The Boston Globe framed its editorial comment on the Texas massacre of fourth graders and two of their teachers with, “You’ve heard it all before. We’ve said it all before.” They then reprinted past editorial excerpts calling for gun controls. It’s nearly impossible to say anything new or offer greater insight regarding the recent crackle of rifle attacks in Buffalo and Uvalde. Nonetheless, it would feel negligent to ignore what we all know and what has been said before – that this American violence is largely preventable. Australians, Canadians and Brits have each reduced their assaults. So should we.

Joan Venocchi, also writing for the Globe, launched her remarks this week with the sentence, “Not all Americans believe in the right to massacre our fellow citizens – just enough to elect and reelect representatives who reflect that value system in Washington, and will stop any federal measures to limit who can acquire a military-style assault weapon without background checks for mental health issues.” It’s not quite that simple. Nearly 90% of Americans support such background checks, 83% of Republicans included. Our dilemma is that “just enough” voters are unwilling to make sensible gun controls a litmus test for securing their support. Almost no one supports mass shootings as a protected right.

We are fortunate Colorado Democrats in our Legislature have been willing to adopt most of the measures recommended to reduce gun violence. We have instituted near universal background checks and adopted a red-flag law that allows courts to remove weapons from an owner who constitutes a demonstrable threat to himself or others. In a major political irony, two-thirds of successful confiscations have been filed by the same Republican Sheriffs who opposed adoption of the enabling legislation. We’ve also closed several of the loopholes that gun purchasers have used to game the background check system and restricted high-capacity magazines. An attempt to reauthorize the federal ban on assault rifles has remained a “bridge too far.”

Democrats have learned, however, that providing leadership comes at a price – three members have lost their seats in recalls or threat of recall. Colorado’s experience with the Columbine High School and Aurora theater shootings – and more recently the King Soopers killings in Boulder – have helped pave the way for their efforts to protect the public. Though far from perfect, this appears to have reduced the frequency and severity of attacks. (I hesitate to point this out for fear a catastrophe may lurk just around the corner). Murders are rising, shootings are up and too many young men seem to believe gun-play is an appropriate choice for resolving personal disputes. It should have been more than alarming when an 18-year-old girl flew to Denver so she could promptly purchase a gun without any delay, and then use it to commit suicide.

The fact that Tom Sullivan, whose son was killed in the Aurora theater shooting, has been elected several times from a Republican leaning District in Aurora is encouraging. Some of those Aurora Republicans who share his hope for stricter gun controls are crossing over to help keep Sullivan in his legislative chair. It’s hard to vote against a father who wears his dead son’s jacket on his daily trip to the Capitol. Sullivan campaigns openly and forthrightly as a gun control advocate and he’s been rewarded for it by his neighbors. It’s been far harder for candidates not directly affected to play the same trumpet on the campaign trail. It’s time they tried. Nothing undermines democracy more than a failure to enact majority sentiments.

Gun control would prove easier if pro-control candidates committed not to carry any other legislation until the gun control job is finished. This would deflate much of the hyper-partisan fear that Democratic majorities would run amuck in an orgy of socialist fervor. The failure to protect our children also sends the message to kids that democracy is a fraud. None of this seems to discourage a noisy although insignificant fraction of “constitutional originalists” who maintain the Founding Fathers intended to place an AR-15 in every American home. That, of course, is utter nonsense. Automatic assault rifles are little more than a work-around the 90-year-old ban on machine guns.

Single-issue voting, as a political strategy, is easy to criticize; but for a single two-year term it would produce salutary long-term results. Demonstrating to candidates that an overwhelming majority can (and, on occasion, will) force its opinions on its leaders has considerable merit. There are several more issues where legislators have refused to act on behalf of the majority in deference to their generous, yet minority, donors. How long did it take legislators to take action against spam callers and, even then, their solution has proven flawed. Voters might get a kick out of firing up the heat underneath the dance floor.

Miller Hudson is a public affairs consultant and a former Colorado legislator.