Gun Owners, It's time to stop compromising.

[OKTexas]

Sandy Hook almost did it. But the NRA went on the offensive. So no gun laws for preventing this type of tragedy. What is going to happen, with the continued proliferation of military weapons, is that there will finally be a massacre so horrible that the citizens of this nation will vote in laws as stringent as those in other sane first world nations. Laws that will even effect the type of traditional hunting weapons that I have. So be it, you fools have brought it on yourselves.

I guess you've never been in the military, if you had you would be aware that the weapons available on the standard civilian market are not military weapons. A special license is required to buy military grade weapons. But hey, it sounds good in the propaganda, hey comrade.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

No actually I've followed them like all law the abiding citizens you people want to fuck with. But I agree with the guy in the video, it's way past time to stop even talking about any more gun laws. The ones we have aren't enforced and didn't work to begin with. You want to call people like me an nut go the fuck ahead, I really don't give a shit anymore. Someday you may decide to become part of the solution instead of being the problem.

Who you callin' "you people"?

I don't support a vast majority of gun control laws.

Well then you might want to find a new way to articulate your ideas because your, giving a lot of people the wrong impression.

No, I don't think I will.

There's plenty of fucking space between No gun restrictions, period and No guns allowed. If you can't see that, it's on you, not me - and you'll continue to look like an idiot for making assumptions.

 

[westwall]

Who you callin' "you people"?

I don't support a vast majority of gun control laws.

Well then you might want to find a new way to articulate your ideas because your, giving a lot of people the wrong impression.

No, I don't think I will.

There's plenty of fucking space between No gun restrictions, period and No guns allowed. If you can't see that, it's on you, not me - and you'll continue to look like an idiot for making assumptions.

Not everyone who owns a gun thinks that selling guns to felons as they walk out of prison should be legal.

I can't think of a single gun owner I know, and I know a lot of them, who feel that way. Not one. Everyone I know is interested in preventing felons, mentally incompetent and even irresponsible people (DUI convictions as an example) from possessing weapons.

 

[OKTexas]

Who you callin' "you people"?

I don't support a vast majority of gun control laws.

Well then you might want to find a new way to articulate your ideas because your, giving a lot of people the wrong impression.

No, I don't think I will.

There's plenty of fucking space between No gun restrictions, period and No guns allowed. If you can't see that, it's on you, not me - and you'll continue to look like an idiot for making assumptions.

Not everyone who owns a gun thinks that selling guns to felons as they walk out of prison should be legal.

Talk about making assumptions, fuck off.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Well then you might want to find a new way to articulate your ideas because your, giving a lot of people the wrong impression.

No, I don't think I will.

There's plenty of fucking space between No gun restrictions, period and No guns allowed. If you can't see that, it's on you, not me - and you'll continue to look like an idiot for making assumptions.

Not everyone who owns a gun thinks that selling guns to felons as they walk out of prison should be legal.

I can't think of a single gun owner I know, and I know a lot of them, who feel that way. Not one. Everyone I know is interested in preventing felons, mentally incompetent and even irresponsible people (DUI convictions as an example) from possessing weapons.

I can't think of a single gun owner that I know in real life who feel that way either.

But that's a logical extrapolation of a lot of the gun nut rhetoric I see on the internet.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Well then you might want to find a new way to articulate your ideas because your, giving a lot of people the wrong impression.

No, I don't think I will.

There's plenty of fucking space between No gun restrictions, period and No guns allowed. If you can't see that, it's on you, not me - and you'll continue to look like an idiot for making assumptions.

Not everyone who owns a gun thinks that selling guns to felons as they walk out of prison should be legal.

Talk about making assumptions, fuck off.

I actually didn't mean to imply that you did think that selling guns to felons should be legal, but re-reading my post, I see I came off that way.

Sorry, I'll re-word it. It was meant as hyperbole.

 

[LuckyDuck01!]

Just because an individual is determined to be mentally stable, doesn't men he/she will stay that way. A myriad of factors can change the mental attitude of an individual (being fired, divorce, cheating spouse, victim of bullying, et cetera).
Bottom line is that there needs to be no more changes/compromises. We gun owners are not giving up our weapons, nor are we going to register.

 

[Abatis]

Sandy Hook almost did it. But the NRA went on the offensive. So no gun laws for preventing this type of tragedy. What is going to happen, with the continued proliferation of military weapons, is that there will finally be a massacre so horrible that the citizens of this nation will vote in laws as stringent as those in other sane first world nations. Laws that will even effect the type of traditional hunting weapons that I have. So be it, you fools have brought it on yourselves.

The NRA didn't quash any gun control initiatives post Newtown, the Democrats, in their infinite wisdom shot themselves in the foot.

With a couple decades of legislative blue-balls built up, they were more focused in poking a stick in the eye of the NRA and 75 million gun owners than crafting a constitutional aw or two that would actually impact the misuse of guns (not by default "gun control laws").

 

[OKTexas]

No, I don't think I will.

There's plenty of fucking space between No gun restrictions, period and No guns allowed. If you can't see that, it's on you, not me - and you'll continue to look like an idiot for making assumptions.

Not everyone who owns a gun thinks that selling guns to felons as they walk out of prison should be legal.

Talk about making assumptions, fuck off.

I actually didn't mean to imply that you did think that selling guns to felons should be legal, but re-reading my post, I see I came off that way.

Sorry, I'll re-word it. It was meant as hyperbole.

What did I say about articulation? I'm done.

 

[Plasmaball]

Colion Noir says here many of the things that I have posted here and other places many times in the past.

Gun Owners have compromised. It's time to stop.

Gun Control: "Compromise" Colion Noir for NRA News - YouTube

based on what? they have an inventory check by the feds every 17 years or so

 

[SwimExpert]

and pass a mental health and criminal background check

We really need to get rid of this nonsense about mental health.

Guess you would not be able to buy a gun, eh?

It's nothing to joke about. Bigotry and ignorance regarding mental health are spreading like wildfire in our society. It's becoming an increasingly convenient scape goat, all the meanwhile demonizing people unjustifiably. You know several people in your personal life who have or have had real mental health problems. You may not know it, but they are there. They are all around us. All of us.

At the end of the day, their health issues are none of your business, or my business, and most especially the government's business. People are now talking about government maintained databases of people with mental health diagnoses, and wanting to cross reference the same in order for a person to be able to own a gun. And if you aren't scared shitless of such an idea then you need to wake the fuck up. Doctors should not be reporting people's health to the government, and the government should not be legislatively revoking constitutional rights based on their whimsical evaluation of your personal health.

 

[FA_Q2]

Sandy Hook almost did it. But the NRA went on the offensive. So no gun laws for preventing this type of tragedy. What is going to happen, with the continued proliferation of military weapons, is that there will finally be a massacre so horrible that the citizens of this nation will vote in laws as stringent as those in other sane first world nations. Laws that will even effect the type of traditional hunting weapons that I have. So be it, you fools have brought it on yourselves.

And your side continues to make that asinine claim all the while failing to show a single law that would have impacted Sandy Hook. Not one.

Us ‘fools’ have brought nothing on ourselves except the continued acceptance of our rights and the ability to exercise them. I see that you wish for a time when rights are simply removed out of emotion. Unfortunately for you, that time is not likely to be coming in the near future.

 

[FA_Q2]

I do remember that law, and I remember the rhetoric from the gun nuts about it.

I remember people burning their NRA membership cards over that "compromise", and joining GOA instead.

And the GOA heralded itself as the "No Compromise" gun rights organization and has maintained that hard line ever since, correct?

But I do understand the point you're making - I'm kinda using a faulty definition of "gun nuts".

Well you must be using it wrong cause you own more guns than anybody here so that means that you just can't be an anti-gunner . . . you're just one of non anti-gunner good guys that refers to gun rights people as "gun-nuts'.

Really where's the problem?

I didn't say that I own more guns than anyone here. I said I probably own more than you.

I refer to people who refuse to compromise in any way on gun control laws as "gun nuts" - which is why my definition is a little faulty, considering my initial post in the thread.

The mistake that you make is assuming that the majority of gun owners, let alone Americans in general, are "gun nuts".

Your definition is asinine to say the least. Refusing to compromise after a thousand other ‘comramises’ have already been met is not ‘nuts.’ It is sane.

There is no end to this either. As soon as the anti-gun crowed gets a new law they move onto the next law they want to pass that violates our rights without any real impact to our safety. What would be nuts is continuing to go down that road. Enough is enough – we have sufficient laws on the books right now. We are not in need of anything more.

If you really want to change gun laws there is an avenue – change the damn constitution. Until then, get off of demanding that you can infringe on others rights without cause. Good luck though – it isn’t going to happen.

 

[JoeB131]

ya but then the dems would say that all gun owners are nut bags and disqualify em all

Any thread on guns on USMB would kind of prove them right.

Usually a gun thread on USMB is the usual suspects talking about all the people THEY JUST CAN'T WAIT TO SHOOT!!!!

 

[JoeB131]

to the OP, when have the Gun Owners, "comprimised"?

Quite the contrary, they've opposed even the most common sense gun laws.

And here's the thing. The NRA used to be for common sense gun laws. Until the Gun Industry realized the only way to stay in business was to sell more guns by stoking fear.


They want crazy people and criminals to have guns so you want them, too.

 

[Politico]

I have proposed a solution here a few times. Instead of registering guns and limiting magazine sizes and whatnot, we should register gun buyers.

If you apply to be a gun buyer, and pass a mental health and criminal background check, your name goes on a list. Sort of like those people who can now get pre-screened before flying.

If you wish to purchase a firearm, the retailer simply looks to see if your name is on the approved gun buyer list. If it is, you can buy as many guns and any size magazines you wish, and no record is kept of what you bought.

If you are a certified nutjob, your name does not get on the list and you cannot buy a gun.

If you are on the list, and then get convicted of whatever crime the people of your state decide warrants your removal from the list, then you are taken off the list.

If you are on the registered gun buyer list, it does not necessarily mean you have bought a gun. Nor does it indicate how many guns you own. Nor does it indicate how much ammo or magazines you own. It just indicates you are an upstanding citizen whose Second Amendment rights shall not be infringed or taken away without due process.

The fact that you would have to register in the first place and be granted permission from the government upon said registration is already an infringement of your right.

A right is inherent. If you need permission from some bureaucrat then it's not a right, is it?

Leftytoons don't care about rights. They just want all guns confiscated.

 

[RandallFlagg]

I have proposed a solution here a few times. Instead of registering guns and limiting magazine sizes and whatnot, we should register gun buyers.

If you apply to be a gun buyer, and pass a mental health and criminal background check, your name goes on a list. Sort of like those people who can now get pre-screened before flying.

If you wish to purchase a firearm, the retailer simply looks to see if your name is on the approved gun buyer list. If it is, you can buy as many guns and any size magazines you wish, and no record is kept of what you bought.

If you are a certified nutjob, your name does not get on the list and you cannot buy a gun.

If you are on the list, and then get convicted of whatever crime the people of your state decide warrants your removal from the list, then you are taken off the list.

If you are on the registered gun buyer list, it does not necessarily mean you have bought a gun. Nor does it indicate how many guns you own. Nor does it indicate how much ammo or magazines you own. It just indicates you are an upstanding citizen whose Second Amendment rights shall not be infringed or taken away without due process.

Unconstitutional. If the Supreme Court found poll taxes an unlawful Constitutional activity for voting which is not completely a right, why would requiring tests for ownership of firearms be constitutional? Who writes the test? Who administers it? Who controls it? Who modifies it?

There is no compelling Government interest in compelling citizens to be tested to use their Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

Indeed, Gunny, indeed…….

 

[Iceweasel]

to the OP, when have the Gun Owners, "comprimised"?

Quite the contrary, they've opposed even the most common sense gun laws.

And here's the thing. The NRA used to be for common sense gun laws. Until the Gun Industry realized the only way to stay in business was to sell more guns by stoking fear.

They want crazy people and criminals to have guns so you want them, too.

'Common sense gun laws', defined by agreement with you, naturally. It wasn't fear that drove up gun sales, it was the elections of a left wing extremist to the White House. More of a get 'em while you can philososophy. I personally bought a few "high capacity" weapons when I thought Hillary might win. And if she does this next time, guns will continue to fly off the shelves.

 

[zeke]

to the OP, when have the Gun Owners, "comprimised"?

Quite the contrary, they've opposed even the most common sense gun laws.

And here's the thing. The NRA used to be for common sense gun laws. Until the Gun Industry realized the only way to stay in business was to sell more guns by stoking fear.

They want crazy people and criminals to have guns so you want them, too.

'Common sense gun laws', defined by agreement with you, naturally. It wasn't fear that drove up gun sales, it was the elections of a left wing extremist to the White House. More of a get 'em while you can philososophy. I personally bought a few "high capacity" weapons when I thought Hillary might win. And if she does this next time, guns will continue to fly off the shelves.[/QUOTE

You got you all those fine guns but forgot to buy the balls to use them. You, like Flagg, are all fucking talk all the time. If you were not all mouths, then the revolution would be underway.

What the fuck are you guys waiting for? Be a leader. Form your militia and get the revolution started.

I'm getting tired of all this promise and no action. What are YOU waiting for?

 

[JoeB131]

to the OP, when have the Gun Owners, "comprimised"?

Quite the contrary, they've opposed even the most common sense gun laws.

And here's the thing. The NRA used to be for common sense gun laws. Until the Gun Industry realized the only way to stay in business was to sell more guns by stoking fear.

They want crazy people and criminals to have guns so you want them, too.

'Common sense gun laws', defined by agreement with you, naturally. It wasn't fear that drove up gun sales, it was the elections of a left wing extremist to the White House. More of a get 'em while you can philososophy. I personally bought a few "high capacity" weapons when I thought Hillary might win. And if she does this next time, guns will continue to fly off the shelves.

I don't know, guy, I htink laws that would prevent Joker Holmes and Adam Lanza from buying guns are pretty much common sense to most people except for the NRA...