I asked myself a lot of tough questions this election year. What will I go to the mat for? What do I want the country to look like in 20 years? Who am I willing to stand with, and against? In the aftermath of the presidential election, it’s time to ask another question: what direction should the gun rights movement take in this new era of Trump?
We know our legislative agenda. We have a general sense of what our priorities are (recently outlined by John Boch): ensuring the appointment of a pro-gun rights Supreme Court judge. Passing a federal National Concealed Carry reciprocity bill. And removing hearing protection from the NFA list.
The next question: what political price are we willing to pay to enact our agenda?
Even though it ran the table this year, the GOP still only has a bare majority in the U.S. Senate. Assuming we could automatically get all GOP Senators on board for, say national reciprocity or the Safe Hearing Act (which may or may not be a good assumption, as we’ve learned in the past), any legislative accomplishments will require at least SOME Democratic support to achieve the 60 vote margin needed to end a filibuster.
[Note: The political calculus would change if the GOP Senate nukes the filibuster. Not likely or advisable. The filibuster in recent times has protected gun rights more than it has weakened them, as the thankfully ill-fated 2013 vote on the Manchin-Toomey universal background check bill demonstrated.]
We have to be careful, though. The history of legislative compromise with the anti-gun lobby makes for depressing reading.
In 1986, we got the Firearms Owners Protection Act — we lost post-’86 machine guns in exchange for creating an affirmative legal defense that law-abiding gun owners driving through New York City with an unloaded .22 pistol locked in their trunk can raise…after they’ve had their property confiscated, been frog-marched to jail, strip-searched and held for trial on $1m bond. In 1994, we hammered out the Federal Assault Weapons Ban; the “compromise” being the ten-year sunset clause.
Despite the record of those Faustian bargains, I say that the pro-Second Amendment people should move forward with malice toward none and charity toward all to ensure the success of our legislative agenda during the Trump Administration. As I alluded to last year, the gun rights movement does not have to limit itself to only working with the people who self-identify as “conservatives” or even “libertarians.”
Pro-gun rights legislators might consider compromising with others on something non-firearms-related, something that might swing enough Democrats without turning off too many Republicans. A little horse trading might do the trick. What about these compromises?
– To get national concealed carry reciprocity protecting the right of law-abiding gun owners to carry in heretofore verboten areas like New York City, San Francisco, and the great state of Hawaii, would you back a bill that reformed Obamacare instead of ending it?
– Would you fund Planned Parenthood to get hearing protection and SBRs off the NFA list?
– Let’s go bat-poop crazy for a moment: would you support a one-time payment of “slavery reparations” for Black Americans in exchange for the whole enchilada? I mean: concealed carry license holders essentially having the same rights as they would under LEOSA, hearing protectors and SBRs off the NFA list, new machine guns back, Constitutional Carry in Washington, DC, and abolishing the ATF?
My name is (not actually) Johannes Paulsen and I don’t approve the above deals — especially not the last one, which veers into odious straight-out ethnic identity politics (though the cognitive dissonance all-around would truly be epic.) But I am saying that this is the moment to think outside the box in terms of what we’re willing to do and who we’re willing to work with to secure the blessings of the Second Amendment for our generation and beyond.
Maybe the best bet is to adhere to the old conservative/libertarian axis and build outward from there. But let’s at least consider what our options are when it’s time to move forward. We won’t always have the opportunity that we have now.
The Planned Parenthood one is a deal I could actually get behind wholeheartedly.
Partially becuase my Wife is a woman who thinks about those sorts of decisions. Personally I do not condone Abortions or anything of the sort but I keep my mouth shut becuase I am not a man and therefore have no say, end of story.
You’re not a man? But you have a wife? I mean, that’s cool and all, chef don’t judge… but something isn’t adding up here…
Abortion has nothing to do with women’s rights; it has everything to do with the value of the babies’ lives. I, as a man, have as much to say about a woman killing her baby inside the womb as I do about a woman killing her baby when it’s a month old.
Actually, no you do not.
Yeah, he does. After a certain undefined point it is a simple act of murder, and he has as much right to intervene as anyone else does.
Believe it or not – We really all agree on this once you set the red herrings from both sides aside.
But the real sticking point always comes down to this – At what point does a fetus become a person?
Hint: Stay away from extremes, and don’t be dogmatic. No one seems to have found the right answer yet, but doing either of the above will guarantee you to find the wrong one.
> At what point does a fetus become a person?
About the only way you could conceivably define it that is 1) clear-cut, and 2) is not based on any religion, is fetal viability.
In other words, if the fetus can be removed from the body of its mother without killing it, and it would survive (assuming it would get full-fledged medical assistance similar to that any grown person would get if they were on a hospital bed, up to and including respirators etc), then that is the point at which it has the right to life; and you may perform C-sections, but not abortions.
This solves the “control of my own body” issue, too, since the mother still has the right to have the fetus removed.
No, you do not.
I have been funding Planned Parenthood for over 20 years. Haven’t you? If not why not? And, Chief Master, someone else’s baby has absolute zero value to me. Pretending otherwise is a fool’s errand.
It sounds like you’re saying there should be no law against mothers murdering their infant children, since acting like those children have value is a “fool’s errand.”
Look. What I’m saying is that the Left has hijacked abortion and made it a “women’s rights” issue. It is not. I’m fairly certain the majority of pro-life folks would agree that a woman should be allowed to do whatever she wants with her body, time, money, etc. The issue of abortion is about whether an unborn child is just as much a human life as a child outside the womb.
Dude, that’s fine to think that way and donate that way, but I think everyone criticizing you is dancing around the elephant in the room so I’ll tell you the secret.
95% of them would want nothing to do with HIS child getting aborted, but if you look at the numbers on the board for Planned Parenthood, the kind of babies getting aborted are those who would grow up to be burning shit down on Ferguson St. The most descriptive part of the PP name is the “hood”
Now when you look at gun rights, that’s MY family, Your family at risk from those very same hood rats and the fascists they elect periodically. If the population growth of the inner city fell to 0, that would be a YUGE win for all of us. There’s a reason crime fell a few years after Roe v Wade.
Once we’ve got our SBRs, suppressor, grenades and machine guns back. After we’ve balanced the budget, built the wall and manned it, etc. After all that, then I will help you save the baby hoodrats. Until then, they are soldiers in the enemy’s camp that never materialize, in a war that we have come very close to losing.
Putting aside the argument of when a fetus is a human life for a second…
You’re saying you’re ok with people being murdered based solely on the fact that their parents are poor and black. I understand that many of them would grow up to be thugs or our political enemies, but some of them will not. I’m not ok with that standard for killing people.
It doesn’t matter what anyone’s stance is on abortion. The fact of the matter is the government shouldn’t use taxpayer money to fund private institutions period. You want to support Planned Parenthood? Great, donate your own money, not someone else’s. I highly suspect everyone bitching about planned parenthood losing government funding never gave them a dime, but instead expected everyone else to through taxes.
^^^^THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS!
Same with Gay Marriage. Remove the state from the institution of marriage and suddenly it becomes a non-issue for most.
So what you’re saying is that the federal government should nationalize Planned Parenthood? ~
More abortions=fewer leftists so its a win/win for us.
Harsh calculus, but true.
I know what you mean. Personally, as a woman, I believe rape is wrong, but I know some men feel differently, so I do not want to cause a scene. I’ll just go along with it. Think of England!
“What Price to Strengthen the Second Amendment?”
Their hide. Stretched on the side of my barn. That’s what the 2nd Amendment’s for. They think about “chucking it”, and we beat them to it.
Since I don’t care about Obamacare or Planned Parenthood or reparations….sure.
Free lifetime abortions for anyone who wants’em. It’ll be cheaper in the long run than dealing with a bunch of unwanted brats. Anything that encourages the snake to eat itself is a win in my book.
Like I would tell my drunken buddies in college “you guys can do whatever you want, just leave me out of it” and everyone is happy.
If you’re not interested in our shared “tomorrow” then I cannot be interested in your “today”.
You pull you’re weight in Societal Agreement. If we’re going to do ‘anything goes’ we’re going to do my version, and I swear you won’t like it.
You could’ve just as easily awoke under a tree this morning and had to fight it out to eek out what you needed to survive the day, with the hope all day that you’d secure the same sleeping spot so that you could do it again tomorrow, instead you got to type in a comment here. That takes a preponderance of the population of where you are (but ultimately of the earth and universe) allowing you to not have to go pick your fing tree every day. It requires the same push back from you. Just because the ABSOLUTE COST, has not immediately befallen you do not think that you can abdicate it without peril. You don’t have to believe that’s the way sh_t works, you just have to look around a little to see it’s played out just like that in many places around the globe [even in formerly advanced countries] (we’re close to seeing some sh_t in Venezuela).
If it doesn’t “affect you” it’s only because you never existed.
When you decide to actually attempt to *enforce* your lunacy, don’t forget to bring your lunch. You won’t be going home.
Lighten up, Francis
I can’t think of anyone of a contradictory opinion during Katrina, I remember a lot of people would have wanted to “lighten up” but it was anything goes in a few key spots, and the only thing that put a border around it was that the limitations on basic human need did not stray very far from the epicenter. You can see the lack of Societal Agreement playing out in thousands of places in the U.S. that don’t require trying to find a ‘riot’, but If you’re worried about “me” enforcing Societal Agreement than you didn’t read what I wrote enough to understand what I’m saying. And it’s not a request for you to stretch your thinking to accept something new. It’s giving you a more accurate depiction and definition for something you already believe in.
If you are at work right now, how did you get there? You only got there because people LET YOU. Why did they let you, because they were not otherwise hampered in their pursuit of basic human need, and you didn’t provide enough impetus of threat for them to interdict you. But that is a tenuous (at best) position, and it could play out either way. Any POS out there could [have] ‘chucked’ Societal Agreement, and you would not have made it out of your house, much less your driveway. What keeps people’s focus on strictly fighting the POS out there is an understanding and belief that YOU are not a POS, that you have shared values, and that you will assist them in upholding those shared values, or else you just get lumped in with the POS.
That’s how it is folks. I didn’t make it up.
I saw a documentary made by the Freakonimics guys on Netflix (forget what it was called), and they gave a reeeeeeeeeeeally compelling theory as to why murders (guns or otherwise) have been plummeting for the last 20 years in the US.
In short, unwanted children are far more likely to live a life of crime. When the mid/late-90’s rolled around, the unwanted pregnancies that were being aborted in the 70’s and 80’s who would have been reaching “trouble-making age” by then, simply weren’t born. Anyway, I encourage anyone with an open mind to check it out…
Might want to check this out with regard to Freakonomics.
https://spectator.org/44970_more-freedom-less-freakonomics/
It’s by John Lott. He argues that the reduction in crime has much more to do with the liberalization of firearm laws.
I’m just being discursive here, but another provocative but rather interesting similar kind of factoid is that global warming has prevent another ice-age . . .
Yes to all.
+1, every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
Bizarro WORLD time. Why trade ANYTHING for a 2A RIGHT? Sure send my wife and kids a freakin’ reparation check…go for the sun,moon & stars NOW. Remember Bury Soetoro had NO Republican votes for Obama care. We don’t need the bastards!
This is the correct answer! The Democrat Party put Obamacare through on a straight party line vote using the reconciliation platform to make it happen. We can do the same thing to them and simply load it up with all the 2A stuff they refuse. Those fools need to realize that one of the major reasons they lost was from listening to Bloomberg and the whole cadre of gun control anti-second amendment nitwits. If they fight us on this they will discover what it means to loose even more members of the Senate in 2018 especially when the math does not favor them in that year. If they hadn’t been 2A stupid they might well have won PA and maybe NC, FL and WI
> Remember Bury Soetoro had NO Republican votes for Obama care. We don’t need the bastards!
Do you think your party will be enjoying full control of the government forever?
And yet you mention Obama. Ponder about that.
I could get behind it all just change reparations to free community college or trade school. Even without the new machine guns I’d go for it. Hearing protection and SBR and reciprocal carry bye bye ATF. Why not? I’m a deal maker not an ideologue.
This is exactly why I voted for the Constitution Party.
Planned parenthood exchange would be easy for me, but not others. The question of reparations is: how much? Where is that money coming from? Are we increasing taxes to pay for said reparations? I’m not willing to get a 5+% increase in income tax to pay for people who have never been enslaved nor have any of us ever enslaved them. Who gets that money? Is there a percentage of blood that must be of African decent? What about other races that could have and probably were?
You’re crossing a very dangerous line with talk like that. Socioeconomics is the issue in these bad neighborhoods. Stop giving them shit and make it easy for them to work for their own shit. Not hard. At the very least, just say sorry to them for not listening. I’ll bet a majority would calm down.
How much? Forty acres and a mule.
We already paid reparations. It was called the Civil War and over a million people paid with their lives and blood.
Bingo.
The only modern reparations I can think of that should.be recognized and is long past due is that owned by all the opportunistic black people that enslaved and abused their own with violence and drugs to this day. All the gangs and squandered freedom have nothing to do with white oppression — just generations of squandered opportunities and poor life choices.
No more hand outs or bailouts please. How much money has been wasted with welfare to date? Lack of personal accountability and responsibility being taken into account.
Unless you can prove someone is oppressing you with the legal definition of “slavery”, I don’t see how reparations are even applicable today,
Stop negotiating!
That is what we’ve been trying to do for the last 90 years.
We negotiate, they win.
FIGHT! Drive them into the dirt.
Someone freakin’ gets it.
The better option is to make it as politically painful for the democrats to block it.
Throw in increased penalties for felon in possesion of a firearm and make NFA items explicitly have to go through NICS. Now they have to be on record as opposing “modernized background checks” and lax penalties for “illegal” guns come 2018. It’s something they’ve done countless times themselves and they could stand to get a taste of their own medicine.
I like this idea. Most legislation has a poison pill of some sort attached to it that forces the other side to make the compromise. I have no problem with continue funding of Planned Parenthood or some other (D) priority in return for really meaningful firearms legislation, but no way in Hell any sort of reparations. Another idea would be to add the firearms owners protection legislation to a law enforcement financial handout bill that is a must-have for the (D) states to continue their speed traps, surveillance cameras, and who knows what else. Or to something else dear to the (D) heart, like NPR funding (well, maybe not. I have a feeling that one is going to be cut to zero.) Some of you would scream at me on this next one, but I would give on mandatory turn-in of guns (to an FFL, with a receipt) if someone has a domestic protection or stalking order, or a significant episode of mental illness. Not the Cali crap of an accusation. An actual order from a judge. If I was so violent toward my wife that she took out one of those orders, I probably should not be trusted with a gun. I don’t have a “bat shit crazy ex” and I don’t come home drunk and stupid from a bar, so for me this one is not relevant. National reciprocity, true protection from harassment while driving in northeastern states, and removing suppressors from NFA restrictions are worth a lot more to me than the possibility that if I go crazy, I might have to face the consequences. A final thought, is there something a National Sheriffs’ Association might want, that is semi-tolerable to pro-2A forces, and could be added to a firearms owners rights bill? I don’t know what it might be, maybe surplus helicopters or Warthogs complete with machine guns and missiles?
The real question here is: can we actually learn from the past?
In the past, we have attempted to work with liberals and progressives on these issues. Every single time they have mouthed words and then taken actions to eviscerate rights, to bypass due process, and to obstruct the exercise of our rights.
While I am generally a go-along, get-along guy, I’m not stupid and I can learn from observation and experience. The left is simply not trustworthy. They will take what you offer then take what they want and then rant about how you’re not being reasonable and won’t compromise. Accordingly, there can be no compromise, no trade-off, no quid pro quo.
No more. Learn from experience. Republican politicians have a majority, a mandate and the power to accomplish great things right now. By 2018 that may no longer be the case. It certainly won’t be the case if they continue to mealy-mouth the left and let the left steal more from the people.
Act now. Pass strong protection and guarantees for the Second Amendment. Appoint many strongly conservative justices who believe in the Second Amendment not as some “collective” right as the socialists want people to believe, but as a personal and individual right just as sacred as the right to free speech and free exercise of religion. This way the right will be protected not for a brief 2-year window until the progressives can further corrupt the system and sow more dissent, but for decades.
The Republicans control everything, and the people have spoken after a long, nasty campaign season where one candidate was openly in favor of increasing gun control laws, and the winner was for 2A freedoms. Our Republican congress critters could take a lesson out of Trumps campaigning: craft a piece of legislation that seems so over the top, so bat shit crazy that the Dems throw a hissy fit and crap the floor. Then, meet them in “the middle” where we get everything we originally wanted, and they get nothing. Because that is how “compromise” works when you’re a great deal maker.
Sounds like a plan!!
As a New York resident, none of these changes will mean a damn thing for me. No matter what “gains” are “negotiated”, a dictator like Gov. Cuomo will simply pass a new law that takes these gains away and the law abiding citizen can go pound sand waiting for the Supremes to decide if they’ll even hear the arguments, much less make a ruling (which will again be ignored at the state level ad infinitum). Without PERSONAL penalties for lawmakers that write/pass legislation and the activist judges that uphold said legislation, any “gains” will be short-lived.
This is why I think we should focus on NFA. Reciprocity will never be acknowledged in the short term even with a law. The anti gun states have relied on NFA to block the really scary guns so they have no laws governing those items currently.
The filibuster is DOA, it only needs a congress to sign the certificate. Tim Kaine alluded to the fact that Dems would have killed it on 1/3/17 if they had won. If we do not kill it and let the Dems obstruct from now til 2020 that’s short sighted on our part. They will kill it if we do not the next time they have the presidency and the Senate.
– To get carry reciprocity, give up on repealing O’care? NO
– To get hearing protection and SBR, give up on defunding Planned Parenthood? NO
– To get “the whole enchilada”, stop fighting slavery reparations? Oh, HELL NO!
These suggestions lack any remote semblance of equivalence. So, will you take a nickel and give me a five dollar bill?
BTW – “The whole enchilada” for me means the repeal or nullification of any and all laws that infringe on the right to keep and bear arms. It’s not a short list of goodies.
I dont think you would have to go that crazy to trade, you just need to hit the right demographics to make it a nightmare to resist.
My suggestion?
A federal law legalizing marijuana with a low federal tax the funds of which go to increasing the federal funding to public and charter schools in exchange for the Hearing protection act and national conceal carry.
Interesting suggestion. Doubtful it will happen, but would be compelling to many.
Reciprocity and two good judges confirmed would do wonders.
OK, for national concealed carry reciprocity I’m willing to offer 8 hours training where you demonstrate safe handling and the basics of shoot, no shoot.
1) – Possibly tied to other legislation the Progs will want passed, it’s time we go for real gun safety.
2) – In schools, K through grade 6, the Eddie Eagle message of stop! Don’t touch it! Get out of the area (run away)! Tell a responsible adult!
Taught by local law enforcement. There is *zero* reason we can’t get that passed. At that age level, actual guns aren’t necessary, pictures and video would be fine.
Is there *any* reason we can’t get #2 passed?
The Second Amendment does not need strengthening, it just needs t be applied as written. “Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American. What clause in the state or (federal) constitution hath given away that important right. … The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”
Tench Coxe, letter to the Philadelphia Gazette, 20 February 1788 explaining the 2nd Amendment’s application.
Same political price they planned to pay for “Assault Weapons” bans, universal registration schemes, etc. NONE! The second amendment is not some piece to be used for political games. It is a right that is granted by God or by natural right (depending on your worldview), not by government, and therefore not open to barter.
No.
Reparations for anybody who has been held in slavery with our government’s blessing?
Yep, our government would be liable for that. But I don’t think any such people exist.
Reparations to somebody for being born with dark skin in a country where the majority color is light pink?
What do they want, a plane ticket “home” to Kenya? What if the Kenyans are too smart to let them in?
For this intellectual exercise… lets go big. We will trade amnesty for all illegals (except for the ones who commited crimes) for full Constitutional carry, SBRs, suppressors, and giggle switches. Anyone who attempts ANY gun control, or supports it, will have a mandatory 10 year prison sentence and all assets forfeited. Further, the path to citizenship will be simplified.
No.
Illegal immigrants commit a crime when they enter the country illegally … thence the name.
I do not condone rewarding anyone for committing a crime. Full stop. I believe the path towards citizenship can be made easier – although serving in the US Military isn’t exactly easy, it’s at least straightforward – but saying “Okay, amnesty” is a slap in the face to all of the people who followed the rules and did it properly.
This I’d be on board with. Since all will be turned into tax payers, no more NFA tax involved.
So how they will vote 99-1 Democratic, they will just vote away any guys we gain.
Maybe if Republicans stopped threatening them with deportations while Democrats promise them a way to legalization, maybe then these immigrants would stop voting overwhelmingly D. I know lots of imigrants personally (both with paperwork and illegal) and most of them align with conservative way of thinking of self reliance and succes through hard work. They could support the GOP – except for their desire not to be kicked out of country they chose as their new home.
Let’s consider some of our own arguments again gun control:
There is great number of guns in the country and even if the Gov. tried to get rid of them it would be logistical nightmare and people would get hurt in process.
It’s fool’s errand anyway as more guns will just get smuggled in faster to fill the vacuum.
Not everyone realizes this, but guns are useful and necessary as they provide important services, it’s hard to impossible to find adequate replacement for them.
Few of those who scream for more and harder laws against guns actually know all the legal hurdles and regulations already on books. They usually have very little knowledge on guns and zero personal experience.
Now try to put in “immigrant” instead of “gun”. Funny, isn’t it?
My answer to all three questions is an emphatic “NO”!
What? Compromise in order to protect my rights?
I thought that the Constitution protects my rights. I didn’t know that I had to horse trade for them or buy them like cheap Chinese goods from Walmart.
2A is either a right or it isn’t. If it is, I’ve already paid for it. We all have. I’m not paying for it again.
Ralph, your points are well-taken. And that’s my point: I don’t WANT another FOPA or Manchin-Toomey. I’d rather find something else to give to the Congress-critters who would ordinarily oppose us to get to 60 votes that doesn’t involve further compromising the right to keep and bear arms and doesn’t cause us to bleed GOP support.
We could remain uncompromising. There’s actually nothing wrong with that. Maybe it will work, somehow. Maybe we could get 60 votes in the Senate after the 2014 midterm. Even if it doesn’t work, we still get to take whatever people Trump appoints to the federal courts, and whatever legacy he leaves on the regulatory state, which will hopefully be good for us. That is, after all, still a ‘win’.
But if we could do an end run around the other side, politically, and help fracture their own coalitions while we’re doing it…well…it’s worth thinking about. No compromise on the 2A. But…oh, you want more money for mass transit in DC? Hmm. Maybe we can talk. That’s all.
would you support a one-time payment of “slavery reparations” for Black Americans in exchange for the whole enchilada?
That is a very interesting question. As someone posted above, a big issue would be “how much,” but a more important question would be “Would this then shut up people like Al Sharpton and the BLM crowd, get them out of our lives, and let the rest of us get on with the business of getting on?”
Unfortunately, I fear not.
Screw those compromises….go the nuclear option.
Don’t be a puss.
There’s some better trades to be made, some non-legislative.
Negotiating NOT prosecuting Hillary Clinton, and perhaps a pardon by Trump for Democrat support or non-hardcore opposition.
Restoring felon voting rights AND $$ to felon gun rights.
Concealed reciprocity WITH opening NICS or some way for anyone who wants to background check to background check- with the added delights of no registry, and even IF there were one, the ability to run false NICS checks to add noise to the data.
This way, Reciprocity is tied to UBC- and eviscerates Bloomberg’s future attempts. Plus, the argument is strong- that people can carry anywhere because we’ve ensured everyone who buys a gun is legal, and if states mandate “UBC” then that is a crime between citizens, with no excuses yet no direct federal issues.
Package reform of asset forfeiture with opening the MG registry or delisting suppressors.
Some educational giveaway or holdoff of cuts/etc. for repeal of GFSZ.
Don’t just make deals- make ones that seem to have a common unifying idelogical thread.
We want justices who support the Second Amendment in its raw form: no one, Congress on down, can make any laws about guns or their accessories or their use, unless it has to do with helping the militia (us) be organized and disciplined.
But at what price? We certainly don’t want justices who are weak on anything else in the Bill of Rights, whether it’s favoring no-knock warrants or any other bit of individual rights. Unfortunately, Trump’s picks so far look weak on a number of our individual rights, so we may end up with a country where it’s fine to carry the gun of your choice — and far more necessary to do so as people hammered by injustice strike back.
Fine with me. I mean, that last one is just stupid but whatever… just take it out of the money that gets blown in places like Chicago anyway.
We need to hold the Supreme Court accountable for decisions that materially affect the Constitution. Our core top 10 first and the other amendments a close second. Then demand accountability when the SJC acts for a Party platform as opposed to for the citizenry. As to 2a, the allowance for regulations have opened the floodgates for Democrat actions against the rights described in Declaration of Independence and other pre-Constitution documents. 2a and the other amendments should be (are) LIMITING and GUIDANCE for government actions and activities not for the citizenry to be governed by.
A.D.D kicking in — on another note, does not the following provide case law for keeping all AR15 and similar style firearms (and military grade weapons) in the market and give cause / case cite to overturn all this copy-cat elimination be regulation? [United States v. Miller (1939), the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government and the states could limit any weapon types not having a “reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia – [this certainly provides some legal precedent that firearms of the type that would be used in military should NOT be limited from public consumption]
I am reminded about the Gun Rights Cake metaphor…. they kept coming back for more and more of my cake and now you are asking me to negotiate with them to get some of *my* cake back? Not just no but hell f’ing NO!
On the flip side… what-if and what-would-you thinking problems like this can be a lot of fun! What political thing do I find distasteful, but not distasteful enough that I wouldn’t allow it as the price for getting something I want. Lets see….
I want everything since the 1934 NFA act repealed, banished, stricken from the record and left to the sands of time to finally erase from our collective memory.
You did say this was a thinking game right? Well I’m going to think big!
Full repeal of all of it, back to Constitutional Carry as the default position Nationwide. (The States can do their own things, that is how it was supposed to work) The Feds get out of the gun control business entirely just the way the Second Amendment intended it to be.
In return I would ‘give’ the opposition….. Some kind of Education Reform. Can’t give free college because that is just a continuation of the race-to-the-bottom. We can do college differently. Lets think differently, specifically lets tell them to think differently and get back to us.,
I would also give them the expansion of Medicare/Medicaid they want. They are going to have to cut foreign aid to pay for it, but they can expand the Medicare/Medicaid system by however much they want as long as they can pay for it without raising taxes.
And even thinking about this as a what-if kind of game I can’t think of too much else I would ‘give’ in return for my rights being left alone.
“Give them nothing. Take from them everything”! From the movie 300.
Man the hell up. We’ve been compromising for far too long. We’ve been pilloried for believing in freedom and the 2A. They were relentless in their attacks on our character and our rights while simultaneously pushing their perversions in our face. No deals, even if it means we don’t get what we want. If you don’t show them you mean business while we have the upper hand they’ll see our weakness and exploit it.
Never, ever compromise your principals. It’s all that separates us from them. Crush them and humiliate them at every turn so that they will finally understand that if you push us we will reciprocate.
Nice guys always finish last.
Soooooo AGREE!!!
Agreed. The time for compromise is over.
Medicare and higher minimum wage is okay but nothing more
None. Obamacare is failed system designed to fail in order to push the USA towards a single-payer healthcare system. If a woman wants to make the decision to have unprotected sex, not take any birth control pill, and then gets pregnant as a result, sure, she can get an abortion, but I’m not paying for it. I don’t want tax payers paying for decisions other people made. I and my family have never owned slaves, what reparations do I, or my family, owe?
I agree with those who say compromise with Dems is a mistake. Though I understand author’s point too. Heller says sensible regulation IS permissible and if you want legislation on suppressors etc., you may not get far without some kind of tussle.
In particular, this Machiavellian realpolitik; I’ll give you free abortions for legal suppressors, really stinks IMHO.
I’d rather see something in line with Greg PR’s recommendation. More legitimate safety regs or training in return for something we want. It’s been about 1 year since I learned about California regs. and have since bought 3 handguns and a 22 rifle. The genuine expert I consulted about the first handgun talked about the “locked in safe” requirement. He complied except for his loaded bedside piece saying, “his kids are out of the house.” Hmmm. OK, but a child risk is still possible.
My preferred approach: Plan out a vigorous offense and negotiate away some of those attacks. Most semi-auto handguns are illegal for sale in CA. That’s tailor made for negating with the interstate commerce clause. Same with the new ammo background check law. The Ninth Circus Court Peruta decision is a clear violation of Heller. Negate it with an executive order.
Keep in mind they (Dem pols) don’t really care about gun violence generally. My favorite part of House of Cards is where Kevin Spacy says to his opponent. “We don’t really give a damn about gun control anyway.” Don’t really care about Chicago deaths. Don’t prosecute felons carrying in Chicago. Obama pardons criminals who were convicted of carrying, displaying, or shooting as convicted felons. They were nonviolent drug dealers, you see!
Dems really DO care about incidents like the original Bundy ranch standoff, where the BLM retreated with tail between legs. Obama promised to create the largest civilian army (e.g. the BLM) and we now have the most powerful gov. in our history.
HPA and removing SBRs from the NFA can be easily removed without risking a filibuster: since the NFA is, technically, a tax, the tax can be repealed via the reconciliation process which cannot be filibustered.
Keep that in mind.
Obamacare? Sure, I’ll make that deal. Reparations? No. Planned Parenthood? Oh F&ck no! In fact, I would be willing to trade the entire RKBA for the criminalization of abortion. It’s a Holocaust. And yes, I realize that most of the people aborted are people that might disagree with me politically or become criminals. Doesn’t matter.
No I wouldn’t agree with any of these proposals. Because history proves that every time you give a liberal A to get B, he takes A, waits a couple years, and then comes after B again.
We just WON, for heaven’s sakes. The last thing we should be doing is offering compromises right out of the chute.
Comments are closed.