Quote of the Day

Yes. We can have both.

We can have sensible gun laws & a law enforcement that’s not corrupted with racist cops.

It takes COMPROMISE & legitimate debate … not one side screaming & crying because the good ol boy racist days are ending & their tiny little penises can’t take it.

Mike_32 @JojoPapa32
Tweeted on January 20, 2023

It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday, it is another science denier!

Via Reticulating_Splines @ReticulatingSp1.

We only need one sensible gun law, and we already have it. It is known as the 2nd Amendment.


5 thoughts on “Compromise

  1. “Compromise”

    This is what “compromise” means to them: the complete and total ban of the sale and ownership of all semi automatic rifles, shotguns and the total ban of all handguns. No grandfathering either. You are forced to give them up. The registration of all firearms left if any. Door-to-door confiscation of all guns that the government doesn’t want. Their “compromise” is that you get to live.

    The thing is they don’t want to compromise. They want nothing less than a total ban of all guns and private gun ownership with no grandfathering; literally everyone has to give up all of their guns to the government followed by the full 100% deployment of United States military to go door-to-door to confiscate all guns by force. But that’s just the base level of what they want. What they REALLY want is to use the military to literally exterminate every single solitary gun owner in the United States. They want literally nothing less than the complete and total extermination of every single person in the United States that owns a gun along with a complete and total extermination of the entire United States population in a home with a gun. They hate every gun owner and want literally every gun owner dead. I don’t understand why people can’t or won’t understand this is what they think of you and want to have happen. There is a reason why democrats talk about using nuclear weapons on gun owners. Because they want to. This includes potato in chief.

    • Beat me to it.

      Their idea of “compromise” is, “We’ll take half and let you keep the other half, and be back for more later.”

      Their goal is to end all private gun ownership. If they have to do it through “compromises” such as letting us keep guns we own, banning future sales, and mandating our guns be collected by the government upon our deaths (i.e. our heirs cannot receive them), that achieves the same goal, just one generation later.

      They’re playing a long game. They’ve been at it for well over a century already in America — longer elsewhere — so a delay of one more generation is no big deal to them.

      But too many “gun rights” proponents — particularly “pro-gun” politicians — see the first part (get to keep what we already own) and think that’s reasonable. It’s not. Not by a long shot.

      See also: LawDog’s glorious (and gloriously accurate) “Gun Rights Cake” analogy.

  2. We tried compromise already. As already mentioned for close to a 100 years now. NRA anyone?
    Joe’s right, we have all the gun law we need in the 2A. So lets try this for compromise. How ’bout we only beat you half to death for violating it?
    The only compromise to be had is in the punishment phase.

    “It takes COMPROMISE & legitimate debate … not one side screaming & crying because the good ol boy racist days are ending & their tiny little penises can’t take it.”
    Seriously? You come begging mercy with an insult? Your lucky we ain’t Chinese communists.
    Keep it up. You’ll get us close.

  3. As the saying goes, it is very hard to persuade someone of your point of view when you slap them while you’re talking.

    To be fair, they have already said what they think of us, which tells us all anyone needs to know about what they mean by ‘compromise’.

    The first step in a true compromise is listening to what the other side has to say. Mike_32 @JojoPapa32, you’ve already flunked that part.

    • All good points here. The other saying that comes to mind is “what do they intend to do to us that they can’t do to us so long as we are still armed?”

Comments are closed.