Why don't politicians roll back gun control?

[g.willikers]

We need a Constitutional Amendment that requires all laws to expire unless renewed by a 2/3 majority.

 

[mgkdrgn]

Why don't politicians roll back gun control? Because it is antithetical to the process of ever expanding government. When the people can arm themselves with impunity, government cannot act with impunity.

Woody

Amen Brother.

Do you folks know that to this day, a pilot can still not fly their airplane into Washington National Airport? The ONLY airport in the nation (world?) off limits to private (and that includes everything from Piper Cubs to Airbus 320's) aviation.

What does that mean in terms of "security"?

Nothing. What danger is a private airplane on the ground at National airport? And any aircraft flying into the "circle of doom" that =meant= to do any harm would either be flying too low to be detected (like 50' over I-95) or too fast to be intercepted before they got to where they were going.

Just "security theater" leftover from 9/11 that is now there, and we'll never be rid of.

 

[clutch]

We need a Constitutional Amendment that requires all laws to expire unless renewed by a 2/3 majority.

I think I could support that.

 

[Mike OTDP]

What do you want rolled back? Seriously, part of the problem is that too many of us are so terrified of change that we would rather do nothing at all.

Let's be honest. Are we going to get NFA'34 repealed outright? Probably not. Can we get suppressors moved off it? That's do-able, especially if you transfer them under a NICS check. How about a national preemptive act? That would be a Godsend to a lot of people - but every time it's mentioned, people go into hysterics.

We can be our own worst enemies.

 

[Ignition Override]

Sunray's comments put some of the other comments in a nutshell.

And imagine the avalanche of money from Bloomberg/Soros which would smother any politician trying to abolish any gun control law(s).

 

[Warp]

The politicians in my state have been rolling it back for years, as it pertains to carry (which is really darn important!)

What do you want rolled back? Seriously, part of the problem is that too many of us are so terrified of change that we would rather do nothing at all.

Let's be honest. Are we going to get NFA'34 repealed outright? Probably not. Can we get suppressors moved off it? That's do-able, especially if you transfer them under a NICS check. How about a national preemptive act? That would be a Godsend to a lot of people - but every time it's mentioned, people go into hysterics.

We can be our own worst enemies.

I've never even heard of a national "preemptive" act. Can you link to any THR threads on that topic?

(note that national reciprocity is not a national "preemptive" act)

 

[monotonous_iterancy]

The politicians in my state have been rolling it back for years, as it pertains to carry (which is really darn important!)

I think that counts more as "creating new opportunities" for gun rights, as opposed to restoring what we've lost. From what I understand, even in the 20s and early 30s before we had any federal gun control, most states had laws forbidding concealed carry. I could be wrong though.

 

[Warp]

I think that counts more as "creating new opportunities" for gun rights, as opposed to restoring what we've lost. From what I understand, even in the 20s and early 30s before we had any federal gun control, most states had laws forbidding concealed carry. I could be wrong though.

Call it whatever you want, my state has been eliminating laws that infringed, in a very meaningful way, on a daily basis, my ability to bare arms.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

Where do you live? Here in Michigan, things have been "rolling back" for quite a while, compared to the 70s. Shall issue, castle doctrine, and many other small items that improve the Right to Bear Arms, and most citizens' personal security for this state have taken place in the last 15 years.

It's still a blue state, so that means many more haven't made it to fruition, but the fight goes on and I'm encouraged by the results.

 

[hammerklavier]

As warp said, the politicians in many states have been rolling back gun control. In NC they eased conceal carry laws considerably, allowed hunting with silencers, and eliminated Durham's gun registry. Now if they would only make silencers "shall issue".

 

[Thermactor]

At the very least, they ought to roll back the NFA's provision for suppressors. Those shouldn't be regulated - its asinine to regulate them. They reduce nuisance and preserve hearing. Come on.

 

[Warp]

Where do you live? Here in Michigan, things have been "rolling back" for quite a while, compared to the 70s. Shall issue, castle doctrine, and many other small items that improve the Right to Bear Arms, and most citizens' personal security for this state have taken place in the last 15 years.

It's still a blue state, so that means many more haven't made it to fruition, but the fight goes on and I'm encouraged by the results.

At my listed location <--- of Georgia.

 

[toiville2feathers]

There are 2 hot button issues that are filled with emotion and frustration. They are the second amendment and abortion. If these were rolled back they would have to address the important issues and tell us what they would do to solve them .
But they use the 2ammendment and abortion to muddy up the water and play there smoke and mirrors game. They've got us hobbled into this stupid partisan politics and leading us down a path by a ring in our nose. The politicians will never roll those 2 issues back!

 

[harrygunner]

I always figured it was ego. If one can remove established law someone else introduced, then, his/her law could be removed.

Politicians instinctively reject such a concept.