What do you want?
It's an honest question, but I think that part of the problem is that gun rights are at a sort of apogee in this country - I don't really have much more to give.
It's an honest question, but I think that part of the problem is that gun rights are at a sort of apogee in this country - I don't really have much more to give.
I don't think it's quite that simple, for it's rather binary. In what I call the free states, it's still climbing, with e.g. 2 states going Constitutional Carry (no license required for concealed carry), with my Missouri likely joining them this month.
In the slave states, its getting steadily worse, California is front and center, but also see the Massachusetts AG continuous redefining of the state's "assault weapons" law, and the various laws that have been passed in the last few years, plus Bloomberg's initiative campaign to ban the lending of firearms, a very direct threat to US gun culture.
And of course there's the minor detail that a very large fraction of the country doesn't see this as a problem at all. The overwhelming majority of the states (42 with shall issue or better), and most of the people (72%, ditto), are directly living and driving this "apogee", through the politicians we freely elect.
As for what we want, let's start with:
Nationwide shall issue concealed carry.
Nationwide reciprocity of concealed carry licenses.
Going further, nationwide Constitutional Carry (no license required, which is the law of the land in 10 states now).
An end to statewide "assault weapons" and magazine capacity bans.
An end to statewide inexpensive gun bans (that's California and Massachusetts.
Cut the thicket of "20,000" gun control laws nationwide to a relative handful, few enough that everyone can know what the law actually is. There's a whole bunch of "flypaper" laws that, whatever the claimed or real intent, just entrap those trying to abide by the law.
Deport Michael Bloomberg ^_^. Seriously, rule unconstitutional the laws he's getting passed, generally by deceptive initiative, that ban the lending of guns, and that are directly aimed at strangulating the creation of new gun owners.
End the VA's polices of removing gun rights from veterans without a real adjudication as is required by law, and stop the extension of this to the elderly on Social Security.
End the ITAR attempt to put most of the nation's gunsmiths out of business.
Put a stake in things like the BATFE's proposal to redefine what nitrogen percentage makes wetted nitrocellulose a high explosive (only stopped for now because of the disaster it posed for the DoD and the rest of the government).
Terminate the BATFE with extreme prejudice, and forbid all in it from ever working in law enforcement again. This article paints a nice picture of them, but in the field they're murderous and incompetent thugs. The ban is to keep them from polluting other law enforcement agencies.
I can go on if you want ^_^.
I'll just let yours stand as evidence of the kind of thing that happens when you ask for compromise on such a strange issue.
If you can't list a single thing, where's the "compromise"?
And please don't take a list and assume I'm demanding all of it in exchange for one of your items, "kitchen sink" may be what I ultimately want, but not in this narrow context (by the same token, the liberals are not shy about calling for total confiscations, so where's the compromise on that side?).
ADDED: And I have no need to replace my comment, since you are not willing to specify anything you're willing to give up. Not. One. Single. Thing.
Maybe we have different definitions of the word compromise?
Well if yours is to ask for measures so extreme that I've never even heard of them, then yes, we do.
You make responsible gun owners look like nuts. But thanks, you've done a wonderful job of illustrating the problem I was commenting on.
And I'm not surprised you haven't heard of the ITAR effort to put most of the nation's gunsmiths out of business, it's very new and still fairly obscure, but are you telling me you see nothing wrong with the general concept of destroying their livelihoods and the work they do for us?
I also gave myself great wiggle room in the "20,000" laws and flypaper bit; are you telling me you can't think of one gun law that makes no sense at all, perhaps one that hasn't worked out in practice? Maybe a relaxation on "the shoulder thing that flips up"?
And, again, ignoring any of the "extreme" items in my wish list, You. Can't. List. A. Single. Thing. to give us in return. If you're asking us to "compromise", but have no idea what you're willing to give up to get what you want, how should we view your offer?
As for your opinion that this makes half the country "look like nuts", "We don't care." We'll just keep piling up the legislative victories in our free states, and sending enough Congresscritters to D.C. who know better than to cross us to keep the Federal government in relative stasis. And it looks like we'll help elect the most pro-gun President since JFK.