A firearm question for you LeftiesFollow

Is there any situation or circumstance where you unequivocally would agree that the private ownership, sale, or use of a firearm is warranted? Either a specific or general condition where you'd unconditionally support an unassailable ownership, use, or sale of a firearm and would do so to the point of writing it in explicit and specific language into the US Constitution?

It probably has been discussed endlessly in a different thread, but with the whole CT school shooting I am guessing this is the new and latest cause d'jour of the Left-- to which my thinking is that there can be no compromise on this issue. Based on your (the Left's) track record, any compromise just lets the camel's nose under the tent to be soon followed by the rest of the smelly animal. And to the extent that gay marriage, legalized drug use, and every other social/cultural issue has been used as a template for change, this particular issue now can actually affect me and mine in that if enacted my ability to defend myself and those I love is impacted, unlike those other political footballs which are largely philosophical/religious questions.

Based on this set of assumptions, is there any room for compromise if I were willing to seriously talk about gun control (and I had the sole power to enact legislation to make it so)? Is there a point at which you would unconditionally recognise my right to own, sell, and use a firearm in exchange for specific conditions in return?

Feel free to imagine you could make this so for argument's sake and if necessary, list specific weapon types, caliber, magazine capacity, and, what the heck, color, since black plastic seems to make you guys irate.

I am listening.

Totem

Edited, Dec 24th 2012 3:13pm by Totem

Zombie Apocalypse, duh.

Well, with the Left pretty much doing a good turn at acting as Z's, I suppose it's open season then.
/shrug
Cool.

Totem

I would like to see a legislative list of what guns ARE allowed rather than trying to play the game of disallowing varieties and having manufactures play with degrees to slide under the wire. I'm not about to try to compose such a list myself for various reasons. Given the changing nature of technology, I think trying to codify it Constitutionally would be foolish.

Fancy that you didn't get a torrent of responses on Christmas Eve.

Given that you have zero power or ability to make things happen, I'm not too worried about trying to draw up pseudo-legislation for ya.

Apparently.

Assuming you can afford taking the medical exams and tests, not to mention pass both. Also it should be noted that the owners of guns that require special permits will have regular inspections of how they store their guns and ammo along with said guns present at inspection, with mess-ups theoretically costing them their licenses plus any special permit guns and ammo for said guns if they fail.

I would like for hunting rifles, shotguns and regular handguns to require said safety storage and inspections but I am willing to allow that to slide.

Tough shit. Maybe they should work for stronger laws themselves so there's less CT shootings to use as justification to take their precious little *****-replacements away.

Exactly. When you're being willing led by the balls by organizations whose very power and justification relies on "they're gonna take our guns!!", you're not interested in sane compromise anyway and will use any excuse to avoid it.

Witness the GOP leaders who stayed silent on CT until the NRA finally spoke first, essentially telling them what their own party line would be.

Edited, Dec 24th 2012 3:05pm by Jophiel

I'm sorry. We can't all say "An armed man in every classroom!" and drop the mic as our well considered solution.

Well, no shit, Professor Politics

Edited, Dec 24th 2012 3:08pm by Jophiel

I'm not de facto against gun ownership either but if some dip wants to try and make it black and white, I'll pick "no guns" over "Murder some more children in the name of freedom" every single time.

What is always puzzling to me is why the Left continues to infantilize the American public when it comes to weapons. The dichotomy in thinking that a 10 round magazine is somehow safer than a 30 round magazine just demonstrates two things: A fundamental lack of understanding about weaponry and the hypocrisy of purposefully undercutting safety in the name of safety.

Why is there a fetish on the Left to turn lawabiding citizens into criminals when it comes to firearms?

Totem

Probably because they're debating against such reasoned and mature arguments as "Why is there a fetish on the Left to turn lawabiding citizens into criminals when it comes to firearms?"