Senators Should Not Listen to Constituents

That's the premise of an article over at the New Republic, that US Senators should ignore the wishes of constituents that contact them about important issues.

For all the talk of AR-15s and high-capacity magazines since the Newtown shootings, you’d think from watching the gun-control debate in Washington that the scariest weapons in the land are the humble telephone and e-mail. Every day seems to bring another report of a senator or congressman who was inclined to support serious gun-control legislation but then had second thoughts after nothing more than a deluge of ding-a-lings and inbox pings. It’s almost as if these poor fellows had never been the target of a concerted special-interest push before.

Alec MacGillis (whoever the hell he is) is upset that Senators are listening and that their "serious gun control legislation" wouldn't have done a damn thing to prevent the tragedy at Newtown.  He uses words like "sensible gun control", but what he's proposing doesn't make sense because it does nothing to address the tragedies that have occurred.

Those who want "serious gun control" have no useful ideas to offer.  Those of us who are serious about gun control (read the Four Rules) know that these proposals will do nothing to improve gun safety.  Thankfully, our Senators are listening to us.  Sometimes, it's best to do nothing, to let human nature take its course, to debate, and consider and decide that there's nothing useful that can be done.

In the case of our legislators, sometimes it's useful for them to know that nothing they do will make a difference, and decide to do nothing. That's prudent, honorable, and perfectly acceptable.  The Senate can't solve every problem we have, and they shouldn't pretend to try.  They're limited in what they can do, and they have better things to do, like passing a budget (which they haven't done in several years).