And so the mayor has a political tactic where he comes out there, starts screaming, gets red in the face, proposes gun control legislation to send to Springfield, and Â doesnâ€™t lift a finger to get that legislation passed. Â He doesnâ€™t used his political strength and muscle to pass the legislation. Just a bunch of baloney.
I don’t think he is either. That’s probably why we’ve never really had a gun control movement of any size in this country. Gun control is a political tool for big city politicians. Guns are a fantastic scapegoat for the crime and societal breakdown that happens in many of our inner cities. They give politicians an easy,Â convenientÂ way of talking about the problem without having to level with people about nasty subjects like taking responsibility for yourself, your family and your communities, working with police to weed out bad apples, and rebuilding the good life. Those are difficult subjects, and politicians never want to tell people they can’t look for a solution to the problem of social breakdown in Government. There has to be a solution. There has to be an easy solution.
The great thing about gun control is you can never have too much of it. Chicago goes about as far as a city can go, but you can always blame it, in Daley’s case, on thoseÂ intransigentÂ downstaters and their insistence on not going farther. But the last thing Daley would want is for the state to actually pass something. At some point you run out of people to blame, just like in fiscal matters you eventually run out of other people’s money.
At some point the gig is going to be up. Pretty soon for Daley, Bloomberg, Nutter, Menino, and all the other big city mayors. Maybe they can switch to blaming the Supreme Court or the Constitution, but it doesn’t seem to me that’s quite the same tool they’ve been using. That’s probably why Daley is losing it. Heavens forbid he level with voters about having to make hard decisions to bring the city’s crime down.