JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
I guess I was confused then when you said laws like the ones Idaho are attempting to pass through legislation... that work to preserve the "American way of life"... only serve to further divide the country.

At first read that doesn't sound like you support it. Or you do, and just a commentary that the woke aren't going to like it(?) šŸ˜
My bad, i support this law. Was just trying to say that needing this law is evidence the country is splitting. We shouldnt even need this law, "shall not be infringed" is pretty clear.
 
My bad, i support this law. Was just trying to say that needing this law is evidence the country is splitting. We shouldnt even need this law, "shall not be infringed" is pretty clear.
We don't need 90% of the laws passed each year. Once being a legislator became a desirable career choice, the logic and sanity went straight out the window.
 
Simply, we need to make serving a term of office like serving a prison term. Put up a barracks on the Capitol grounds, and once in session nobody leaves for any reason until adjourned. Violators to be shot on sight by WSP.
 
You would suggest we simple go along with the woke agenda so as not to further divide the country?

That's kind of what has gotten us to where we are now. Not making waves and allowing the wacko's to infest our society with their delusional reality... since it doesn't really impact "our" lives... until the country is so far gone and... it does!

If there is no push back toward normalcy and a return to patriotism and social responsibility, we really are doomed.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing," comes to mind, and IMHO, it's about time those that live within reality and exercise common sense started standing up to preserve what's left.
If that means legislating people's personal choices and individual morality, then we're going to lose every single time, and in fact we're losing right now. Legislating those issues has NEVER been a winning platform ever in this country. A tactical retreat on some culture war issues would do Republicans a world of good right now.

But of course they won't do that, and then they'll be shocked when they lose their asses in November and Biden is still in office and a Democrat House Majority becomes a thing. Too stupid to see that getting into power is the goal, not the end game.
 
If that means legislating people's personal choices and individual morality, then we're going to lose every single time, and in fact we're losing right now. Legislating those issues has NEVER been a winning platform ever in this country.
This is what i meant above. I still support the law but in itself its not solving the anti gun issue.
 
If that means legislating people's personal choices and individual morality, then we're going to lose every single time, and in fact we're losing right now. Legislating those issues has NEVER been a winning platform ever in this country. A tactical retreat on some culture war issues would do Republicans a world of good right now.

But of course they won't do that, and then they'll be shocked when they lose their asses in November and Biden is still in office and a Democrat House Majority becomes a thing. Too stupid to see that getting into power is the goal, not the end game.

This is what i meant above. I still support the law but in itself its not solving the anti gun issue.
What that sounds like to me is what has gotten things so bad to begin with. Gradually conceding issues, compromising away the freedoms and societal principles as we slide down the slippery slope into division, depravity, tyranny through gooberment overreach and chaos.

If a policy or principle is fundamentally detrimental to our way of life then there should be no compromise. "Wrong is wrong" and an infringement is an infringement. Full stop.

That's how the other side works. Push for something ridiculous then play the "good guy" and claim "common sense" by making it seem a requirement that a compromise be reached for less, but it is still fundamentally "wrong". Only to restart the game over again after each stepping stone to their ultimate goal is reached.

Failing to grow a backbone and refusing to compromise is the only way to preserve what little else is left and stop playing the game by the other sides rule book. Of course, that is going to ruffle some feathers and make some people uncomfortable. Change is never "comfortable".

Illustrated time and again with gun-control. We all know what the 2A says, what it means and that has never changed. Yet look back to where we started a lifetime ago and where we are today. Every single infringement has occurred incrementally and through one side exploiting the "demand much and force compromise for less" policy.

Suggesting that we continue as we have seems to bring to mind the futile principle of, "repeating the same thing over and over and expecting a different result." What further proof needs to be had that it's a continually loosing proposition? We didn't get where we are today where overreach and having our own gooberment weaponized against every facet of our rights as the new status quo in one giant leap. Unless we stand our ground and take a "no compromise" approach, we will continue down the path we are currently on.
 
As far as I can tell we have never compromised*, only complained after the fact that we did somehow to minimize the anger over getting our clocks cleaned
Oh really? No mail order to your door firearms? BGC's in lieu of a waiting period? CHL's? Bi-partisan safer communities act? In OR most recently, HB2005... just to name a very few over the years where our politicians saw fit to "compromise" or fail to stand their ground.

Not much on history, hu? :D

Not that at other times we cry over getting duped, too. That's not completely untrue.
 
Reading this thread brings to mind Yeats, The Second Coming:

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

As a veteran, who has spent his life trying to hold on to the center, I'm now without hope. Yes, we are now two separate countries. Yes we are going into, or have already been in..WW3. Sad state of affairs.

P.S. I have a Gadsden backplate on my glock..heh.
 
Lets say enough states get on board with this law.
What happens to these states economies when these big companies cant/wont do business in them?
 
Oh really? No mail order to your door firearms? BGC's in lieu of a waiting period? CHL's? Bi-partisan safer communities act? In OR most recently, HB2005... just to name a very few over the years where our politicians saw fit to "compromise" or fail to stand their ground.

Not much on history, hu? :D

Not that at other times we cry over getting duped, too. That's not completely untrue.
That's an impressive list there! Remind me again, what we got for our side out of all of those things? Did they open the registry or national concealed carry or?
Maybe we're using slightly different definitions, but to me compromise means that both sides get some thing out of a deal, and I can't remember our side getting anything out of the things you listed
 
Lets say enough states get on board with this law.
What happens to these states economies when these big companies cant/wont do business in them?
That depends on too many factors to theorize. Most likely it is just a virtue signaling. It could end up like San Fran, that has to now reevaluate their position. I don't see a big win to come out of this, but who knows?
 
That's an impressive list there! Remind me again, what we got for our side out of all of those things? Did they open the registry or national concealed carry or?
Maybe we're using slightly different definitions, but to me compromise means that both sides get some thing out of a deal, and I can't remember our side getting anything out of the things you listed
Exactly! They call it "compromise", but it is nothing of the sort. When we fail to stand our ground, they give up nothing. It's simply a matter of, "how much" we're losing... this time.

That's the whole problem with those that would say we need to back off, don't be so hardline, pick our battles and be willing to loose a few in order to win the war. There IS no "winning the war" when you're playing the "take-away" game. The only "win" is to maintain the status quo and give up nothing. I mean... "they" aren't. šŸ¤£
 
That's the whole problem with those that would say we need to back off, don't be so hardline, pick our battles and be willing to loose a few in order to win the war.
I haven't read anyone here saying to back off or reject this law?
 
Lets say enough states get on board with this law.
What happens to these states economies when these big companies cant/wont do business in them?
That's the thing about "big companies". Their entire goal is profits and their business decisions are rarely... solely ideological. If the projections say they stand to profit more by supporting woke ideology or reduce the market share of their competitors... they will. If the numbers say they stand to see reduced profit margins... they will adjust policies to compensate. Money doesn't "have" feelings.

They may be able to stand losing the business of one state. Standing strong in their policies may bolster even greater profits in other states, but if they suddenly find themselves unable to do business in multiple states, there is going to be a policy shift.

Capitalism, being what it is, the companies are more reliant on the states than the states are on the companies. There will always be some other company that will fill a demand void. Always and without fail.

A companies customer base is not so readily replaceable and is finite.
 
That depends on too many factors to theorize. Most likely it is just a virtue signaling. It could end up like San Fran, that has to now reevaluate their position. I don't see a big win to come out of this, but who knows?
Its an interesting law but it reminds me of sanctuary laws... red and blue cities enacted them in response to the other... but in the end undocumented immigrants are still illegal and BGC/gun registrations are still the law.

So will antigun states pass laws to stop doing business with companies or states that are pro gun?
 
I haven't read anyone here saying to back off or reject this law?
Oh? Not specifically Idaho's two new law proposals, but we "have" been speaking in context of more general principles.

A tactical retreat on some culture war issues would do Republicans a world of good right now.

But of course they won't do that, and then they'll be shocked when they lose their asses in November and Biden is still in office and a Democrat House Majority becomes a thing. Too stupid to see that getting into power is the goal, not the end game.
 

Upcoming Events

Good News!! The Carson, WA shows are back!!
Carson, WA
Handgun Self Defense Fundamentals
Sweet Home, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top