[W:255] Why won’t Democrats offer “common sense” compromise solutions?

[Noodlegawd]

Instead of continuing to push the same old gun control packages that have failed to pass time and time again, why won’t Democrats offer something else as a compromise solution?

For instance, instead of pushing for a ban on 11+ round magazines (not to mention the useless ban on “assault weapons”), why not just propose a ban (or even just background checks) on 31+ round magazines instead? Biden keeps telling us that “nobody needs a 100 round magazine,” so why not actually focus on that instead of just using that mantra to mislead people?

Instead of continuing to push for “universal background checks” on all private firearm sales, requiring a licensed dealer to be involved in each transaction with the same record-keeping requirements as for sales of firearms by that dealer (i.e., de facto registration), why not try:
-limiting it to handguns (which would address 98% of the supposed problem and significantly mitigate the registration concern of certain gun rights advocates);
-allowing for private buyers and sellers to conduct the checks themselves for free through an online system (as proposed by Sen. Coburn in 2013); and/or
-allowing for alternative proof of eligibility, like a current concealed carry permit or trusted traveler card?

And instead of proposing even stricter laws for meaningless nonsense like SBRs, “pistol braces” and suppressors, why not throw a bone to gun enthusiasts and RELAX the restrictions on those things, which will realistically endanger no one?

Or even better, let the states decide for themselves and just pass a single federal law making it more difficult for private sellers to sell firearms to people from out of state? This could be as simple as requiring sellers to check ID, and not sell to anyone from out of state.

I think I know the answer on background checks at least: although Dems mostly claim that they’re not pushing for federal gun registration, that’s exactly what they are proposing. Sadly hat may have been the only issue that prevented UBCs from passing in 2013. But if what they really want is universal registration, why won’t they just be honest about it and run on that platform?

 

[mrjurrs]

Instead of continuing to push the same old gun control packages that have failed to pass time and time again, why won’t Democrats offer something else as a compromise solution?

For instance, instead of pushing for a ban on 11+ round magazines (not to mention the useless ban on “assault weapons”), why not just propose a ban (or even just background checks) on 31+ round magazines instead? Biden keeps telling us that “nobody needs a 100 round magazine,” so why not actually focus on that instead of just using that mantra to mislead people?

Instead of continuing to push for “universal background checks” on all private firearm sales, requiring a licensed dealer to be involved in each transaction with the same record-keeping requirements as for sales of firearms by that dealer (i.e., de facto registration), why not try:
-limiting it to handguns (which would address 98% of the supposed problem and significantly mitigate the registration concern of certain gun rights advocates);
-allowing for private buyers and sellers to conduct the checks themselves for free through an online system (as proposed by Sen. Coburn in 2013); and/or
-allowing for alternative proof of eligibility, like a current concealed carry permit or trusted traveler card?

And instead of proposing even stricter laws for meaningless nonsense like SBRs, “pistol braces” and suppressors, why not throw a bone to gun enthusiasts and RELAX the restrictions on those things, which will realistically endanger no one?

Or even better, let the states decide for themselves and just pass a single federal law making it more difficult for private sellers to sell firearms to people from out of state? This could be as simple as requiring sellers to check ID, and not sell to anyone from out of state.

I think I know the answer on background checks at least: although Dems mostly claim that they’re not pushing for federal gun registration, that’s exactly what they are proposing. Sadly hat may have been the only issue that prevented UBCs from passing in 2013. But if what they really want is universal registration, why won’t they just be honest about it and run on that platform?

Instead of asking your question, why don't you ask why R politicians don't support gun safety ideas that are supported by the majority of their constituents?

 

[Subieguy]

or the grip mainly on the GOP but some Dems. too, the NRA has on them.

 

[AtlantaAdonis]

Democrats: So, can we do anything about all the people dying in mass shootings?

Republicans: Liberteh! Freedumb! Muh gunz!

Democrats: okay... How about universal background checks?

Republicans: Liberteh! Freedumb! Muh gunz!

Democrats: Well how about banning assault rifles and assault pistols?

Republicans: Liberteh! Freedumb! Muh gunz!

Democrats: What about bans on high-capacity magazines?

Republicans: Liberteh! Freedumb! Muh gunz!

Democrats: Well, do you have any ideas at all?

Republicans: Liberteh! Freedumb! Muh gunz!

Democrats: So, you have no ideas?

Republicans: It's you who has no ideas!

 

[swing_voter]

Because common sense compromise solutions would be dead on arrival.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

Instead of continuing to push the same old gun control packages that have failed to pass time and time again, why won’t Democrats offer something else as a compromise solution?

For instance, instead of pushing for a ban on 11+ round magazines (not to mention the useless ban on “assault weapons”), why not just propose a ban (or even just background checks) on 31+ round magazines instead? Biden keeps telling us that “nobody needs a 100 round magazine,” so why not actually focus on that instead of just using that mantra to mislead people?

Instead of continuing to push for “universal background checks” on all private firearm sales, requiring a licensed dealer to be involved in each transaction with the same record-keeping requirements as for sales of firearms by that dealer (i.e., de facto registration), why not try:
-limiting it to handguns (which would address 98% of the supposed problem and significantly mitigate the registration concern of certain gun rights advocates);
-allowing for private buyers and sellers to conduct the checks themselves for free through an online system (as proposed by Sen. Coburn in 2013); and/or
-allowing for alternative proof of eligibility, like a current concealed carry permit or trusted traveler card?

And instead of proposing even stricter laws for meaningless nonsense like SBRs, “pistol braces” and suppressors, why not throw a bone to gun enthusiasts and RELAX the restrictions on those things, which will realistically endanger no one?

Or even better, let the states decide for themselves and just pass a single federal law making it more difficult for private sellers to sell firearms to people from out of state? This could be as simple as requiring sellers to check ID, and not sell to anyone from out of state.

I think I know the answer on background checks at least: although Dems mostly claim that they’re not pushing for federal gun registration, that’s exactly what they are proposing. Sadly hat may have been the only issue that prevented UBCs from passing in 2013. But if what they really want is universal registration, why won’t they just be honest about it and run on that platform?

Clearly the problem with gun control in this country is the Democrats’ reluctance to pass serious legislation.

Our one party system really has to end.

 

[Rich2018]

Because common sense compromise solutions would be dead on arrival.

And they involve the gun lovers having less guns...

 

[Noodlegawd]

Instead of asking your question, why don't you ask why R politicians don't support gun safety ideas that are supported by the majority of their constituents?

Answering "yes" to a proposition on a poll is not the same as wanting it, and saying yes on a poll to "universal background checks" is not the same as saying yes what Democrats are selling.

 

[Noodlegawd]

Democrats: So, can we do anything about all the people dying in mass shootings?

Republicans: Liberteh! Freedumb! Muh gunz!

Democrats: okay... How about universal background checks?

Republicans: Liberteh! Freedumb! Muh gunz!

Democrats: Well how about banning assault rifles and assault pistols?

Republicans: Liberteh! Freedumb! Muh gunz!

Democrats: What about bans on high-capacity magazines?

Republicans: Liberteh! Freedumb! Muh gunz!

Democrats: Well, do you have any ideas at all?

Republicans: Liberteh! Freedumb! Muh gunz!

Democrats: So, you have no ideas?

Republicans: It's you who has no ideas!

How would universal background checks or banning rifles based on whether they have pistol grips "do anything about all the people dying in mass shootings?"

 

[Noodlegawd]

Because common sense compromise solutions would be dead on arrival.

Why not try?

 

[Noodlegawd]

Clearly the problem with gun control in this country is the Democrats’ reluctance to pass serious legislation.

Our one party system really has to end.

So you have no answer to my question. You think Dems should just keep repeating the same insanity that will never pass instead of trying something different?

 

[Aunt Antifa]

So you have no answer to my question. You think Dems should just keep repeating the same insanity that will never pass instead of trying something different?

Your question was bullshit. You guys think spewing your ideology and personal wants isn’t that so long as you put a question mark at the end of the rant.

GOP has been the major blocker of any common sense gun legislation, full stop.

 

[Winston]

I think if gun control comes it’s going to have to come from a Republican President. The GOP would never let Biden have a win on a “pet project” of the left because then he would be seen as an effective politician.
If however they can graciously say look we passed a pile of shit that won’t work then they can also point to it when it doesn’t work and say see I told you so.

addressing America’s gun violence problem will take bold and radical legislation similar to what AU did. And AU took massive heat from their gun lobby and rural citizens when they banned guns but it did work

 

[Noodlegawd]

Your question was bullshit. You guys think spewing your ideology and personal wants isn’t that so long as you put a question mark at the end of the rant.

GOP has been the major blocker of any common sense gun legislation, full stop.

This thread is about Dems, not the GOP. What was bullshit about my post? I proposed several "common sense" solutions that Dems could try if they really wanted to get something done.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

This thread is about Dems, not the GOP. What was bullshit about my post? I proposed several "common sense" solutions that Dems could try if they really wanted to get something done.

Yes, and the subject is lack of serious gun control legislation. The part where you omit the folks who have stopped all legislation in its tracks is convenient to your premise, but not reality.

 

[rickc]

This thread is about Dems, not the GOP. What was bullshit about my post? I proposed several "common sense" solutions that Dems could try if they really wanted to get something done.

As long as the filibuster exist gun control legislation is all lip service.

Pretty much the entire democratic agenda is lip service!

 

[Noodlegawd]

Yes, and the subject is lack of serious gun control legislation. The part where you omit the folks who have stopped all legislation in its tracks is convenient to your premise, but not reality.

The fact that the legislation has been stopped IS my premise. I thought that was obvious.

 

[brianpatrick]

How would universal background checks or banning rifles based on whether they have pistol grips "do anything about all the people dying in mass shootings?"

They won’t. Republicans are too worried about the slippery slope for anything to pass anyway. It’s the culture and the idiots it creates that’s the problem.

 

[mike2810]

What is the "common sense" solution offered up by Republicans?

 

[brianpatrick]

 

[brianpatrick]

 

[brianpatrick]

 

[brianpatrick]

 

[jamesrage]

Instead of continuing to push the same old gun control packages that have failed to pass time and time again, why won’t Democrats offer something else as a compromise solution?

For instance, instead of pushing for a ban on 11+ round magazines (not to mention the useless ban on “assault weapons”), why not just propose a ban (or even just background checks) on 31+ round magazines instead? Biden keeps telling us that “nobody needs a 100 round magazine,” so why not actually focus on that instead of just using that mantra to mislead people?

Instead of continuing to push for “universal background checks” on all private firearm sales, requiring a licensed dealer to be involved in each transaction with the same record-keeping requirements as for sales of firearms by that dealer (i.e., de facto registration), why not try:
-limiting it to handguns (which would address 98% of the supposed problem and significantly mitigate the registration concern of certain gun rights advocates);
-allowing for private buyers and sellers to conduct the checks themselves for free through an online system (as proposed by Sen. Coburn in 2013); and/or
-allowing for alternative proof of eligibility, like a current concealed carry permit or trusted traveler card?

And instead of proposing even stricter laws for meaningless nonsense like SBRs, “pistol braces” and suppressors, why not throw a bone to gun enthusiasts and RELAX the restrictions on those things, which will realistically endanger no one?

Or even better, let the states decide for themselves and just pass a single federal law making it more difficult for private sellers to sell firearms to people from out of state? This could be as simple as requiring sellers to check ID, and not sell to anyone from out of state.

I think I know the answer on background checks at least: although Dems mostly claim that they’re not pushing for federal gun registration, that’s exactly what they are proposing. Sadly hat may have been the only issue that prevented UBCs from passing in 2013. But if what they really want is universal registration, why won’t they just be honest about it and run on that platform?

1. A compromise implies that both sides are giving up something in order to get something in return. About every so called compromise I seen involves the pro-2nd amendment side giving up something in order to keep something they already have or should have while anti-2nd amendment trash give up nothing.

2. Anti-2nd amendment trash falsely label 10 to 30 round standard capacity magazines as high capacity in order to try to get nitwits to support bans on them. Do you honestly think they be ok with bans on 31+ magazines and never try to push a lower capacity magazine ban? A magazine ban regardless of capacity is just another baby step towards a total ban to them.

3.The reason they are not honest about their UBC as a backdoor to gun registration because the pro-2nd amendment side will use that fact against them. Anti-2nd amendment trash piss bitch and moan how we don't have great gun control like other countries do and honestly expect people to believe that they don't want to take guns away.


4.Every gun control law is nothing more than a incremental step towards a ban.While this cartoon doesn't contain every gun control law passed it does show why the pro-2nd amendment side refuse to "compromise" with anti-2nd amendment trash.

 

[brianpatrick]

It’s all day long...