Republicans are not restoring crap!

[cuchulainn]

The RKBA will be repaired the same way it was harmed. Bit by bit, slowly.

We make the same political mistake in calling for "all or nothing" that the antis made in the 1960/1970s when they called for complete bans rather than incremental regulation.

 

[LAR-15]

Any DC members want to chime in?

What say you?

 

[R.H. Lee]

We make the same political mistake in calling for "all or nothing" that the antis made in the 1960/1970s when they called for complete bans rather than incremental regulation.

That may be true if it were happening. What are the Republicans actually doing to rollback restrictive legislation? Or are they just riding on their constituent's faith that they're not outright gun banning Democrats?

 

[pcf]

Alaska is a perfect example of how jumping up and down, screaming like a kid getting pulled out of a toy store, about any legislation that doesn't fit into an utopian gun rights agenda, is the best way to accomplish a goal. Thanks to mindless internet ramblings, Alaska, went overnight from no CCW to CCW without needing a permit.

LAR-15, I'm glad your looking out for the citizens of DC. If the citizens of DC can't have it your way, the right way, of course, they shouldn't have the ability to keep loaded firearms in their home for self defense? 2 inches by far outways being robbed, raped, beaten, and murdered.

 

[LAR-15]

So when they go outside of their house the bad guys will get them then because they can't CCW.

They claim they are restoring the SA rights of DC citizens while in reality this bill picks and chooses what rights will be restored by Congress.

And there are two codes restricting firearms in DC. They are only amending one.

 

[cuchulainn]

R.H. Lee: What are the Republicans actually doing to rollback restrictive legislation?

I wasn't defending the Rs -- I was describing how the RKBA will be repaired, incrementally. However, FWIW, the Rs are trying to make an incremental step in the right direction, and it seems silly to try to stop it with "all or nothing" protests.

Similarly, the wave of "shall issue" CCW is an example of the incremental approach to the RKBA. Although I agree with those who say we shouldn't need any permit whatsoever to carry, I see "shall issue" as a interim step.

LAR-15: They claim they are restoring the SA rights of DC citizens while in reality this bill picks and chooses what rights will be restored by Congress.

That's how incrementalism works. It ain't perfect, but it's better than leaving things alone.

 

[pax]

Looks like there are a lot of Democrats on this site, who once became Reagan Democrats/Republicans during the Reagan era, then back Democrats during Clinton, and then back to Republican for Bush 2000 and now when something goes wrong the claim they are Libertarians.

Never voted Democrat, ever. Never will.

Voted Republican for a long time. Never will again.

Personaly to me, a libertarian is a moderate, who tends to side with Democrats on most social issues, and Republicans on many economic issues. Pick a side already.

There's no "personally to me" about the word libertarian. It has a specific meaning.

A lot of people think the political spectrum is only "left=liberal/Democrat" vs. "right=conservative/Republican."

In truth, the political spectrum is best represented not by a line, but by an axis of two lines. One line (left-right) represents social issues. The other line (up-down) represents fiscal issues. One end of each line is maximum freedom; the other end is maximum government control.

Dems generally score towards individual freedom on the social scale, and towards government control on the fiscal scale.

Repubs generally score towards government control on the social scale, but away from government control on the fiscal scale.

Because libertarians consistently support maximum liberty, in both personal and economic matters, they aren't "moderates" on either scale, and certainly cannot be represented as being halfway in between the two parties when the political spectrum is pictured on a single line.

"Pick a side already." The libertarians did pick a side. They picked liberty.

Fun, quick quiz & more info at http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html

pax

A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. – L Neil Smith

 

[Standing Wolf]

Thanks, pax!

You just said it all and said it very well. I was going to say some of it.

 

[Henry Bowman]

Personaly to me, a libertarian is a moderate, who tends to side with Democrats on most social issues, and Republicans on many economic issues. Pick a side already.

Perhaps what he meant was : "In my experience, those whom I have met who claim to be "libertarians" are really moderates who tend to side with Democrats on most social issues (abortion, prayer in school, etc.), and Republicans on many economic issues." Deep down, these people are liberals who have not yet been mugged themselves, but know people who have. They do not really understand what a libertarian (or Libertarian) really is, but are ashamed to admit that they are leftist liberals.

No offense is intended to those who are genuine libertarians and understand the true definition.

 

[SomeKid]

Dems generally score towards individual freedom on the social scale, and towards government control on the fiscal scale.

pax

pax, I would disagree.

The way they view the RKBA, 1A rights regarding worship and politcal speech, and the rights to own property tells me Democrats are really just Communists. They are always for more government, even on social issues.

 

[Zundfolge]

That may be true if it were happening. What are the Republicans actually doing to rollback restrictive legislation?

Over the last ten years we've seen "Shall Issue" CCW explode across the country, the Clinton AWB died with a mighty whimper, Alaska went to "Vermont Style" CCW, and the house and senate just passed protection from frivolous law suits.

I guess since they didn't pass that one piece of legislation that did away with every gun law back to the 1911 Sullivan Act the first day Bush was in office ... clearly they are a bunch of "Do-Nothings".

 

[walking arsenal]

wow, y'all bitter much?

Have some coffee, try decaff.

 

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

I say support the law. Give the beseiged residents of DC access to basic firearms. Lord knows they need it. With the murder rate the way it is, every day of delay could mean the difference between life and death for good, honest, desperate people.

Then we can work on the finer points like NFA weapons. But the people of DC need self defense NOW. Let's not make them wait simply because they won't be able to buy a machine gun (which most of 'em would never buy anyway...)

We can either support the law because it grants us 99% of what we want. Or we can oppose it because it fails to give us 1% of what we want. Which makes more sense?

 

[cbsbyte]

Perhaps what he meant was : "In my experience, those whom I have met who claim to be "libertarians" are really moderates who tend to side with Democrats on most social issues (abortion, prayer in school, etc.), and Republicans on many economic issues." Deep down, these people are liberals who have not yet been mugged themselves, but know people who have. They do not really understand what a libertarian (or Libertarian) really is, but are ashamed to admit that they are leftist liberals.

No offense is intended to those who are genuine libertarians and understand the true definition.

You are right. I probably have never met a true Libertarian. It seems alot of people broadly use the term libertartian to describe anyone who does not support the current political trend, or only support one aspect of it's ideaology, I.e personal freedom. Many of these people are moderates or liberals who do not know the Liberatrian idealogy but call themselves one because it sounds better than being labled a conservative or liberal. And no, I do not any problems with true libertarians. I agree with many libertarian view points, but I will not discrace libertarians by call myself one.

Charles

 

[rick_reno]

Voted Republican for a long time. Never will again.

Pax - Me too, since Nixon. The current Bush cured me of that affliction. I should write him and thank him.

 

[RealGun]

So they claim in this bill they are 'restoring Second Amendment rights' in DC and prohibiting the DC govt from restricting firearms YET they are still allowing the DC govt to ban NFA items?

I hope this bill does not pass. It also still states a 'sawed off shotgun' in DC is less than 20 inches.

Do something that will help all gun owners.

I think this bill does help all gun owners, big time. If Congress was going to tell States that they could not ignore the 2A, wouldn't DC be the place to start? Congress governs DC, so first the hypocrisy has to be removed.

 

[BigG]

EDIT: I came a little late to the party but I had no trouble getting his drift.

Looks like there are a lot of Democrats on this site, who once became Reagan Democrats/Republicans during the Reagan era, then back Democrats during Clinton, and then back to Republican for Bush 2000 and now when something goes wrong the claim they are Libertarians. Personaly to me, a libertarian is a moderate, who tends to side with Democrats on most social issues, and Republicans on many economic issues. Pick a side already.

+1 They want their bread buttered on both sides, it would seem.

 

[Lupinus]

Is the bill perfect? Not by a long shot.

But it is a LOT better then what they have now. A step in the right direction is better then nothing. More will get done but it takes time if you have to compromise a bit to get your foot in the door and get things rolling you have to compromise a bit. Or would you prefer the redicules ban to continue because the bill isn't perfect?

 

[DeseoUnTaco]

So they claim in this bill they are 'restoring Second Amendment rights' in DC and prohibiting the DC govt from restricting firearms YET they are still allowing the DC govt to ban NFA items?

I hope this bill does not pass. It also still states a 'sawed off shotgun' in DC is less than 20 inches.

LAR-15, I can feel your feeling there. DC residents should not be restrained from owning normal shotguns (18"ers), NFA items, etc. But let's go step by step here. Even a small victory is a victory. Creeping CCW reform is a great example of it. Started in Florida 20 years ago, has spread to about 40 states now, and pressure is building even in California. This is the way to victory. Let's support every law that enhances our freedoms.

 

[Flyboy]

Thank you, pax; you saved me from having to muddle through it.

 

[gulogulo1970]

Are you really griping that DC is finially getting to have handguns, but not NFA items, is not helping the RTKBA cause? Give me a break.

Gotta learn to crawl before you can walk and walk before you can run.

 

[RealGun]

My only concern is what amendments the bill will draw. I don't believe there is any rule that amendments have to relate directly to DC? Anybody know?

 

[Lupinus]

why wouldnt it RG?

 

[LAR-15]

The bill does nothing to address self defense outside the home.

Therefore it is partially worthless.

The Congress has a chance to reform DC's carry laws and won't.

Not even from unreasonable may issue to reasonable may issue

Some type of CCP permit scheme needs to adopted for DC residents.

We should not be following Illinois in regards to CCW laws.

 

[LAR-15]

In the senate any amendments can be added.

Look for Schumer to load it up.