Skip to comments.My Turn: Gun Rights: Compromise is nothing but theft of a right
Posted on 01/14/2013 2:04:39 PM PST by marktwain
I think you need a little history lesson. In your editorial, "Common sense must prevail....", you use the phrase "Irresponsible gun availability," as if guns are just so much more available, as compared to the past etc.
Did you know that prior to 1968, guns were advertised in the back of comic books, and various magazine, and sold in every hardware store and many department stores, and could be purchased by anybody, of any age, all you needed was money and a postage stamp, and a gun would be delivered to your door by the postman. Licensed gun dealers didn't exist, anybody could simply order guns from a distributor and resell them.
Now, the press implies that Internet sales are doing the exact same thing, but that is not true, every Internet sale of a firearm must be shipped to a licensed FFL gun dealer, and that dealer must do a NICS background check on the buyer, before delivering that Internet purchased gun to its buyer.
Prior to 1934, it was very common, and almost expected, that soldiers fighting overseas would ship fully functional, machine guns back home to their families as a war trophy, no questions asked, after 1934, you had to pay a $200 tax to legally bring a machine gun back, but many thousands were illegally shipped back anyway. That practice was stopped by the military in the early 1950s, to my recollection.
(Excerpt) Read more at campverdebugleonline.com ...
This is exactly right! Our Constitutional Rights are NOT to be compromised on!
I hear a lot about “compromise” from your camp ... except, it’s not compromise.
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.
There I am with my half of the cake, and you walk back up and say, “Give me that cake.”
I say, “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 have your compromise — let us call this one the Gun Control Act of 1968 — and 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.
Then we compromised with the Lautenberg Act (nibble, nibble), the HUD/Smith and Wesson agreement (nibble, nibble), the Brady Law (NOM NOM NOM), the School Safety and Law Enforcement Improvement Act (sweet tap-dancing Freyja, my finger!)
I’m left holding crumbs of what was once a large and satisfying cake, and you’re standing there with most of MY CAKE, making anime eyes and whining about being “reasonable”, and wondering “why we won’t compromise”.
I’m done with being reasonable, and I’m done with compromise. Nothing about gun control in this country has ever been “reasonable” nor a genuine “compromise”.
I was completely unaware of this event that took place in Athens, TN. in 1946. I did not know an armed revolt by WWII veterans ever took place. A very sobering video to say the least.
Now the second amendment is a little clearer.
Massive civil disobedience and non-compliance. It worked for MLK and Gandhi.
Why do you suppose it was covered up? Why isn't it in the history books? Why isn't the anniversary celebrated?
Had they tried it against Hitler or Stalin, they'd have ended up in an unmarked grave and no one would ever have heard of them. I doubt civil disobedience will work any better against our would-be King. Be glad we have guns. Never give them up.
The disobedience I am talking about is to refuse to register or comply with confiscation. Retaining our guns gives us a huge advantage over a would be tyrant. I thought that was obvious.
Thanks for post that link. I had never heard of this event.
Ping for later.
***and a gun would be delivered to your door by the postman.***
Not so. You could order by mail but the firearm would be shipped by railway express or some other shipper but not the post office.
Not for Govs. Ross Barnett and George C. Wallace.
I remember as a kid going in the American Auto store back in the late 50’s .In the back of the store next to the “tube tester” was a 55 gallon drum of surplus WW II rifles for sale from anywhere from 10-20 dollars. Pay the money and walk out with it .
We win if we shoot back. If we shoot first, all bets are off. Ignore their EO and see what they do. I think the sissy-boy Kenyan is hoping we comply; when we dont, he doesn’t really have a lot of good moves to make
“Massive civil disobedience and non-compliance. It worked for MLK and Gandhi”
That was before Homeland Security and FEMA camps. You been listening to too much Glenn Beck.
That is an awesome analogy. I like it!
So, you plan to comply with and obey an EO to register and turn in or do you intend to engage in civil disobedience? “Civil” disobedience is not well-behaved disobedience. In this context “civil” refers to citizens as in civil rights.
Likewise, I remember as a kid in the mid-1950’s going into the Gambles store in Pierre, South Dakota and seeing a stack of green boxes with WW2 military rifles packed in cosmoline. I am sure anyone could have paid for their gun, dug it out of the cosmoline and taken it home.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.