View Poll Results: Would this compromise be acceptable?

Voters
93. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. This isnít perfect, but no compromise is.

    12 12.90%
  • No. I donít mind some compromise, but this still takes away too much.

    13 13.98%
  • No. We should never compromise our gun rights.

    61 65.59%
  • No. This still gives too many gun ownership privileges.

    4 4.30%
  • I can hit a target 400 yards away with my eyes closed.

    3 3.23%
Page 1 of 71 1231151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 705

Thread: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

  1. #1
    Sage
    Phys251's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    12,710

    A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    If we are to renew the "assault weapons" ban, then let's grandfather it in. I.e., if someone legally owns an "assault weapon" before the ban takes effect, then they may keep that gun. Afterward, no such weapon may be legally purchased for civilian use.

    Would this be acceptable or not?
    "A man you can bait with a tweet is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons." --Hillary Rodham Clinton
    "Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not elections." --Mitt Romney

  2. #2
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,157

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Nope.


    We've compromised too much already.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Phys251 View Post
    If we are to renew the "assault weapons" ban, then let's grandfather it in. I.e., if someone legally owns an "assault weapon" before the ban takes effect, then they may keep that gun. Afterward, no such weapon may be legally purchased for civilian use.

    Would this be acceptable or not?
    What's an assault weapon?

  4. #4
    User
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago burbs
    Last Seen
    02-06-14 @ 03:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    56

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    No, they shouldn't keep redefining our amendments towards what they would like to see happen.

  5. #5
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    I think you should have put the parentheses around Compromise too but I have yet to see a list of what these banned weapons would be, so nope.

  6. #6
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    Μολὼν λαβέ's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    09-29-17 @ 11:22 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,914

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    You forgot to list "go pound salt" as a response option.
    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Generalizations are stupid.
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Steel View Post
    The Second Amendment has nothing to do with guns.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Denio Junction
    Last Seen
    11-13-14 @ 12:09 AM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,039
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    The so called assault weapons have killed fewer people then hammers and clubs. The need to ban them is one of control not safety. Grand fathering in existing rifles is telling future generations you have to pay our debts AND depend only on govt for your security. World history proves that will produce a horrible outcome for 10's and maybe even 100's of millions of people. NEVER.


    Quote Originally Posted by Phys251 View Post
    If we are to renew the "assault weapons" ban, then let's grandfather it in. I.e., if someone legally owns an "assault weapon" before the ban takes effect, then they may keep that gun. Afterward, no such weapon may be legally purchased for civilian use.

    Would this be acceptable or not?

  8. #8
    Guru

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Nevada
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,838

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    No compromises about anything related to guns.

  9. #9
    Sage
    Lutherf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    24,640

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Phys251 View Post
    If we are to renew the "assault weapons" ban, then let's grandfather it in. I.e., if someone legally owns an "assault weapon" before the ban takes effect, then they may keep that gun. Afterward, no such weapon may be legally purchased for civilian use.

    Would this be acceptable or not?
    How is that preserving anyone's rights? "You can do it but he can't" is pretty much the opposite of equality.

    Would you consider it just fine if there was a law that people who have money now can keep it but everyone else has to suck up a tax hike?

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    I have no idea what to make of this.

Page 1 of 71 1231151 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •