A reasonable compromise?

[Bailey Guns]

You hit the nail on the head.

At least it wasn't my thumb this time...

[theGinsue]

I quit reading after the first paragraph because even that has FAIL written all over it.

A REASONABLE COMPROMISE?

As it seems that the current administration is determined to place rather extreme restrictions on firearm ownership in the immediate future, I recently posted about the Draconian and Byzantine nature of the New York gun control laws which apparently are being utilized as the template for new legislation. It seems rather asinine to attempt to force NYC gun laws on the residents of rural Kentucky, Arizona, and Alaska, yet that is what has been proposed . . . and there is a very real possibility President Obama may approve that proposal and even bypass Congressional oversight to sign it into law via Executive Order without fully considering the fact that any citizen who failed to comply in full with such a decree could have their Rights of citizenship stripped from them and face the threat of imprisonment. Never before in the history of our nation has the power of Executive Order been abused in such a punitive and ill-considered manner, and I truly hope that does not occur in this instance.

First, the red NON-Bold text: Whether our government wishes to treat them as such or not, an EO is NOT a law. Only the Legislative Branch (ie. Congress) can make laws.

Next, the bold text: To say that they've failed to consider the ramifications of such a decree, causing citizens to be stripped of their Rights is naive. They have absolutely considered the potential for those who fail to comply - and they're counting on it. Look at all of the realistically misdemeanor offenses that are now classified as felonies for proof of this intent. The ultimate goal is control and disarmament of the citizenry by any means possible. To demonized a citizen by permanently classifying them as felons they effectively neutralize them for life. Our "leaders" know precisely what they're doing.


As far as much of the remainder of the post, I quickly scanned it and I am not impressed. Licensing either firearms or firearms owners (FOID cards in IL is an example of this) is another means of both control and setting up a database to know who to target for confiscation & or imprisonment later. What's to stop the authorities from making unannounced visits to verify full compliance of the laws - under the auspices of "public safety" at any point in time? NOTHING! I you want the people to maintain any power over the government you need to maintain the anonymity of firearms owners.

The only compromise that should be occurring is the .gov stepping away from the Rights infringement they seem so hell-bent on performing.

ETA: It's not a compromise when only 1 side has something to lose.

ETA2:

I never got past "law by executive order". Uh, no... executive order is not and cannot be law. This retarded president and vice president think if they say something in executive order, it will apply to everyone. Short of directing employees within the executive branch, they mean NOTHING.

Glad I'm not the only one who caught that.

[sroz]

At least it wasn't my thumb this time...

None of us want compromise. I think we just want our current laws enforced & individuals held accountable for their actions. Unfortunately we most likely will see some changes. Btw, glad your thumb is ok.

[Bailey Guns]

I'd rather be dead than give another fucking inch.

Furthermore, I'm getting to the age where the inevitable actually does seem inevitable. More so than if was still in my 30s. So the thought of that doesn't bother me as much as it might have at one time.

[NMB2]

You'll have plenty of time to think about it yourself in jail. Unless you're dead.

I very well may die, but I will never spend a day in jail.

Good point. Yea, we all know about making flat statements. They sometimes leave us few options with none of them being very pleasant.

None of us want compromise. I think we just want our current laws enforced & individuals held accountable for their actions. Unfortunately we most likely will see some changes. Btw, glad your thumb is ok.

You have already submitted, you don't deserve any of our freedoms.

[MOD: Let's not take this to personal attacks]

[DOC]

None of the proposed laws would have prevented any of the shootings. How am I suppose to compromise with that?

[NMB2]

It is VERY important for us like-minded to understand that the Liberals/Progressives are not the only dangerous people to the 2A. You equally need to worry about people that mascaraed around as Constitutionalists, 2A supporters. Really, they are nothing but limp wristers that will take what uncle sam will give them.

... they will try to convince you that more compromise is the answer, and that there is no other choice. They are blue falcons, and they are cowards. FMedges said it yesterday.... cowardice spreads like a disease. You need to distance yourself from these types of people. They will sell you out, and they will get you killed.

[sroz]

You have already submitted, you don't deserve any of our freedoms.

I haven't submitted to shit. Careful, you're starting to sound like the libs. Remember that our rights are GOD-given. They not granted by the gov AND not by you (sorry to be the one to break that to you). So, you do not get to determine who deserves our freedoms. You would have much less success attempting to do so than the gov. Just chill and carry on with your debate without all the drama.

[NMB2]

I haven't submitted to shit. Careful, you're starting to sound like the libs. Remember that our rights are GOD-given. They not granted by the gov AND not by you (sorry to be the one to break that to you). So, you do not get to determine who deserves our freedoms. You would have much less success attempting to do so than the gov. Just chill and carry on with your debate without all the drama.

hahahahahaha.... you're such a blue falcon its not even funny. Anybody that reads your posts can see that, don't try to backpedal now.

[Ridge]

I'm already subjected to many minor inconveniences:

• Fill out a federal form to buy a gun
• Submit to a background check

I didn't really think any of us had a problem with making sure criminals can't buy guns.

• Wait, possibly several days, for the "InstaCheck" to be completed
• Which might entail an additional trip to the gun store

That is because of the market, not the government.

• I'm told by the government where I can take my gun
• I'm restricted by the government as to how I can carry my gun
• I'm charged a fee by the government if I want to carry my gun in a certain way

I can understand annoyance with those.

• I can't have certain guns because the government doesn't trust me

Again, I agree. It's an illegal law, and needs to be rectified.

• I have to pay an astronomically, artificially inflated price to own certain guns or accessories

Again, that is free market, not because of the law.

• I have to pay taxes non gun owners don't have to pay

Such as?

• I'm vilified by the media because I like guns
• etc, etc, etc...

Sticks and stones

So you can take your additional "minor inconveniences"...somewhere else.

Besides...it's not like we're going to have any say on whether or not any particular anti-gun law is passed. Well, I guess we'll have a say...it's just nobody's listening or cares.

I'm suggesting that by going on the offensive and volunteering to regulate ourselves, we can have laws passed by people who will be affected by it, people who know what they are talking about, versus some jackass half way across the country who is talking out of their ass and making laws over things they don't understand.

There WILL be anti gun legislation passed this year. I'm trying to limit it's negative effects on the law abiding.