Why We Should Never Compromise On Gun Rights

[wildchild]

Weak-willed pols like Florida governor and future senate candidate Rick Scot and House Speaker Paul Ryan were quick to surrender to anti-gun activists in the wake of the Parkland shooting. Their argument was they didn't give up much, so everybody please calm down.

Here is an example of why you can't concede any ground. Our favorite congresswoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz. She was last heard from when she was rigging the primaries for Hillary and trying to cover up the scandal involving her Pakistani IT staffers. Now she has another "commons sense gun control measure." She is introducing a bill to require background checks for ammo purchases. Can you imagine having to go through the red tape every time you need some ammo? And now there is a three day waiting period. http://www.breitbart.com/video/2018...equiring-background-checks-ammunition-buyers/

>>
Surrounded by students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Wasserman Schultz said, “Unlike firearm purchases, someone who wants to go into a store that sells ammunition can buy as much ammunition as they want without so much as being asked their first name.”

She added, “This is just such a gaping and grave and dangerous loophole that I could not wrap my mind around it when I was told that that was the case.” <<

The American left does not want it's opponents to comprise. The American left wants it's opponents to capitulate.

Any questions?

 

[wildchild]

And yet the same party that wants to ban guns is the same party of slavery, the KKK, Jim Crow, and Japanese Internment.

The democrat party has more American blood on its hands than Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot combined.

 

[Tsing Tao]

My impression is that the majority is fine with the profits due to sales of assault riffles and bump stocks being lost. And the majority seems fine with some additional expense being associated with gun purchases as a trade off against the benefits of uniform background checks and gun laws. Just my personal impression of what the majority favors, your impression my be different. The idea that we should be armed to the hilt for the time when the Guberment shows up at your front door in an Abrams Tank has some appeal to the lunatic fringe of society, but it's just looney tunes to most Americans. It's a no sell to the majority, Sorry.

Most gun owners do not own guns because they are worried about the government coming for them. They realize that if the government wants to come for them, the government has bigger guns and more people. Only a fringe of the 2A folks believe that. Now, in aggregate, millions of gun owners prevents the government from doing something that might cause an uprising of some sort - that much is true. And please stop pretending you speak for the "majority". That's a non-starter to any conversation.

There is no restriction on your Second Amendment right by any of the Kid's proposals that have any traction. So we can simply dispense with any argument based on unreasonable restriction of liberty. The Constitution, as interpreted by the Court handles this issue nicely.

What Kid? All I've said is that restricting firearms for purchase has been challenged in court before and the restriction has been overruled, citing constitutional rights. You can see that in Washington DC, or Chicago for example.

I'm afraid that your observation that there is already so many guns in the U.S. that any restrictions will have only minimal effect is going to fall on the deaf ears of the majority. But you can keep trying out that argument until proven wrong. And you will be, of course. Because the distribution of guns among the population isn't even close to uniform. A fraction of the population owns the majority of the guns, invalidating your argument.

Again, you're trying to speak for the majority, which is horseshit. You surround yourself with those who have your views, never venturing out into the discussion of the opposing viewpoint and somehow believe this represents "the majority".

When you say "a fraction of the population owns the majority of the guns", this is a disingenuous statement, and completely irrelevant to the conversation. What matters is the percentage of Americans that own 1 or more firearm, because that is who a ban would affect. And that percentage is 42%.

These kids are going to succeed where adults couldn't. They are going to send those congressmen who refuse the will of the majority packing come November. Most likely they will have the congressmen so scared come Summer that by November we will have sane, effective, and uniform gun laws in place. But it doesn't really matter, because if we don't, then come January we'll have a whole new Congress. And that Congress will pass gun legislation. So either way, it's a done deal.

When it doesn't happen, will you finally shut up about it?

Finally consider this. The reason we don't have reasonable gun controls uniformly enforced across the entire country is because of money paid by the gun lobby to keep profit impacting gun legislation from been implemented. The lack of reasonable gun control laws has nothing to do with logic or loss of Second Amendment Rights, it has to do with money. The kids from Parkman have figured that out, and they are going after those who have taken the money.

In a perfect world there would be no laws. That would require perfect people. A person who values their personal freedom in the imperfect world we live in will equally value good and sane laws.

The Kids from Parkman are going after what your left groups like Soros funded action committees tell them to. They're pawns in a game where one side has money from the gun lobby and the other from your progressives - and any attempt to paint this in any other way is pure bullshit - no one but very gullible folks believe that. And the laws will fail because there won't be the political will to enforce them when it gets down to it. Promises will be made, and broken as they always are - because the system is broken.

 

[Tsing Tao]

So then you do NOT understand how getting an AR 15 from Wallmart is easier than getting one from a gang member.

Like I said, it must be sheep brain worm.


And just to remind, only your handguns and assault rifles will become illegal. So you can still stick your regular rifles and shotgun up your ass just as you do now.

Again with the anal orifice jokes. Not everyone goes that way, dude. I understand you're into that sorta thing but not everyone else is. You have to understand that.

Because you can't get the guns away from the gang member, the folks who got theirs legally will never surrender them. You'll never ban them, because no ban can be effective. So you'll just continue shouting at the rain like you do with climate change.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Constitution can be amended. What will happen if 2nd amendment is repealed??? We are a nations of laws after all. Very unlikely of course, but not impossible, happened in past. Personally would hate it, but would turn in my gun. What about the rest?

No one has a list of what guns are owned. In the incredibly unlikely event the 2nd amendment is repealed (we're talking so unlikely as to be fantasy land) I would not turn mine in. I've posted it before, but when New York state banned "assault rifles" they estimated only 4% of the people who owned them followed the law and turned in their rifles.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Here you go, Piezoe. The "majority" are pissed.

NRA's political fund sees donations spike in February after Florida shooting
By Lukas Mikelionis | Fox News

• Facebook
  
• Twitter
  
• Flipboard
  
• Comments
  
• Print
  
• Email

Ingraham: Conservatives strike back at the NRA boycott

After the Parkland Massacre, students-turned-activists trained their own political sites on the NRA, launching a boycott championed by the mainstream media.

Contributions to the National Rifle Association's political action committee tripled in February amid public attacks against the organization following the Feb. 14 high school shooting in Parkland, Fla.

Supporters of the Second Amendment donated about $779,000 in February to the NRA’s political arm, the Political Victory Fund, according to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) data.

The figure marked a more than threefold increase compared to January, when the PAC received nearly $250,000 in donations, and was the fund's second-best month over the last year.

The NRA has come under fire from gun-control activists, who have criticized the group in the wake of the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, which left 17 dead.


Last weekend, thousands of people rallied in support of gun control during the “March for Our Lives” protest, with many placards openly attacking the NRA. The increasing onslaught against the organization, however, correlated with more donations going to the group’s PAC.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, two weeks before the fatal school shooting, the NRA’s PAC received $27,100 from itemized contributions – donations that exceed $200 – from 51 donors. Over the next two weeks after the shooting, the itemized contributions skyrocketed to nearly $71,000 from 226 donors.

Most donations to the group – totaling $685,099 – came in small donations that did not exceed $200.

Multiple politicians are facing the fury of anti-gun activists who criticize them for accepting the NRA’s support and donations.

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is among the primary targets due to the NRA’s support of him, which totals more than $3 million, although actual donations to his campaigns since 2010 totaled only nearly $15,000.

The Political Victory Fund’s donations to individual lawmakers are limited due to election laws that limit contributions at $10,000 per election cycle.

 

[Arnie]

No one has a list of what guns are owned. In the incredibly unlikely event the 2nd amendment is repealed (we're talking so unlikely as to be fantasy land) I would not turn mine in. I've posted it before, but when New York state banned "assault rifles" they estimated only 4% of the people who owned them followed the law and turned in their rifles.

Not only that, but you can still buy one in NY...

https://www.campsitesportshop.com/html/firearms-rifles-ny-compliant.asp

 

[RedDuke]

And yet the same party that wants to ban guns is the same party of slavery, the KKK, Jim Crow, and Japanese Internment.

The democrat party has more American blood on its hands than Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot combined.

You do realize that the tables have turned??? Dems became Republicans and VS. Most of progressive thinking is coming out of democratic party and conservatism from republicans.

 

[UsualName]

Trump has not been voted in contempt, has he? Congress should respect the will of the voters and approve funding for a massive wall immediately. Or we can just vote them out of office.

We’ll see what Paul Ryan does. I read he is looking for an early exit. I think he’s ready to take that Trump poster off of wall.

 

[UsualName]

No. No one is going to run on it. That is not the point. The point is that there are ten senate races where incumbent dems are up for re-election in states that Trump won. Do I think the republican candidates will fail to use the lefty attempts or even mentioning the thought of attempting to repeal the second as a campaign issue? No. I do not think that. And it would be silly for anyone to think they wont. They most certainly will. Justice Stevens has mentioned the unmentionable and that genie cannot be put back into the bottle at campaign time.

Same thing if congress forces a vote on this census issue just to make dems go on record. Do I think it will be used against the dems as a campaign weapon? You betcha.

So let me get this straight, the government is being run like a shithole by republicans and you think the answer is more republicans?