Is the ultimate anti-gun plan a (raw deal) compromise? Relatively "mild" ban, coupled with registration?

[TheSingularity 0]

My fear is that, after all is said and done this year, Congress will reach some sort of purported "compromise" that will be a combination of what could be argued as a relatively "mild" ban, along with a firearm registration requirement.

 

And I don't personally agree with ANY ban being "mild" ... but I am referring to things like a 10 round mag restriction, restrictions like that.

 

Anyway, my point is: this ban will actually be DESIGNED to fail.

 

The ban will be held out to the public by the anti-gunners as their sincere, good-faith effort to balance gun violence reduction and 2nd amendment rights.

 

But candidly they will know - and hope - that the gun violence continues after the ban.

 

After about five years, the anti-gunners will be able to say: "look, we tried this ban, and it obviously wasn't enough. Turns out there are just too many of these pre-ban guns already on the streets. We tried our best under the circumstances, but it just didn't work."

 

Then their obvious argument will be for confiscation. Since they will already have the registration info.

 

Not that you all don't already know this.

 

[hd2000fxdl 422]

While this is a very touchy time in our history and I hate to say it, but a ban, an order of confiscation in this country would probably be the straw that breaks the camels back.

 

Remember Compromise's are just Concession's and I see no wiggle room, see no well that's ok I can live with that. This is the time to fight this harder than anything, period.

 

Also you do have to realize that there are topics like this being brought up on most forums and between 2A supporters, but I'd be willing to bet, NJ, NY, CT, IL 2A supporters are probably having the most conversations and doing the most doom and gloom perspective discussions.

 

Just keep in mind, that a lot of people in these states are just numb and their views reflect that, but there are other states, Lots of them, where the 2A is very much alive and supported, actually when you look at the numbers, more states support things like CCW and are against new BS laws vs. the way it is here when you look at the national picture.

[Stides 0]

It is definitely a slippery slope. Gun control does not work so after each new restriction there is always going to be some incident that gives the anti-gun lobby an excuse to say "we just didn't do enough, if we had more restrictions this could have been prevented." The proposed restrictions this time around will be geared towards compromise. They will ask for a lot hoping to make some headway. That is why everyone must urge their representatives and governors to stand firm on this issue.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Actually, besides standing firm, why not the Pro 2A side really put a push on removing all the BS Laws on the books that do nothing to prevent crime and are there just to make criminals out of law abiding, responsible gun owners.

 

How aboout this, we say, Want to make concessions, remove these 5000 BS Laws, no, ok no, then lets settle on these 2500 and we can do it again down the road.

 

I know, but why is it only 1 sided? Really, especially when facts are on our side, ans since when did it change that facts don't trump emotions?

[BCeagle 12]

You hit the nail on the head. This is right out of Rules for Radicals, the left's playbook. You ask for the moon, sun and stars, when you deserve nothing and when you compromise on the moon, you have won half of what you wanted for no reason.

 

It is also covered by "dont let a crisis go to waste"

 

We should not give a single inch.

[TheSingularity 0]

I am expecting a lot of aggressive-looking "head fakes" by the anti gunners in the coming weeks and months...

 

But make no mistake about it, the only punch they really want to land is a firearms registration of some kind.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

I am expecting a lot of aggressive-looking "head fakes" by the anti gunners in the coming weeks and months...

 

But make no mistake about it, the only punch they really want to land is a firearms registration of some kind.

 

Actually the only punch they want to land is the complete banning of gun ownership, and thats the fight, each other step is only a step closer to what they want, and like I said, why is it only a single direction? It should be and this is the time for that to change.

[TheSingularity 0]

Absolutely, that is the knock-out punch. An upper cut.

 

But that will be saved for the rematch fight, a few years down the road.

They want the 2013 fight to just be a rope-a-dope with a lot of swinging and posturing, with the only real objective in this particular fight to land the solid jab of a firearms registration.

[ruger9 0]

If progressive gun control laws were fingers, toes, arms, and legs, and gun owners lost an appendage every time we "compromised" on this issue, we would be quadruple amputees by now.

 

Not. Another. Inch.

[Candide 0]

The people who have power like to wield it, and one way to do that is to conduct business in secret without any input from those below them.

 

They might take meetings with the NRA and other groups but let's be real here. Its all a dog and pony show so they can say they were fair. Behind closed doors they delete and laugh at our emails while they draft the real proposals.

[Zell959 40]

I'd actually like to see some more creativity in how we reply to their tired ideas and usual strategy of claiming it is only our side that is being unreasonable and won't "compromise". I was actually thinking it might be worth calling them out on that claim by throwing out proposals that'd force them to show their true colors on the issue.

 

Example: You claim that you do support someone's 2nd amendment right to keep a handgun to protect themselves and that this is just about getting highly dangerous "assault weapons" out of circulation. If that's true, I propose an assault weapons ban with a provision stating citizens able to legally own a handgun also have an unquestionable right to carry that handgun concealed and no state law shall be allowed to subject that right to licensing requirements, apply additional limitations on that right, or prohibit it entirely. There, that's a compromise. I get something that's important to me and shouldn't be a problem, given your support of handgun ownership for self defense, in exchange for accepting your assault weapons ban I dont' agree with at all. Absolutely not? What's your counter offer? Oh, you don't have one and are still pushing the exact same idea you started with, yet I'm the one unwilling to compromise?

 

NOTE: I'm not actually suggesting the above tradeoff is one we should accept. It would just be a strategy for changing the narrative and proving it's a lie when they claim that they are just opposed to a few specific "assault weapons" by making them reject a long series of counter-offers that bring their true civilian-disarmament beliefs to the surface.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Glad you not suggesting and only using that as an example but why is it we have to give up something at all. Why not them giving up something, I'm tired of this being so 1 sided.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Zell959 40]

Glad you not suggesting and only using that as an example but why is it we have to give up something at all. Why not them giving up something, I'm tired of this being so 1 sided.

 

 

I'd like to stress that I'm not actually suggesting we should have to give something up to get something. Essentially, I'm suggesting we trick them into outing their real intentions by throwing out give & take 'offers' we can be certain they will reject instantly. What makes their current position dangerous is that they can frame it in a way that might actually sound "reasonable" to the uninformed sitting in the middle of the issue. I believe making their true radical core more readily apparent makes them easier to fight.

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

From what I've seen and read, I would predict that Biden is going to recommend:

 

1) Criminal background checks for all gun sales.

2) Ten round mag limit. (BTW, why does it always have to be ten? When they say they don't want 100 round mags, couldn't they set the max at 20?)

 

The good news is I don't think they have the support for national registration or the AWB (not that Feinstein won't try). The bad news is I think they might try to do the two items above by executive order.

[kman 56]

50 state carry permit reciprocity should be super glued to any federal 'deal' if there is some sort of compromise bill. And a strengthening of the interstate travel exemptions to fix the awful ruling in the port authority case at Newark airport. If there will be a deal we ought to get something positive out of it.

 

Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[Zell959 40]

50 state carry permit reciprocity should be super glued to any federal 'deal' if there is some sort of compromise bill. And a strengthening of the interstate travel exemptions to fix the awful ruling in the port authority case at Newark airport. If there will be a deal we ought to get something positive out of it.

 

Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk 2

 

Well, again, I don't actually throw the idea out there as a goal. We really should be able to get it via a Supreme Court decision without any need to conceed to an AWB. My thought is just that we needle them in other areas instead of getting drawn into the one specific fight they're picking right now. Split their focus. Possibly cause some division among their ranks.

[Handyman 5,682]

50 state carry permit reciprocity should be super glued to any federal 'deal' if there is some sort of compromise bill. And a strengthening of the interstate travel exemptions to fix the awful ruling in the port authority case at Newark airport. If there will be a deal we ought to get something positive out of it.

 

Why a right that is federally enshrined is subject to being carved up by each state to follow willy-nilly has always escaped me. Why just 2A? Why can't New York and New Jersey have different levels of freedom of religion? Or speech?

[Njbanshee 9]

All this guns aren't safe shit makes me sick

[Handyman 5,682]

All this guns aren't safe shit makes me sick

 

Look on the bright side. When he visits CT, they will all have to be single-shot...