"att ställa någon mot väggen!”
Posted on 09/08/2019 3:58:18 AM PDT by WWG1WWA
A back fire may help save some homes from a wildfire but the same principal doesn’t apply when it comes to our civil rights A Republican Senator is saying the we should sacrifice some of our 2nd Amendment gun ownership rights so the democrats don’t take all of our gun rights in the future. Listen, you don’t negotiate with terrorists or the devil. This is quite possibly the dumbest thing a Republican has ever suggested.
The Hill reports that Republican Indiana Senator Mike Braun is ready to sacrifice some of our gun rights in hopes that that the rest of our gun rights will be saved.
“I look at it this way, if we’re not willing to do the commonsense stuff probably legislation will occur that we’ll regret that will actually I think will infringe upon Second Amendment rights down the road,” Braun said.
And what, pray tell, is the “commonsense” stuff?
“I think for those of us that want to always make sure that law-abiding citizens can own and bear and use a weapon, that we’ve got to talk about it and start doing some things or else I think we’ll get overwhelmed to where we’ll lose down the road that Second Amendment right,” said Braun.
For a guy who says “I think” that much, he sure isn’t thinking at all. There are numerous problems with his willingness to capitulate some of our gun rights to the democrats.
First, there is the 2nd Amendment, which guarantees our right to keep and bear arms. This right is backed up by a Supreme Court decision that says gun ownership is an individual right and the we are all allowed to own guns “in common use.” The democrats can try to pass whatever gun control laws they like, but they can’t get around the Constitution on this. To negotiate away our rights when they have absolutely nothing to bargain with is incredibly stupid.
Second, there is no negotiating with democrats. It either their way or nothing. Period. They won’t give an inch and expect the other side (our side) to give up everything. There is no give and take with them, just take.
Lastly, any sacrifice of our gun rights is not the end for democrats, but the beginning. Their endgame is the the abolishment of the 2nd Amendment and the complete disarmament of the American people. Look at New York and California, states controlled entirely by democrats. They have the strictest gun control laws in the country and yet every single year they pass more gun control laws. It’s never enough for them and encouraging them by caving on some minor issues will only lead to more demands.
If you need any proof of the democrats unwillingness to negotiate, just look at immigration. They wouldn’t trade border security funding for permanent legal status for DACA recipients. The reason is because they want open borders and citizenship for every single scumbag who sneaks in the country. They will accept nothing less.
The same is true on gun control. Republicans couldn’t get a deal for concealed carry reciprocity in exchange for universal background checks because democrats are only willing to move in the direction of total disarmament.
Sacrificing some of our gun rights because we might loose more in the future is dumb on so many levels. We currently have a Republican President and Senate so democrats can’t do a damn thing about anything. Should they somehow gain control of the White House and the Senate, there’s still the 2nd Amendment and the DC v. Heller decision so they still couldn’t do a damn thing about it.
The only way democrats can impose their gun control wet dreams is by repealing the 2nd Amendment and that’s never going to happen. Negotiating away our rights based on an impossibility is something so stupid it sounds like an idea that would come from a democrat. Shame on Senator Mike Braun for even floating this.
Never said I did not understand.
Apologies for implying you didn’t. That was not my intent
Agreed, we need to sacrifice some RINO's so Democrats don't take over the Republican party.
Right & Duty To Keep & Bear Arms.
Those who doubt Washington's wisdom, should study Swiss crime statistics, as a multi-century long demonstration of his point. (Or, at least let's talk about it.)
I hope you will call his office and let his staff know what a coward and a traitor he is. They don’t take calls from people outside their states.
Not any good ones since Senator Helms retired
When we had Helms in the Senate and guys like Phil Crane and Larry McDonald in the House we has some hardcore conservatives that we could really count on. Nowadays, we have lots of Republicans but few strict-constructionist conservatives. The internet helped break up the power of Big Media but we’re having a difficult time getting really strong people elected.
How the the Anti-gun groups plan to do it, they spilled their guts in a magazine interview back in 1976. They tried to walk this back but it was too late.
From 1976.
Nelson T. ‘Pete’ Shields
Founder of Handgun Control, Inc.
“I’m convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest.
Of course, it’s true that politicians will then go home and say, ‘This is a great law. The problem is solved.’ And it’s also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time.
So then we’ll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we’d be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time.
My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition — except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — TOTALLY ILLEGAL.”
-Pete Shields, Chairman and founder, Handgun Control Inc., “A Reporter At Large: Handguns,” The New Yorker, July 26, 1976, 57-58
“Yes, I’m for an outright ban [on handguns].”
-Pete Shields, Chairman emeritus, Handgun Control, Inc., 60 Minutes interview
HCI, around 1984, suddenly made a grab for the semi-auto rifles and shotguns, and missed But they showed their hand. As a result all gun owners know we are always up against a stacked deck.
NEVER GIVE AN INCH!
Giving up a few gun rights is like throwing the baby to the wolves in hopes of the wolves eating you last.
“Civil rights”? From an org calling itself conservative?
Sheesh.
Great... another flake?
He's the guy who flipped the seat held by Joe Donnelly in 2018.
-PJ
Except for smoking marijuana, of course, because THAT smoke is absolutely harmless < /s>
Indeed. I always say the country was a better place when many people smoked. That’s not a comment about how wonderful smoking is. It’s a comment about how far the Nanny State has come, trying to micromanage every aspect of your life. IMO, smoking was where they kicked everything up a notch, and they haven’t slowed down since.
Exactly. Incrementalism. They are masters of it! I’m with you, not one single inch! Not one! Good find.
What an idiot, you cannot compromise with the democrats on anything. He needs to resign.
I do not comply
"att ställa någon mot väggen!”
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.