State News & Gun News > NRA & National Gun News

Not Time For Compromise?

(1/4) > >>

Clarence:
I read this on another board.  I did not write this but I am putting it out here for discussion:


This is not a time to compromise.

Who are we trying to appease? The democrats who have no control over any branch of government?

These last elections were a clear message. America does not want the left and their vision of America.

As for trying to appease the anti-gunners, I could understand having to make a deal of the president were a Democrat, or they controlled any of the other two branches. They don't.

We shouldn't be giving up bump stocks. Are they dumb? Sure. Would I ever buy one? No. This is not the time to make a deal with a group who has nothing to give back.

If there was a handshake and we would be trading bump stocks for the SHARE act, or even the repeal of the NFA ENTIRELY, sure, we could maybe entertain having that discussion.

But right now what do we get in return? Nothing.

I don't give one fraction of one **** about hunting, bolt action rifles, lever guns, single shots, trap/skeet, or any of that crap. They are all toys. Fun toys, but toys.

I care about Americans having the ability to own military style, combat grade weaponry. Are bump stocks that? Not really. But if the NRA is willing to give up something like a bump stock when the Republicans control all three branches of government, what happens when there is ANY type of real pressure? Then what?

Do we give up the ability of any citizen to own any full auto weapon at all? What about short barrels? Silencers? Then what's next? Magazine capacity limits? Detachable magazines? Semi auto firearms? Handguns? All guns? Where does it end?

We should be on the offensive. Not clutching our pearls and fainting on the couch at the first sign of any pressure at all.

It's time to eliminate unconstitutional legislation. To repeal the NFA. To repeal the GCA. Repeal the FOPA.

I don't care what the democrats or media has to say. I don't care if it makes Kimmel or Colbert cry. It doesn't matter to me at all. They are not here to have a discussion. They are here to take our guns, death by a thousand cuts.

Anyone who thinks we should be respectful of the democrats and try to reach across the aisle is delusional. They want to talk about "common sense" gun control and "reasonable restrictions." No they don't. The first chance they get, they will do everything they can to disarm us.

If this were the other way around, and Democrats held all three branches of government and had a majority liberal Supreme Court, you can kiss the 2A goodbye entirely. If that ever happens, America will be a country full of disarmed subjects, just like every other European country.

We are in control, we elected our people into all three branches of government, and even the Supreme Court is looking good too.

If there was a gun to our head, and we HAD to make a deal that was an overall net benefit to the 2A, sure.

This isn't that time. Now is the time we attack.

muleman88:
I mostly agree , their running on feelings not facts.. I had a conversation with a 3/4 lib today at work and he insisted we have to do something  after this horrible event? I ask what ?? He said well we should have a lic to buy a gun just like a lic to drive a car , then we should register our guns so they know who owns what . (Pssst  they already know if bought legally) . Then he goes on about bump stops . Personally I never knew what they were until now . But I ask him so if we make all this illegal that would protect us? He thought and replied yes. Then I ask isn’t it already illegal to shoot people ? ( yesss) so i added if CRIMINALS don’t follow the law now what makes you think they will follow more laws?? At that point his attitude changed and he looked at me and said your right ! I then explained we have to have a lic to drive a car and cars kill way more people than guns so why don’t we outlaw cars? He sorta argued that he thought guns kill more people than cars . I didn’t know the #s but I’m very confident I’m correct . Anyhow I added personally I don’t think a tool or laws will stop crazy people and in my soul I believe we have a society problem ( broken families, working like wild people to stay ahead, kids can’t be corrected without worry of the state ... on and on) . In the end I felt like we both agreed there’s no easy fix or that another law will protect us . So I thought it was a positive debate .

Cbmarine:
The post reads like a rant.
"Repeal FOPA"? The law that allows us to travel with our equipment through anti-gun states? What?

"Democrats held all three branches of government and had a majority liberal Supreme Court, you can kiss the 2A goodbye entirely"?  Doing away with the 2nd Amendment entirely requires another amendment to the Constitution.  A Constitutional amendment must pass both houses of Congress by a two-thirds majority and ratified by 3/4 of the States (a State convention can also amend the Constitution).

Bump stocks? IMO, that was a mistake by the BAFTE under the Obama administration. Using a design mindset, they reckoned that the bump stock didn't materially alter the weapon. If they had taken a systems approach where the weapons systems is observed outside the "box", the performance is close to automatic fire.  Personally, I'm not willing to dig in my heels and defend bump stocks.

Clarence:
I had to scratch my head about the FOPA comment to until I realized that he is probably referring to the Hughs Amendment that was tacked on and banned new machine gun registrations after 1986.  

Radnor:
35,000 vehicle deaths in 2015  http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalityfacts/state-by-state-overview

33,000 opioid deaths https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/data/statedeaths.html

88,000 alcohol deaths  https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm

480,000 tobacco deaths   https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/index.htm

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page