PDA

View Full Version : Hey California: Let me have my High-Caps and Suppressors. Just tax me for them...


Wiz-of-Awd
07-30-2012, 2:17 PM
$1.00 /mag?

Duplicate tax stamp for suppressors?

Seriously, why not guys? Most of the rest of the country can have these things. Many such states neighboring ours, so why not do the prudent thing and create a brand new revenue stream for the Golden State.

You'll make big, big money - overnight. I promise.

A.W.D.

JackRydden224
07-30-2012, 2:21 PM
I was thinking somewhere towards $1 per each round past 10.

$10 a day to reduce gun jail time.

$100 for each gun that's off roster.

But then again, we are talking about the people who ran this state into billions of dollars of debt. They can't possible know how to make money.

Some Guy
07-30-2012, 2:22 PM
I'd be willing to pay sales tax.

Scratch705
07-30-2012, 2:22 PM
don't give them any ideas on how to tax us even further in debt.

Wiz-of-Awd
07-30-2012, 2:23 PM
I was thinking somewhere towards $1 per each round past 10.

$10 a day to reduce gun jail time.

$100 for each gun that's off roster.

But then again, we are talking about the people who ran this state into billions of dollars of debt. They can't possible know how to make money.

That's the worst part, as they don't have to know how - only collect it. Of course a thank you letter from Sacramento for my idea would be appreciated :)

A.W.D.

RMP91
07-30-2012, 2:23 PM
NOT ONE INCH!

Either we get what we want or we don't!

There's no "middle" ground!

Some Guy
07-30-2012, 2:26 PM
I was thinking somewhere towards $1 per each round past 10.

$10 a day to reduce gun jail time.

$100 for each gun that's off roster.

But then again, we are talking about the people who ran this state into billions of dollars of debt. They can't possible know how to make money.

If you could pay $10 a day to reduce the wait the legislature would just up the wait to a few years.

Wiz-of-Awd
07-30-2012, 2:29 PM
NOT ONE INCH!

Either we get what we want or we don't!

There's no "middle" ground!

Everything has middle ground. As exists in nature, there is always balance.
A tax to allow me to have what I want is not about giving an inch or giving in.

It's about getting what we want. Sometimes compromise is required.

After all, you already need a tax stamp for suppressors. One more to get my right back isn't a bad deal. You have to pick your battles.

A.W.D.

Librarian
07-30-2012, 2:29 PM
Handing down one of the basic decisions of U.S. constitutional law, the Supreme Court ruled in McCulloch v. Maryland, back in 1819, that the Constitution exempts the Federal Government from state taxation. Setting forth his renowned dictum that "the power to tax involves the power to destroy," Chief Justice John Marshall declared that the states (and, by inference, local governments) "have no power, by taxation or otherwise, to retard, impede, burden or in any manner control the operations of the constitutional laws enacted by Congress."http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,863135,00.html

Not a good idea.

Bhobbs
07-30-2012, 2:29 PM
You say you are willing to spend x but x really isn't the most you would consider paying. What's to stop them from charging $10 per round over 10 rounds? Once they get a tax started it will never go away. It will just get more and more expensive. Then they will realize if they make it high enough, most people won't bother. They get their de facto ban and it's not only legal but was our idea.

Wiz-of-Awd
07-30-2012, 2:31 PM
You say you are willing to spend x but x really isn't the most you would consider paying. What's to stop them from charging $10 per round over 10 rounds? Once they get a tax started it will never go away. It will just get more and more expensive. Then they will realize if they make it high enough, most people won't bother. They get their de facto ban and it's not only legal but was our idea.

You're right.

Go ahead and keep your 10 round mags and noisy rifle.

A.W.D.

Montu
07-30-2012, 2:32 PM
Hah, if they thought of a tax per round trust me it would start on the first round not after 10

Wiz-of-Awd
07-30-2012, 2:33 PM
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,863135,00.html

Not a good idea.

Yes, and we already have the Fed tax stamp for certain things...
...so, If I decide I can pay [more] to have the same here in CA, I will.

There is no escaping taxes.

A.W.D.

ap3572001
07-30-2012, 2:33 PM
It may sound funny, but the they can have the best gun control if they go to National Shall Issue CCW. Let people have all the "fun" guns they want. All the magazines they want. Just make sure that is everything is done right

Turo
07-30-2012, 2:34 PM
You say you are willing to spend x but x really isn't the most you would consider paying. What's to stop them from charging $10 per round over 10 rounds? Once they get a tax started it will never go away. It will just get more and more expensive. Then they will realize if they make it high enough, most people won't bother. They get their de facto ban and it's not only legal but was our idea.

^This^

I don't want to pay those bastards any extra money to exercise my God given rights.

JackRydden224
07-30-2012, 2:41 PM
^This^

I don't want to pay those bastards any extra money to exercise my God given rights.

They were given to you by the constitution, not God :hide:

Don't get me wrong. I'm don't like the idea of having to pay extra on retail or tax on things I should rightfully have. I'm more disappointed that the Golden State does not cash in on this huge opportunity. It makes you wonder where else they are screwing up. .

Bruceisontarget
07-30-2012, 2:50 PM
Guessing everyone would buy their mags in Nevada.

Wiz-of-Awd
07-30-2012, 2:55 PM
Guessing everyone would buy their mags in Nevada.

Yes, likely; however...

CA would have to issue a permit of sorts I'm sure allowing possession based on taxes paid. You couldn't just all of a sudden have 30 round P-Mags and claim that you owned them "way back when..."

I would feel pretty safe in guessing there are quite a few people submitting their tax form/permit and payments for the opportunity to have/own and use hi-caps without fear of being arrested.

A.W.D.

2Aon2wheels
07-30-2012, 3:01 PM
NOT ONE INCH!

Either we get what we want or we don't!

There's no "middle" ground!


My view on this too... Not often I agree with Papa Joe, but....


Ни шагу назад!

TKM
07-30-2012, 3:01 PM
It's not a tax, it's a fine.

CitaDeL
07-30-2012, 3:05 PM
Yeah, while we are at it, maybe we can raise some revenue for taxing my opinion of various and sundry government restrictions or reinstitute a poll tax.

jonzer77
07-30-2012, 3:57 PM
$1.00 /mag?

Duplicate tax stamp for suppressors?

Seriously, why not guys? Most of the rest of the country can have these things. Many such states neighboring ours, so why not do the prudent thing and create a brand new revenue stream for the Golden State.

You'll make big, big money - overnight. I promise.

A.W.D.

How about cutting spending and not taxing us on a fundamental right?

Wiz-of-Awd
07-30-2012, 3:59 PM
How about cutting spending and not taxing us on a fundamental right?

Which do you think is more likely?

A.W.D.

email
07-30-2012, 4:01 PM
Getting our rights back in exchange for more taxes seems like a bad precedent.

hornswaggled
07-30-2012, 4:01 PM
Boston Magazine Party everyone!

Wiz-of-Awd
07-30-2012, 4:07 PM
NOT ONE INCH!

Either we get what we want or we don't!

There's no "middle" ground!

My view on this too... Not often I agree with Papa Joe, but....


Ни шагу назад!

Can you buy high capacity magazines in California?

Can you purchase/possess an SBR in California?

Can you purchase/possess a suppressor in California?

Do you pay a fee when purchasing a new firearm in California?

Do you have to wait 10 days for it in California?

Can it have a standard magazine release and evil features in California?


I think you're already balls deep in "inches" and "compromise."

How about figuring out a way to take some back, in a manner that the anti/GOV may benefit from by "letting you."


Think harder people. We may only regain our rights through compromise and critical thinking, rather than fighting the same old fight with old tactics that are getting us nowhere.

A.W.D.

wjc
07-30-2012, 4:07 PM
They were given to you by the constitution, not God :hide:

Don't get me wrong. I'm don't like the idea of having to pay extra on retail or tax on things I should rightfully have. I'm more disappointed that the Golden State does not cash in on this huge opportunity. It makes you wonder where else they are screwing up. .

Incorrect if i read what you are stating correctly.

The right to self defense is a natural law and endowed by the Creator. This was "validated" by the Constitution.

Hanse Davion
07-30-2012, 4:11 PM
They were given to you by the constitution, not God :hide:


Actually as I some people are inclined to think, the rights are merely recognized by the constitution, and existed before its creation. Although im not sure if the sofa gif is alluding to sarcasm.

jonzer77
07-30-2012, 4:15 PM
Which do you think is more likely?

A.W.D.

Ask Gene or Wildhawker that question.

Connor P Price
07-30-2012, 4:20 PM
Can you buy high capacity magazines in California?

Can you purchase/possess an SBR in California?

Can you purchase/possess a suppressor in California?

Do you pay a fee when purchasing a new firearm in California?

Do you have to wait 10 days for it in California?

Can it have a standard magazine release and evil features in California?


I think you're already balls deep in "inches" and "compromise."

How about figuring out a way to take some back, in a manner that the anti/GOV may benefit from by "letting you."


Think harder people. We may only regain our rights through compromise and critical thinking, rather than fighting the same old fight with old tactics that are getting us nowhere.

A.W.D.

You are sorely mistaken. Our modern tactics are gaining incredible ground without us having to submit to unconstitutional taxes on fundamental rights.

In a few short years the modern civil rights movement has revolutionized the 2A thanks to organizations like SAF and CGF along with their skilled attorneys. They have done so without compromise and will continue to do so. We don't have to strike deals with an oppressive government and bribe them with our tax dollars to cajole them into allowing us our rights. We are still a nation of laws and we will win our arguments on their merits through the courts.

Check out recent cases like Heller, McDonald, Ezell, and Woollard and you'll begin to understand that we will win because we are in the right as a matter of law. I won't pay for my rights in taxes, I'll do it by donating to organizations that fight for my rights. When the dust settles after this movement people will be rich no doubt, but they will be the attorneys that fought on our behalf rather than the government that fought against us.

BucDan
07-30-2012, 4:22 PM
Personally, I believe the right to self defense isn't a Creator given thing (as I have a different religous belief), more so it is a natural right that is recognized and affirmed by the Constitution.

mosinnagantm9130
07-30-2012, 4:22 PM
Nope.

Poll taxes anyone?

chris
07-30-2012, 4:22 PM
NOT ONE INCH!

Either we get what we want or we don't!

There's no "middle" ground!

yep there is no compromise with these people.

SilverTauron
07-30-2012, 4:24 PM
$1.00 /mag?

Duplicate tax stamp for suppressors?

Seriously, why not guys? Most of the rest of the country can have these things. Many such states neighboring ours, so why not do the prudent thing and create a brand new revenue stream for the Golden State.

You'll make big, big money - overnight. I promise.

A.W.D.

Progressive governments don't care about profit and loss. They care about power and control. They believe that total civil disarmament is a priority goal, and as such structure their laws to get as clooooose to an outright ban as possible without triggering a lawsuit that risks repeal. Were it not for hard legal work firearms would doubtlessly be banned already in CA.The other side isn't interested in taxes, but in outright disbarment of civil arms possession and useage. They will not compromise from that goal, and neither can we to our own.

Capybara
07-30-2012, 4:35 PM
I am in serious doubt that we will ever get "normal" capacity magazines back in this state. We will never be allowed suppressors, MGs, modern SBRs/SBSs, not going to happen, any of those would make Sacramento's head explode.

Wiz-of-Awd
07-30-2012, 4:43 PM
Progressive governments don't care about profit and loss. They care about power and control...

I beg to differ on this point...

Greed and corruption rule at the higher level of control in this country.
Money breeds power and control to the types that are out of control in our law making capitols.

A.W.D.

Interfan
07-30-2012, 5:07 PM
The problem with the assumption of any tax creating some "good" is that the state legislature will find a way to spend $13 for every $10 taken in. Then they would put additional restrictions and add more taxes to cover the $3 while spending $8 more to administrate. So the net is that everyone is worse off with a larger deficit.

The reasonable solution is to get rid of these (and many, many, other) laws, taxes, and regulation and restore freedoms and fiscal common sense. It would cost the state less money in the process.

taperxz
07-30-2012, 5:12 PM
Can you buy high capacity magazines in California?

Can you purchase/possess an SBR in California?

Can you purchase/possess a suppressor in California?

Do you pay a fee when purchasing a new firearm in California?

Do you have to wait 10 days for it in California?

Can it have a standard magazine release and evil features in California?


I think you're already balls deep in "inches" and "compromise."

How about figuring out a way to take some back, in a manner that the anti/GOV may benefit from by "letting you."


Think harder people. We may only regain our rights through compromise and critical thinking, rather than fighting the same old fight with old tactics that are getting us nowhere.

A.W.D.

Ha ha haha Buwahahahah

A tax for all this? The politicians don't take our rights away for taxes. They take it away so they can impress the donors that fund their campaign.

Welcome to reality!

wildhawker
07-30-2012, 5:38 PM
It appears to me that the OP believes that the shortcut to achieving a better firearms environment is to skip the necessary litigation and horse-trade with the irrational. That theory would seem to be a result of a false premise; namely, that the state legislature generally regulates firearms for purposes other than suppressing and chilling our rights.

We will fight years, decades, however long it takes to secure the broadest Second Amendment protections possible. There will be no horse-trading in the stable of civil rights. Either the Constitution means what it says, or it doesn't.

-Brandon

Wiz-of-Awd
07-30-2012, 5:48 PM
It appears to me that the OP believes that the shortcut to achieving a better firearms environment is to skip the necessary litigation and horse-trade with the irrational. That theory would seem to be a result of a false premise; namely, that the state legislature generally regulates firearms for purposes other than suppressing and chilling our rights.

We will fight years, decades, however long it takes to secure the broadest Second Amendment protections possible. There will be no horse-trading in the stable of civil rights. Either the Constitution means what it says, or it doesn't.

-Brandon

I suppose my thinking is to find a way to lure the Gov away from their BS agendas by appealing to their sense of greed, or some other driving force...

A.W.D.

Turo
07-30-2012, 5:53 PM
They were given to you by the constitution, not God :hide:


God/nature/being human/whatever you like. The right to be armed and to protect ourselves is a natural right not given by any government entity or person. It exists because we as people exist.
The amendments to the constitution merely acknowledge the fact that we, as people, have these rights and protect us from our government taking them away. They aren't the source of our rights.

thenodnarb
07-30-2012, 5:53 PM
:slap:
This is a really stupid debate over a hypothetical argument that has no chance of ever happening. Whats to stop them from just taxing the crap out of the guns we are already aloud to buy? And aren't we assuming they care about a balanced budget? Their goal is to take our firearms away. They don't care about the revenue they could make.

BO made a relevant statement when confronted with the concept that lowering taxes would increase revenues. His response was something like "its not about revenue its about social equality." They are more principled than selling us our rights for money. Of course their principals are marxist.

taperxz
07-30-2012, 6:02 PM
I suppose my thinking is to find a way to lure the Gov away from their BS agendas by appealing to their sense of greed, or some other driving force...

A.W.D.

Do you really think the government has an agenda?? Their agenda is winning the next election. They don't care about money, they don't care about rights, they only care about their next move in politics. Thats it! no more, this is crystal clear, there is no debate.

five.five-six
07-30-2012, 6:03 PM
Just wait till they force Calguns to start reporting sales in the marketplace so the state can start collecting sales tax... They did it to eBay, they did it to Amazon.

carlosdarwin
07-30-2012, 6:06 PM
I was thinking somewhere towards $1 per each round past 10.

$10 a day to reduce gun jail time.

$100 for each gun that's off roster.

But then again, we are talking about the people who ran this state into billions of dollars of debt. They can't possible know how to make money.


This is really quite brilliant actually. What a tax does, is make it such that people who really want something have to pay for it, and no harm to anyone else (if the price is right).

jonzer77
07-30-2012, 6:09 PM
This is really quite brilliant actually. What a tax does, is make it such that people who really want something have to pay for it, and no harm to anyone else (if the price is right).

Not sure if your serious or not.

taperxz
07-30-2012, 6:10 PM
This is really quite brilliant actually. What a tax does, is make it such that people who really want something have to pay for it, and no harm to anyone else (if the price is right).

:TFH::smilielol5: Your kidding right? They have smilies to show you are just kidding about stuff you know. :shrug:

eeeeman
07-30-2012, 6:23 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lgr0Q-WKZk

Connor P Price
07-30-2012, 6:27 PM
This is really quite brilliant actually. What a tax does, is make it such that people who really want something have to pay for it, and no harm to anyone else (if the price is right).

The harm of taxes on fundamental rights is that they prevent the poor from enjoying their rights. Furthermore it has a chilling effect on others exercising their rights who feel that other costs are more pressing.

To say there is no harm to anyone else is ignoring a significant harm done to a great deal of people.

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk 2

five.five-six
07-30-2012, 8:25 PM
This is really quite brilliant actually. What a tax does, is make it such that people who really want something have to pay for it, and no harm to anyone else (if the price is right).

I bet they could make more money with a voteing tax, before you enter the booth, you have to buy a stamp.

mbt
07-30-2012, 8:40 PM
When u open up a tax on certain items, it will expand to more items until it is cost prohibitive.

They have a huge desire to disarm civilians. This is be basic tenant of power.

To think that you can bargain with your overlords is a huuuuge mistake.

You are thinking like they are dumber than you. They are power hungry scum. Once, they disarm you , they can tax you on other stuff and you would be defenseless.

Learn about Power before you even think about bargaining with your enemies. Never show signs of weakness or else they will walk all over you and your progeny.

Their top goal is to have complete control over you. What can you possibly offer them that tops that?

mbt
07-30-2012, 8:47 PM
Learn about history before you betray your brothers to the vile politicians.

Look into England and Australia and how giving up a little ended up giving up EVERYTHING. Now they are paupers and slaves for their government to abuse and slaughter. I see all these English and they talk like cowards and defeatists cuz they are DISARMED.

They won in England and Australia. You want to be a defeated civilian/slave?

Gawd. I can't believe you don't know basic history. This was just a few years ago.

Kids, need to grow up and learn history.

desertjosh
07-30-2012, 8:52 PM
Just wait till they force Calguns to start reporting sales in the marketplace so the state can start collecting sales tax... They did it to eBay, they did it to Amazon.

The difference on Calguns, would be that most transactions are done face to face...cań be really hard to track when bought in cash ect..
At least the big ticket items anyways.

SilverTauron
07-30-2012, 8:55 PM
I suppose my thinking is to find a way to lure the Gov away from their BS agendas by appealing to their sense of greed, or some other driving force...

A.W.D.
Let us review the core purpose of a tax, according to economic dogma.

The purpose of a tax is for the government to collect revenue, and to serve as a discouragement for socially unacceptable activities.

Think cigarette taxes, for example. Why are they so high? Because public opinion doesn't care if people have to pay more to kill themselves. That same crooked canard can be easily applied to firearms in anti-RKBA places like CA. Note that there are still millions of anti's in this nation, and a "tax" is just what the doctor ordered for them to enforce their will on us gun owners.

After all, cigarettes kill people, and guns kill people no? So , according to the leftist logic, lets tax them both to discourage their use. :rolleyes:

Librarian
07-30-2012, 10:24 PM
Let us review the core purpose of a tax, according to economic dogma.

The purpose of a tax is for the government to collect revenue, and to serve as a discouragement for socially unacceptable activities.

Think cigarette taxes, for example. Why are they so high? Because public opinion doesn't care if people have to pay more to kill themselves. That same crooked canard can be easily applied to firearms in anti-RKBA places like CA. Note that there are still millions of anti's in this nation, and a "tax" is just what the doctor ordered for them to enforce their will on us gun owners.

After all, cigarettes kill people, and guns kill people no? So , according to the leftist logic, lets tax them both to discourage their use. :rolleyes:

Exactly.

New York State tax is now $5.35 a pack (governor just signed a $1/pack increase). California is a mere $0.87, though there was an attempt to get a $1/pack increase last election (Prop 29 just failed, finally, last week).

Even if taxing a right was acceptable, there is no possible way that the taxing authorities would not abuse any so-called 'deal'.

Gio
07-30-2012, 11:05 PM
I like onion rings :)

RobG
07-30-2012, 11:09 PM
Give one good reason why Commiefornians should have to pay more than others states.

I love onion rings, too. Have my own special beer batter. Mmmm good!

Gray Peterson
07-30-2012, 11:20 PM
Why would we support tax stamps when another method is being done to deal with the high capacity mag issue?

Screw giving California money.

Stonewalker
07-30-2012, 11:28 PM
No. A thousand times No.

FXR
07-31-2012, 12:03 AM
They were given to you by the constitution, not God :hide: [...]

NO! Your human rights were yours the moment you were born by virtue of your humanity. (Or given to you by God, if you chose to think of it in this way.) The constitution limits the restriction the government can impose on your pre-existing natural rights.

[...] There will be no horse-trading in the stable of civil rights. Either the Constitution means what it says, or it doesn't.

-Brandon

Going in the sig!

Ryan in SD
07-31-2012, 1:57 AM
Banning from bad politics is one thing, but charging people for something they should already have I think is worse and a slap to the face of every patriot of this nation.

Wiz-of-Awd
07-31-2012, 5:44 AM
Let us review the core purpose of a tax, according to economic dogma.

The purpose of a tax is for the government to collect revenue, and to serve as a discouragement for socially unacceptable activities.

Think cigarette taxes, for example. Why are they so high? Because public opinion doesn't care if people have to pay more to kill themselves. That same crooked canard can be easily applied to firearms in anti-RKBA places like CA. Note that there are still millions of anti's in this nation, and a "tax" is just what the doctor ordered for them to enforce their will on us gun owners.

After all, cigarettes kill people, and guns kill people no? So , according to the leftist logic, lets tax them both to discourage their use. :rolleyes:

I suppose I can see you point. As well as those points of view expressed by the rest of you...

Thank you for the insight.

A.W.D.

mag360
07-31-2012, 6:06 PM
california is bankrupt, all they do is float a few billion more in bonds to pay for crap. The end goal of this state is to stiff the bond holders because with pension costs going OUT OF CONTROL, that is exactly what will happen.

overpaid firefighter "You can't cut my pension, just default on the billionaire wall street guys that own our bonds"

normal person "you mean the bonds that are owned by your own pension fund, and millions of individuals across the country that wanted some tax free income during retirement"


overpaid State university president "yeah those billionaire wall street guys don't need any more money, just gimme my dang pension"

:facepalm:

Mute
07-31-2012, 9:40 PM
So the poor can just go screw themselves?

Drivedabizness
07-31-2012, 9:50 PM
They were given to you by the constitution, not God :hide:

Don't get me wrong. I'm don't like the idea of having to pay extra on retail or tax on things I should rightfully have. I'm more disappointed that the Golden State does not cash in on this huge opportunity. It makes you wonder where else they are screwing up. .

Maybe I'm missing the meaning of the hide behind the couch graphic but you are 100% wrong.

The Bill of Rights merely enumerated rights that pre-existed the ratification of the Constitution. Read Heller - this point is raised in the Courts analysis.

carlosdarwin
07-31-2012, 9:57 PM
Yes, this probably just is a lame, hypothetical, but the idea is that it's really just an economics question regarding demand. If a college education was free, more people would do it, and maybe some would do it who really shouldn't. If it costs a little something, most who don't care that much about education don't bother, and so the average drops a little. Nevertheless, those who really care about education do it at almost any price.

Its the same idea with many products including parking spaces, premium .44 magnum rounds, and french goat cheese. The poor are screwed any way you slice it up.

cdn

carlosdarwin
07-31-2012, 9:59 PM
...but at least the real enthusiasts get to exercise their preferences.

carlosdarwin
07-31-2012, 10:03 PM
...and of course a few of the poor who really care enough about .44 magnums or gourmet cheese will forego other things to get them. As a few of them already do for their preferences for drugs, prostitutes, and gambling.

Mute
08-01-2012, 3:25 PM
The difference is, pricing on those things are usually driven by supply and demand not by government mandate. As to letting real enthusiasts exercise their preferences, you're still at the mercy of some dip*($ in a government office somewhere. Don't believe me? How many people do you know in CA with access to NFA items?

It isn't just an issue of economics.

Uxi
08-01-2012, 3:53 PM
Yeah they could have probably turned a profit if they issued Dangerous Weapons permits to ordinary citizens who wanted in on NFA. That's contrary to the goal, which is the complete ban of such weapons by private citizens. They'll probably always allow exceptions for crony groups, though.

foxtrotuniformlima
08-01-2012, 4:10 PM
It appears to me that the OP believes that the shortcut to achieving a better firearms environment is to skip the necessary litigation and horse-trade with the irrational. That theory would seem to be a result of a false premise; namely, that the state legislature generally regulates firearms for purposes other than suppressing and chilling our rights.

We will fight years, decades, however long it takes to secure the broadest Second Amendment protections possible. There will be no horse-trading in the stable of civil rights. Either the Constitution means what it says, or it doesn't.

-Brandon

Every time I start to think about a compromise I get a bad feeling and I think Brandon summed up exactly why that happens.

You can only compromise with someone who sees the benefit in both sides getting something instead of both sides getting nothing. The current ( and I am afraid future ) legislators don't view gun laws as a compromise issue. There is too much money coming into their re-election campaigns to.

I think that any compromise we could get with them would merely set us up down the road for worse. For example, let's just say we could get a system set up by where we could have all the stuff we wanted but in order for that to happen, you needed a license, like a drivers license but it would be a gun license instead. I'm sure many would be thrilled and I would be too but this would then enable them to have us by the short hairs. They could then, at any time, modify it just like they do the drivers license laws. It would give them ultimate control. When I got my DL, there were no restrictions. I was free to go where and when I wanted with whomever in the car I chose. Not so anymore.

I hate to say it because the compromise / negotiation route would be faster to getting back some of the ground lost but in the long run, it will end in disaster.

And the worse part would be that the very people that we all want to keep guns away from in the first place will still have them and not lose one minute of sleep worrying about being felons cause they are already felons to begin with. Or they lack the mental capacity to understand right form wrong. True firearms law reform will address these issues and not the capacity of magazines nor the type of action that a weapon is.

Carnivore
08-01-2012, 7:06 PM
Once you pay ransom money to a kidnapper you set up the precedent for them to do it again. Considering that in this case the "kidnapping" would be completely legal then you know the nappers are coming back for more and more money. It is a sad day when rights only go to the highest bidder. All or nothing has to be the only way if we are all going to be equal.