Your idea of “flexibility” is completely disregarding what my starting position is. Try harder.
You’re really looking at the small picture here. What is good for “pro-gun America” might be bad for “America”, or at least detrimental to “America”.
Really, after handguns are banned, I’m pretty much fine with whatever else you guys want. I assume you don’t want Stinger missiles in the garage or a .50 cal mounded by your chimney.
If it helps, what other concessions would you like to have from my side?
Why do you want handguns banned?
And, given the slippery slope that gun-banners work so hard on, it’d go from Handguns to “guns easily converted to handgun size guns” in a few years. Which is pretty much all of them.
IOW, you have no idea what I was talking about and zero comprehension of what I wrote. Well…not like it’s a big surprise, ehe?
It’s pretty obvious that you don’t get it actually. Your points are irrelevant…though I have to say at least you didn’t toss in a drive by link as well.
Muggers are humans…but so what? Handguns are designed to kill or at least subdue and/or suppress other humans…again, so what?
As for the extremes…do you not get it that asking people to give up all handguns via another ban IS an extreme position to those in favor of the right to keep and bear arms?? The thing is, if this were the first and only request for a ban then you’d be perfectly reasonable in your request for a compromise on this…but it’s not. In fact, we’ve had a pretty slippery slope on the banning issue as left wing types have repeatedly tried to expand any crack they see in the 2nd…and in many cases in pretty cowardly ways by essentially trying to interpret it out of existence. Had we not had this history of lefties trying to worm their way into a complete and total ban then your position would be reasonable. As it is…it’s not and it’s really no big shocker to me that the right wing type feel the way they do on this issue. Any hope of compromise has been tossed out the window by your side, and now ANY attempt to put in new legislation is going to now be fought tooth and nail to the death.
It didn’t HAVE to be this way…but that’s how it is now. Just like there are some things the left will fight to the death on with no compromise (and in many cases because the right backed them up against the wall on it).
So, to answer your question, no…it’s not acceptable. And believe it or not I’m a MODERATE on the whole gun control issue. The REAL rabid types are looking to not only NOT compromise on this but to roll back the clock and the legislature to open things up even more. I’d say most people are somewhere in the middle with me…which means that when your side tries new bans they are going to fail in the same way that right wingers are going to fail to get abortion outlawed. You guys should ACTUALLY try and compromise on this and hold the line at registration and the curbs that are in effect today.
But you won’t, will you (‘you’ being defined as those on the anti side)? You guys will keep pushing, ehe?
-XT
No slope needed for this exercise.
Besides, how common and how expensive are such guns that are easily converted to handgun size guns? Really, if that’s the case, they should be on the table as well, but I’ll look past that class of weaponry as well. In a real debate, I would see no reason to take them off the table as well, but I’d like to see SOME resolution here.
Then fix your definitions. We’ll have this battle for decades to come until someone decides to sack up and make some compromises.
Your failure to be flexible isn’t my problem. It’s mucking up the whole debate. Furthermore, I don’t care what “lefties” have done in the past. Really, let’s get to a solution here.
‘You want the bullet in the back of the head or in the heart? WTF? You need to pick! Why won’t you compromise…??’
Good luck with that.
-XT
I appreciate the well wishes.
Interesting saying, there. I didn’t know guns actually did kill people.
Yes, I’m just being a pain with that last joke there.
You didn’t answer my question "Why do you want handguns banned? "
One can take just about any shotgun or rifle, cut back the stock and cut down the barrel, and you have a gun about the size of a large handgun.
here’s a film replica of such a weapon:
google-image of “sawed off shotgun”
The thing is, from my perspective you are being completely unreasonable. I HAVE compromised…and so has the pro-gun side (which, btw, I don’t agree with completely either). I have no problem with registration of fire arms. No problem with waiting lists or even bans on certain types of military use only firearms (automatic weapons for instance), no problem with heavy restrictions on carrying firearms in public, etc. I don’t have problems with gun CONTROL in fact, even though I think it runs counter to the spirit of the 2nd.
Yet it’s never enough, is it? The anti-gun folks just keep pushing and pushing, wanting more and more compromise…and it’s pretty obvious by now to even the stupidest person that the ultimate goal is outright banning or restrictions so heavy that most citizens wouldn’t be able to own ANY guns. Or be like our Euro buddies and only be able to use or own them for very small, niche oriented activities (like in Britain with their gun clubs).
That’s no compromise.
-XT
FTR, today my 1895 Nagant revolver was delivered right to my door. It’s a 1943 production model from the Tula arsenal. This is still the greatest nation on Urth. I see no reason to give away my rights to own such interesting curios in some ill-advised attempt at compromise with people who aren’t bargaining in good faith.
Before I even consider any anti-gun legislation, I would want a guarantee that_if it were enacted_anyone proposing any further anti-gun legislation would be hanged by the neck until dead. Unless the anti’s are willing to pledge their lives that this is absolutely the last gun legislation ever, I will never believe that there is any compromise possible. They’ll always be back for more sacrifices on our part.
Compromise. OK how about this.
Gun registration. Register your firearm and get grandfathered in. The gun registration cannot be used to track down or confiscate the gun if the particular type is ever banned.
This should be transferable if the gun is ever sold, inherited or otherwise given away, unless sold to a felon or other person not legally able to own the weapon.
I’m moderate on the issue. As others have stated here, they don’t trust the people that want to take away guns. And frankly, I doubt something like this would work either, considering how our legislators like to bend and reinterpret laws. Chicago passed a law stating that handguns would be legal as long as they where registered. Then pulled a switcharoo and stopped registering handguns. Bada-bing bada-boom… Your handgun is not legal because it’s not registered. ‘Cause you can’t register it.
Many of the gun control people say they want registration ONLY to help law enforcement. I don’t think this would help a bit myself, but if that’s the only reason for the registration, and it did not encroach on my privacy, AND, It was iron clad (good luck with that).
Banning handguns is a deal breaker for me too… Just like the AWB.
Was say LOUNE?
I give your position as much credibility as you have given to mine. I’ll try again though, there is nothing that I would trade or accept in lieu of banning all handguns.
I don’t disregard your position, there is just nothing that you can offer in compromise. So besides outright banishment of any types of gun, what else is considered on the table?
Simple, remove the 1986 ban on select fire gun production.
Reduce the restrictions on purchasing said guns as well as short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, etc.
Take away from states the ability to add more restrictions then on the federal level for said guns.
Trade all of that for closing the gun show loophole.
Who’ll work with you? With all the Republicans in power, expiration of the 94 AWB was the only thing that happened. Bush’s 89 ban stands as does Clintons Executive Order against China. I’m afraid that the 94 Ban will become permanent and the coup de gras will be the end of private sales among individuals (gun show loop hole).
Good question. Nothing but lip service by Bush and company for six years.
There’s a problem with your handgun proposal, LOUNE. It’s specifically unconstitutional. I don’t think it’s really even vaugely reasonable to start a discussion with an unconstitutional request. Do you?
So where did all those amendments come from?
LOUNE
Bolding mine. Good luck with that. But I’m willing to help.
I think, the only way there is going to be any ‘resolution’ is if the anti-gun folks learn a little bit more about guns, and the people that own them.
I own two shotguns. Four rifles, a revolver and a pistol. What would you like to know? I’m open to all questions.
Agree with learning more about guns. I have a dozen or so rifles, the same number of shotguns and about twice that many pistols. Everything from practical to tactical. If you want to ban something, there is a good chance I own it. I too would be happy to educate.