Mike Braun and preemptive infringement, to keep the Dems from doing it first

[jamil]

What's wrong with mowing? You use your favorite active earpro, hook your phone into it, listen to an e-book, or podcast, or jam to some Led Zeppelin/Traffic/whatever and no kids to whine, or wives to nag for those precious moments. Just you, a machine, and your thoughts. Mowing is awesome.

Oh. And no ****ing way. Zero compromises when there's nothing to gain and rights to lose and nothing that would have prevented any of these shootings.

 

[T.Lex]

What's wrong with mowing? You use your favorite active earpro, hook your phone into it, listen to an e-book, or podcast, or jam to some Led Zeppelin/Traffic/whatever and no kids to whine, or wives to nag for those precious moments. Just you, a machine, and your thoughts. Mowing is awesome.

Yeah, the "me and my thoughts" is where it gets tricky.

I start thinking of stuff political opponents might say....

Well, I try to think of counterarguments, too, but this one kinda had me stymied.

 

[KLB]

Get a Zero turn mower and it becomes more enjoyable and much less of a chore.

And what jamil said.

 

[jamil]

Yeah, the "me and my thoughts" is where it gets tricky.

I start thinking of stuff political opponents might say....

Well, I try to think of counterarguments, too, but this one kinda had me stymied.

See my edit. No compromises.

 

[T.Lex]

Get a Zero turn mower and it becomes more enjoyable and much less of a chore.

And what jamil said.

My modest yard doesn't justify such an expense. I guess I'm more of a skinflint than a landscaper.

Wait.

Does "skinflint" still mean what it did when I was a kid?

 

[Expat]

I was going to make one of my usual dumb joking comments about my thoughts while mowing and then I thought... no... that could get me red flagged.

 

[jamil]

My modest yard doesn't justify such an expense. I guess I'm more of a skinflint than a landscaper.

Wait.

Does "skinflint" still mean what it did when I was a kid?

I'm not gonna judge what you do while mowing...as long as you're not my next door neighbor.

 

[KLB]

I'm not gonna judge what you do while mowing...as long as you're not my next door neighbor.

Where I live that doesn't even matter. I wouldn't be able to see more than enough to laugh at him.

 

[T.Lex]

See my edit. No compromises.

Philosophically, I'm totally with you.

But, as I read in another thread we need to operate in the real world.

If a proposal like what I outlined comes out, the "No compromises" is easily parried with a "No compromises means more blood." Let's set aside the pure emotional appeal of that, because that's literally where we are. The facts of mass shootings are far overwhelmed by the emotions of the moment.

I guess the fortunate thing is that Beto staked out the far end of the field. The proposal might be spun as a first step toward confiscation or something.

In terms of policy, though, I think it superficially meets the current definition of "reasonable gun control."

 

[KLB]

My modest yard doesn't justify such an expense. I guess I'm more of a skinflint than a landscaper.

Wait.

Does "skinflint" still mean what it did when I was a kid?

Then get an eGo mower and mow your little piece of suburbia.

Or, suck it up and pay someone else to do it

 

[T.Lex]

I'm not gonna judge what you do while mowing...as long as you're not my next door neighbor.

 

[KLB]

Are you stalking Kut?

 

[T.Lex]

Are you stalking Kut?

Or is Kut stalking me... ?

 

[2A_Tom]

I feel left out. I never got a reply from him. Maybe because I told him he was on his way to losing my vote.

One of you should reply and ask him where in the Constitution it says this.

I know that the federal government’s most fundamental responsibility is to keep citizens safe

That was actually the exact point of my last email!

 

[jamil]

Philosophically, I'm totally with you.

But, as I read in another thread we need to operate in the real world.

If a proposal like what I outlined comes out, the "No compromises" is easily parried with a "No compromises means more blood." Let's set aside the pure emotional appeal of that, because that's literally where we are. The facts of mass shootings are far overwhelmed by the emotions of the moment.

I guess the fortunate thing is that Beto staked out the far end of the field. The proposal might be spun as a first step toward confiscation or something.

In terms of policy, though, I think it superficially meets the current definition of "reasonable gun control."

I think I understand the real world well enough. So let's look at what you've outlined.

So, I was mowing over the weekend - and I hate mowing. Its a chore. But, it gives me time to think.

Unfortunately, I think I see a way for Braun's concept to get some traction.

There's already a list of machine guns: the NFA. For every semi-auto version of an NFA listed machine gun, any transfer needs to go through NICS. It would "close" the "gunshow loophole" for "assault weapons," especially if we ever get a decent integration with mental health records. (And a decent way to decide which mental health issues should deny firearm ownership.)

That's the kind of compromise approach that would give Dems a shouting point that they've done stuff to stop the "mass shootings" and it would allow the Republicans to say that they quelled the effort at gun control, because no one had to turn in their ARs or AKs.

I hate mowing.

Okay, so it seems to me that you're saying, because we operate in the real world and all, that if we take a "no compromise" stand they're going to portray us as unreasonable nutters and we'll end up with even more gun control shoved down our throats. So because of that, proposals like Braun's will gain traction. Well yes. They will react with utmost hyperbole, and they'll portray us as being as unreasonable as they can imagine. That's nothing new. That's been a feature of the real world for many years. They'll say the stupid **** like they've been saying, such as, "Anyone who opposes UBC has the blood of children on their hands!" And of course that's absurd. And we should say so.

Everyone who understands how absurd that is, should ridicule the absurdity as publicly as they can, using every bit of platform they have. But when I say "no compromise" I'm not saying we should stand on a hill armed to the teeth with our hands clenching our guns tightly, as we proclaim, "nobody's takin' muh guns". Taking a "no compromise" stand means we point out the absurdity of all the hyperbole, we knock down the straw monsters, and we make the case that these proposals are ineffective and only cause law abiding gun owners to jump through hoops that non-law abiding gun owners won't.

I don't think we need to acquiesce to the hyperbole. I think we need to do a better job at presenting our case against proposals which are merely appeasements.

 

[jamil]

That was actually the exact point of my last email!

Speaking of reality, I think it's definitely worth pointing out to him, but the reality is, so many people have been fed the notion that government is here to save them from danger. And it just can't do that. He's probably more afraid of losing the mass's votes which believes he's supposed to be protecting them.

 

[T.Lex]

I don't think we need to acquiesce to the hyperbole. I think we need to do a better job at presenting our case against proposals which are merely appeasements.

I think you and I both remember the AWB. (Dang we're old.)

The "no compromise crowd" was drowned out in favor of the "OMG there's an emergency (drugs and gangs at the time) that we need to do something about."

The political landscape has evolved, sure. But my concern is that a No Compromise position will be marginalized by the current politics. With the relatively close margins in the national legislature, and a POTUS who so far seems willing to appease emotional calls for gun control, something less than an AWB would be a "win." (Trump cannot be counted on to veto an AWB, IMHO.)

Have a 10 or 20 year sunset on the new assault rifle NICS program, and that's even better.

Personally, I can see the value of indulging some minor incrementalism before going full on molon labe.

 

[2A_Tom]

Solving the drug problem is simple, ban Narcon.

 

[BigRed]

It’s a fair point though. Libertarians do the same thing every election. They do their own party convention, debate about how impure and statist the other candidates are, they get their 3-5% at the polls then go home. Every election, rinse, repeat.

You keep doing the same thing because that’s what you do. It’s deterministic. Its what we all do. People are wired differently. Don’t be surprised when the patterns of behavior reflect how they’re wired.

If you want the patterns to change you have to change the wiring, people’s worldview.

Down the road, when individual liberties including the natural right to defense are further eroded, my children and grand children may ask me, "Why did you vote for these infringement's?" I will be able to answer honestly that I did not.

 

[WebSnyper]

There should not be a policy of appeasement. It simply does not work with this type of opposition. We should be continuing to fight to extend our rights and freedoms, not looking to give in. I was not wrong about Braun. I spotted him as a flip flopper who will say whatever is necessary to get and stay in office. It's clear he doesn't have any knowledge in the area of the 2A fight, nor does he care.