Dem Senator Says "Not Interested in Conpromise with NRA" - Page 2

**Aguila Blanca** · February 25, 2018, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pond, James Pond

Any reliable sources for that?
Good to know where to find it/read it in more detail.

Probably FBI crime statistics.

Whatever statistics you find, be sure to read the fine print. Some statistics include people up to age 25 as "children." Also, "homicide" does not equate to "murder." A gang banger killed by a police officer in a completely justified shooting is still a "homicide." Anti-gun types like to include ALL deaths by firearms in their counts, even though many are not what the country needs to be worrying about.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s...2016/cius-2016

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s.../violent-crime

20-year chart: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s...tables/table-1

In The Ten Ring · February 28, 2018, 04:00 PM

Count Trump in that bucket too....he just bragged about "not needing the NRA" so it looks like we put our money on the wrong horse.

adamBomb · February 28, 2018, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Count Trump in that bucket too....he just bragged about "not needing the NRA" so it looks like we put our money on the wrong horse.

Drain the swamp means getting rid of all special interest groups/lobbyists that buy and sell our politicians. That includes the NRA. If you voted for trump and wanted him to drain the swamp then his statement is exactly what you voted for.

Having said that Trump is not draining the swamp. Washington is filled with lobbyists and trump has a number of them working on his team.

**44 AMP** · February 28, 2018, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Count Trump in that bucket too....he just bragged about "not needing the NRA" so it looks like we put our money on the wrong horse.

Are you implying we should have voted for Hillary???

Not in a million freaking years!!!!

NO, Trump isn't our friend, never was. He'll throw our interests under the bus if he thinks its the right thing to do. Never was any doubt in my mind about that. On the other hand, the other choice was immeasurably WORSE!!!

With Trump, we got someone who might only give our interests lip service, and might "betray" us on this or that, but he has not (so far) shown to be someone who is actively working against our interests. You cannot say that about Hillary, gun control is part of her party's planks now.

There was no "right horse", and there hasn't been for some time. I'd rather waste my "money" on a horse that won't run than on one who is determined to kick me to death.

adamBomb · February 28, 2018, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Are you implying we should have voted for Hillary???

There were other choices...

s3779m · February 28, 2018, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

Are you implying we should have voted for Hillary???

Not in a million freaking years!!!!

NO, Trump isn't our friend, never was. He'll throw our interests under the bus if he thinks its the right thing to do. Never was any doubt in my mind about that. On the other hand, the other choice was immeasurably WORSE!!!

With Trump, we got someone who might only give our interests lip service, and might "betray" us on this or that, but he has not (so far) shown to be someone who is actively working against our interests. You cannot say that about Hillary, gun control is part of her party's planks now.

There was no "right horse", and there hasn't been for some time. I'd rather waste my "money" on a horse that won't run than on one who is determined to kick me to death.

And if hillary had been elected, the scotus would now be 5-4 in favor of the liberals. That would mean the 2nd would be on life support.

WyMark · February 28, 2018, 09:05 PM

Quote:

And if hillary had been elected, the scotus would now be 5-4 in favor of the liberals. That would mean the 2nd would be on life support.

Well, when you put it that way then yeah, Trump wanting to void the 2nd and 4th Amendments seems almost trivial.

Glenn E. Meyer · February 28, 2018, 09:43 PM

We don't need to redo the failings of both candidates. We only have the failings of one to deal with now.

**Aguila Blanca** · March 1, 2018, 07:32 AM

What we need to do now is help President Trump find his spine again.

It takes 5 minutes or less to contact the President. I urge everyone to do it -- multiple times. As they say in Chicago, "Vote early and vote often." The Pres doesn't read all these messages, but the staff count them.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

Duster340 · March 1, 2018, 07:41 AM

The POTUS's recent comments are a bit concerning. Anyone else a bit nervous by the "take the guns first and worry about due process later" comment he repeated a few times yesterday? I mean really? WTH

Bartholomew Roberts · March 1, 2018, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adamBomb

Drain the swamp means getting rid of all special interest groups/lobbyists that buy and sell our politicians.

So, you contend that “drain the swamp” means eliminating a key aspect of democracies since forever? I think that shows a poor understanding of how democracies and republics work. Constituents organizing to lobby their representatives is an important part of democracy.

“Drain the swamp” can mean vastly different things to different people, which is why it makes such a handy political slogan. It concerns me that you think constituents organizing to lobby their Congressmen is a problem or that it needs to be fixed.

Lohman446 · March 1, 2018, 08:14 AM

Its relatively easy to advance fundamentally flawed legislation or legislation that would have effects you do not want if you know it has no chance of going forward or passing. When you know its not going to make it to general discussion or have any chance of actually reaching negotiation its very easy to take a "no compromise" stance. Take for example the countless (ok not countless there is a number) votes to repeal the affordable health care act. Easy votes to cast when you know its dead in the water and a sudden problem when it might move forward. I don't intend to discuss the merits of that particular legislation its just a good example

ATN082268 · March 1, 2018, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

That's because their definition of "compromise" is very flawed, and purposefully so.

A compromise involves a situation in which either party gives a little and gets a little. What did we get in exchange for the 1934 NFA? Nothing. The 1969 GCA? Nothing. When the FOPA was set to pass in 1986, they were appalled that there were provisions that might actually benefit gun owners, so they poisoned it with the Hughes amendment.

What did we get in exchange for the Brady Bill or the Assault Weapons Ban? Nothing. In fact, the little negotiation the NRA was able to do to ameliorate the effects of those bills (no persistent registry, 10-year sunset on the AWB, letting people actually keep property they lawfully owned prior to the law) was scorned by the bills' sponsors. Going into the vote, they crowed about how great those laws were. Once the President signed both bills, they claimed they hadn't gone far enough.

The important thing to remember is this: gun control is an incremental strategy, with the end goal being as close to total civilian disarmament as possible. Any "compromise" its advocates offer is simply a pause along the way. They simply can't be dealt with in good faith when they're so dishonest about their intentions.

This. On another note, are there any other examples, other than the Lautenberg Amendment, where someone can lose a Constitutional right for life because of a misdemeanor?

armoredman · March 2, 2018, 06:08 AM

And now we hear he had a meeting with NRA and "all is well now".

adamBomb · March 2, 2018, 07:01 AM

Quote:

So, you contend that “drain the swamp” means eliminating a key aspect of democracies since forever? I think that shows a poor understanding of how democracies and republics work. Constituents organizing to lobby their representatives is an important part of democracy.

“Drain the swamp” can mean vastly different things to different people, which is why it makes such a handy political slogan. It concerns me that you think constituents organizing to lobby their Congressmen is a problem or that it needs to be fixed.

I mean, how could I take it to mean something different than what Trump said “We are fighting for every citizen that believes that government should serve the people, not the donors and not the special interests" - Trump

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...g-purge-233736

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...s-draining-the

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.aa7c55ddf1b3

Bartholomew Roberts · March 2, 2018, 08:05 AM

You realize that all three of those stories aren’t about lobbying per se; but about limiting the rotating door system between lobbyists and bureaucracies. Nothing in that article has anything to do with the way the NRA does business.

NRA isn’t hiring top leaders of ATF straight from the agency to come work for them. They aren’t paying seven figure “show up” salaries to disgraced ex-DoJ attorneys who fell on their swords to protect the higher ups during the scandal du jour. NRA isn’t being asked to send over big donors to staff White House positions. So in what way is getting rid of the NRA “draining the swamp” in your view?

There is a big difference between “there should be no money or lobbying in politics” and “money and lobbying should be transparent to the point an ordinary voter understand what is going on.” Not to mention the necessary underlying assumption that it is the money that gives NRA its power is wrong.

turkeestalker · March 4, 2018, 02:21 AM

Quote:

The POTUS's recent comments are a bit concerning.

I honestly don't believe that they are, everything is not what it is assumed to be.

Quote:

There were other choices...

No there weren't. Supreme court justices were the only issue.

Quote:

Its relatively easy to advance fundamentally flawed legislation or legislation that would have effects you do not want if you know it has no chance of going forward or passing.

Bingo.

Aguila Blanca is right, be proactive.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

Complacency sucks, and we would deserve what we would gain or lose as a result of it.

Just don't lose sight of the fact that this guy has very deliberately had a whole lot of people behaving like a bunch of baby chicks in a pen, all chasing the same grasshopper... the one that he threw in the pen.

JoeSixpack · March 4, 2018, 02:41 AM

Compromise to us would be we get something in return, Compromise to them is taking some and not all.

Right now they are bold cause they feel like they have the upper hand.. their time has come.. did you see how giddy Di-Fi got when trump said something about putting in some of the stuff she wanted into a bill.

I honestly thought she was gonna wet her self.

That's how politics work.. The side on the loosing end complains about no middle ground, no compromise.

But once the shoe is on the other foot they employ the same behavior they decry.

It's all about power.. no one who has it wants to share it.
So they're gonna try to take the whole pie.. They think they can.. I would suggest the same no compromise stance for our side of things.. cause every day their power wave wains and they'll have to wait to get their next "fix".

Their power peaks with fresh blood but it wears off as fast as it cools.
Time is their enemy, But we keep them at bay (and sometimes not even then) only cause many of us will become single issue voters when necessary.

.. When that falls apart we really will be in trouble.

Machineguntony · March 4, 2018, 12:43 PM

As an NFA machine gun collector and enthusiast, every time I hear of a “no grandfathering” clause, I swallow my drink extra hard.

February 28, 2018, 09:43 PM	#33
Glenn E. Meyer Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 20,064	We don't need to redo the failings of both candidates. We only have the failings of one to deal with now. __________________ NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens

March 4, 2018, 02:41 AM	#43
JoeSixpack Senior Member Join Date: April 12, 2017 Location: Ohio Posts: 1,048	Compromise to us would be we get something in return, Compromise to them is taking some and not all. Right now they are bold cause they feel like they have the upper hand.. their time has come.. did you see how giddy Di-Fi got when trump said something about putting in some of the stuff she wanted into a bill. I honestly thought she was gonna wet her self. That's how politics work.. The side on the loosing end complains about no middle ground, no compromise. But once the shoe is on the other foot they employ the same behavior they decry. It's all about power.. no one who has it wants to share it. So they're gonna try to take the whole pie.. They think they can.. I would suggest the same no compromise stance for our side of things.. cause every day their power wave wains and they'll have to wait to get their next "fix". Their power peaks with fresh blood but it wears off as fast as it cools. Time is their enemy, But we keep them at bay (and sometimes not even then) only cause many of us will become single issue voters when necessary. .. When that falls apart we really will be in trouble. __________________ NRA sold us out This is America!, You have the right to be stupid.

March 4, 2018, 12:43 PM	#44
Machineguntony Senior Member Join Date: June 22, 2013 Posts: 1,277	As an NFA machine gun collector and enthusiast, every time I hear of a “no grandfathering” clause, I swallow my drink extra hard. __________________ Sent from Motorola DynaTac 8000x

February 28, 2018, 04:00 PM	#27
In The Ten Ring Senior Member Join Date: January 26, 2018 Posts: 380	Count Trump in that bucket too....he just bragged about "not needing the NRA" so it looks like we put our money on the wrong horse.

March 1, 2018, 07:32 AM	#34
Aguila Blanca Staff Join Date: September 25, 2008 Location: CONUS Posts: 18,468	What we need to do now is help President Trump find his spine again. It takes 5 minutes or less to contact the President. I urge everyone to do it -- multiple times. As they say in Chicago, "Vote early and vote often." The Pres doesn't read all these messages, but the staff count them. https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

March 1, 2018, 07:41 AM	#35
Duster340 Member Join Date: December 27, 2014 Location: Illinois Posts: 92	The POTUS's recent comments are a bit concerning. Anyone else a bit nervous by the "take the guns first and worry about due process later" comment he repeated a few times yesterday? I mean really? WTH

March 1, 2018, 08:14 AM	#37
Lohman446 Senior Member Join Date: April 22, 2016 Posts: 2,192	Its relatively easy to advance fundamentally flawed legislation or legislation that would have effects you do not want if you know it has no chance of going forward or passing. When you know its not going to make it to general discussion or have any chance of actually reaching negotiation its very easy to take a "no compromise" stance. Take for example the countless (ok not countless there is a number) votes to repeal the affordable health care act. Easy votes to cast when you know its dead in the water and a sudden problem when it might move forward. I don't intend to discuss the merits of that particular legislation its just a good example

March 2, 2018, 06:08 AM	#39
armoredman Senior Member Join Date: May 22, 2007 Location: Arizona Posts: 5,299	And now we hear he had a meeting with NRA and "all is well now".

March 2, 2018, 08:05 AM	#41
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	You realize that all three of those stories aren’t about lobbying per se; but about limiting the rotating door system between lobbyists and bureaucracies. Nothing in that article has anything to do with the way the NRA does business. NRA isn’t hiring top leaders of ATF straight from the agency to come work for them. They aren’t paying seven figure “show up” salaries to disgraced ex-DoJ attorneys who fell on their swords to protect the higher ups during the scandal du jour. NRA isn’t being asked to send over big donors to staff White House positions. So in what way is getting rid of the NRA “draining the swamp” in your view? There is a big difference between “there should be no money or lobbying in politics” and “money and lobbying should be transparent to the point an ordinary voter understand what is going on.” Not to mention the necessary underlying assumption that it is the money that gives NRA its power is wrong.