Gun Control promise

Hell no.

Nope.

What's so right about California?

How 'bout this: They promise to leave us alone IF we would accept the laws of Arizona?

I'll vote for that.

Now seriously, there have been a rash of threads lately where members here are asking us all if we can just unite together and offer the antis a sacrifice of good faith and hand over ____________ firearm or accessory. I think it is an emotional reaction born out of fear and misunderstanding. Don't let the fear of these people get the best of you. Don't concede an inch, make them win it at the ballot box. Do all that you can to defeat them there.

The last thing we all need is someone in our own ranks surrendering and stepping across the line to join with the fascists who would disarm this nation. I don't know why it is that some people feel the need to change sides when they feel like the tide might be turning. It's not.

No.

Watch your lane.

wasn't this kinda what happened with the GCA and NFA? Seems like after a while they always want more.

How do you propose we hold them to that promise?

What has been our past experience with politicians following through on their promises?

No. You can't even shoot or carry a slingshot in California.

No.
And we wouldn't know what was in it until it was signed anyway.

Not a chance, because they would never keep their word. They would fabricate some reason.

Nope. Not a chance.

Um, no!

No no no and no!!!!

CoRoMo said everything I would say, so I'll just add another heartfelt "Hell NO!"

Nope

Why do these questions about surrender and appeasement pop up periodically?

Another vote for,

[X] No.


If I wanted cali gun laws I would move there.

never

Never!! Ever!!

Hell No! It is fitting reply for a first post here.

Hell no

Not a chance in hell.

For further elaboration see post #3

Only If.

Only if it was like Vermont Firearm Laws.

Red Cent said:

If the heavy hitters of GUN CONTROL would forever promise to leave us alone...

Click to expand...

Would you accept the same promise from V. Lenin or Mao Tse Tung or Ho Chi Minh or Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez? They are the same people.

No, because restriction laws (of any type) are like potato chips: hard to stop at just one. Heck, Acevado in Austin wants the legal booze limit lowered to .05 (I'm no drinker, but part of one drink would make me one in that world).

Why can't we just prosecute (and defend against) violent crimes, reckless driving, and keep an eye out for weirdos in our neighborhoods? Seems simpler than trying to out-manuever every stupid/crazy person's stupdity/craziness.

As far as folks not wanting, or feeling the need, to defend themselves (as civilians)? It's just laziness; pure, good 'ol top-o-the-heap American laziness. Many don't want to think about all the problems that plague our nation, let alone deal with them directly. They'd rather trust some unseen Overseer to do it for them (or to at least say they'll do it for them). Ignorance is both Bliss and Laziness.

TCB