Parkland “survivor” Hogglet needs his 15-minute-fame fix again.
David Hogg suggests compromise on gun control
“If this plan ends up in Congress, and they say a gun registry is a nonstarter or the assault weapons ban and mandatory gun buy back program are nonstarters, OK. Then maybe we start talking about reclassifying them and making sure you have the right permitting in place where you can still go and use them,” Hogg continued. “But people aren’t going to have nearly as easy accessibility to them to go and commit mass shootings as they are currently.”
Reclassifying semiautomatic firearms as NFA machineguns is registry, dumbass.
And that’s no compromise.
compromise [ kom-pruh-mahyz ]
noun
a settlement of differences by mutual concessions; an agreement reached by adjustment of conflicting or opposing claims, principles, etc., by reciprocal modification of demands.
Hogglet’s “compromise” offers nothing to human rights-respecting gun owners in exchange for giving up or registering tens to hundreds of millions of firearms. Allowing people to beg permission, pay a $200 bribe, and register to keep their property is not compromise.
Offer to give us something.
And listen when we say, “No.”
“Or else“.
[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited, and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]
(More Tip Jar Options) |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTRKCXC0JFg
I’m not sure he knows how to spell it either.
FOPA forbids registering guns and gun owners.
The Act also forbade the U.S. Government agency from keeping a registry directly linking non-National Firearms Act firearms to their owners, the specific language of this law (Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 926 ) being:
No such rule or regulation prescribed [by the Attorney General] after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.
To do it Congress would have to pass a Law that states a semi-auto firearm is a machine gun, and no new machine guns can be registered due to the Hughes Amendment of FOPA. That would effectively outlaw all pistols and most rifles and shotguns. Bolt action firearms and revolvers is all that would be legal. In addition, ATF ILLEGALLY and ADMINISTRATIVELY rewrote the 1934 NFA to make bump stocks a machine gun, which they obviously are not. Lawsuits pending.
I hate to piss in your Cheerios this early in the day, but I’m thinking that you’re the ones who are misconstruing the word “compromise.” While I agree 100% with your disparagement of placing autoloaders on the NFA register, compared to the statements of some of our wannabe Democratic Presidential candidates about outlawing and confiscating all such weapons, placing them on the NFA register is, indeed, a compromise. Not an ACCEPTABLE compromise, but a compromise none the less.
If it’s a compromise, what do I get?
ETA: What you describe is a compromise between victim disarmers. Piglet proposes a compromise of registration (for the submissive) vs. killing (Swallows) or imprisoning (Gillibrand et al) those who respect rights.
None of those is a compromise with honest firearm owners, because we get nothing.
Here’s my idea of compromise on Gun Control.
You don’t come to take my guns and I won’t shoot you.
That’s a “Win-Win,” right?