Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
17. If you weren't referring to laws, what did you mean by compromise?
Wed Sep 7, 2016, 10:12 PM
Sep 2016
You mean the laws that were passed.


If you weren't referring to laws, what did you mean by compromise?

What do you want, and what are you willing to give up to get it?

Pre 1977 when the NRP was actually a value added lobby for gun rights and safety. Back then both sides of the debate showed a level maturity and compromise that the NRA has not had since.


You're more right than you know, in fact, I'm delighted that you brought it up.

Back then nobody was really trying to ban semi-auto rifles because they bear a military resemblance. Back then nobody counted suicides as 'gun violence'. That only happened when gun homicides dropped significantly, in spite of the fact that they dropped significantly , as a way of propping up an argument against the hated gun. Back then we didn't have background checks at all, let alone on private sales. Back then there wasn't absolutely false anti-gun propaganda like "weapons of war" or "weapons that belong on the battlefield" being floated by anti-gunners. I could go on a whole long ways here, believe you me.

So kindly spare me your false narrative and finger pointing.

People like you who push for more and more and more made the nra what it is today, because you neither consider alternatives outside gun control, nor leave any alternative but to fight it as it gets more and more and more extreme.




Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

It is only. deathrind Sep 2016 #1
Bull. beevul Sep 2016 #2
You mean the laws that were passed. deathrind Sep 2016 #10
If you weren't referring to laws, what did you mean by compromise? beevul Sep 2016 #17
What do you think of Feinstein's riders to the UBC proposal, post Sandy Hook? Eleanors38 Sep 2016 #5
How much more shit can you pack into one OP? flamin lib Sep 2016 #3
You want to compare your liberalism with mine? Tell me. Eleanors38 Sep 2016 #4
Is that a personal call out? nt flamin lib Sep 2016 #9
After asking about Breitbart "comfort" levels, I coulda sworn it was the opposite. Eleanors38 Sep 2016 #18
The things you posted are identical to what I see at Breitbart. Just sayin . . .nt flamin lib Sep 2016 #19
Hell, they may agree with me on who was the first president, too. Eleanors38 Sep 2016 #20
"only some strange anatomical speculations you seem unusually expert on." Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2016 #11
I'm pretty sure I'm being ignored as well discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2016 #12
If the rationale is, "You just can't reason with these gunners!" Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2016 #13
'Tis a question of the ages and as old as time discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2016 #14
"Sure you wouldn't be more comfortable at Breitbart?" He hasn't advocated voting GOP like you did: friendly_iconoclast Sep 2016 #7
Ouch, that will leave a mark Duckhunter935 Sep 2016 #16
This group is enormous Duckhunter935 Sep 2016 #15
Isn't this typical of how all legislation is put together? JonathanRackham Sep 2016 #6
Actually, imo, compromise usually comes with measure of degree and authority-sharing... Eleanors38 Sep 2016 #8
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Zika funding stalls due t...»Reply #17