Never trust the words of any politician. It seems Nancy Pelosi has done a bit of an about-face on the issue of "assault weapons".
From The Hill Blog:
Funny, I thought compromise involved two or more parties coming to mutual agreement on an issue? I don't recall gun owners talking to her or the Democratic leadership and agreeing to further curtail their rights. What did we get out of the deal? National CCW? Repeal of the Hughes Amendment? Removing of the "sporting purpose" clause from GCA'68?
Nope, no compromise to be found here.
In the politicians world, compromise means "I won't take away as many of your rights as I would like to at this time.".
And she thinks her statement is a compromise?!? Federal gun registration and what sounds like imposing NFA interstate transport requirements on common Title 1 firearms. That's a compromise?!? How is it every time some politician suggests a "compromise" on an issue, those on the receiving end of the compromise find their rights curtailed more afterwards?
This is how freedom dies, folks.
At least Pelosi is back to showing her true colors. We all knew her prior protestations on gun control not being an issue previously was simply her waiting for the right opportunity. I guess she feels this past week or two has given it to her. Fine by me. I, at least, prefer dealing with an enemy whose intentions are clearly stated upfront.
The battle lines are starting to be drawn. I fear we are about to cross the Rubicon into a very unpleasant place.
From The Hill Blog:
During an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America," Pelosi said that the Congress will work to find some middle ground between the previous ban, which expired in 2004, and the precedent laid by the Supreme Court in a ruling enumerating more concrete gunowners' rights last term.So we've gone from gun control is off the table in response to AG Eric Holder's comments about reinstanting the so-called "assault weapon ban" to Pelosi stating a compromise needs to be made on this issue.
"We have to find some level of compromise," Pelosi said, citing 53 victims of gun violence nationwide in less than a month. "And we have to rid the debate of the misconceptions people have about what gun safety means."
"Yes, it is," the Speaker said when asked if the ball is in Congress's court now that Democrats control the White House. "And we are just going to have to work together to come to some resolution."
Pelosi indicated that new regulations might entail registration and prohibitions on transporting some firearms across state lines.
Funny, I thought compromise involved two or more parties coming to mutual agreement on an issue? I don't recall gun owners talking to her or the Democratic leadership and agreeing to further curtail their rights. What did we get out of the deal? National CCW? Repeal of the Hughes Amendment? Removing of the "sporting purpose" clause from GCA'68?
Nope, no compromise to be found here.
In the politicians world, compromise means "I won't take away as many of your rights as I would like to at this time.".
And she thinks her statement is a compromise?!? Federal gun registration and what sounds like imposing NFA interstate transport requirements on common Title 1 firearms. That's a compromise?!? How is it every time some politician suggests a "compromise" on an issue, those on the receiving end of the compromise find their rights curtailed more afterwards?
This is how freedom dies, folks.
At least Pelosi is back to showing her true colors. We all knew her prior protestations on gun control not being an issue previously was simply her waiting for the right opportunity. I guess she feels this past week or two has given it to her. Fine by me. I, at least, prefer dealing with an enemy whose intentions are clearly stated upfront.
The battle lines are starting to be drawn. I fear we are about to cross the Rubicon into a very unpleasant place.

4 comments:
Registration leads to confiscation, each and every place, each and every time, as sure as God made little green apples.
Good pickup. I hadn't seen that comment in any of the "far right" news sources I rely on.
dangit, I posted alost the same theme, just not as well, after you did before reading yours...
Like you said, at least she is showing her true colors again. Too many people sighed in relief when she said that she wouldn't entertain a ban, but the truth is that she and her lackies were just waiting on a look at what the political winds would bring.
It seems that she thinks it's not as politically risky as she first thought.
What does that say about our resistance?
Post a Comment