Why should we help gun owners who support gun control?

[Aguila Blanca]

Much of the recent worry of gun control is, IMHO, the lack of trust within our political system.

I accept this. Remember that the original Militia Acts of 1792 provided that all able-bodied white males between the ages of 18 and 45 were to be enrolled in the militia, and the local militia captain was to keep a record of all the members of his company. Under the Militia Acts of 1792, each militia member was responsible for providing his own firearm and the first, basic load-out of 20 rounds of ball. Consequently, at the end of the 18th century the "authorities" knew and had a record of who owned the "assault weapons" of that day.

Although I am over the age of 45, if I were assured that my local police department wanted to keep a record of everyone who owns an AR-15 rifle so they would know who they can call on for back-up in the event of a serious "incident," I would not object. However, since I'm quite certain the local cop shop is NOT going to call on citizens for support under any foreseeable circumstances, any registration they might conduct of "assault weapons" is most likely going to be for the purpose of potential confiscation. And I am opposed to any such registration on that basis.

 

[zukiphile]

Much of the recent worry of gun control is, IMHO, the lack of trust within our political system. History has shown us that it is not just the Democrats we can't trust. Still we trust in the 2nd, so why can't we trust in the government that is governed by the same piece of paper? Why will one survive when the all the rest won't?

Because we aren't governed by the piece of paper, and the text matters as much as we make it matter. I like to make the text matter a lot because the alternative is making peoples' desires and opinions of the day matter more, and that's typically a bad idea.

Trust in a system that ultimately threatens force against you is something I find perverse. Affirmatively distrusting those who would ask for greater trust and vest additional power in that system seems prudent.

Seeking greater than current restriction on possession of arms reduces the scope of the right, and increases government power over exercise of the right. I would not be inclined to assist another gun owner in increasing that power because the act itself seems imprudent.

We all obey the National Firearms Act of 1934 by the bylaws of this forum, so "gun control" is simply a matter of grey... not black and white.

Advocating for additional restriction is a matter of making the grey darker. That an individual agrees that he will observe a law is not a comment on the wisdom of that law, and shouldn't suggest that a principled opposition to additional restrictions is arbitrary.

 

[Skans]

I say let every free person have guns. If someone commits a crime for which we do not want him to have a gun once released, then it's simple - change the law to not release that person. However, once someone fully pays their debt to society, then they should be full citizens with full rights to own guns, vote etc. If we are not prepared to allow that, then we are really not prepared to let the person live, or be free in our society.

 

[GM1967]

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete2 View Post
I don't give donations to any democrat, won't vote for one. Don't sleep with the enemy.
I agree. I dont knowingly talk to Democrats. Its truly bad that when you boil it all down, I have more in common with the Taliban than I do with Democrats.

I have to talk to a Democrat, I'm married to her
But at least she has come around to my way of thinking about gun rights.

And as far as helping a person who doesn't fully agree with your position on gun rights/gun control.....well, it's your right to help or not help. But isn't it kind of being a jerk to withhold your help (if it's not something like driving them to an anti-gun rally, of course)?

And if you won't help them, do you really think they are going to do you the courtesy of listening to your views on gun rights? If you help them, and they become a friend (or at least a friendly acquaintance), they might be more receptive to hearing your views, and you might even be able to change their mind. If, however, you treat them with hostility or callousness, they will close off, and you'll never get them to listen.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

So, no more support for John Lott?

https://townhall.com/columnists/joh...34d45cab30c0f59da9a088f62e766381&recip=793963

There is so much wrong with this quote that it is just darned embarrassing...

Second, no self-respecting military in the world would use the “assault weapons” that we sometimes see in mass shootings. AR-15s fire the same sorts of bullets as small game-hunting rifles, and even do so with the same velocity and rapidity (one bullet per pull of the trigger). In fact, AR-15s aren’t allowed for deer hunting in most states because of the fear that they will wound rather than kill the animals. This may cause the deer to die slowly and painfully.