In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Whatever the People Wanted
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Whatever the People Wanted
by Stephen Burr
Recently, there's been quite an uproar in the state of North Carolina about whether we will soon have a lottery. The General Assembly was to have voted by the end of this week (July 12, as I type this) on whether to place an "advisory referendum" on the November ballot. This Wednesday, local Charlotte radio personality Keith Larson (WBT 1110AM) interviewed state Senator Charles Dannelly (D-Mecklenburg) on the subject. The senator was asked as to whether he would support having the referendum. He said yes, and that he would follow the wishes of the people in this matter. Larson then asked him what his personal opinion was, that is, whether he himself supported having a lottery.
His response was a bit confusing. He stated that his personal opinion was that he would do "whatever the people wanted". As you can imagine, this didn't fly very well with Larson. He asked the senator at least a couple more times what his own personal viewpoint was regarding the lottery. The senator continued to reply that his personal opinion would be what the voters would say. "Whatever the people wanted," he kept repeating.
I could tell the host was getting exasperated. He then asked (and I'm paraphrasing here), "Well then, why don't we just have little boxes in everyone's homes so that the people can vote directly on these things? And wouldn't we no longer need you?" The senator hemmed and hawed at this. At one point during the interview, though, he admitted that he would only do "whatever the people wanted" about 90% of the time. I guess he meant that, if the people wanted the state government to engage in activities not authorized by the state Constitution, then he would oppose those actions. Again, I guess that, because he never said it himself.
Listening to the senator talk, I had to wonder how he was ever elected to the state legislature. He seemed to have absolutely no opinions or basic philosophy of his own. At that point I realized that, as with most politicians, he had probably promised his constituents that he would do "whatever the people wanted". Most likely he has a great deal of name recognition in his district, especially if he's managed to secure plenty of goodies for his district from the state coffers. He also probably talked about how he was a great supporter of democracy, and that always plays well in the media.
Now, I don't mean to specifically single out the senator here. This column is not intended to be a platform to "whup up on Dannelly." Plenty of our state and national legislators do the same thing. But the problem is that's not the system of government under which this country was originally established. The problem is, at one point or another in our history, "whatever the people wanted" included such things as segregation, subjugation of women, and slavery. Even today, it includes the War on Drugs, the War on Guns, and the War on Private Property. Democracy was something that our Founding Fathers opposed. That is why they established a system of government where representatives are elected by the people to use their own judgment in creating laws, and that men would be governed by the rule of law. This nation was to be a Republic.
But sadly, that is no longer the case. Democracy is the buzz-word for today. Rule of law has been replaced by rule of men, rule of whim, rule of political expediency. You do whatever you can to get elected, and you promise the voters that you will do "whatever the people wanted."
As for me, I oppose having a state lottery. So long as privately-sponsored gambling will continue to be illegal, then I will refuse to support the establishment of government-sponsored gambling. And even if all the restrictions on private gambling were to disappear overnight, if the state Constitution does not grant the General Assembly the power to create a state lottery (and I don't believe it does), then I will still oppose it. Even if the people want it. That is my opinion, and my philosophy. http://libertyforall.net/2002/archive/july20/people-wanted.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
by Stephen Burr
Recently, there's been quite an uproar in the state of North Carolina about whether we will soon have a lottery. The General Assembly was to have voted by the end of this week (July 12, as I type this) on whether to place an "advisory referendum" on the November ballot. This Wednesday, local Charlotte radio personality Keith Larson (WBT 1110AM) interviewed state Senator Charles Dannelly (D-Mecklenburg) on the subject. The senator was asked as to whether he would support having the referendum. He said yes, and that he would follow the wishes of the people in this matter. Larson then asked him what his personal opinion was, that is, whether he himself supported having a lottery.
His response was a bit confusing. He stated that his personal opinion was that he would do "whatever the people wanted". As you can imagine, this didn't fly very well with Larson. He asked the senator at least a couple more times what his own personal viewpoint was regarding the lottery. The senator continued to reply that his personal opinion would be what the voters would say. "Whatever the people wanted," he kept repeating.
I could tell the host was getting exasperated. He then asked (and I'm paraphrasing here), "Well then, why don't we just have little boxes in everyone's homes so that the people can vote directly on these things? And wouldn't we no longer need you?" The senator hemmed and hawed at this. At one point during the interview, though, he admitted that he would only do "whatever the people wanted" about 90% of the time. I guess he meant that, if the people wanted the state government to engage in activities not authorized by the state Constitution, then he would oppose those actions. Again, I guess that, because he never said it himself.
Listening to the senator talk, I had to wonder how he was ever elected to the state legislature. He seemed to have absolutely no opinions or basic philosophy of his own. At that point I realized that, as with most politicians, he had probably promised his constituents that he would do "whatever the people wanted". Most likely he has a great deal of name recognition in his district, especially if he's managed to secure plenty of goodies for his district from the state coffers. He also probably talked about how he was a great supporter of democracy, and that always plays well in the media.
Now, I don't mean to specifically single out the senator here. This column is not intended to be a platform to "whup up on Dannelly." Plenty of our state and national legislators do the same thing. But the problem is that's not the system of government under which this country was originally established. The problem is, at one point or another in our history, "whatever the people wanted" included such things as segregation, subjugation of women, and slavery. Even today, it includes the War on Drugs, the War on Guns, and the War on Private Property. Democracy was something that our Founding Fathers opposed. That is why they established a system of government where representatives are elected by the people to use their own judgment in creating laws, and that men would be governed by the rule of law. This nation was to be a Republic.
But sadly, that is no longer the case. Democracy is the buzz-word for today. Rule of law has been replaced by rule of men, rule of whim, rule of political expediency. You do whatever you can to get elected, and you promise the voters that you will do "whatever the people wanted."
As for me, I oppose having a state lottery. So long as privately-sponsored gambling will continue to be illegal, then I will refuse to support the establishment of government-sponsored gambling. And even if all the restrictions on private gambling were to disappear overnight, if the state Constitution does not grant the General Assembly the power to create a state lottery (and I don't believe it does), then I will still oppose it. Even if the people want it. That is my opinion, and my philosophy. http://libertyforall.net/2002/archive/july20/people-wanted.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878