on Big Brother.
Maslow's hierarchy: the most important factor at the base of the pyramid is physiological need (air, water, food, shelter, energy, etc.). Control the economy, control the supply chain, control the energy, and you make the people dependent on the government. Maslow's second most important level is safety. Machiavelli might say, "Keep the plebiscites dependent upon you for their safety; keep them afraid of consequences if they don't have your government to protect them. This also has the vital benefit that a weak populous is one that cannot rise up against you."
I'm depressing myself. I'm going to go back to reading all the ways that the administration is trying to change the definition of "recession"...