jfh
Member.
This topic brings a few issues to the front.
The first is that currently accepted conventional wisdom is that
1. We will have a Democrat Party control of both houses of Congress and a Democrat President. As a result, a new Gun Ban bill is a certainty.
I wouldn't count on that just yet. Those of us old enough to remember the 1968 Democrat Convention in Chicago see the seeds for that kind of failure. Personally, I think the "power group" structures in place will prevent that--but it can't be counted out.
And, if one considers the two probable candidates / one of whom will be elected--I am not so sure McCain cannot win. (I like him about as much as I like Hilary, but he offsets the power and control from Congress.)
Personally, I bet on no "ban" bill--but a "gunshow loophole" is probably a certainty. The trouble is, for it to have any real teeth in it is virtually impossible, given the 2nd Amendment incorporation issues, and the pending Heller decision.
2. While I will never dismiss the capability of politicians to overreach when they have a mandate, it does appear that the Democrat Party so far may have actually learned the political lesson of the 1994 AWB.
It is important to understand that even if they were to pass a new ban, it will not be exhaustive. The so-called "loopholes" of the '94 AWB were carefully planned. The only way all loopholes would be closed would be if they overreach.
3. There have been fundamental changes in the public values about self-defense--both personally and as public policy: For the latter, we have 9/11 to thank. On a personal level--other than in isolated enclaves, we are winning the public discussions of a right to self defense, with firearms.
The "assault weapons" myth and political definition is the only one that stuck--and that is the pro-gun group's fault as much as the antigunner's success.
There is now a twenty-year success record for citizen carry. Again, it is only in isolated enclaves that it remains an issue. It is this success--when the non-active voter (the sheeple, as it were) knows this more, it will return to being a non-issue, as long as there is not widespread abuse by carriers. That citizen carry success is responsible for advancing firearms back into the public consciousness in a way that no hunter or marksman has been able to do during this time.
Now, I grant you, it is fun for people of like mind and perspective to get together and hand-wring--but it isn't necessary. IMO.
Jim H.
The first is that currently accepted conventional wisdom is that
1. We will have a Democrat Party control of both houses of Congress and a Democrat President. As a result, a new Gun Ban bill is a certainty.
I wouldn't count on that just yet. Those of us old enough to remember the 1968 Democrat Convention in Chicago see the seeds for that kind of failure. Personally, I think the "power group" structures in place will prevent that--but it can't be counted out.
And, if one considers the two probable candidates / one of whom will be elected--I am not so sure McCain cannot win. (I like him about as much as I like Hilary, but he offsets the power and control from Congress.)
Personally, I bet on no "ban" bill--but a "gunshow loophole" is probably a certainty. The trouble is, for it to have any real teeth in it is virtually impossible, given the 2nd Amendment incorporation issues, and the pending Heller decision.
2. While I will never dismiss the capability of politicians to overreach when they have a mandate, it does appear that the Democrat Party so far may have actually learned the political lesson of the 1994 AWB.
It is important to understand that even if they were to pass a new ban, it will not be exhaustive. The so-called "loopholes" of the '94 AWB were carefully planned. The only way all loopholes would be closed would be if they overreach.
3. There have been fundamental changes in the public values about self-defense--both personally and as public policy: For the latter, we have 9/11 to thank. On a personal level--other than in isolated enclaves, we are winning the public discussions of a right to self defense, with firearms.
The "assault weapons" myth and political definition is the only one that stuck--and that is the pro-gun group's fault as much as the antigunner's success.
There is now a twenty-year success record for citizen carry. Again, it is only in isolated enclaves that it remains an issue. It is this success--when the non-active voter (the sheeple, as it were) knows this more, it will return to being a non-issue, as long as there is not widespread abuse by carriers. That citizen carry success is responsible for advancing firearms back into the public consciousness in a way that no hunter or marksman has been able to do during this time.
Now, I grant you, it is fun for people of like mind and perspective to get together and hand-wring--but it isn't necessary. IMO.
Jim H.