Well, if I did, it wouldn't be over 10-round magazine clips that are widely available anyway. One thing you purists must learn to understand (this for the sensible ones, not the name callers who are obviously just too smart for me). None of us will ever get to be the dictator of the U.S. We can't have it all just our way. Social Security is here to stay. Get used to it. Abortion will always be legal somewhere (New York, Massachusetts, and California will NOT ban it if Roe v. Wade is overturned). And there will always be a limit to the second amendment (you will never regain the right to own a machine gun).
That's life. And you know what? Even with all that, this is a GREAT country. You must fight for what you believe in, but don't go into hysterics when you don't get everything you want. And, for some of you, debate with dignity, and don't fall into the arrogant name-calling and condescension that we despise from the left.
As for the train ride to the camps, well, I don't think the assault weapons ban (which has been law for almost ten years, during which time right-to-carry has expanded to nearly every state) renewal is the slippery slope that is going to get us there. Bush is smart not to fight it. It's simply not worth the political capital.
Leaving aside the namecalling and deadcatting, and even the insurmountable Second Amendment problem for the minute, this STILL may not be true.
There is ample evidence that, had Bush pere not stabbed gunowners in the back in '91 or thereabouts, he'd have gained about 4-5 million votes, thus making his reelection that much easier just on progun votes alone. Those conservatives who questioned his "purity", and voted for Perot instead (?) might also have supported him.
Think of the results.
Those who have said here that the President wins NO Leftist votes for supporting a ban, but loses MANY conservative votes, are far from wrong. These are votes worth considering given the near-even split of the past election.
Yet, the article states that the White House is going to fight this...on the wrong side. If he does, he must pay a price politically...even if that means that an anti-gun nut job moves into his office.
Your point about expanding CCW is well taken...we're on the offensive there and winning. Why, then, do you cede defeat on this front? Because you don't own any of those nasty rifles?
We can't have it all just our way...
And there will always be a limit to...
It's simply not worth the political capital....
Get used to it...
Translation: "When all else fails, lower your standards."
GOP rationale: "So what if the conservatives don't like it? What are they going to do, vote democrat?"
The last two on Timmy's list really grind my guts every time I hear them. Maybe that is why I don't converse with republicans very often these days.
Regards
J.R.