Hamburger Dan said:

---

I'm 60 years old, life long Texan. Had guns since I was 17, fairly avid bird hunter, along with trap / skeet shooting. I would be fine with more background checks, and even more few red flag restrictions. Not a popular opinion here, but I don't believe everyone should have access to guns, just because it's their right. There are some guns, I just don't see Joe Public needing".

Edited for a vet appt

---

Folks like this will be why we lose our 2A rights either tomorrow or 50 years down the line. He thinks there are sensible people in government that have our best interests in mind. The *******s in Washington look out for themselves and do whatever to get themselves re-elected. Very naive and dangerous point of view.

Just checking to see how thread was going. I might be naive, but I generally hope to see the best in all people, no matter how hard it is. We can all hope for the best in our leaders. Al too often, we accept mediocrity in our politics. Maybe that's just the overall change in our society. That was the basic premise of my post. I didn't mean to ruffle so many feathers, but that's ok. Long time coaches have thick skins. I'm not much of a doom and gloom thinker. Always lots of grey areas. Besides, nobody really knows what it will be like in a 100 years. Things don't have to be either / or. As stated above, we should hope for meaningful compromises in things we think are important.

The security details for all these politicians should have to surrender their weapons as well.....Not a one of them are worth protecting anyway. 'Rules for thee but not for me' is their mantra.

Hamburger Dan said:

---

Just checking to see how thread was going. I might be naive, but I generally hope to see the best in all people, no matter how hard it is. We can all hope for the best in our leaders. Al too often, we accept mediocrity in our politics. Maybe that's just the overall change in our society. That was the basic premise of my post. I didn't mean to ruffle so many feathers, but that's ok. Long time coaches have thick skins. I'm not much of a doom and gloom thinker. Always lots of grey areas. Besides, nobody really knows what it will be like in a 100 years. Things don't have to be either / or. As stated above, we should hope for meaningful compromises in things we think are important.

---

I'll leave this alone. You have more faith in your fellow man and government than I do. My only hope at this point is that I'm able to pass my values and mistrust of big gov on to my grandchildren.

Hamburger Dan said:

---

Just checking to see how thread was going. I might be naive, but I generally hope to see the best in all people, no matter how hard it is. We can all hope for the best in our leaders. Al too often, we accept mediocrity in our politics. Maybe that's just the overall change in our society. That was the basic premise of my post. I didn't mean to ruffle so many feathers, but that's ok. Long time coaches have thick skins. I'm not much of a doom and gloom thinker. Always lots of grey areas. Besides, nobody really knows what it will be like in a 100 years. Things don't have to be either / or. As stated above, we should hope for meaningful compromises in things we think are important.

---

How can you hope to see the best in people, but want to further restrict rights? It sounds like you try to see the best in Government people, but not the citizens of this country. Your conclusion doesn't match your justification.

I agree with you that we've accepted mediocrity in politics for too long. Giving those *******s more power is NOT the answer. Quite the opposite, in my opinion.

My meaningful compromise goes like this: if you don't want firearms to be part of your life, don't buy one. If all you want is a couple shotguns for hunting and clays, knock yourself out. It is not my place to tell you what to do. Here's where the compromise comes in. I expect you to show me the same level of respect.

magnumtmp said:

---

My meaningful compromise goes like this: if you don't want firearms to be part of your life, don't buy one. If all you want is a couple shotguns for hunting and clays, knock yourself out. It is not my place to tell you what to do. Here's where the compromise comes in. I expect you to show me the same level of respect.

---

We as a society would be so much better off if this outlook was applied broadly.

Canyon's point is the crux-

"Folks like this will be why we lose our 2A rights either tomorrow or 50 years down the line.....The *******s in Washington look out for themselves and do whatever to get themselves re-elected. Very naive and dangerous point of view."

If you look at the numbers, guns are far from the biggest cause of deaths. It's simply a wedge issue to garner votes.

The terrible occurrences of school, and now church, shootings have really simple solutions as has been shown.

The "conservative" politicians who fail to push back on this narrative with facts are the worst kind of deal makers, gradually chipping away at our rights in the process.

I used to be a "hunting guns are all you need" person but not with a family, not with daughters, not with the "progressive" big government policies I see being pushed on the left's platform. The 2nd isn't about hunting.

Hamburger Dan said:

---

I'm 60 years old, life long Texan. Had guns since I was 17, fairly avid bird hunter, along with trap / skeet shooting. I would be fine with more background checks, and even more few red flag restrictions. Not a popular opinion here, but I don't believe everyone should have access to guns, just because it's their right. There are some guns, I just don't see Joe Public needing".

Edited for a vet appt

---

Describes me to a T.

JonSnow said:

---

Hamburger Dan said:

---

I'm 60 years old, life long Texan. Had guns since I was 17, fairly avid bird hunter, along with trap / skeet shooting. I would be fine with more background checks, and even more few red flag restrictions. Not a popular opinion here, but I don't believe everyone should have access to guns, just because it's their right. There are some guns, I just don't see Joe Public needing".

Edited for a vet appt

---

Describes me to a T.

---

Then you don't get it either. This is why we can't have nice things.

You can have universal background checks in exchange for full repeal of NFA, GCA, Hughes Amendment, import ban, federal "gun free" zones, universally accepted CHLs, and ending all taxes on the sale of guns and ammunition.

See?

Compromise.

Hamburger Dan said:

---

Just checking to see how thread was going. I might be naive, but I generally hope to see the best in all people, no matter how hard it is. We can all hope for the best in our leaders. Al too often, we accept mediocrity in our politics. Maybe that's just the overall change in our society. That was the basic premise of my post. I didn't mean to ruffle so many feathers, but that's ok. Long time coaches have thick skins. I'm not much of a doom and gloom thinker. Always lots of grey areas. Besides, nobody really knows what it will be like in a 100 years. Things don't have to be either / or. As stated above, we should hope for meaningful compromises in things we think are important.

---

The illogic of this post has already been addressed.

My question is, when did we start spelling 'gray' like the damn limeys? I see this too often.

Hamburger Dan said:

---

Just checking to see how thread was going. I might be naive, but I generally hope to see the best in all people, no matter how hard it is. We can all hope for the best in our leaders. Al too often, we accept mediocrity in our politics. Maybe that's just the overall change in our society. That was the basic premise of my post. I didn't mean to ruffle so many feathers, but that's ok. Long time coaches have thick skins. I'm not much of a doom and gloom thinker. Always lots of grey areas. Besides, nobody really knows what it will be like in a 100 years. Things don't have to be either / or. As stated above, we should hope for meaningful compromises in things we think are important.

---

Hamburger Dan said:

---

Just checking to see how thread was going. I might be naive, but I generally hope to see the best in all people, no matter how hard it is. We can all hope for the best in our leaders. Al too often, we accept mediocrity in our politics. Maybe that's just the overall change in our society. That was the basic premise of my post. I didn't mean to ruffle so many feathers, but that's ok. Long time coaches have thick skins. I'm not much of a doom and gloom thinker. Always lots of grey areas. Besides, nobody really knows what it will be like in a 100 years. Things don't have to be either / or. As stated above, we should hope for meaningful compromises in things we think are important.

---

There is exactly ZERO that i'm willing to compromise on. ZERO. ZILCH. ZIP. NADA. NOTHING.

See my illustration above - there have been enough compromises, and shockingly there is only one side that ends up getting screwed in any of the "comrpomises" you speak so fondly of.

I think we saw how vulnerable it was when the cities said firearms are not "essential" and with the swipe of a pen all gun stores/FFL were shut down. If we get a group of power hungry politicians they can do what they did to California, once a strong red state within a generation you have to jump through hoops to own a firearm and it has meet several requirements. Death by a thousand cuts can happen sooner than you think. Look how crazy the left is with almost all of the candidates (maybe all, I did not pay attention) said they were going to ban "assault" rifles like the AR15. How many times have states said they were going to limit or highly tax ammunition?

For some this COVID restrictions will be a wake up call. Firearm sales are through the roof since people do not trust the government and even less when they are releasing prisoners, those being released are up to the governments discretion.

The real issue with compromise is the other side is willing to compromise by only taking small bites out of overall gun ownership at a time, but they lie about their objective and frame it relative to saving lives.

If saving lives was truly the goal of gun control, they'd be pushing hard against handguns and shotguns, both of which are used in more murders than ARs every single year...handguns by a factor of 10.

The reason they push hard against ARs first is its easy to get folks like Hamburger to think of that as reasonable.

If they can get that done, they'll go after handguns, "sniper rifles capable of defeating police body armor at 100 yards" (aka your bolt action deer rifle), and so on.

We must all hang together or hang separately. You may not see the "point" of ARs, but the politicians sure do. And if they can ban them without much blowback, coming after the rest is a given.

"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . 'Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in,' I would have done it."

I will never forget Feinstein saying those words........never!

I don't think they lie about the ultimate goal anymore. They used to, but the last year or so it seems and feels as if they have even abandoned the "saving lives" BS and flat out have gone full libtard and are open about the fact that they simply want only the government to have guns.

Which is kind of funny when you think about it - because a dude like Trump is "literally Hitler" to the left, but they still advocate for literally Hitler to be the only one with guns.

That's the way I like it....Uh Uh.

You did good here!

These threads always end up like this:

Step 1: Someone voices an opinion/opens a discussion about guns in America.

Step 2: OB decides if poster in Step 1 is taking a hard line stance in favor of 2A.

If opinion is deemed too gray or even slightly left of NRA - poster is slammed as a nut job lib that wants all guns melted and made into kids recess participation medals that say "You tried really hard!".

Step 3: Poster from Step 1 goes away, discussion stops, and we are all lectured on how there is no such thing as compromise or a middle ground.

Repeat.

Repeat.

Repeat.

These threads belong on the politics board.