Banning optics next?

[Koda]

No, we gave up a "right" we weren't getting for a licensed privilege.

The left gave up perceived safety.

None of that makes any sense. A "perception" is not giving anything up.

Bearing arms is not a priveledge, its a right. Yeah we know that doesnt mean there cant be laws, but the left gave up nothing when we lost the "right" to not need a permission slip.

I asked for an example of what the left has given up? Im alaso still asking what we can do preemptively as you suggested?

Its not a new topic, but one ive never heard an answer for. It comes down to the other side has literally nothing to lose or give up.

 

[CamoDeafie]

None of that makes any sense. A "perception" is not giving anything up.

Bearing arms is not a priveledge, its a right. Yeah we know that doesnt mean there cant be laws, but the left gave up nothing when we lost the "right" to not need a permission slip.

I asked for an example of what the left has given up? Im alaso still asking what we can do preemptively as you suggested?

Its not a new topic, but one ive never heard an answer for. It comes down to the other side has literally nothing to lose or give up.

This is why a National Divorce/Balkanization is more and more likely than a conventional civil war.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

I think a bunch of y'all are confusing compromise with "losing"

A good example of compromising would be we get nationwide concealed carry in exchange for increased funding, requiring higher taxes, for mental health services
Or maybe some thing like opening up the NFA registry again and reducing or eliminating the tax stamp fee in exchange for a nationwide seven day waiting period on all purchases
But just fighting an ineffective battle to stop encroachment on 2a rights and saying that we compromised because we lost is an incredible miss use of the word

 

[Koda]

I think a bunch of y'all are confusing compromise with "losing"

A good example of compromising would be we get nationwide concealed carry in exchange for increased funding, requiring higher taxes, for mental health services
Or maybe some thing like opening up the NFA registry again and reducing or eliminating the tax stamp fee in exchange for a nationwide seven day waiting period on all purchases
But just fighting an ineffective battle to stop encroachment on 2a rights and saying that we compromised because we lost is an incredible miss use of the word

Except all those examples are things we "compromised" already.
So now we should "compromise" to get those back.?

Really, the root of the problem here is the other side literally has nothing to give up...

 

[Member 53328]

No.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Except all those examples are things we "compromised" already.
So now we should "compromise" to get those back.?

Really, the root of the problem here is the other side literally has nothing to give up...

What does the Right have left to give to the Left, besides gun rights and sovereignty?

 

[RX-79G]

Excuse me, I would think reducing the noise levels of gunshots would be of benefit to everyone not just "progun" people.. as a person who is deaf, I see some potential irony here and reducing the barriers to lawful silencer purchase would also be of benefit, particularly for hunters and for competitors.

And for murderers, which is why they ended up in the NFA in the first place.

 

[RX-79G]

None of that makes any sense. A "perception" is not giving anything up.

Bearing arms is not a priveledge, its a right. Yeah we know that doesnt mean there cant be laws, but the left gave up nothing when we lost the "right" to not need a permission slip.

I asked for an example of what the left has given up? Im alaso still asking what we can do preemptively as you suggested?

Its not a new topic, but one ive never heard an answer for. It comes down to the other side has literally nothing to lose or give up.

If you can't see gow allowing a flood of loaded guns in public is not a loss for pro gun control people, I don't think anything is going to make sense.

 

[CamoDeafie]

And for murderers, which is why they ended up in the NFA in the first place.

Are you a criminal, a Prohibited person? Or do you think everyone who's not you, are?

 

[CamoDeafie]

Criminals who are prohibited from firearms do not outnumber citizens who are lawful gun owners.

 

[RX-79G]

What does the Right have left to give to the Left, besides gun rights and sovereignty?

Playing along, change on other conservative agendas.

Think how good universal background checks would be if we wrote the law. Free, DIY, no waiting. Or we can wait to get a terrible version crammed down our throats


This national divorce BS is ludicrous. Is everyone going to move away from prosperous places to live in poor S-holes like Mississippi? No, Texas isnt going to last much longer. Like VA and NC, the liberals will move there to get paid for their educations, then they'll vote.

 

[RX-79G]

Are you a criminal, a Prohibited person? Or do you think everyone who's not you, are?

We wouldnt have any gun control if it weren't for violent criminals. Which we have an excess of.

 

[CamoDeafie]

27 States have passed constitutional Carry. 2 particular States have tried to crack down and ignore Bruen. Several other states are watching these two States and trying much the same things. A few States (OR and WA in particular) are trying to get more gun control, against the national trend and against the SCOTUS trends. Please. A national divorce is more likely than an outright civil war. Several Oregon counties have signed declarations of desire to break away from Oregon and join Idaho or make Greater Jefferson State.

 

[CamoDeafie]

We wouldnt have any gun control if it weren't for violent criminals. Which we have an excess of.

400+ million guns. 150-250+ million armed citizens. It's not the guns. It's also not the lawful gun owners. Yes criminals are everywhere; however.. It's also the State and DAs who aren't enforcing existing laws and making sure that the violent criminals are not free to violate people again...

 

[solv3nt]

Has @Nosferatu ordered a Langdon yet?

 

[RX-79G]

400+ million guns. 150-250+ million armed citizens. It's not the guns. It's also not the lawful gun owners. Yes criminals are everywhere; however.. It's also the State and DAs who aren't enforcing existing laws and making sure that the violent criminals are not free to violate people again...

That misses the point. ALL of the US gun control has been a direct reaction to crimes, not lawful anything.

 

[Nosferatu]

Has @Nosferatu ordered a Langdon yet?

Has @solv3nt ordered a GrayGuns Sig yet?

 

[solv3nt]

Has @solv3nt ordered a GrayGuns Sig yet?

I'm kicking around a Luger.

 

[CamoDeafie]

That misses the point. ALL of the US gun control has been a direct reaction to crimes, not lawful anything.

That's what they have been marketed as. The actual reason IMO, and many share is that... it's all about controlling the people so they cannot resist the Government. It is an extension of a Hobbesian government model where the Government/State is sovereign over the people and where the people are either subjects, outlaws or criminals. If the State/Government were serious about controlling criminals, they wouldn't be releasing violent criminals without bail, they would be keeping them locked up for life, and they would also take steps to ensure that gang activities ceases.. but none of that has happened. Why? Because gun laws do not affect criminals at all, but disproportionately affects law abiding citizens.

 

[solv3nt]