Compromise: Trade Universal Checks for Serial Numbers

[clauwitz]

I would like to put forth a proposal and see what everyone thinks about it. The liberals always talk about compromise as they get just some of what they want instead of all of it (at least that's how it seems to me). Well, how about we propose an actual compromise: change the law to remove make, model, and serial number from ATF 4473s and require a background check for all firearms transactions. Additionally, somehow make the background check system open to more businesses (not just FFL licensed dealers), thereby increasing competition for the "service" of doing a background check. This way the gun-grabbers get more background checks, but we get fewer places our serial numbers are recorded.

[kollector03]

Your chasing a solution to an non-problem.

So give them background checks. OK, so what do you propose to give up when they come back and say that the universal background check is not good enough to solve the problem of evil people committing evil acts?

I'm for enforcing the laws that we currently have. Take the money were pissing away to propose new laws and build some prisons to house the criminals for the length of their sentence rather than releasing them to the street after 1/4 of their sentence is up.

If you are convicted of a crime and sentenced to 20 years in prison, well then you should serve the 20 years.

Problem solved

[Holland&Holland]

Pretty certain we compromised in '34 and '68. At some point ya gotta tell the ex to go pound sand.

[MXGreg]

A compromise is when both sides give something up. The gun ban people aren't giving anything up, they're just not getting as much as they want.

[EllisW]

How about we don't give up anything? How about they get nothing? No compromise, no retreat, no surrender.


and please find a better way to refer to the opposition than "the liberals." I consider myself very socially liberal and I hate the Left in this country just as much as the Right. There are plenty of liberals who aren't total wingnuts like the nutbars trying to ban whatever scares them each week.

[AgAuTHORITY]

How about we don't give up anything? How about they get nothing?

Not good enough, let me correct it, "How about we don't give up anything? How about they give us suppressors"

Ag

[XDM45]

No effing way.

Surrender nothing because everything is at stake.

On a somewhat-related note, it looks like the feds are going after our privacy as well - http://cispaisback.com/

[Li'l Beaver]

I would like to put forth a proposal and see what everyone thinks about it. The liberals always talk about compromise as they get just some of what they want instead of all of it (at least that's how it seems to me). Well, how about we propose an actual compromise: change the law to remove make, model, and serial number from ATF 4473s and require a background check for all firearms transactions. Additionally, somehow make the background check system open to more businesses (not just FFL licensed dealers), thereby increasing competition for the "service" of doing a background check. This way the gun-grabbers get more background checks, but we get fewer places our serial numbers are recorded.

No way Jose! What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

[EllisW]

Not good enough, let me correct it, "How about we don't give up anything? How about they give us suppressors"

Ag

It would be a dream come true, but I fear it will remain a dream for a long time to come. My sbr is loud.

[St. Olaf]

There will be a compromise, but we won't have any control over it.

It will just happen, and probably quickly, at the end of this.

If we're lucky enough to get by with background checks on all gun sales except to family as our new infringements, I'll be relieved.

Maybe if we can raise public awareness and make enough noise about the fact that the "Grandfathering" of what they call "Assault Weapons" only until the death of the owner is just delayed CONFISCATION.....maybe we can head that off.

I hope so.

[ex-LT]

Pretty certain we compromised in '34 and '68.

And again with the Lautenberg Act, and again with the Brady Bill, (etc, etc ad nauseam).

[ex-LT]

Here's a good read on the subject of compromise as it pertains to the Second Amendment and gun rights.....

Lawdog Files 1/25/13

...
I hear a lot about "compromise" from the gun-control camp ... except, it's not compromise.

Allow me to illustrate:

Let's say I have this cake. It is a very nice cake, with "GUN RIGHTS" written across the top in lovely floral icing. Along you come and say, "Give me that cake."

I say, "No, it's my cake."

You say, "Let's compromise. Give me half." I respond by asking what I get out of this compromise, and you reply that I get to keep half of my cake.

Okay, we compromise. Let us call this compromise The National Firearms Act of 1934.

This leaves me with half of my cake and there I am, enjoying my cake when you walk back up and say, "Give me that cake."

I say -- again: "No, it's my cake."

You say, "Let's compromise." What do I get out of this compromise? Why, I get to keep half of what's left of the cake I already own.

So, we compromise -- let us call this one the Gun Control Act of 1968 -- and this time I'm left holding what is now just a quarter of my cake.

And I'm sitting in the corner with my quarter piece of cake, and here you come again. You want my cake. Again.

This time you take several bites -- we'll call this compromise the Clinton Executive Orders -- and I'm left with about a tenth of what has always been MY DAMN CAKE and you've got nine-tenths of it.

Let me restate that: I started out with MY CAKE and you have already 'compromised' me out of ninety percent of MY CAKE ...

[bstrawse]

I'll make it simple: No.

Stop conceding ground.
b

[clauwitz]

and please find a better way to refer to the opposition than "the liberals." I consider myself very socially liberal and I hate the Left in this country just as much as the Right. There are plenty of liberals who aren't total wingnuts like the nutbars trying to ban whatever scares them each week.

Yeah, I usually try to avoid one word labels because they are generally not meaningful. I started out saying Democrats, but I figured that was too targeted. I guess I should have said "gun-grabbers" but it's not always the gun-grabbers that are screaming compromise and then give nothing up...

So, getting rid of serial numbers for transfers of ANY type (including ones through an FFL dealer) would not be worth completing a background check for all transfers? Even if the private party transfer background checks would be nearly unenforceable, since there's no serial number recorded at the transfer?

[St. Olaf]

Gun-haters might be an accurate term, but anti-gun will serve better.

Anything that demonizes the opposition in any emotive way is going to work against you.

We're not alone here, so I've been trying to to just say I'm angry and deadly determined, but not trash the anti-gun folks in any way.

Why intensify THEIR anger and determination? I'm sure a lot of them get even more fired up when jabbed, so why jab them?