
<p>How is it possible that specific gun restrictions seem overwhelmingly popular but do not get enacted into law by the people’s elected representatives? ; News outlets constantly note that gun restrictions are favored by 60 to 80 percent of the public. ; That includes red flag laws, banning large magazines, waiting periods, background checks, and age limitations.</p>



<p>Conversely, the anti-gun media notes that passing such laws is not detrimental to the political careers of legislators who vote for them. ; They specifically note that then-Governor Rick Scott signed several of the aforementioned restrictions into law that were passed by the Florida Republican legislature – and he went on to be elected to the United States Senate.</p>



<p>In a spirit of simplistic partisanship, those wondering why such popular legislation does not get enacted place the blame on the money and influence of the National Rifle Association. ; They claim that the mostly Republican legislators like the money and fear getting a primary opponent if they do not go along with the NRA.</p>



<p>There is a logical misfire in that thinking. ; If voting for gun restrictions is not harmful to political careers – as they claim – the threat of opposition over that issue is not effective. ; And the money is not a deal maker. ; Most legislators would do very well without NRA dollars. ; But there are more fundamental flaws in the arguments of the gun control advocates.</p>



<p>It is true that specific gun restrictions are popular with the voters. ; It is also true that legislators face very little danger of getting ousted if they vote for gun restrictions. ; But there is the other side of that coin.</p>



<p>It also does not threaten the career of legislators who vote AGAINST gun restrictions. ; While the left-leaning media is quick to point to the cases in which legislators who voted for restrictions got re-elected, they fail to note that virtually every legislator voting against restrictions also gets re-elected.</p>



<p>There is a simple reason for that. ; Gun restrictions are not an issue upon which most voters cast their votes. ; It is not a decisive issue except for a very few one-issue voters—and they do not impact significantly in the final vote count. ; As I have noted many times in past commentaries, that issue does not drive votes in any meaningful way. ; It has little impact on outcomes. ; Same with abortion.</p>



<p>So, two things are possible – and in play. ; I will use myself as an example. ; I tend to favor banning bump stocks, and high-capacity magazines, while supporting red flag laws, and background checks. ; I am one of those 70 percent of the voters. ; BUT I never consider gun restrictions when I vote. ; In my mix of issues that direct my vote, gun restrictions are not in the mix. ; Whether a candidate favors them or not, is irrelevant to my vote.</p>



<p>I am a pro-lifer, but I do not determine my vote by the candidates’ stand on abortion. If a candidate meets my philosophy on a wide range of issues – but not on abortion or guns – he or she may still get my vote. ; ;</p>



<p>I tend to vote conservative on a broad range of overarching issues – such as personal freedom, constitutional rights, low taxes, and limited government. ; I think I am typical of the conservative voter.</p>



<p>The fact that so many on the telly seem mystified about how such popular issues can be ignored has to do with how they fit in with a wide range of other issues. ; They are mystified either because they do not understand the dynamics of voting – or they are just peddling partisan propaganda.</p>



<p>Whatever Congress does about gun restrictions, that issue will not be the issue determining the outcomes of the elections … period.</p>



<p>So, there ‘tis,</p>

Why the gun issue baffles the left
