Besides can’t you buy a silencer in Europe off the counter?
Thought that was one of the few things they weren’t making you kiss the ring to do.
2A Grifters and Fair Weather Supporters
- Thread starter akmike47
- Start date
Besides can’t you buy a silencer in Europe off the counter?
Thought that was one of the few things they weren’t making you kiss the ring to do.
About the reaction I expected.
What you fail to see is that we got here by incrementalism, we turn the tables. Trade short term losses for long term gains.
If you take 2 steps forward and 1 step back, yes you did take 1 step back, but you are overall ahead.
The thinking is "we essentially already have universal checks, so give 'them' a tiny gain, while we get a 'huge' gain like removing silencers from the NFA"
the 2A comes out ahead. It doesn't mean i am ok with background checks, it means I want more of my rights back.
The key is the trade off--Libs are never going to give us anything for free, so they have to be outmaunevered. Please take your ball and go home. The adults have work to do.
No, we do not.
I get it. You have sand in your pussy because you can't just buy a suppressor and walk out with it in minutes.
I don't give a fuck. And so do the millions of people who are used to buying firearms from individuals without telling the government about it.
Go sell someone else down the river.
This is where you are VERY wrong, possibly because you already live in a non free state.
"Universal background checks" is NOT about the stupid "stopping bad guys from getting guns" B.S. that all the FUDDs swallow like whores.
There is a reason the Democrats and those that hate freedom and free men having the tools of freedom push that so hard.
"Universal Background Checks" = "National Gun Registration" done and dusted, and you are handcuffed into it and from then on the government knows who has what guns and can go after you hard if there are any "discrepancies" in what guns you turn over when they show up at your door and say turn them over now. (And don't go all false bravado, when the goons with guns show up at your door threatening you and your family with death right then and there, almost everyone will choose not to die then and there).
I don't see why 2A advocates and Gun owners can't simply take a look at first the Women's Suffrage movement, then the Homosexual Movement, and now the Transgender Tyranny and realize you don't win by making compromises, you win by going full force, relentlessly until you win it all.
I fight hard in the political world against such "universal background check" crap and don't have any sympathy for people supposedly on our side that agree with it. It will ONLY ever be used to enslave and oppress the good people and just like now it will make no difference to the criminals / thugs and the brownshirts of the Democrat party.
I support gun ownership for felons.
While they are in prison!
Of course, my idea of a prison has prison guards that are good at hosing down escape boats with a naval gun mount.
Major infractions of the rules result in the island eating a whole tranche of AP warheads from an MLRS.
While they are in prison!
Of course, my idea of a prison has prison guards that are good at hosing down escape boats with a naval gun mount.
Major infractions of the rules result in the island eating a whole tranche of AP warheads from an MLRS.
You'd never get a trade where you would come out ahead in the first place even if it was a good idea, but none of these ever are.
We all should have “sand in our pussies” about infringements, if that shit doesn’t piss you off, check your pulse or maybe check what you stand for.
To be fair felon doesn't automatically mean violent.
Point went right the fuck over your head.
What's more detrimental, asking ATF if you can buy a suppressor (which the majority of American gun owners don't even care about) OR having no option to buy or sell firearms without reporting each transaction to the government.
It'd be nice to buy suppressors over the counter, but I am sure as hell not willing to give up my ability to buy and sell firearms privately for some fringe accessory.
The stupidity of gun people is endless.
A reform of what we consider felonies would of course be in order.
And impossible these days.
I’m with ya, but….. How the fuck are you going to buy used Hornady bullets?
I think people who get felonies in their teens and never get in trouble again for sure shouldn't be punished later depending on the crime.
I've seen a guy who got a felony at 16-17 not get hired 30yrs later because of it and his record was spotless after the one arrest.
Shoot soft targets duhI’m with ya, but….. How the fuck are you going to buy used Hornady bullets?
I am one of the more radical of the freedom types that believes just because you once did something that somebody else decided was a crime, doesn't mean you don't still have all your rights once the matter is settled.
I'm also not a fan of our whole harsh puritanical "justice" system here where we are all about draconian punishments for things that don't bother anyone else or because maybe something else that didn't happen could have possibly happened and everyone wanting to destroy everyone's lives over everything.
The reason the government and the oppressors LOVE all these laws as harsh penalties and the public going along with hanging some label on somebody for the rest of their lives, is that then they can oppress them without any opposition. Make everybody a "criminal" and you get everybody onboard with you putting the boots to everyone else. The police can happily murder you on your doorstep in cold blood and if they say well they were a "felon" all the FUDDs fall to worshiping the police and the police happily get away with cold blooded murder.
I'm also not a fan of our whole harsh puritanical "justice" system here where we are all about draconian punishments for things that don't bother anyone else or because maybe something else that didn't happen could have possibly happened and everyone wanting to destroy everyone's lives over everything.
The reason the government and the oppressors LOVE all these laws as harsh penalties and the public going along with hanging some label on somebody for the rest of their lives, is that then they can oppress them without any opposition. Make everybody a "criminal" and you get everybody onboard with you putting the boots to everyone else. The police can happily murder you on your doorstep in cold blood and if they say well they were a "felon" all the FUDDs fall to worshiping the police and the police happily get away with cold blooded murder.
You entirely missed the point. Most firearms are already bought at FFLs. Ok instead of suppressors, make it Machine Guns. Univeral Background checks for a lift of the MG ban. Pick your gain. I want something big for the SA.
On the surface I agree, but we could get a system which lists prohibited people. THe check is "are you a prohibited person?" No. Fine sale can go through. No more forms, no more logs and no record of the sale. Which is why the NFA is so bad as it is a bona fide-registry. THat's the target. While BG checks will evetually turn out that way if we don't stop, there is still time to 'fix' it. It can also paint them into a corner because if they want a registry, that's a 0% starter and forces them to admit it.
And that's precisely the point. Everyone only looks at the first part and not the second part. (1) We give something. (2) We get something of greater value. Without #2, I am giving zero. nothing nada. But you guys froth at the mouth at the suggestion. And it the past we give (1) with the promise of (2). Nope. They have to be joined. You kill (2) we get back (1). (see Reagan Amnesty on how they duped him)
Are background checks an infringement? yes.
Are there worse infringements? yes.
How do we come out ahead?
We'll never get anything for free. So chip away piece by piece like they did to us. But you never 'give' without a greater 'gain'. And if you get a 'gain' for free, take it. And anything we give, make sure it can work to our advantage, like reforming background checks to a simple lookup and maybe eliminating 4473s.
You guys are smarter than this. Think!
That's already what we have for all commercial gun sales transactions.
Remember this when you have your wonderful ideas, the ones implementing, operating, enforcing and ruling on "The Law" will be evil people who hate you, hate your freedoms and your ability to have freedom at all.
A "Universal Background Check" CANNOT work unless it actually has some kind of enforcement means to punish anyone that privately sells something without doing the "background check". And how will anyone prove a background check was done unless they have a record and proof and transaction number? Then going forward, how will you prove on either side that you actually gave the specific gun to the specific person unless the serial number is also recorded. Regardless of any assurances of data deletion or privacy that are given, eventually all that data WILL be matched up, correlated and catalogued into a database of who has what and one day the law will flip to you being guilty of illegal sales if you don't have a gun you are supposed to have and can't prove it was legally transferred. (Exactly as it's done in countries that now have such systems).
Much like if your FFL calls in to the NICS, they get a transaction number. Now that transaction number currently records the time / date and both parties involved in the transaction, and while it is legally supposed to be deleted after so long, only the blindest of fools don't realize all that information is being stored for good. There is also lots of evidence that the ATF is most likely using "Audits" to secretly match up those transaction records with the actual records of serial and model numbers (including why they changed the forms so you only had to scan / photograph the front page instead of a front and back).
You need to stop trading your freedom for a temporary handout that you could get by simply doubling down on your hard work and not letting up the pressure to change the laws, or for the illusion of temporary safety.
Reality says that criminals will ALWAYS find what they need or want in order to do a crime... So assume every evil person will have access to weapons, which is EXACTLY what they do now, the states with the most strict laws only disarm the law abiding while the criminals are well armed. I don't care if "criminals" have guns and neither should you. What I care about is ALL the good folks should carry guns all the time & be able to legally use them for self defense without fear of criminal or civil consequences from those who are trying to commit a criminal act or their families / heirs.
Generally most criminal types do not want to be shot then and there, they want to go on living, so once everyone is armed and it's considered just common knowledge that bad people get killed, you'll actually be a lot better off than now, where criminals can roll the dice that most people will be unarmed victims.
Then someone will bring up the argument about insane people getting guns to do horrible things. Well as we have seen recently, guess what, they tend to have no problem somehow getting them, sometimes they are given them, steal them or have never acted up before. More gun restrictions are not the answer, the answer is more people ready to shoot back at a moment's notice, much as we are now seeing in Churches after a short wave of attacks on congregations.
We were very close to actually having suppressors be treated as any standard firearm when the Democrats pulled an attempted mass murder and all the FUDDs and the NRA went all squishy (even though a suppressor was not used) and said "well it's a bad time to push this, let's just give up for now because, well we should give up what we want anytime someone bad does something," and of course the cowards that are the Republicans were more than happy the moment the pressure to do something was removed.
Recently in Texas after years of hard long work by dedicated people and when the GOA finally was able to take the lead instead of the FUDDs of the NRA, we we were able to push through being able to constitutionally carry firearms openly or concealed and be able to legally (with the state) make, use and own suppressors WITHOUT any paperwork (if you don't mind dealing with the feds).
And before you go all, "Well that's Texas, it couldn't happen here", something to think about is that 30 years ago, Texas was a solid democrat safe area with Democrats running every major office in the state and mostly voting Democrat, and almost NO Legal way to carry a handgun for self defense, as well as all kinds of restrictions on knives. 30 years of hard work and pouring money into the groups that fought to change the laws, completely changed things to be one of the most free states.
BUT it takes years of dedicated hard work, every year, every session, never letting up, never compromising, always demanding a new victory, always wanting a new nibble of freedom each session, holding your local elected types responsible to give you what you want or you get a new one in.
Once the compromisers and FUDDs got cleaned out, things eventually started moving even faster, under the leadership of new groups like Knife Rights and the GOA who understood it is always attack always get more, never give anything back, and always come back for more the next time around.
Who the fuck made helped that happen asshole. (I was nor personally responsible but worked 15+ years with people on it).
I live in Texas and work in politics. Compromises sometimes get made. The key is how to make it work for your benefit.
Learn how the game is played.
Operation Alberich - Wikipedia
Suppressors are not of greater value than 100% private gun transactions.
Only an idiot would make that trade. Guess what that makes you.
There is NO worse infringement than 100% registration of every firearm transaction, anyone, by anyone. It's the huge open barn door to confiscation.
Once your rifles are gone, I suppose you can use your cherished suppressors to fuck yourself in the ass.
Fuck you and your faustian bargains.
Last edited:
Many people including common every day folks such as me, for years financially supporting those that were the visible face of the movement and going to vote at every election large or small and calling the offices of the elected representatives regularly to express their support for freedom and their disapproval of any non freedom things.
I've been doing the above for the past 30 years.
We DIDN'T win by giving anything up, rather we get more of what we wanted by always coming for more and never giving anything back.
Now granted sometimes we didn't get everything we wanted in a single bill, or at a single legislative session, we had to accept getting what we could even if it wasn't everything and then coming back the next time to get the rest.
That is a lot different than giving something up, like the ALL IMPORTANT ability to freely buy / sell / trade and give firearms between consenting, assumed to be law abiding adults without government interference. And guess what, we got our suppressor freedom without giving anything up.
Now if we could only get people nationwide to stop being compromisers and willing to offer up freedoms because "media says it would be nice" we could carry the push that has been going on at the state level around the country to the national level and work to get back everything that was ever taken away (which only got taken away because of FUDDs being willing to hand over freedoms because, well we must play nice).
You are so obtuse its laughable
You have 0 clue how things were done. You don't win a bargin by saying "this is my only and final offer". Not every legislator is 100% active 2A. You may not like my specific example, but are obviously too dim to see the idea. You will never get 50+delta 2A diehards in any legislature. Which means you have to trade favors for votes. Sometimes for things you don't like.
Maybe its a vote for their pet project that you oppose outside the 2A maybe its something they think is a big win, but in fact is as just a red herring. Politicians really care about being reelected. You don't have that problem so you can play keyboard hotshot and hardliner. Call me when you line up the votes to get a pro 2a bill passed. We'll talk. Until then have fun throwing a tantrum about things you know sqaut about.
I've always been the guy that always said...I hope you got yours, because, I sure as hell got mine!
Mac
I think you don't quite get how giving up something you ALREADY have is different from being willing to not get everything new you wanted, and accepting for the time being to get just some of the new things you wanted in order to get some new stuff rather than none.
Which 2A specific freedoms did the 2A supporters in Texas give up in order to move forward?
Please note this does NOT mean what new things were we willing to not get in a specific bill in order to get what we want most of.
Being willing to get most of what you wanted to gain but not everything, is not the same as giving up what you already have.
Helping with votes for other things not specific to the 2A is part of normal politics and is NOT giving or trading away freedoms.
Doing favours for those who will do favours for you is not the same as giving up a 2A freedom.
So please actually list what, at the time existing, 2A freedoms, those successfully fighting for expanded 2A freedoms in Texas gave up or traded away for something else.
You would be mistaken if you think I don't understand the nature of politics and the primary things that motivate most politicians.
You're asking the right question but in too limited a scope. The correct question is
Which specific freedoms did the 2A supporters in Texas give up in order to move forward? (notice the ommision of the 2A in the first part)
While I appreciate that this is a 2A oriented community there are swaps that happen. Examples: Support for funding of things in the budget Govt has no business doing. Support of judges not friendly to 2A or freedom in general. We got this horrible abortion bill that is gonna get whacked like a Pinata in the courts. In the rush to push the bill, it is setup to fail, but in all the favor swaps it got out. Nothing happens in isolation. If you think freedoms don't get traded you haven't been paying attention. The key is to get more than you gave. Too often we gave more than we got. That absolutely has to stop.
Plus you have to get committe chairs on board. You gotta get the things on the agenda. You think that magically happens for free? Think again.
The Bill of rights has 10 amendments, of the #2 is but a part, and #10 is the key that just because they are listed, it is not an inclusive list.
Do I think the open carry was a win. Yes. Did I think is was free? No
There
is
no
such
thing
as
free
lunch
I know how to make deals. It's not just a politics thing.
The smart deal makers know where that line is that separates the appearance of winning from actually winning.
You don't know where that line is when it comes to the 2A
You are very correct in your wider view and make good points.
In the case of the abortion bill, it was stupid from the get go, but I think it was never actually meant to last long term, I think more it was designed simply so some politicians can dramatically tell their hardline religious supporters that they got a win against abortion and passed the toughest bill yet, so... give us money and vote for us.
I don't think the Republicans actually want to really get rid of abortion as then they would loose a key issue, just like they never really seem to want to go all the way with giving back all the 2A freedoms. Both are things they can use to rile the base up with and raise money with. If both were settled on their side, then how would you whip everyone up.
And, the Democrats are counting on that law being able to be easily overturned in the courts so they can dramatically tell their hardline Abortion worshipers, look we got a win and turned back the worst law in the country, so... give us money and vote for us.
I also don't think the Democrats really want to totally win the abortion issue in full, because if it was officially a guaranteed right anytime, anyplace and for free anytime you wanted it and done / dusted, then how do they rile up all their base of female SJW voters?;
Much like once Homosexual marriage became law of the land, suddenly that block couldn't be counted on to always get out the vote for the Democrats.
I didn't really care about it all that much as it didn't have any effect on me or my 2A rights or for that matter most anything else concerning me, other than it will be yet another stupid thing our tax money will get wasted on putting up a half assed defense of it, only for it to be eventually destroyed in the Federal courts.
I dislike Abortion and think it's wrong, however it's not something I care all that much about, if my enemies want to murder their unborn babies, I'm not going to expend much of any energy, wealth or concern trying to keep them from their sin against their own flesh, I'm a bit heartless that way. I'm also not going to care if those that are a net drain on society happen to listen to the propaganda of my enemies and willingly decide to depopulate themselves for their own short term convenience. I understand to some it is a huge important thing, but for me it's not.
However in my uneducated, and somewhat twisted opinion, I actually think that stupid abortion bill was useful:
1. It's a giant FU to the democrats / liberals / woke SJW types, even if in the end it serves no purpose, still seeing them mad is fun.
2. It gives our enemies something they have to divert their attention to and fight against which leaves them less time / resources for fighting against the 2A
3. The silly law says you can sue people for helping other people do something that is federally legal & technically legal in the state, essentially using lawsuits to do an end run around what you can't do in straight law... sound familiar? Now eventually this stupid law will get tossed out by a federal court, with a long righteous blather about how stupid the whole idea is and so on and how you can't try to sue over legal things because you didn't get your way in politics and the courts... which decision can then be used when our enemies try to sue gun makers and gun sellers out of business over "somebody somewhere did something bad with a gun, so somebody not directly involved, who broke no laws or regulations should have to pay because we can't ask the actual criminal to pay."
So you have never seen people selling bullets they no longer want on line?I’m with ya, but….. How the fuck are you going to buy used Hornady bullets?
What’s your favorite way to get raped?
It is what it is right now, but the march forward is no compromise
Making compromises, and we’ll this is better than that, is how we ended up here.
Repeal the NFA
I see some of you didn't recognize this fuckstain a month ago, and hit the ignore button..
He is a leftist, despite his many feigned protestations of umbrage.
He is a leftist, despite his many feigned protestations of umbrage.
Bullshit
The Buckeye Firearms Association can teach you how to win without losing elsewhere.
Geez, I wish you hadn't brought that up. I miss the days of ordering surplus from the Shotgun news. I remember pulled 5.56 for less than $0.04 if you bought bulk. You could buy metric ton of WCC844 for the same as a 8# jug of H335 today.
See you get the idea. Everyone has different priorities and managing that is a NIGHTMARE. You don't always get a perfect win. I'm worried about those lawsuits on gun mfgs.
For me I could give a toss about background checks--essentially 90% of all transactions are already governed. I want to kill the NFA. You have valid concerns about background checks so for you and some others its a no go. But its the concept that matters.
Lets take a different example: National Pre-emptional. Basically Federal Firearms laws trump local. We know that is a huge violation of enumerated powers, but it would totally trash NY, CA, IL, MA etc. Yes or No? Remember the power you give one party, will be used when they nationally pre-empt something like abortion or education.
Then there are the idiots in Texas open carrying rifles into Macdonalds to protest lack of open carry. Yes it is their right, but it actually sets things back as it allows the media to forth at the mouth of the crazy idiots walking around because that's how they get portrayed. But try and tell them to chill and "ITS MUH RIGHT YOU FUDDDDDDDD!!!!" So yeah, go in there and scare off every damn Karen who then whoops up support for the opposition by crying on TV to the camera. Good job morons!
We need to be way smarter and tactical rather than a bunch of frothy idiots.
speaking of frothy idiots:
Remember anyone who disagrees is a liberal! Make sure we all think alike.
Just like liberals!
Last edited:
Point went right the fuck over your head.
Here in Washington State, Initiative 594 passed several years ago, effectively banning face to face sale without an FFL transfer. For a while since, folks were terrified of handing a gun to another person at the range to take a closer look at it, or shoot it, as it could be interpreted as an illegal transfer. The wording was that vague and onerous. Even Washington State Patrol said it was so vague, they wouldn’t enforce it without clarification from the State Attorney Generals office.
Do not horse trade with the Devil, you will not win. Do not give up anything. It is a false analogy to suggest giving anything up is wise. It assumes all parties are acting in good faith.
You speak the truth.
Here in Washington State, Initiative 594 passed several years ago, effectively banning face to face sale without an FFL transfer. For a while since, folks were terrified of handing a gun to another person at the range to take a closer look at it, or shoot it, as it could be interpreted as an illegal transfer. The wording was that vague and onerous. Even Washington State Patrol said it was so vague, they wouldn’t enforce it without clarification from the State Attorney Generals office.
Do not horse trade with the Devil, you will not win. Do not give up anything. It is a false analogy to suggest giving anything up is wise. It assumes all parties are acting in good faith.
Your point is not unwise. You can say trade "A" for "B" but the details of implementation matter. (and lets be honest that measure was in no way a pro-2A bill.. that pure anti-gun. flat. stop).
The problem is the devil comprises 50% of the legislature, you sort of have to deal with them. Even in the minority they have tricks to gum up the works. And your own allies with a poorly crafted implementation can hose you.
Many years ago the Senator from Idaho that got caught in the men's room in Minneapolis killed his own gun legislation after the Dem's poisoned it. I forget the details, but he got shallacked for pulling the bill, but the implementation would have absolutely destroyed the 2A.
On the flip side, you can poison anti-gun deals by pulling stuff like removing the police exemptions for magazines. Yeah it really makes the cops mad, but that's the point--forming the coalition the oppose or promote things.
If you don't like horse trading with the Devil--become the Devil and work on equal terms.
Last edited:
Let's go to that example.
The basic issue is that people have not been free for so long that actual freedom scares them and seeing people openly enjoying their freedom is scary because the propaganda for half a century has been guns bad, people with guns bad, guns dangerous.
Now 50 years later when everyone carries guns all the time, it might be no big deal at all when folks walk in and lean their rifles up against the rifle rack on the end of their table and get to eating.
You also have the SJW/Idiots/Liberals making the argument that they feel unsafe because they don't know if the people are trained. They also of course start whining about "protect the children" and we shouldn't have people carrying guns around where we are with our children because somehow my kids might get harmed.
Now many 2A folks have no problem with them doing that other than some of us think it's kind of stupid to be all in your face if you don't need to, but in the end we accept that it is their right even if we think they are being idiots.
NOW
Flip the script a bit to another freedom that many 2A supporters cannot handle because of religious hang-ups.
Let's say those same 2A supporters that were walking around McDonalds or Starbucks with their AR rifles and thinking it's funny to see "liberals" freaking out, are now the ones sitting down at McDonalds with their family after going to their church service and are enjoying inviting calories into their hearts.
Now a large group of people celebrating their freedom from illogical religious based body shame, walk in to the McDonalds, completely naked, ordering food, walking past the tables those same 2A "activists" are having a meal with their family. Doing nothing other than being naked and walking around like free, enlightened people. Said group of people take a bunch of seats at tables near them and sit down on little towels with nothing else on and eat food like everyone else, enjoy, chatting, maybe give a friendly hug to others that come in to join the table. Essentially being exactly normal except with no clothes.
I'll bet a large number of those 2A "activists" would start screaming, yelling and freaking out and going on about needing to protect their children from knowing what the human body looks like and demanding the police come do something and demanding the store manager throw them and and screaming on TV about how there should be some law to protect them from having to see actual humans in their natural state.
But again go to place in Europe who were not brainwashed by the same religious dogma and a family might nonchalantly walk by some couple having sex on the beach as they find a place to set up their umbrella, because people are used to that freedom. But those same folks would freak the hell out over someone with a gun on their hip because they are brainwashed with oppression.
It goes back to the root problem:
Very few people actually want true freedom for everyone
Most people really want freedom to do what they want and men with guns "just following orders" to put the boots to anyone doing things they don't like.
You got it exactly.
I think our difference is between idealism and pragmatism. Ideally people should be able to hit McDonalds with their rifle and no issue. 100% agree.
Pragmatically, people are going to freak for the very reason you mention. Since I can't undo 150 years of propaganda, I try and ask "hey guys maybe its not the best idea right now to protest this way because it can cause backlash while we try and pass this reform" Notice I am not asking for a law--I am asking for individual discretion NOT to exercise your right so we can get some freedom back. Its a long journey back.
Same thing for nudists--Europe perfect example, they have nudity in their commercials like its no big thing. Its the human body. We have to reconditioned the brainwashed. But failing to acknowledge that people are in fact brainwashed it not a recipe for success.
Take this example: Ban the internet sale of guns. Liberals would love that. Let them have that win.
(Except we know its already banned, as you have to go through an FFL!), so if you implement it right (and @Kamerad has it right, if they actually do something extra like shutting down shipping to FFLs, deal is off!), nothing changes, and then in return we add in national constitution carry.
Both sides "Win" But they get nothing and we get something.
But what do you get in response:
"FUDDDDDDDDDDDDDD!!!!"
"FILTHY LIBERAL"
"SELLOUT"
sale =/= transfer.....buying guns and transferring guns is 2 separate actions
you ban "internet sales"...that would prevent you from buying any guns from Buds, Brownells, Midway, ect...
...this is why we dont want fudds like you negotiating with our rights....
That's a sticky one, an easy one and a fully corrupted one.
Despite little arguments over the exact details of devolving the civil rights in the constitution to bind the states to honour civil rights, just about everyone agrees that at least for all the "Popular rights" it's settled law and the States must abide by the bill of rights amended to the constitution and the Federal government and the federal courts have the power to enforce and defend the civil rights of the citizens in any state.
For example, if some state decided to go back to the old days of the constitution, before the bill of rights and pass as state law saying you must all belong to the state Muslim church or be thrown in jail. Well the state can vote all they want and make it all legal according to their state laws but it will get smacked down in an instant, and if needed the Federal government will sent armed agents to enforce it.
Same thing with owning slaves, sorry federal constitution says no, you try it, you'll have the army in your state taking the politicians to prison.
Same goes for almost every other right in the bill of rights, people generally all agree that the states have to respect those rights and violations can be taken to a Federal court who will enforce your rights, regardless of what some state wants to do.
EXCEPT for the 2A, which is every bit as clear as the 1A and all the rest. Shall NOT infringe is very simple.
If you needed a government permit to worship???
If you needed a government permit to engage in free speech???
If you needed government permission to not be subject to warrantless search and seizure??
If the moment your wife filed for a divorce and wanted to stop you from doing anything to the bank account, you lost the right to free speech and free worship and your right to a fair trial???
BUT all the "good folks" have been hoodwinked into letting the 2A slip from an actual "Right" to a "Privilege" because... oh bad people...
If you get a "felon" tag hung around you neck, once your sentence is completed to you still have your right to free speech? your right not to be a slave? your right to worship or not worship the deity of your choice? the right to a fair trial? Nobody seriously argues otherwise.
Yet way too many "good folks" and "2A" supporters are all fine with the 2A being a privilege, one you can only enjoy if you have never done anything wrong, only if you are not currently accused of doing anything wrong, only if you are paying your evil ex tons of child support money so she and her druggie boyfriend can get properly high as they beat your kids. And only the way the government says, not too big, not to small, not to short, not to long, not to loud, not to quiet, not to scary, not too unscary, not to fast etc.
The actual "bad guys" don't care about any of that, they have whatever freedom they want with having guns, and if they get caught the charges are often dropped by the prosecutors or even totally ignored so long as they are on the criminal class. Just look at the glaring lack of any interest in gun charges for all the gun violence and breaking of gun laws by Antifa and BLM in 2021
So the "good folks" have made chains for themselves that they have to wear, while those who they thought they were making the chains for laugh at them.
That's the problem.
Surprisingly the latest Supreme Court justice was actually more on the side of 2A freedom applying to most people than many "2A supporters"
I'm a firm believer in freedom and liberty.
Specifically the liberty to do as you wish regardless of what others don't like, so long as you cannot be shown to be actually harming them or keeping them from enjoying their freedom.
I'm also firmly against other people being able to force you to do anything against your will or take your property to support others.
I don't believe anyone has the right to the body of another, the property of another or the fruits of someone else's labour.
That sets me on a collision course with all kinds of "conservative" folks, from people wanting the young to be kidnapped and enslaved for the "draft" to folks demanding people get vaccinated against their will to "protect others", to folks who think the government should be able to take your property if they want it, or those that think the government should be able to tax your property to support "social causes."
And while I understand that you can't have no taxes, I'm pretty much against every single one of them except a flat rate sales tax for everything at the same rate and you can apply that to money being sent out of the country.
Now I'm not perfect and if I was an unchallenged dictator, I'd probably wind up being considered a terrible tyrant since I'd be more on the side of, be decent to others or die. Which is why we don't have dictators even those with the best intentions.
You completely misunderstoood. Try reading next time.
Its using their own propaganda against them. (And that was the point about implementation and the devil being in the details). You can't "buy" a guy on the internet--but the shapeless masses believe you can because the fancy tv box told them so. So the "people" think there is this big victory, when in reality its just a repeat of something already on the books.
The key point is YOU DON'T ACTUALLY CHANGE ANYTHING. Take a step back and think. Of course is always in the wording of the law, and you write it such that transfers are still legal.
Then you say "hey look we comprimised" (wink wink) and in return we get National Concealed Carry.
You guys keep thinking of this as straight up honesty--no the point is the bait and switch except instead of us being the victims, we're pulling the bait and switch. Everyone says libs play dirty.
Ok so lets play dirty. Find the bait for them, lure them in and get some big wins and if you do it right they don't even realize it.
Hell you guys can't even figure it out. Use their propaganda against them.
Don't forget there are so many laws on the books that everyone is just a felon in waiting...
1) you are not smart enough to fool them in your hypothetical scenario....what makes you think you are going to do it in real life?
2) when have the left actually compromised on anything?...ever?
...trying to pull tricks isnt going to work in your favor...playing games is how we ended up in the scenario we are in...
