Ole_grizzly wrote: Ole_grizzly wrote:
Chuck wrote:I am disappointed in the knee jerk reaction of banning something just because someone did something bad.
The antis know that bump fire is possible by a variety of means, belt loops and rubber bands are only a couple.
Their goal is to ban the entire AR platform, as they did once before.
They are on record as hoping that banning bump stocks is only the beginning of the slippery slope towards achieving that goal.
Remember Fast and Furious? They wanted a massacre then too, for the same purpose
Why would any freedom loving American support them in their quest?
I would really appreciate an answer to this part, as I see allowing their stupid little accessory ban as the beginning of rowing the boat upstream when I've can't even get everyone to row together downstream.
Here's my answer in the best way I know how. By being against everything 100% of the time, we will never reach people that are moderate on the issue. To most of the country, and I'd say a healthy majority of liberals, they see absolutely no reason that anyone needs to own multiple firearms, carry them outside the home, own weapons that look scary, have access to so-called armor piercing ammunition, have big magazines, have more than 20 rounds of any ammo, etc. Even people I know that I can talk to about owning firearms have come over, I've shown them my Rock River LAR-8, what a 308 round looks like, and some are physically upset that these can be privately owned. However, in all the instances I just named, all of those are worth fighting for, there are valid reasons if someone would just think them through for a few minutes why there's a justification to be had. However, there simply is none for a bump stock. In my opinion, by coming out against this for a future reason of never allowing a "creep" just is foolish, as our side has proven time and time again, even with a democratic president and senate (beginning of Obama's term) that we won't lose the fights that matter most. We don't need to make a stand on crap accessories when the negatives of making us look crazy outweigh some future possibility of opening the door a crack.
This is going to sound offensive, so I'll apologize in advance. I'm sorry you see things the way you do.
To me,,,, the gist of your paragraph above is that you think we should throw the antis a bone because they lose so much and you want it to be bump stocks because that won't affect you, personally.
You seem to think that doing this will buy their support for something in the future,
Chuck wrote: I don't believe that the NRA is making a "strategic move" by calling for more ATF intervention; I think they're screwing up.
- We can agree to disagree. Fighting for an innocuous accessory that serves absolutely no purpose no matter your opinion of the second amendment in the name of fighting incrementalization without realizing our current political climate is beyond my understanding. We have the entire media against our opinions and rights. The NRA is simply giving an out to republican legislators in contested districts that can't remain on the far right of gun control when mass shootings continue to occur, and low information voters who can't and won't think for themselves decide their contest. Being against every possible gun control regulation is self defeating, and this seems like an easy compromise. This does not preclude a future fight against legitimate attempts, it gives us a leg to stand on that we're not totally against everything just because. Your position (and apparently OFCC's) does not allow for that discussion, and it's severely disappointing.
Republicans control EVERYTHING!!
WHY DO THEY NEED AN "OUT"??
They control everything? They have a slim majority in the senate, everyone is not caucusing together on what was supposed to be solid conservative issues such as health care, and to call our current president a republican that controls anything is a stretch. I agree that the time is now to get national reciprocity, and more federal level legal judgements, as the situation is unlikely to improve, but our own governor doesn't agree with the state republicans on most things, and most people in congress can't stand trump. To think we're united and things would be smooth sailing legislatively, and in turn getting the american people to understand and agree, is also a stretch.
Not caucusing together is their problem. Freedom works every time it's tried, as does conservatism. The country is ready, the time is now, and the problem is boys who have run for office making promises are now afraid to fulfill them.
Chuck wrote:They should pass reciprocity as a single item bill, and the hearing protection act as another
They should grow some balls
The time is perfect
Agree, but the hearing protection act is something I'm not interested in at all as I'm not a hunter, and many firearms enthusiasts are not either, and in this climate putting any weight behind a narrow scope that doesn't really advance actual rights or help us in the defense of our families and loved ones is a waste of time and opportunity.
This is the total gist of your post.
You're not interested in gun rights infringements unless they affect you directly. You don't care that my ears maybe wouldn't be ringing right now if suppressors were legal all my life. You don't care if someone else's chosen method of fire is outlawed because you don't shoot that way.
Can you give me any good, sound logical reasons why a bump stock should be banned?
Other than to appease the antis and make ourselves appear "reasonable"?