Gun control compromise

Drugs do nothing.

 

No. Thats a compromise between the left and the right, while an overwhelming victory for authoritarianism and a mighty blow against liberty.
Its precisely the sort of thing our powermongering parasitic overlord elites play 'donkey vs the elephant' to achieve.

Here's what actual compromise looks like: raise the gun purchasing age (and the military draft AND enlistment age) to 21 (the claimed reasoning behind one applies to them all), and federally deregulate firearm suppressors. Decrease one right, expand another. Thats 'compromise.'

And ya, its not a very good compromise, its just an example.

 

Drugs do. I threw in abortions to sweeten the deal a little.

 

One has to wonder just how far people think before they speak.

 

That’s true some ******* did.

 

I would agree with this with a few minor exceptions.
The same card would be your drivers licence or state ID. They can be swiped now.

staggered gun availability:
15 years: non semiautomatic hunting rifles to be used only under adult (21) supervision
18 years: expand to revolvers and shotguns without adult supervision
21 years: all semiautomatic weapons
Foreign nationals in the country legally with a green cards the same rules would apply except no exceptions for those under 18

 

The current process does most of that, but you don't get a card, you do the check every time you buy a gun unless the dealer has a recent record on you, and the new one is added.
The anti-gun people don't seem to understand that it is the person causing harm; they seem to forgive criminals and hate guns. There's not a way to reason with irrational minds that reject common sense.

 

Problem with that. High IQ's are both a blessing and a curse- the curse being a lack of sensitivity to realistic values among people. I was once invited to a Mensa meeting, because my IQ was in the upper 99th% bracket. Rather than finding myself among people who thought as I did, I found myself in a group who had invited a practicing witch as the speaker for the evening. My first thought was it was entertainment, a study of the fringes of society. Then, I learned this was the second time she had been invited, and the questions indicated these highly intelligent people had no common sense at all. They had no connection with life and the challenges we all face, it was almost totally devoid of the understanding of people. I left.

 

The problem with that is people believe that everyone who agrees with them meets that threashold and those that don't, don't

 

There is IQ, and there is EQ. IQ is about ones intelligence, as I'm sure you well know. EQ is about ones emotions. It is often the case that those with high IQ often have a low EQ, and visa versa. It is often hard for someone with a high IQ to understand other "normal" people because they lack the ability to empathize, which is an emotional thing.

 

I am glad you are throwing this stuff out there. But the reality is this. The NRA will not allow this to happen. Key GOP senators have stated that increasing the age is off the table, per the NRA directive. The NRA does not want background checks, no age limits, no determination if you are a US Citizen or not, and anything else that may be deemed reasonable, and no, I do not mean banning "assault rifles."

However, if you really want to make a change, I would agree with one proviso. That proviso is that you will no longer support the NRA if it decides to go against the proposal. If you can get that plus some 4.9 million other members to withhold their dues to said organization, then this might pass. Otherwise, the reality is, what the NRA says, goes, unfortunately.

Note: 11th appeals court, affirmed by SCOTUS in a per curium order, stated that illegals do not have a right to keep and bear arms under the second amendment. This was a case out of Florida. However, the 14th and 15th amendments state that the equal protection clause is to all who are in the "jurisdiction within the United States" Thus, even green card holders have pretty much the same rights as US citizens in nearly all cases unless it is specified under the law for national security, safety, or other limited reasons.

 

And that is very accurate explanation. Having been there- and wondered why I made so many people mistakes when they said I was exceptionally intelligent, I can say it make you feel not smart at all- IF you recognize it. Some people never do; they just assume that they are normal and others are handicapped because of the lesser IQ. I did recognize it, and I spent a lot of effort and years to make the changes and gain the balance of both. It is a hard gap to overcome as well, but some do- and a person who has both can be exceptional. It's also a healthy place to be. I wish more people understood this. It is a kind of handicap to have the high IQ- and a low EQ. Perhaps worse than the other way around.

 

On a 1v1 aspect I'd say you're correct. On a mass level though, I think it would be better if more people had high IQ and low EQ. Too often emotions are a barrier for things that, without it, would be far simpler to solve.

 

No.

1) That is an unconstitutional infringement on the right to keep and bear arms
2) That is an unconstitutional infringement on the right to vote. Not that you present ID which ensures 1 person 1 vote, but that A) you'd have draftable citizens who cannot vote creating a 2nd class of citizens and B) you can have a mental illness short of actually requiring civil commitment and you're entitled to vote.

If you want: The federal government can require that every person at 18 to 45 report 2 months out of the year (by rota) for militia training and service. Part of this service is a psych and physical evaluation. Even someone with a bona fide physical disability must present, be assessed, be cleared.
In this way the feds could quite literally get a yearly psych eval on every able bodied person.
If they expanded militia service up to 65 for rear echelon supply and clerk type positions, they could do it to essentially the entire population that would be relevant to an attack given statistics on mass shooters.


That is 100% within the original constitutional powers and intent.
That would also mean 100% of those militia members was given military training together in the groups they would actually present in etc.

You want a compromise? There is your compromise in that it does not require any expansion of federal powers or destruction of individual rights.

 

LOL. The left will say you are discriminating against minorities. If we are serious about getting these things under control it all boils down to mental health and in letting known dangerous people with records run around loose. The country has a big problem with gangs and yet we let gang members go through the revolving door where they are right back out doing gang activities.

 

I grant that there are a variety of arguments- but a sound society has to have a level of empathy for all it's members. Without that, tyranny is ok so long as it's useful to the people doing it.
And don't forget, smart people aren't devoid of emotions at all, they are just selfish with them; ruled by theirs just as most people are- but without EQ, ruled only by theirs, with no consideration for others.
That is how some can excuse brutality and insensitivity, a degree of sociopathy. To do the right thing for the whole society, you have to be able to see the value of all people who contribute, and understand as much as possible. That's not to say you allow an angry person to abuse others. I remember a story in a Carniegie class long ago, that compared a person encountering a bear, and a person encountering a person in a bear suit. The point was that while the latter person was not in real danger- their fear can be just as real as the person who was. That is where IQ and EQ need to be able to clarify without offending and dismissing a genuine emotion instead of addressing it.

 

The anti-gun left neither seeks, nor offers compromise - they expect their demands to be met, with no meaningful offer of anything in return.
Indeed - their version of "compromise" is to demand all of someone's money, and then change their demand to only half.

This is why we do not give an inch.

 

There is no Constitutional way to remove someone's right to vote based on "history of mental illness." And the age to vote isn't 21.

 

Make gun owners and purchasers to join a militia. Require the militia to meet several times a year so all members know each other. Militia will require members to have a clean record and illegal drug free. No compromise.

 

Too bad about that 2nd Amendment, eh?

 

Ya....

 

I am a militia of one

 

The 2nd amendment is not followed today. Or else every citizen could own a firearm, or a tank for that matter. Even citizens with a decorative past.

 

that's why we must stop the government from encroaching any further

 

So if you're an average person you don't get to participate in politics sounds a bit creepy.