It seems gun owners are frequently asked to give up one or more of their rights at various times, especially following acts of violence where firearms are involved. When gun owners push back at attempts to take away their rights, they are often charged with refusing to compromise. Of course, as has been pointed out many times, compromises are not really being offered since only the gun owners are asked to give up something they wish to retain while the other side offers nothing they are willing to give up in return (which would be required if compromise were to occur).
Those attacking the rights of gun owners seem to have a list of things they seek, such as banning certain guns or types of guns, banning certain individuals from buying guns due to age or past actions relating to health or brushes with the law, as well as instituting waiting periods before possession of a gun. Of course all of those have been tried with essentially zero success. Sadly, they seem driven more by their hatred of guns than the success or failure of their attempts to address the crimes of evil individuals.
But the real point I would like to make concerns the typical approach to “compromise” taken by gun owners. While I don't oppose an approach that says we have the rights to our guns and aren't willing to give up anything else (just because you hate guns), I wonder if another tool would be useful as well.
The gun haters have their list of wants they trot out on cue; why don't we develop a list as well. Then when they moan about how gun owners are unwilling to compromise, we challenge them to a real compromise where they would be required to give us something we want for them to get something they want. This could serve two purposes, one being they would suddenly be faced with a situation of compromise that actually affects them as well. Secondly, if a real compromise did occur, gun owners would acquire something they didn't enjoy previously.
One such item on the gun owners list could be the already proposed National Reciprocity on Concealed Carry, but there are many other possibilities. Things like (listed in no particular order):
1) The right for gun owners to carry concealed without a permit. Such already exists in some states. And many states already have no prohibitions against open carry. If the people truly have the right to keep and bear arms, they must be able to carry them somehow, with no permit.
2) A consistent age of Adulthood. As has been discussed recently, when one becomes accountable as an adult with the accompanying rights and responsibilities, gun ownership should occur at the same time as the right to vote, serving in the military, purchasing alcohol, etc.
3) Allow non-violent offenders to purchase firearms. While the moral character of someone who has written bad checks or evaded taxes may be rather deplorable, I'm not sure that behavior should bar them from owning firearms.
4) Create a class of firearms that require little or no paperwork or background check for purchase (in addition to Antique Firearms and air rifles). Purchase/ownership would still have age restrictions, but adults would be able to easily purchase them. Not sure what form this might take, but since many have been led to believe that semiautomatic firearms (and especially those with detachable magazines) are the root of all things evil, something like this could be proposed as a “compromise” for other firearm types. Such a proposal would put their deceptions to a test.
5) Press for a relaxation of select fire/full auto restrictions. Since those type of firearms are the preferred choice of our military they are the obvious best choice for a well regulated militia. It's time to allow the militia to suitably equip itself.
6) Require firearms training to be a part of public school curriculum. Better yet require it to include hands on training.
This is not meant to be a complete list, or even a good start. Some of the suggestions might seem outrageous, but a good argument probably can be (and perhaps has been) made for all of them (though we know that sound reasoning will mean nothing to some people). It just seems it might be good to look at other approaches to fight for our gun rights. And I think bringing some of our own wants to the table when someone hollers “compromise” will serve to educate if nothing else.
Those attacking the rights of gun owners seem to have a list of things they seek, such as banning certain guns or types of guns, banning certain individuals from buying guns due to age or past actions relating to health or brushes with the law, as well as instituting waiting periods before possession of a gun. Of course all of those have been tried with essentially zero success. Sadly, they seem driven more by their hatred of guns than the success or failure of their attempts to address the crimes of evil individuals.
But the real point I would like to make concerns the typical approach to “compromise” taken by gun owners. While I don't oppose an approach that says we have the rights to our guns and aren't willing to give up anything else (just because you hate guns), I wonder if another tool would be useful as well.
The gun haters have their list of wants they trot out on cue; why don't we develop a list as well. Then when they moan about how gun owners are unwilling to compromise, we challenge them to a real compromise where they would be required to give us something we want for them to get something they want. This could serve two purposes, one being they would suddenly be faced with a situation of compromise that actually affects them as well. Secondly, if a real compromise did occur, gun owners would acquire something they didn't enjoy previously.
One such item on the gun owners list could be the already proposed National Reciprocity on Concealed Carry, but there are many other possibilities. Things like (listed in no particular order):
1) The right for gun owners to carry concealed without a permit. Such already exists in some states. And many states already have no prohibitions against open carry. If the people truly have the right to keep and bear arms, they must be able to carry them somehow, with no permit.
2) A consistent age of Adulthood. As has been discussed recently, when one becomes accountable as an adult with the accompanying rights and responsibilities, gun ownership should occur at the same time as the right to vote, serving in the military, purchasing alcohol, etc.
3) Allow non-violent offenders to purchase firearms. While the moral character of someone who has written bad checks or evaded taxes may be rather deplorable, I'm not sure that behavior should bar them from owning firearms.
4) Create a class of firearms that require little or no paperwork or background check for purchase (in addition to Antique Firearms and air rifles). Purchase/ownership would still have age restrictions, but adults would be able to easily purchase them. Not sure what form this might take, but since many have been led to believe that semiautomatic firearms (and especially those with detachable magazines) are the root of all things evil, something like this could be proposed as a “compromise” for other firearm types. Such a proposal would put their deceptions to a test.
5) Press for a relaxation of select fire/full auto restrictions. Since those type of firearms are the preferred choice of our military they are the obvious best choice for a well regulated militia. It's time to allow the militia to suitably equip itself.
6) Require firearms training to be a part of public school curriculum. Better yet require it to include hands on training.
This is not meant to be a complete list, or even a good start. Some of the suggestions might seem outrageous, but a good argument probably can be (and perhaps has been) made for all of them (though we know that sound reasoning will mean nothing to some people). It just seems it might be good to look at other approaches to fight for our gun rights. And I think bringing some of our own wants to the table when someone hollers “compromise” will serve to educate if nothing else.
