Would You Trade One Gun Law For Another?

[WrongHanded]

So clearly many of the Democrats want further restrictions on firearms, in all manner of ways. The Republicans stonewall of course, but what if they were to trade instead? Is there anything you'd want that would be worth trading for?

How about legal concealed carry in all 50 States, in any and all government buildings that do not have a secure and guarded perimeter. With full reciprocity, so none of this State by State legal mess of what you can and can't have where. If it legal to carry in your State, and you have a permit, it's legal anywhere. Would that be something you'd trade for?

 

[wiscoaster]

Trade that for what for example?

 

[Blue Jays]

This is indeed a good question and one that I would need to ponder a bit more.
The whole idea of negotiation is one needs to give something to get something.

Thus far gungrabbers want us to sacrifice this, that, or the other with nothing in return.
It sure would make life easier if one could holster their weapon and drive where we wish.

If in return we standardize new firearm purchases (not gifts) be done by someone 21+ y.o. for example?
They already have thousands, and thousands, and thousands of pages of legislation they could trim.

 

[N555]

Put removal of the hughes ammendment on the table and I would talk.

 

[CapnMac]

Well, that's probably what "our" side ought to be doing.
"They" want to raise the buying age, fine, then repeal the Hughes Amendment.
"They" want longer NICS checks? Remove silencers from NFA.
They "ask big" we ought "ask big" too,

​

 

[MosinT53Hunter]

No. People in power have already taken away so much, its never enough.

You say, we get constitutional carry in all states, without permits or licenses. What do we give up?

Registration of all firearms, limits of 10 rounds or less, home and business inspections of where firearms are stored and confiscation if "they" deem necessary.

If people used common sense in making laws, then there is wiggle room. I havn't seen anything as of yet to make me believe that trading one gun law for another would do any good.

 

[DustyGmt]

Not sure I understand but I have recently been thinking that I could probably get behind a 21 age limit for firearm purchases on the condition that they drop the issue there. That would be a good trade in my opinion. We have some young men who join the service at 18 and are indeed "men", but in the last 30 years something has changed. Kids just out of high school aren't "men", they're sniveling lil crybaby wussy la la types who can't let go of the ribbing they took in high school so they shoot up a place. We might all be better off if we gave these new generation of kids a lil time to grow up and let go of the high school vendettas....

Totally just my opinion, I'm certainly not in favor of any additional firearm restrictions so don't flame me for my opinion, but if I was gonna trade something, that'd be it. Sadly that's not how this thing works, but hypothetically, that'd be my compromise

ETA: I fully understand the hypocrisy here, we take away 2nd Amendment rights for people of legal adult age, but ask them to go die in war, subject to drafts, legally eligible to vote, etc... in this scenario I would also be willing to move the legal age to 21 in all those cases as well. 18 year Olds just aren't what they used to be.....

 

[TomJ]

No, as more guns laws will not correct the problems we have. I would prefer that the politicians who are pro 2A push for solutions that will actually help with the same amount of intensity that the anti's attack the 2A. They can start by pushing back against the defund the police movement which has led to rapes of adults in Seattle not being investigated due to manpower shortages, DA's in blue cities not prosecuting violent criminals, doing away with no bail laws, stop releasing violent criminals early, etc. There's a reason that the cities run by anti's have among the strictest guns laws in the country and the highest crime rates (Chicago, New York, LA for example). The end game for the anti's is the abolition of the 2A. Nothing short of them will appease them.

 

[tommy.duncan]

How about legal concealed carry in all 50 States

What state regulations do they want to follow??
California?? Hawaii?? Illinois??

No matter what we would be willing to give up we would still lose.

How about a sunset clause if the new law doesn't work??
How about any congressman or congresswoman loses their tax payer funded armed security if they vote to take away my constitutional rights??

 

[N555]

Hughes ammendment abolishment for 21 and up firearms sales, dew it.

 

[tommy.duncan]

I could probably get behind a 21 age limit for firearm purchases on the condition that they drop the issue there

Remember, at 18 you can join the military or be drafted.
But, 18 year olds are mature enough to vote... Children who are even younger can chose their gender...
This makes it harder for me to be willing to allow this to go through.

 

[rust collector]

Never say never. If there is a proposal, I am willing to listen. In this atmosphere of emotional outcries fueled by the usual suspects, however, I see little in the way of potential concessions because all guns are bad and cause bad things to happen. If we can limit the emotional manipulation by the politicians, media and shadowy figures pressing the buttons, there might be some chance of a mutually acceptable compromise.

 

[DustyGmt]

Remember, at 18 you can join the military or be drafted.
But, 18 year olds are mature enough to vote... Children who are even younger can chose their gender...
This makes it harder for me to be willing to allow this to go through.

Refer to the last paragraph of my very recently edited post. As soon as I posted I had to go and edit to clarify, I think 21 being the "new" legal adult age could be a good thing in more ways than one.

 

[TomJ]

If I were negotiating this I would start by insisting that any laws they pass apply to everyone equally, including all politicians and celebrities as well as their security details. I don't know how eager they'd be to have their security details protect them with 22's, as Biden thinks is sufficient.

 

[tommy.duncan]

Refer to the last paragraph of my very recently edited post. As soon as I posted I had to go and edit to clarify, I think 21 being the "new" legal adult age could be a good thing in more ways than one.

I read and responded before your edit, Now we are on the same page!!

 

[WrongHanded]

Trade that for what for example?

I'd seriously consider UBIs and a mag cap limit (grandfathering existing mags) of 15 rounds. But that's just me. You can argue against those points if you want, I'm more interested in the responses from others though.

 

[starnbar]

Negotiate your constitutional rights ha ha Thomas Jefferson would have you put in irons for sedition is that what the citizens of this country will settle for negotiation? Not this citizen there is a reason for the 2nd amendment and it is not for compromise or negotiation.

 

[TomJ]

I'd seriously consider UBIs and a mag cap limit (grandfathering existing mags) of 15 rounds. But that's just me. You can argue against those points if you want, I'm more interested in the responses from others though.

The issue with grandfathering things is that we're retaining our rights while giving away the rights of future generations. I will not do that to my kids and grandkids.

 

[Scooter22]

While I know it's blasphemy to suggest giving in on anything anti gun. I think we are at a point something needs to give or we may really lose everything. And now we have a "George Floyd" moment that REALLY puts the public squarely against guns. Especially AR15 based guns which is the anti's poster child which have been the "mass" shooters choice. Why? IMHO it's the gun that is used in all the shooter games and it gives these wackos a 24/7 instruction using them even if they have never used a real gun. Plus I think that gives the marginal wacko a sense of empowerment that yes they can actually do this. And some do. I don't know why the violent shooter games haven't been blamed but IMO they are a big part of the problem with mentally unstable people. Our local NY state gov is voting on that you have to have a 5 year permit to own ANY semi auto rifle. So we need to more of something than nothing. Because the anti's are doing something and getting it done with a majority of the public behind them.

 

[WrongHanded]

What state regulations do they want to follow??
California?? Hawaii?? Illinois??

I suppose the Republicans drafting the bill would figure that out. But the permitting requirements would probably (as I mentioned on another thread somewhere) end up something akin to a hunter safety course with a background investigation included.

 

[SC45-70]

Raise the buying age to 21 in exchange for national conceal carry with no exceptions and also repeal the entire 34 NFA.
SC45-70

 

[WrongHanded]

The issue with grandfathering things is that we're retaining our rights while giving away the rights of future generations. I will not do that to my kids and grandkids.

That is a good general point Tom. However, living by the law in Colorado, I've not bought any magazines over 15 rounds since the law was passed. I personally haven't found it to be a big deal. I don't know how much it mattered to people in the early and mid 1900s that they didn't have the level of capacity (commonly available anyway). I do see what you're saying, I'm just not sure whether future generations will really be disadvantaged if they can't have 30 round magazines.

It's certainly a point worth pondering though.

 

[AlexanderA]

The whole idea of negotiation is one needs to give something to get something.

Thus far gun grabbers want us to sacrifice this, that, or the other with nothing in return.

Exactly. I'm afraid such "deals" and negotiation are no longer possible, because matters have become so polarized. As long as guns are in the realm of policy, the two sides can talk. But guns have now transcended policy and are seen (by both sides) in stark moral terms of black and white. The antigunners want complete disarmament, and will not rest until they get it, while the pro-gun side sees guns in existential terms, as a matter self-preservation and self-autonomy.

That said, the professional politicians may still have a role to play. Most of them don't care about guns, per se, but they say whatever they think is pleasing to their constituents. That is, they're at least one step removed from the heart of the issue. Get them in a smoke-filled room, and something may come out that nobody will like. (Sounds exactly like the discussions among the SCOTUS justices, to be honest.)

 

[TomJ]

That is a good general point Tom. However, living by the law in Colorado, I've not bought any magazines over 15 rounds since the law was passed. I personally haven't found it to be a big deal. I don't know how much it mattered to people in the early and mid 1900s that they didn't have the level of capacity (commonly available anyway). I do see what you're saying, I'm just not sure whether future generations will really be disadvantaged if they can't have 30 round magazines.

It's certainly a point worth pondering though.

A 10 round magazine limit was a concern when I lived in the Chicago area given that a significant percentage of violent crimes we saw were committed by 4 or more criminals, including the last three shootings in the suburb I lived in. How things were 75 to 100 years ago are not relevant to the issues we're facing today.

 

[Fyrstyk]

The dems are going to seek all of their pet proposals put into law. The republicans should counter with a bill for term limits for both the congress and senate. Then let the negotiations begin to see what the dems are willing to "compromise" on.