Why won't gun owners compromise?

[Horrible]

Compromise is a two-way street. What they call "compromise" ISN'T COMPROMISE!!

Compromise means that I give up something but GET something in return. The antis think that it means that instead of their goal to ban all guns, we only ban half of them! That is NOT compromise!

What is their side willing to offer up? Sure, I will entertain compromise. Willing to ban bump stocks for CCW reciprocity.

Since there is no real compromise to be had, as a previous poster said their goal is ban all guns, then I refuse to give an millimeter!

Moar lawrs and more infringements is NOT compromise!

 

[Permanent Waves]

As far as anti's are concerned, their end of the compromise is that you get to keep "some" of your firearms. You know, because of 2A and all...

Other than that, how you purchase a firearm, how long you can wait to acquire your purchase, the level of permitting, the permitting process, the background check, how in depth the background check is, how invasive to your privacy a check can be, how you carry, store, maintain, transport, any physical portion of the firearm or attachments, how, when, why it works, when you need to "give them back", and every single of every other aspect of ownership is within their purview to control. Period.

It's a Right? BAH!! That matters how?? We live in a society - we all need perceived safety and CONTROL!! /s

 

[SKumar]

Spot on. If we can't agree on basic fundamental truths such as what's a man or woman, how the hell can I have a conversation about Rights with you?

 

[Whiskeywon]

Imagine the braying and crying if people had to fill out a 4473 and pass a NICS check to vote...

-Mike

Imagine if they were required to have a trust that cost 200$, fingerprints, and an extensive background check in order to vote in the primaries? As it is only restricting a small portion of voting and thus a compromise. That's clearly fair and comparable. That'd be the day.

 

[JohnZ]

Why won't the gays just compromise and have another shop bake their cakes?

 

[ridleyman]

You joke, but those are literal arguments used by some of the stupider antis.

exactly

 

[amm5061]

Imagine if they were required to have a trust that cost 200$, fingerprints, and an extensive background check in order to vote in the primaries? As it is only restricting a small portion of voting and thus a compromise. That's clearly fair and comparable. That'd be the day.

That's a brilliant idea! Killary rigging the Democratic primaries is an excellent example of exactly why this should be implemented. But alas, poll taxes are illegal in the US. But f*** your car you use to get to your polling place, pay the .gov every year for that privilege. Amirite?

 

[VetteGirlMA]

Imagine if they were required to have a trust that cost 200$, fingerprints, and an extensive background check in order to vote in the primaries? As it is only restricting a small portion of voting and thus a compromise. That's clearly fair and comparable. That'd be the day.

I've said that publicly a few times. A license to vote. Submit to a background check, fingerprints, mental health check (don't want crazies voting right?) and at the very end a local police chief will arbitrarily determine what elections you can vote on based on nebulous 'suitability' rules that they make up in their heads. Make the right to vote identical to a firearms owner and the laws would change in a heartbeat.

 

[Coyote33]

10 Memes That Perfectly Explain the Two Sides of the Gun Control Debate