No.
No.
Never.
Your rationalization is that I have 6 months to give up my legally owned, constitutionally owned private property, is..... Not worth arguing with someone who thinks that's acceptable. Your idea of compromise is that we will take item 1, 2 and 3, instead of 1 thru 5.
For the record, you are acknowledging that you wouldn’t be “made a felon” by anything, but that you would
choose to be a felon. Which is a very different posture indeed, and takes you out of that victim role you adopted earlier.
Second, what you describe above is it works
every time something is restricted
. By definition, your legally owned property is no longer legal after the change. In NC, at one time it was legal to drive around with a muffler cutout. One day that law changed and the people with muffler cutouts got rid of them.
There’s nothing inherently sacred about a 12-round mag under the Constitution. Your right is to “bear arms”, not to “bear whatever arms you please without any restriction whatsoever”. If the state takes way your 12-round mags you will still be perfectly within your rights to carry two 6-round mags instead. I’m certain that you must know this already, given that you’ve seemingly put a huge amount of time and thought into the matter.
So adopting the posture that there will be NO compromise EVER is… that’s not the wisest strategy. Our political system is based on the assumption of compromise and negotiation. Refusing to engage in that process turns politics into a contest of raw power — and that’s a dangerous game to play if you’re interested in preserving the Constitution and the rights it protects.
Crime bill of 94 anyone?
Care to guess who authored that? He has about 2 weeks left in office. Now what's worse? Patriot act or the 94 crime bill and it's associated sister bills?
Okay. Do you think I’m not fully aware of who’s been a piece of shit the past 30 years?
