Meeting on the 'middle ground' on guns, eh?

[Dave Workman]

'Meeting in middle' on guns depends upon where the 'middle' is

Yesterday longshot Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), appearing on CNN's "State of the Union," was widely quoted on his contention that he could "bring us to the middle" about gun rights versus gun control.

<broken link removed>

Read More

 

[AMT]

It would be interesting to know exactly what he is thinking.

 

[richardlpalmer]

"How about this as a starting point for such a debate: The Second Amendment means what it says, that individual citizens have a right to keep and bear arms, that this right extends beyond the front porch and that it shall not be infringed. If there must be licenses to carry, they must be recognized everywhere, regardless of state boundaries, and people should not have to provide a "need" to get one."

 

[deadeye]

He voted for a lot of the things we do not want.

<broken link removed>

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

There is no middle ground.
They seek to limit and confiscate firearms.
Place taxes and restrictions on them.

That is not a middle ground.
The constitution was clear and we need not make excuses.

 

[Koda]

there is no middle ground when the other side has nothing to lose.

 

[Callidus98]

With the laws we have, we are already well left of the middle.

Too many Americans have forgotten what true freedom is. This allows others to redefine the 'middle'. So the only middle I will give them is a finger.

 

[Mark W.]

Exactly from watching this crap take place since 1968 I would say if we run backwards about 4000 laws we could be close to the middle again. But right now we are hanging on to the last 25%.

 

[Koda]

its a quick read, I promise.... but its pertinent to the discussion for anyone who thinks there is a "middle ground"

http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-repost.html?m=1

 

[PiratePast40]

Sounds like blah, blah, blah from another politician. Full of vague terms and phrases, and absolutely zero in the way of definition of a problem, or any semblance of a solution. He's pandering to emotionally distraught people. Just more hot air that means absolutely nothing.

 

[donaldc]

Yeah, the middle of where we are right now. Then when that doesn't work we will need to "move to the middle" again until we are left with just a sliver of our inalienable rights.

 

[fuhr52]

Sanders is a democrat and self proclaimed socialist. Middle ground and socialist democrats? Really! When has a democrat ever wanted anything but total control?

 

[rick benjamin]

Middle ground is concession.
We've done that.
How about NO?!

 

[mjbskwim]

Here's a middle ground for ya.
We get our constitutional carry in all states and they oppositions realizes it is our right to do so.
Then the crime rates go down,what will the media do with themselves?

 

[NSDQ]

Sanders is from Vermont. One of the highest gun ownerships in the Union. He's also quoted as saying anti gun legislation is liberal elitism. Hence why he's been opposed to certain types of gun control.

You also have to understand the political process in which most senators are required to tote the party line regardless of their personal feelings. Much akin to the republicans that voted united with Mitch who negotiated federal funding for their states. Sanders pandered to his party just like every legislative body member toted along.

I disagree with my fellow gun owners that there shouldn't be changes made to gun laws. The system as it stands is not perfect and the NRA idea that no changes should be made I simply don't subscribe to. I don't blindly eat every bullcrap spewed from the NRA. I can never subscribe to any political lobby whose majority of funding comes from corporations.

I for one am interested in either Webb or Sanders as the democratic frontrunner.

 

[rodell]

I'd be happy to talk a deal. What will the other side "give"? Nothing? Never mind.

 

[Heywood]

My idea of "middle ground" when talking to democrats about gun control is this.
Democrats should not own guns! They make up about half the voting public so we would split gun ownership right down the "middle".
It would do them good to be able to square their personal life in line with those they vote for. They will be forced to do exactly what their betters which have their support want them to do.
It would also make gun crime almost disappear because if not for inner city democrats and their children. U.S. gun crime would be much lower than that of all the euro trash countries they idolize. It's a win win win win. Run on that honesty Bernie and you will have my vote.

 

[alphapygmy]

Hard to read but gets to the point.

 

[Caveman Jim]

its a quick read, I promise.... but its pertinent to the discussion for anyone who thinks there is a "middle ground"

http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-repost.html?m=1

Awesome read and right on the money!!!! I'm gonna share the HeII out of this!!!!

If you vote for a D, then you should give up your 2A rights because you are essentially trying to take away mine and yours!!!!!

 

[308]

I'm good with this kind of middle ground



"U.S. Senator Mike Crapo and I hold one of the two signs that Jett Corrections Consulting LLC donated to the City of Greenleaf. Waiting now for ITD to give us the OK to put them up, as over-reaching Federal rules actually go so far as to dictate how many city-maintained signs we can have"
https://www.facebook.com/JettCorrectionsConsulting?fref=photo