Yes. This isn’t perfect, but no compromise is.
No. I don’t mind some compromise, but this still takes away too much.
No. We should never compromise our gun rights.
No. This still gives too many gun ownership privileges.
I can hit a target 400 yards away with my eyes closed.
AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.
I no longer hunt, I would not use my weapon for unprovoked taking of another human life. That leave the third. And that is why I carry.
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"
Cicero Marcus Tullius
So the "grandfather clause" is really the default assault weapons ban, not a compromise.
Here's a compromise.
Give us the same weapons the government has access to, but keep explosives regulated.
"Political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. . . . Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness."
~Orwell, Politics and the English Language
2) Killing things other than humans
3) Threatening to kill
Yeah, that's just killing. Killing people, killing animals, and telling people you're going to kill them. Guns do nothing but kill. They have no other purpose. Cars do. Knives do. Maybe some knives are specifically designed for killing and should be treated the same ways guns are, as opposed to a kitchen knife. That's fine. But the point I'm making is that a tool that has no purpose other than for killing automatically should be treated differently from one that has other primary purposes, even if it can later be used to kill. Those would get a separate evaluation more appropriate to their nature.
Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.
The five great lies of the
We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.