06-18-2013, 08:59 AM
Thanks, Six.
I still haven't read what I consider a valid reason for opposing the bill on universal background checks by those who claimed to support the concept before the legislation was drafted. Separate issue from enforcement of current laws (which were as they are now when the alleged support for UBC was expressed).
I only see fear and personal inconvenience cited as reasons for backing off of the support, just worded in different ways repeatedly. I think the backing off would have occurred no matter what the bill included or excluded because by the time the bill was submitted, it was pretty clear that the fear that some bans might get passed was an unnecessary fear. And, so, there was no longer a need for the pro-gun advocates to continue feigning support of something that would have required change to benefit society as a compromise position; it was instead time for excuses and time to back peddle.
It comes down to any new law or change that makes sense and would benefit society getting a shallow verbal commitment of consideration from the NRA and pro-gun advocates, as a "show" that there's a willingness to reason. However, the same re-worked excuses will be used to oppose it when it comes down to putting their money where their collective mouth is. IMO.
Why? It's become clear to me from reading and listening carefully that it's because the pro-gun side considers anything that's proposed or supported by the middle or the left, even if it's the right thing and the best thing for the collective of individuals known as society, as a "loss". And that's scary and just not acceptable to the gun enthusiasts. Any pro-gun advocates who buck the group mentality and follow through on their personal commitments/convictions are then viewed as traitors. It's unreasonable group-think at an extreme level, and very discouraging.
We're not gonna agree on the reasonableness or lack thereof on full display by the NRA and pro-gun advocates; I've been paying too much attention.
But, I really do appreciate reading the view points shared by you and others here and have learned a lot from the gun enthusiasts among us.
I still haven't read what I consider a valid reason for opposing the bill on universal background checks by those who claimed to support the concept before the legislation was drafted. Separate issue from enforcement of current laws (which were as they are now when the alleged support for UBC was expressed).
I only see fear and personal inconvenience cited as reasons for backing off of the support, just worded in different ways repeatedly. I think the backing off would have occurred no matter what the bill included or excluded because by the time the bill was submitted, it was pretty clear that the fear that some bans might get passed was an unnecessary fear. And, so, there was no longer a need for the pro-gun advocates to continue feigning support of something that would have required change to benefit society as a compromise position; it was instead time for excuses and time to back peddle.
It comes down to any new law or change that makes sense and would benefit society getting a shallow verbal commitment of consideration from the NRA and pro-gun advocates, as a "show" that there's a willingness to reason. However, the same re-worked excuses will be used to oppose it when it comes down to putting their money where their collective mouth is. IMO.
Why? It's become clear to me from reading and listening carefully that it's because the pro-gun side considers anything that's proposed or supported by the middle or the left, even if it's the right thing and the best thing for the collective of individuals known as society, as a "loss". And that's scary and just not acceptable to the gun enthusiasts. Any pro-gun advocates who buck the group mentality and follow through on their personal commitments/convictions are then viewed as traitors. It's unreasonable group-think at an extreme level, and very discouraging.
We're not gonna agree on the reasonableness or lack thereof on full display by the NRA and pro-gun advocates; I've been paying too much attention.
But, I really do appreciate reading the view points shared by you and others here and have learned a lot from the gun enthusiasts among us.