iceberg
Diamond Member
- May 15, 2017
- 36,788
- 14,921
- 1,600
We know a few shooters got guns because of a failed background check. Do you at least agree with that?I fully realize the hardline stance and agree with most. A compromise to me is fixing a proven background system and ensuring those passing gun laws are properly trained the topic not pandering to their base in confused gun jargon that is flat wrong.great. but since it's a group decision in the end....i disagree also - not sure if i actually said that - but my reference was the (2) extremes going at it. most of us in the middle are willing to compromise if the extremes would shut up.
i think we agree more than disagree so i'm going to hush and read more on your opinions now.
I don’t negotiate my rights away.
You want to opt out of yours, go for it. Mine aren’t for sale.
As a member of the "group", I'm not interested in compromising crap. If the other side wants to come to me with a REAL, verifiable problem and suggest a REAL solution to it with some actual proof that it will produce a substantial positive net result, then we can talk. But horse-trading away my Constitutional rights for nothing more than to sound conciliatory and be able to say, "Look, we made a deal!"? No. Uh uh. No way. Not a chance.
Yeah, that's a compromise to me, too, and I believe I already expressed my opinion of compromises.
If it's now "hardline" to insist that changes to the law actually be necessary and demonstrably beneficial, then I don't see where we have any grounds even for discussion, because how can there be discussion with people who find facts and evidence to be unreasonable?