Gun dealers are just ordinary Americans. They don’t have any felony convictions, like most of us, and they’re generally small business owners. They’re not that different than someone who owns a carpet cleaning service or a tree removal company.
And sometimes, small business owners run for office.
For one op-ed writer, though, that’s where there’s a problem.
Chuck Edwards couldn’t even be bothered to offer thoughts and prayers on the day of the Raleigh shooting. When asked in the recent debate against Beach-Ferrara if he’d support a ban on the semi-automatic rifles used in most mass shootings, Edwards said there “shouldn’t be any other restrictions on the Second Amendment.” On March 6, Edwards tweeted that he should be elected because he’s the only congressional candidate that’s a licensed gun dealer (remember, not owner, dealer, meaning he makes money off gun sales).
North Carolina Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Cheri Beasley sent three tweets about the Raleigh shooting, two offering support for victims and law enforcement, and one saying it’s our responsibility to “prevent avoidable tragedies.” Republican Senate candidate Ted Budd continued to “gather all the facts.” When questioned about the shooting four days later, he acknowledged both the tragedy and importance of protecting the Second Amendment. Budd is the owner of a gun store and range.
I can’t stress enough how alarming it is that both our Republican House and Senate options here in NC-11 are licensed firearm dealers who benefit financially from no gun restrictions. This isn’t about freedom for them. It’s about money. It’s a disturbing, profoundly unsafe conflict of interest. It’s genuinely scary.
For people like the writer, it’s always something shady. These people couldn’t have been pro-gun before they had a financial interest in the firearm industry. Nope, it must be about the all-mighty dollar.
Yet I can’t find where this particular author has offered up an opinion about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and allegations of insider trading that’s been plaguing her for years. She’s allegedly profiting off of her job as a member of Congress–and really, no one is just that lucky or good, in my opinion–but that’s somehow OK?
No, the issue is that these guys are gun dealers.
Would it somehow be better if they owned a used car dealership and supported a new Cash for Clunkers law? They would financially benefit from such a law. Is that somehow the big problem?
Of course, it’s not. That’s not the issue in the least.
See, the problem is that anything to do with guns, such as gun dealers, needs to be othered. They’re not allowed to be part of modern society in any real sense, and that includes seeking public office. They’re supposed to say in their dark, seedy neighborhoods–the only places they’re allowed to exist in some towns–and just stay put.
This kind of attitude is why many of us continue to argue the Second Amendment is a Second-class right. Anti-gunners don’t look at those who partake of this constitutionally protected right as real people worthy of acting in a manner many citizens do.
He wants these candidates to stay home, be silent, and not worry about the laws being passed, even if they think those laws will be a disaster for this country.
Good thing he doesn’t make the rules.