Our New Anti-Gun Resolution, Just For The Record

I told you in the last post that a large number of matters were passed without comment in the Consent Agenda.  Frankly, I suspect no one had the stomach for any more discussion, about anything.

During public comment before the main agenda, Linda Dillon spoke to say she was still not satisfied with what I gather was a reworked version of Noah Jacobs' obsession with a resolution against guns.  This item was part of the Consent Agenda.  It appears Noah himself shoots from the hip, and one of the people who caught a bullet was Linda.  But Noah is in rapid fire mode, and he doesn't seem much concerned with Linda and her passions.

Let me be crystal clear about my own sentiments in this area.  I am anti-gun.  Virulently so.  I have had a number of debates with Linda, who is a gun and shooting enthusiast (to say the least), about this.  I wish no civilians had guns.

Noah's proposal, in the name of the Village (a formal Commission/Village "Resolution," not just the statement of Noah's own opinion), was that gun sales and marketing should be "more responsible."  Noah's original proposal was more forceful and encouraged more active inhibition of gun availability.  I gather he softened his proposal under pressure from Linda.  Noah seems now to have reduced his resolution to the most meaningless statement possible.  Gun sales and marketing, as is true of pretty much everything there is, should be "more responsible."  You can't really argue with that.  You can't do much of anything with it.

Here's the problem: Linda, a BP resident who is far more stable and devoted in the neighborhood than Noah is, doesn't approve of Noah's resolution.  Many BP residents, I'm sorry to say, own and keep guns.  There are no sales, and there is no marketing, of guns, or anything else, in BP.  So Noah is proposing something that offends many BP residents, and has no local meaning or applicability.  To the extent that the Resolution's sentiment pleases some BP residents, like me, it doesn't go anywhere.  It merely gratuitously affronts other BP residents for no gain.  No one is meaningfully gratified (even including virulent anti-gun people, like me), and others are simply annoyed.

So Noah got himself a silencer, and he had his little pet passed without comment on the Consent Agenda.  This was expedient.  It was not nice, it was not respectful, it was not graceful, and ultimately, it was empty and useless.  But I have a feeling it will find its way onto Noah's resume, which may be the only thing this was about anyway.