Anti-gun pundits always say we as gun owners need to compromise. My question is this. What is the other side giving up? How is giving up my constitutional rights while they give nothing a compromise?
2007-08-09 17:38:11 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
shaz,
And that would mean... what??
2007-08-09 17:43:24 · update #1
No one seems able to answer the question. We compromise by giving up semi-automatic weapons and they give up... what? Nothing?
2007-08-09 18:00:06 · update #2
Kermit, abortion is not constitutionally protected, gun ownership is.
Cattledog, it is not up to you to decide what is legal and what is not. Unless I am wrong, you are no expert on weaponry or constitutional law.
2007-08-09 18:06:40 · update #3
As a gun owner, I resent any weak minded attempt at compromise.
For every life saved by an existing law, thousands more die from other forms of violence. Taking guns out of the equation of violence will do little to curb or curtail people dying at the hands of others. They'll just find other means.
Granted I fully support the laws that remove and keep guns and other weapons out of the hands of those who have no right to own them. It's a pity that some extremists want to support the 'rights' of the mentally unstable to own guns.
Until someone can guarantee that gun control laws are perfect and will insure the end of all violence, I'm standing firm right where I am now, no matter what Rosie O'Donnell thinks. Even she isn't that stupid to believe such a falsehood.
2007-08-09 17:58:46 · answer #1 · answered by Floyd G 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
And now you understand why the NRA fights every form of legislation that puts limits on gun ownership. They fear (perhaps rightfully) that to cave on any point, will only unleash a flood of new legislation.
And now you know why so many folks support other legislation such as Roe V. Wade. Just like the NRA, they fear that once that is overturned...what will be next on the agenda of those who sought to overturn it??
Probably not an apples to apples comparison, but the fear of what is lost and what is gained is similar.
2007-08-09 17:44:52 · answer #2 · answered by KERMIT M 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
i like the actuality which you have placed lots concept into this, no longer an argument being made by using the left in any respect. I purely have one situation with style 2. shall we are saying a women human beings is raped, she is clinically shown to have melancholy, rigidity and particular fears approximately her risk-free practices. She has no situation with being good knowledgeable on the weapon or she already is. under the recent rules, she would be petrified of reporting the rape or her themes coming from the rape in concern of dropping that weapon and that weapon is the only ingredient helping her by way of this time by using giving her risk-free practices in her very own residence and permitting her to get some relax. The unintended effects of gun administration...
2016-10-09 21:54:47 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I own guns... however, I don't see a need of a hand gun or a assault weapon. I am not saying we should outright ban handguns (although I can certainly see a reason for that) but I can not see a reason for private citizens owning assault and machine guns. We can not own rocket launchers or personal SAM's,
I have a military background and was born in a house with guns twenty feet from my childhood room... I would certainly compromise on guns. Being out of the military for many years I can't think of a reason to posess an assault weapon.
2007-08-09 17:46:34 · answer #4 · answered by cattledog 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
That is THE liberal MO. They badger, they bully, they mock, they ridicule, and they NAG until we give in ... a little. Then they come right back badgering, bullying, mocking, ridiculing, and nagging AGAIN, trying to get us to give up MORE.
They will NEVER be happy until they have their way. And their way is ruling the world, throwing out the Constitution, banning God, and having us all worship at the footstool of the almighty government.
1984
2007-08-09 17:45:21 · answer #5 · answered by Just_One_Man's_Opinion 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The short answer is, they give up nothing, nor do they intend to.
The longer answer is, that's because they are defining the argument. So they use words like "reasonable" and "compromise" and "assault weapon" when they really mean "give up your guns because we find them scary."
Don't let them redefine the argument.
2007-08-10 06:19:06 · answer #6 · answered by Shrimp 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
They're giving up their complete and total opposition to all gun ownership.
2007-08-09 17:41:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋