What would we actually accept?

[38special]

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, unless new weapons are formed.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, unless you want more than 10 shots at your disposal.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, unless the guns look really scary to some people.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, unless it has a pistol grip.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, unless it's not used for hunting.

NO.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

[Colinb913]

NOTHING. Period.

 

[Montgomery Hicks]

What I believe will happen is anything over 30 rounds will be ban and there will be more emphasis on background checks

 

[sparkyfender]

Is what we will "accept" even a concern to those forging and then voting on these new restrictions?

 

[hick185]

I comprise nothing. They are not the ones being attacked. We are. No to capacity bans. No to background checks on a PRIVATE transaction. What if I was selling a firearm to my cousin? Known him all his life. There is nothing they know about him, that I don't already know. And how are they going to know when a gun was sold? How will they be able to tell if a gun was sold before or after they put a new law in place? They would have to start a database and record ever serial number they came across. It is another type of registration. No comprise.

 

[BowhuntnHoosier]

I SAY DON"T GIVE THEM ANYTHING. WE ALREADY HAVE MORE GUN LAWS THAN SHOULD BE ACCORDING TO OUR CONSTITUTION. I SAY NO LONGER SHOULD WE BE MADE TO PAY A TAX FOR CLASS III AND NO LONGER MADE TO GET A LICENSE OR PERMIT. OUR CONSTITUTION IS OUR LICENSE OR PERMIT TO CARRY.

 

[silverspoon]

I can't believe how fast some are to "compromise" away something someone risked everything for. Thousands died, had their homes burned, their families killed, watched their friends die and now you give in so easily? Research exactly happened to most that signed the Declaration of Independence. It wasn't all lovey dovey let's compromise our way outa this that's for sure. Once they did it there was no turning back. It was on! They paid the price in blood and most lost everything. Fast forward 237 years and look what we have become, a society of compromisers where there is no room left for compromise. We have already given up more then we should have.

 

[01deuce]

 

[bft131]

Hate to tell you all.. Something's going to happen and our next change will have to be at the ballot box.. Even the NRA, ect isn't that dumb not to have some compromise. So all the bandwagon members will need to stay and WE need to start whittling away a piece at a time at these slackers in Washington.

Lots of bluster but how many of go to meet and greets with your state and federal reps ? Attend county meetings ? Speak out when you hear misstatements or untruths or keep your mouth shut for fear of being labeled ? Give and take are part of politics, hopefully our side will give less and take more but it's going to happen..

 

[cwagner1]

So I take it everyone posting here has contacted all of their representatives?

That's the only way to be heard. If you haven't, do it NOW.

 

[WebSnyper]

How much are you willing to negotiate on your other rights?

I'm not willing to negotiate.

Trading freedom for security becomes a slippery slope.

Maybe someone should drop a politician out a window onto a group of innocent bystanders, then we could ban politicians.

 

[Mango]

I should have known it would derail into a barrage of "not a damn thing".

I dont disagree, our goal is not to compromise, but they will want SOMETHING. Congress may very well be incapable of passing ANYTHING, which is all we can hope for, but I am more interested in what people could actually live with. We are talking amongst ourselves, not in a negotiation with the other side. If we had to chose "X new rules" or "Feinstein's AWB Ban" what would "X new rules" be?

They want SOMETHING? Fine. Molan Labe. End of story.

 

[nova512]

absolutely nothing,, i will give nothing.enforce the laws already in place. why should we all pay for a few monsters.they are criminals they will find a way no matter a law.

 

[Mad Macs]

Just out of curiosity how does having stricter background checks and harsher penalties for gun-related violence infringe upon anybody's rights?

Just asking, I'm curious.

 

[Expat]

Just out of curiosity how does having stricter background checks and harsher penalties for gun-related violence infringe upon anybody's rights?

Just asking, I'm curious.

Most of us feel that guns shouldn't be treated any differently than other consumer products. We have learned that more people are killed each year by hammers than rifles. So why don't we have background checks on hammers? Why should there be harsher penalties for gun crimes than hammer crimes? Is my victim soothed by the fact I used a hammer instead?

 

[Birds Away]

I don't believe the founding fathers wrote the Bill of Rights to be compromised at some later date.

 

[jb1911]

I would love to accept Ocommie's resignation, but I wouldn't accept any more restrictions. There are already ~47,000 gun laws that aren't enforced.

 

[LarryC]

Obviously there are is a lot of emphasis on what might happen, or what could happen, but in all likelihood it will come down to a compromise. If we have to accept new legislation, what could you live with?

I could live with a practical way to perform NICS checks for private parties, provided it was not required by law, but provided as an option to vette out buyers who shouldnt be buying. Personally, I would actually feel comfortable doing transactions on Armslist or similar sites if I could check someone out. The check would in some way have to be mutual, and it would have to be free.

I would also like to see existing laws enforced to a much stricter degree to prevent sudo dealers who are selling stacks of new guns as a "private party". If you are operating a business, you should have an FFL. I would also support better contribution of mental health records, as long as it was court ordered. Among those records I would also include things like court ordered anger management. Lastly, I would support an improvement to NICS so that when someone was denied (not delayed, but denied) that it would notify the local police immediately. If that person was already being monitored by local LEOs, that information could be helpful.

I wouldn't "accept" any new laws restricting our RIGHTS. Anytime you have to have "checks" on every sale, you most likely will have a De facto "registration" as you would have to list the gun - serial number, make and type and name of purchaser. Once all guns are "registered" it is very easy to confiscate. As this would only apply to honest citizens, it would be of Zero value to prevent criminal ownership or use. It is already a "LAW" that a collector cannot derive a substantial income from gun sales. Why in the HExx would you want to restrict our RIGHTS by passing another law? As to the NCIS denial - I have stated before that almost all "criminals" do not and will not attempt to purchase a firearm legally. They will steal one, buy one from a criminal friend, or otherwise obtain one. The only persons that are denied have attempted to purchase legally, probably not believing they have any incident on their record that would affect their owning a firearm. Otherwise it would be kind of like stealing a gun and taking it to the police station and asking if it show up as a stolen gun!

 

[HenryWallace]

Nothing. Because they will never be content. Make no mistake. They want to take your guns from you. They will do it incrementally. It will start with gunshow loophole, mag restrictions. Next universal background checks, then a retroactive national registry.

We cannot afford to give them an inch.

They've already taken the mile... All I demand is equality... They wont give up there body guards? Well guess what I am for my children!? And that right is important to me, and to my children.

If it's "THE PEOPLES GOVERNMENT" and it's "MADE FOR THE PEOPLE, MADE BY THE PEOPLE, AND ANSWERABLE TO THE PEOPLE" then we should demand that power to make these people ANSWERABLE.

 

[LarryC]

Just out of curiosity how does having stricter background checks and harsher penalties for gun-related violence infringe upon anybody's rights?

Just asking, I'm curious.

Background checks have been used as a method of "registration". A few years ago the US Congress with held funding in order to make the ATF destroy the records regarding the sale of guns. Seems the ATF were archiving all names and gun sales for a period of time. This was against the Constitution and the rules of operation set by Congress. If you think this won't (or isn't happening right now), I have some land to sell cheap about 250 mile south of Key West. As to harsher penalties - if they would enforce the ones they have (against the Attorney General also) it would be a bigger help than making new ones.