ReadyontheRight
Member
Ratzinger P38 -- The problem is that the folks who do not like liberty want to use your good intentions to hurt your ability to protect your rights.
compromise on AWB II?
- Thread starter Ratzinger_p38
- Start date
- Status
Neo-Luddite
Member
NO compromise---that road leads to hell.
Just a little appeasment is what we should do, right? Give the polls something to throw at the anti croud? No silly--send them away. They can develop an interest in regulating somethig else to their profit and psycho-sexual jollies. Controlling others is their game.
Peddle that snake oil elsewhere--send the feelers out somewhere else.
I'm becoming indignant and rude, so I'll shut up now.
Just a little appeasment is what we should do, right? Give the polls something to throw at the anti croud? No silly--send them away. They can develop an interest in regulating somethig else to their profit and psycho-sexual jollies. Controlling others is their game.
Peddle that snake oil elsewhere--send the feelers out somewhere else.
I'm becoming indignant and rude, so I'll shut up now.
lacoochee
Member
Thanks to the internet these bills are no longer settled behind closed doors with NRA lobbyists and Republicans compromising on our basic liberties. Moveon.org thinks it owns the Democratic party but they don't in fact it's moderate gun rights Democrats who do. Just look at the last election almost every one of the winning Democratic candidates ran to the right of their Republican opponents especially on Gun Control. We may in fact now be in a stronger position than we were before the last election at least in so far as our gun rights go. We now have a voice in both parties. (hopefully)
Ratzinger_p38
Member
"black rifles" if by that "they" mean military weapons, covers my entire collection (be it all pre-1946). I have a big stake in this - I almost fell out of my chair that the M1 Carbine was listed by name (I intend to get it and an M1 Garand before the end of the year from the CMP). I could care less about hunting rifles, and for that guy Zwhatever saying its a fair compromise, no way.
As for Brady , after 1994 they almost seemed to cease to exist. The revolt of gun owners killing the Ds in the 94 mid term elections has, at least on the main stream, seem to have resulted them being left with their diehard core.
As for Brady , after 1994 they almost seemed to cease to exist. The revolt of gun owners killing the Ds in the 94 mid term elections has, at least on the main stream, seem to have resulted them being left with their diehard core.
Derby FALs
Member In Memoriam
I would most like to see them ban everything and start the confiscations while I'm still breathing.
billwiese
Member
Understand that many of the horrific provisions in HR1022 were intentionally put in to be thrown away as part of compromise.
We're actually standing in a better political position than when first Fed AWB was passed, and about in the same condition as when attempts to renew the sunsetting Fed AWB failed in 2004. Remember we took down a Speaker of the House and several other congressman (and Senators, IIRC) due to the last AW.
The mainstream media has even noted our unity in taking down Jim Zumbo, so they know it's gonna be a fight.
'Cosponsors', btw, don't mean doodly. These people are the ones that are gonna vote for the bill anyway and just join up for some feel-good.
I'm really interested in why the orig poster wants to surrender right off the bat. The tone of his post is either that of a Bradyite/AHSA shill, or someone clueless like Zumbo who thinks the 2nd Amendment is about hunting but now thinks his hunting guns may be in danger.
I live in CA, where lack of support by "the duck hunters" and the "it hasn't touched my Garand or M1A" crowd directly caused our 1989 Calif named-AW ban to just get thru by the skin of its teeth (1 vote!). It formed the infrastructure of the later features ban (SB23) in 2000 - which has led to the arrests of several M1A owners.
BTW, some of the work we are doing in CA managing to bypass parts of CA's bans (which are a mix of statutory law, regulatory code and court decisions plus DOJ regulatory history) has actually affected the wording of the proposed Federal ban. Our CA Deputy AG from our DOJ Firearms Division was in continuous contact with the Bradyites and LCAV and I believe the Fed wording was updated via this path.
At this point, if a Fed ban does go thru, I sadly must say I almost HOPE for "hunting guns" to get banned as retribution for the 'duck hunters's' support of the Bradyites. Maybe that'll force 'em to get a clue. Remember, 870s are considered AWs in some proposed AW laws.
Bill Wiese
San Jose CA
We're actually standing in a better political position than when first Fed AWB was passed, and about in the same condition as when attempts to renew the sunsetting Fed AWB failed in 2004. Remember we took down a Speaker of the House and several other congressman (and Senators, IIRC) due to the last AW.
The mainstream media has even noted our unity in taking down Jim Zumbo, so they know it's gonna be a fight.
'Cosponsors', btw, don't mean doodly. These people are the ones that are gonna vote for the bill anyway and just join up for some feel-good.
I'm really interested in why the orig poster wants to surrender right off the bat. The tone of his post is either that of a Bradyite/AHSA shill, or someone clueless like Zumbo who thinks the 2nd Amendment is about hunting but now thinks his hunting guns may be in danger.
I live in CA, where lack of support by "the duck hunters" and the "it hasn't touched my Garand or M1A" crowd directly caused our 1989 Calif named-AW ban to just get thru by the skin of its teeth (1 vote!). It formed the infrastructure of the later features ban (SB23) in 2000 - which has led to the arrests of several M1A owners.
BTW, some of the work we are doing in CA managing to bypass parts of CA's bans (which are a mix of statutory law, regulatory code and court decisions plus DOJ regulatory history) has actually affected the wording of the proposed Federal ban. Our CA Deputy AG from our DOJ Firearms Division was in continuous contact with the Bradyites and LCAV and I believe the Fed wording was updated via this path.
At this point, if a Fed ban does go thru, I sadly must say I almost HOPE for "hunting guns" to get banned as retribution for the 'duck hunters's' support of the Bradyites. Maybe that'll force 'em to get a clue. Remember, 870s are considered AWs in some proposed AW laws.
Bill Wiese
San Jose CA
Dan from MI
Member
Here's my compromise.
You don't vote for this ban, then I won't vote your butt out of office. Deal?
You don't vote for this ban, then I won't vote your butt out of office. Deal?
Compromise is the reason that freedom is only a shadow of its former self in the USA.
So you compromise and give up a little freedom now, and they come back at you again after the dust settles, and you compromise again, and again and again until the invisible chains of slavery weigh you down so heavily that you can't move.
No compromise. I would rather get this system of slavery out in the open instead of pretending we are free; at least then it would be clear what we are up against, and we would know that we did not participate in our own demise.
So you compromise and give up a little freedom now, and they come back at you again after the dust settles, and you compromise again, and again and again until the invisible chains of slavery weigh you down so heavily that you can't move.
No compromise. I would rather get this system of slavery out in the open instead of pretending we are free; at least then it would be clear what we are up against, and we would know that we did not participate in our own demise.
Ratzinger_p38
Member
Bill Wiese, as the original poster, read my follow up posts.
I am not as 'defeatist' as you might think - but im concerned. But we all knew this day was coming, as the left has occasionally brought up the AWB.
Youre right though - there are too many guys like me - collectors of C&R military arms - that will lay down in defeat because it doesnt affect *our* guns. (the hunting types are even more guilty of this).
I am not as 'defeatist' as you might think - but im concerned. But we all knew this day was coming, as the left has occasionally brought up the AWB.
Youre right though - there are too many guys like me - collectors of C&R military arms - that will lay down in defeat because it doesnt affect *our* guns. (the hunting types are even more guilty of this).
Titan6
member
'As for Brady , after 1994 they almost seemed to cease to exist.'
You are so funny!
Not.
You are so funny!
Not.
Ratzinger_p38
Member
''As for Brady , after 1994 they almost seemed to cease to exist.'
You are so funny!
Not.'
Read all of that message - I mean from the mainstream. They are no longer the moveon.org of elections. Youll disagree of course, but that is probably because you follow this much more closely. I did not start collecting antique/C&R arms until a few years ago, but I follow politics closely.
You are so funny!
Not.'
Read all of that message - I mean from the mainstream. They are no longer the moveon.org of elections. Youll disagree of course, but that is probably because you follow this much more closely. I did not start collecting antique/C&R arms until a few years ago, but I follow politics closely.
Titan6
member
Gosh, I just started following politics day before yesterday. Let me go look and see who moveon.org is always quoting and attributing their craziness to...
Oh yeah Sarah Brady, Hand Gun Control inc., The Brady Campaign
So you collect military rifles eh? Tell us a little about your collection. I would love to hear about it and your concerns for it.
Oh yeah Sarah Brady, Hand Gun Control inc., The Brady Campaign
So you collect military rifles eh? Tell us a little about your collection. I would love to hear about it and your concerns for it.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
You can't compromise with someone who is only interested in taking something away from you and giving you nothing in return. All they can give you is a meaningless promise not to take away everything you have right now - and since they have already told you they plan to take everything, there isn't much sense in that compromise.
Now say I want the 1934 NFA overturned and we compromise by just overturning 922(o). That is a compromise.
"I don't want you to have any firearms; but right now I will only take these firearms" is not a compromise. It is literally feeding the crocodile feet first.
Now say I want the 1934 NFA overturned and we compromise by just overturning 922(o). That is a compromise.
"I don't want you to have any firearms; but right now I will only take these firearms" is not a compromise. It is literally feeding the crocodile feet first.
thexrayboy
Member
Compromise with anti freedom proponents is not possible. What they consider compromise is actually an agreement to take less of your freedom at this point in time. You cannot negotiate with an opponent who has nothing to give in exchange. To even consider compromise with these people is to grant them power and position. We must never under any circumstances willingly compromise with those whose goal is to destroy our freedom and enslave us. Doesn't matter whether you are talking about the bradyniks or radical islam. The end result is the same. We lose.
Anti 2A people enter the political arena knowing they cannot lose. For them the worst outcome when they propose a restrictive bill is they don't win, if it does not pass they didn't actually lose anything, they merely failed to win.
We need to start pushing our congresscritters to start proposing legislation that actually rolls back restrictions and laws controlling arms. That way the antis will understand the feeling of "i could actually lose".
Compromise is the flag bearer of defeat. When you compromise you open the door to defeat. If something is truly worth fighting for it is worth fighting for 100% to the bitter end. Otherwise whats the point of even starting the battle.
Anti 2A people enter the political arena knowing they cannot lose. For them the worst outcome when they propose a restrictive bill is they don't win, if it does not pass they didn't actually lose anything, they merely failed to win.
We need to start pushing our congresscritters to start proposing legislation that actually rolls back restrictions and laws controlling arms. That way the antis will understand the feeling of "i could actually lose".
Compromise is the flag bearer of defeat. When you compromise you open the door to defeat. If something is truly worth fighting for it is worth fighting for 100% to the bitter end. Otherwise whats the point of even starting the battle.
BADUNAME14
Member
The gun grabbers won't ever stop trying to take the guns. Don't be deceived. They want ALL the guns. Every gun ban that there ever was is just a stepping stone to the next. All gun owners should be on the same page here. Don't ever think that your bolt action hunting rifle can't be labeled as a "sniper rifle". Don't think your target rifle is just a "sporting" rifle. They want ALL the guns. And you're right, it's about control. It's a bit harder to tell a man with an AR-15 what to do and how it will be than an unarmed man, don't you think?
Ratzinger_p38
Member
You know, there would be an easier way for the goverment to 'control' guns without having to stomp on our rights -
Similar to what was done with the 03 Springfields, m1 garands and m1 carbines, they allow X ammount a year done through CMP - once they are 'obsolete'. The military doesnt have to sell surplus M16s, full auto M14s (still alot of those around) m4 carbines, mp5s and such until they decide to, as perhaps only the m14s are obsolete (although, after I got out of the Army, a handful of guys were issued them in iraq from what I hear). The m16 has proven its worth to the Army, plenty of those were made in the 70s (esp ones used in basic training) are still around - so in theory this might be awhile.
Similar to what was done with the 03 Springfields, m1 garands and m1 carbines, they allow X ammount a year done through CMP - once they are 'obsolete'. The military doesnt have to sell surplus M16s, full auto M14s (still alot of those around) m4 carbines, mp5s and such until they decide to, as perhaps only the m14s are obsolete (although, after I got out of the Army, a handful of guys were issued them in iraq from what I hear). The m16 has proven its worth to the Army, plenty of those were made in the 70s (esp ones used in basic training) are still around - so in theory this might be awhile.
Titan6
member
-- errr???
I am not smart enough to understand your idea without more words.
Edit: Oh I get it. Troll. Stick a whole bunch of gun names in there with a bunch of other nonsense. NAP....
I am not smart enough to understand your idea without more words.
Edit: Oh I get it. Troll. Stick a whole bunch of gun names in there with a bunch of other nonsense. NAP....
hagar
member
I have a good compromise: if you are a politician and vote for anti gun laws, we will throw your backside out of office. If you vote pro-gun, you might get to keep it..
He's talking about government intervention to limit the supply of firearms manufacturers can sell to us poor peasants. Good way to not have any firearms. You heard others say it and I will say it: THERE CAN BE NO COMPROMISE.
So long as I am a citizen in good standing I should be able to buy any rifle/shotgun/handgun I want whether it's a single shot or full fledged machine gun.
So long as I am a citizen in good standing I should be able to buy any rifle/shotgun/handgun I want whether it's a single shot or full fledged machine gun.
Neo-Luddite
Member
OK-I'm going to watch a test pattern for a while until my head clears.
This is my third attempt to post to this thread, the other 2 were too X rated to allow my conscience to hit the post button.
Folks! If we allow the government to tell us what Rights we are allowed to have, then are they Rights?
If we allow the government to demand that we get permission from them to exercise our Rights are they Rights?
If they can tell us that we can not have firearm "X", then we have no leg to stand on when they come for "Y"
If the anti-Rights, anti-Liberty, anti-Freedom, anti-Gun commies in this country insist on waging war against the people of this country, I just as soon use my M1a, FAL, AR15, AK47 to fight back, rather than give them up and use my SKS and M1 carbine 5 years later.
If your Liberty is worth bending over for the anti-Liberty people in this country, I wish you well, may your lube be plentiful and may you get a little kiss on the cheek when your rape is over. May history show that you and your ilk were just a Zumbo like side bar in the restoration of this country's Liberty.
I really think that the Rats in DC have no clue what kind of turd storm that they will start, if they are successful in shoving this down our throats. Our job TODAY is to hammer them with post cards and phone calls, let them know that if they do this, we will not passively obey. They need a little health fear of those of us that hold votes and guns.
Or we can ask the NRA to help us formulate a compromise so we can at least shoot our pet guns once or twice a year:banghead:
Folks! If we allow the government to tell us what Rights we are allowed to have, then are they Rights?
If we allow the government to demand that we get permission from them to exercise our Rights are they Rights?
If they can tell us that we can not have firearm "X", then we have no leg to stand on when they come for "Y"
If the anti-Rights, anti-Liberty, anti-Freedom, anti-Gun commies in this country insist on waging war against the people of this country, I just as soon use my M1a, FAL, AR15, AK47 to fight back, rather than give them up and use my SKS and M1 carbine 5 years later.
If your Liberty is worth bending over for the anti-Liberty people in this country, I wish you well, may your lube be plentiful and may you get a little kiss on the cheek when your rape is over. May history show that you and your ilk were just a Zumbo like side bar in the restoration of this country's Liberty.
I really think that the Rats in DC have no clue what kind of turd storm that they will start, if they are successful in shoving this down our throats. Our job TODAY is to hammer them with post cards and phone calls, let them know that if they do this, we will not passively obey. They need a little health fear of those of us that hold votes and guns.
Or we can ask the NRA to help us formulate a compromise so we can at least shoot our pet guns once or twice a year:banghead:
- Status
