Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by HerrGlock, Feb 22, 2013.
Yet, there are gun owners, on this very forum, that won't take the 5 minutes and $30 per YEAR to join.
What I gathered from that article.... It is vital to stand united as one group of pro-firearms movement. Not divide ourselves into splinter groups willing to compromise. Stand with the NRA and refuse to compromise. "Shall not be infringed" means just that.
There are two things I found interesting in the article about the "data" presented. First, of the 25 stakeholders in the gun control-gun rights debate, the data mining marketing group failed to include the mainstream media, the TV networks and newspaper chains that most definitely function as advocates for gun control. The media is the gorilla in the room, yet not once mentioned let alone identified. Without the considerable support of a biased media, the leftist control groups would have much less influence.
The second observation, that Republican politicians are largely absent in the debate is somewhat true but again, the gorilla in the room directs both the debate and those who are allowed to speak. Republican politicians are sidelined from the debate due to lack of fair access to the public through the media.
Hopefully we can stand and fight on a united front, rather than let our right be chipped away over time...then fade into nothingness
There's plenty of info out there on the NRA leading the compromise crew as early as the 1968 GCA on no more mail order firearms. Do a search on this forum as I'm pretty sure I saw it here.
I agree that "shall not be infringed" is seemingly a clear statement but the courts have not held to that standard with rulings that say some regulation does not necessarily mean infringement. We could debate that until the end of time but there is little political traction to really move toward the ideal stated by the Founders.
The problem with the historical results of previous compromises has meant we, the gunowners, gave a lot and got nothing in return. This is where the line should be drawn, along with anything that could support registration and later seizure. If you have to give anything, reach for the brass ring in getting something back. Put it all on the table.
I know the precedent the supreme court has set in the matter. I just got into a big argument with WarCry about it in another thread. My point is if you just stand there and be content with that attack on the clear wording in the Constitution then you are just allowing it to deteriorate further from there.
Agreed - we are singing from the same hymnbook! That's why I say put something you want on the table to create pushback and stop the deterioration. Never allow UBC but let them think it's under discussion while you get back something else of value that restores the "shall not be infringed" concept. I think both of us are saying that the NRA should not just play defense.
There was compromise by the NRA and US gun manufactures on the 1968 GCA. Over mail order guns and importation of foreign made firearms which sold for far less than an American made firearm.
As I recall, the NRA lost a significant number of members over that "compromise".
I wasn't alive in 1968 and if I was I sure wouldn't have supported that.
I hold no water for the mainstream media. They are biased, dishonest, have no credibility with anybody with 2 brain cells. But mostly, they are self interested. They are running businesses. We should not call CNN and others "news", we should call them "entertainment". A pox on their houses.
But, we should also not allow Republicans to use that excuse. If they wanted to take a position and truly defend the constitution as they swore to do, they could do so. They are cowarding in the corner right now, on a key constitutional issue. Republicans continue to prove that they are only marginally better than Democrats. They stand for nothing. Which makes them even more dangerous.