Do they really think we're going to give up?

[jimmy the one]

28. Buh bye

demdealer: Could that not be cause of the fact that every time they "compromise" the pro-gun side gets nothing out of the deal? The only thing you ever offer them {nra/progun} is to take away slightly less of their rights than you actually want.

You can't be serious, this is baloney. You can't have followed this guncontrol issue for the past 30 years & say that with a straight face. If you believe what you wrote you're either a gullible nra shill or an undereducated gun owner hyped up on 2nd amendment mythology.
The nra has no understanding of 'compromise' until guncontrol passage is imminent, then they barter to weaken the legislation as much as possible - the nra 'compromise'.
Yeah guncontrol has really infringed on gunrights in america, national gunstock has doubled in the past 20 years from 150 million to 300 million - how is that 'taking away slightly less of their rights?'.

DemDealer (17 posts) The only thing you mean by "coming out..."

Oh, 17 posts. If I don't hear from you again, have a nice days.

demdealer: Weighing "keeping what you have" versus "how much I take" is not a compromise. What would you offer to GIVE them, that they do not already have, that has value to them, in exchange for meaningful reform that you (and possibly I, depending on what it is) want?
If you demand from someone and offer nothing in return, you can not call that compromise. In harsher terms, we call that theft.

Please, you do not belong on this board, rightwing troll. You twist about what is actually transpiring & promote rightwing garbage. Yours is the kind of mindless opinion that prevents any kind of meaningful prevention policy regarding guns.
The nra got what they 'got' because gwbush got elected & appointed his pet rightwing cretins, elected in 2000 & gwbush presiduncy resulted in pro gun attitudes & ultimately heller in 2008 as scalia twisted 2ndA into some individual freak show.
.. NRA/gun lobby does not want to 'keep what it has' it wants more lethal & more sophisticated guns with unfettered access & little to none restrictions & regulations regarding guns; and to suggest that guncontrol efforts comprise of 'how much can I take' is asinine when they don't want to take anything they want to limit the carnage the nra & your stinking hobby have created & will continue to foist upon us under the pretext of an obsolete retro-fabrication of an antiquated amendment.

What the nra 'got' was the assault rifle ban lifted in 2004 (& a phony appeal for renewal from bush knowing it hadn't a chance in all creation), then heller in 2008.
The nra is at it's high water mark in history as far as guns galore policy goes, & you have the nerve to say it has everything to lose & nothing to gain by compromise? Background checks are some slippery slope to gun confiscation? if you're here to support nra & wayno's world hopefully you've stumbled upon an exit ramp back to nra headquarters where you belong.

We shouldn't be trying to 'compromise' with the nra anyway, we can see how they manipulate that into 'more guns more guns'. At this point we should be trying to STOP THEM, a runaway train gone insane.

Paladin (8,541 posts) As if the pro-gun side has gotten "nothing out of the deal" for decades. Try reading something besides "American Rifleman" magazine to be disabused of that ridiculous mindset. Let me bring you up to speed real quick: in the last battle in Congress a few days ago, Wayne LaPierre and Ted Nugent came out on top, and Gabby Giffords and the Newtown parents lost. That's where "compromise" with pro-gunners has gotten us, lately.

Spot on paladin, you make more sense than that rw troll ever will.
Hey, if I get banned awhile or post hidden, it was worth it. I'm rolling the dice, 7 come 11.