Expanded and enhanced background checks that somehow still are useless for other than giving us an idea how many million guns Americans buy every month.
Point of fact: Discussion on "gun control" with the Dems NEVER means compromise. Compromise requires they give something up to get something.
Discussion on "gun control" with the Dems inevitably means they demand we preemptively surrender something else, and give nothing up in return.
F*&k that.
They want "Red Flag" laws, we can try them ONLY on three conditions:
1. Due Process is followed (including the accused's right to face his/her accuser in open court), reports are unenforceable without a verified name submitting them (i.e. "anonymous" reports are invalid by law), and false reports -- from police or private citizens -- are punishable by the same fines and prison sentences as whatever alleged crime they were reporting. Those "fines" go right to the person they falsely reported, and even so, that person can sue for further damages, legal fees, lost wages/income, etc. As "Red Flag" reports are libelous and slanderous by default, there is no immunity -- qualified or otherwise -- for false reports. And a commission SHALL be formed to study the effects of the law in 5 years, and if more than 1% of total reports turned out to be false, the whole law is retroactively invalidated and all reportees' rights restored.
2. NFA'34 is repealed in its entirety.
3. Nationwide Constitutional Carry (with or without a license) becomes the Law of the Land.
That's a possible compromise. No, we really don't want "Red Flag" laws, but if the Dems are hard-set on having them, compromise means we have a say in how they're implemented and what else we want in return. Anything less isn't compromise. If nothing else, we can gauge just how badly they want this.
Thought my reference to "the pie" would have engendered a rather well known article of some time ago, reposted more recently but nevertheless also some time ago. Best example, piece by piece, or slice by slice if you prefer, with pun intended, on the subject.
"Gun Rights Cake" is a classic. It never goes out of style.
Yes, I got the reference, but I'm always curious, as a matter of pragmatism, what we could achieve as far as repealing bad old gun laws if "our" reps insisted on *real* compromise instead of what the Left currently calls "compromise".
Why shouldn't we take Trump's public approach to federal regulations (for every new regulation an agency wants, they must remove two) and apply it to new gun legislation? "Want a new law? First tell me which two existing laws you're willing to give up," with a dash of "Now let's discuss how to not violate any more Constitutionally-protected rights than we have to."
(Again, this is a matter of curiosity; in my opinion, all gun restrictions are inherently unconstitutional.)
That "our" reps never push for any of these things always makes me question whether they're really on our side at all.
Just like how gun laws "keep guns out of violent criminals' hands" ... and yet, by and large, violent criminals still have guns. (Not to mention dozens of other non-firearm weapon options, but for the purposes of this discussion, let's go ahead and focus on guns.)
How are the violent gangs in Chicago and Oakland still armed, if the gun laws "keep guns out of violent criminals' hands", hmmm? Any time one is arrested and his gun confiscated, he'll be re-armed 30 minutes after he's turned loose, 2 hours (or less) later. How is that happening with all those gun laws in place?
So to reiterate: [citation needed]
The black market exists. Loss and theft exist. Idiots leaving guns in unlocked vehicles exist. As long as those things exist (and they ALWAYS will), violent criminals will be able to get their hands on guns, and no "Office of Gun Violence Prevention" will stop them. At best, the multitude of gun laws are an inconvenience, not a panacea.
A more relevant number associated with the Brady Background Checks (NICS), is how many felons were convicted and are doing/did jail time for violating that law? A million? Thousands? Hundreds? Tens? For all the drum-beating and propaganda flying from Everytown, the Bradys, Moms Demand, and all of the "gun safety" organizations, you would think it would be in the millions. 2009 is the latest data I can find: https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/234173.pdf . it was actually less than 50. From what I can find, there has never been more 40 prosecutions/year that have resulted in jail time. Considering the millions of guns sold since the enactment of the NICS act, the numbers are risible. It's no wonder the numbers are not being bragged upon by the gun control pushers.
people control masked as gun control… love it! ole Trumpy IS working for the American people. liberals always show how stupid they are..
Problem is, Bondi has continued her Florida attitude. There was a time when we, as you know, were definitely on the right road. That travel has slowed significantly over the years. Red Flag law for one example.. https://www.ammoland.com/2025/01/trumps-ag-nominee-bondi-expresses-willingness-to-work-with-dems-on-gun-control/
I didn't trust here here and I don't trust her there.
Damn. Premature ejac, er, ah, Post.
Meant to add that discussion on gun control with Ds INEVITABLY means compromise. Just how much of the pie is Bondi going to give away now?
Point of fact: Discussion on "gun control" with the Dems NEVER means compromise. Compromise requires they give something up to get something.
Discussion on "gun control" with the Dems inevitably means they demand we preemptively surrender something else, and give nothing up in return.
F*&k that.
They want "Red Flag" laws, we can try them ONLY on three conditions:
1. Due Process is followed (including the accused's right to face his/her accuser in open court), reports are unenforceable without a verified name submitting them (i.e. "anonymous" reports are invalid by law), and false reports -- from police or private citizens -- are punishable by the same fines and prison sentences as whatever alleged crime they were reporting. Those "fines" go right to the person they falsely reported, and even so, that person can sue for further damages, legal fees, lost wages/income, etc. As "Red Flag" reports are libelous and slanderous by default, there is no immunity -- qualified or otherwise -- for false reports. And a commission SHALL be formed to study the effects of the law in 5 years, and if more than 1% of total reports turned out to be false, the whole law is retroactively invalidated and all reportees' rights restored.
2. NFA'34 is repealed in its entirety.
3. Nationwide Constitutional Carry (with or without a license) becomes the Law of the Land.
That's a possible compromise. No, we really don't want "Red Flag" laws, but if the Dems are hard-set on having them, compromise means we have a say in how they're implemented and what else we want in return. Anything less isn't compromise. If nothing else, we can gauge just how badly they want this.
Thought my reference to "the pie" would have engendered a rather well known article of some time ago, reposted more recently but nevertheless also some time ago. Best example, piece by piece, or slice by slice if you prefer, with pun intended, on the subject.
https://thelawdogfiles.com/2013/01/a-repost.html
"Gun Rights Cake" is a classic. It never goes out of style.
Yes, I got the reference, but I'm always curious, as a matter of pragmatism, what we could achieve as far as repealing bad old gun laws if "our" reps insisted on *real* compromise instead of what the Left currently calls "compromise".
Why shouldn't we take Trump's public approach to federal regulations (for every new regulation an agency wants, they must remove two) and apply it to new gun legislation? "Want a new law? First tell me which two existing laws you're willing to give up," with a dash of "Now let's discuss how to not violate any more Constitutionally-protected rights than we have to."
(Again, this is a matter of curiosity; in my opinion, all gun restrictions are inherently unconstitutional.)
That "our" reps never push for any of these things always makes me question whether they're really on our side at all.
Useless Government agency shutvdown.
Last time I checked, the so called “gun lobby” was orgs funded and driven by The People.
"Elections have Consequences," Bitches.
"Kept guns out of the hands of domestic abusers"
As Wikipedia says, "[citation needed]".
Just like how gun laws "keep guns out of violent criminals' hands" ... and yet, by and large, violent criminals still have guns. (Not to mention dozens of other non-firearm weapon options, but for the purposes of this discussion, let's go ahead and focus on guns.)
How are the violent gangs in Chicago and Oakland still armed, if the gun laws "keep guns out of violent criminals' hands", hmmm? Any time one is arrested and his gun confiscated, he'll be re-armed 30 minutes after he's turned loose, 2 hours (or less) later. How is that happening with all those gun laws in place?
So to reiterate: [citation needed]
The black market exists. Loss and theft exist. Idiots leaving guns in unlocked vehicles exist. As long as those things exist (and they ALWAYS will), violent criminals will be able to get their hands on guns, and no "Office of Gun Violence Prevention" will stop them. At best, the multitude of gun laws are an inconvenience, not a panacea.
A more relevant number associated with the Brady Background Checks (NICS), is how many felons were convicted and are doing/did jail time for violating that law? A million? Thousands? Hundreds? Tens? For all the drum-beating and propaganda flying from Everytown, the Bradys, Moms Demand, and all of the "gun safety" organizations, you would think it would be in the millions. 2009 is the latest data I can find: https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/234173.pdf . it was actually less than 50. From what I can find, there has never been more 40 prosecutions/year that have resulted in jail time. Considering the millions of guns sold since the enactment of the NICS act, the numbers are risible. It's no wonder the numbers are not being bragged upon by the gun control pushers.
Well, there is your proof, PROOF! I tell you.
The President got rid of a useless office. Proof positive he is hitlerstalinsatan!