search
top

Compromises

I know some of you might be shocked to hear an NRA board member say Compromises Do Not Work, but that’s what Tom King is trying to do with one guy that goes by the alias “Gman”.  Gman is one of the disenfranchised souls that is disappointed Harlan Carter managed to wrest control of the NRA in the 1977 “Cinncinatti Revolt”.

It’s generally been my experience that, unless you’re the type that thrives on politics, the more understanding of the process that you have, the less you trust it.  Gman says this, in regards to Tom’s last post on ballistic imaging and microstamping:

Don’t be shocked, but I happen to agree 110% with you on this one…and would like to take a step back to my post on microstamping. Because it would seem to me to be pretty much the same logical principle; that it really does not aid in apprehending a criminal, even if the gun is ID’ed. It just adds expense. The new evidence on imaging should help make the case for microstamping moot up in the Capitol.

It really seems to me to be a no-brainer. And I would think that it would be one of those issues that would be fairly simple to head off early in the legislative process by a fairly clear explanation; that is, an issue that the legislative liaison folks could take care of, alleviating the information overload on Joe Sixpack gun owner.

My response to that is one should never assume the legislative process involves a bunch of smart, well meaning people sitting around trying to fix real problems with real solutions. Think of the opposite of that, and you have the legislative process. This isn’t about the utility microstamping has in crime solving, it’s being pushed by the gun control groups because it will drive the cost of guns up, and drive some manufacturers who won’t be able to afford to add this to their production process to either close shop if they manufacture in-state, or sacrifice the market in a large state (like New York and California).  The gun control groups don’t give a whit if it never solves a single crime, beause it’s about increasing the regulatory burden on the gun industry, driving prices up, and putting a damper on the market.

Politicians will go along with this if they think they can go back to their constitents, and talk about all the wonderful things they are doing to fight crime.  This is why you can’t rely on liasons, you have to educate people, tie these issues together, so that gun owners understand what they are up against, and will tell their legislators that they want none of this nonsense.

2 Responses to “Compromises”

  1. BobG says:

    Your response is 100%.
    Some of those politicians are idiots who only stay in office because they kiss the right butts and put on a good show for their constituents.
    Gun control has nothing to do with crime, just control.

  2. DirtCrashr says:

    Absolutely the same thing is happening with the lead ammo ban and, “If it will save just one Condor…”
    It’s got nothing to do with the Condor, except that they’re trying to introduce it into new “potential” habitat (like AZ) where they then call up the ammo-ban.
    At a gun-shop Tuesday down the central coast in CA – which is really big boar-hunting and other critter territory – and their ammo shelves were empty including .22LR — because you cannot shoot even a squirrel anymore with lead ammo. They had some .30 carbine ammo that was “FMC” and I thought~?? “Full Metal Case” – so exposed lead doesn’t pollute and enter the environment. $27 for a box of 20…

top