I hope you have all seen the cake analogy of gun rights. Where compromise always consists of us giving up some more of our gun rights in return for keeping some of ours. We never seem to get any back.

Beto O’Rourke is out there talking about “Finding Common Ground.” The democrat talking point is “balancing responsible gun ownership with public safety”.

All of them consist of ignoring just a little bit of the second amendment “for the common good”, “for public safety”, “to save just one life”.

My state has constitutional carry. I have a CCW as well. This allows me to travel to a few more states without problems as those states recognize my CCW. When we talk about common ground, how about allowing my permit to allow me to carry in every state and D.C.?

How about we recognize that short barreled rifles were added to the NFA to keep people from avoiding the tax by claiming a pistol was a rifle? How a person can end up arrested because it was 15.99inches instead of 16.00 inches long.

How about removing suppressors from the NFA? The fact that I can buy a stainless steel suppressor for a 64mm pipe for $200 installed but it is $200 just for the tax stamp and another $600+ for the actual can?

We know that we can get suppressors down around the $30 mark because people sell “solvent traps” that can be converted into a suppressor.

Common ground? I’d love to find common ground with the gun infringers. Unfortunately there seems to be a huge gulf between us that they are unwilling to cross.

Former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas) said in an interview broadcast on Sunday that Texas needs to find “common ground” on gun control by respecting the Second Amendment while also requiring safety measures on firearms.

O’Rourke highlighted moderate gun control measures that both Republican and Democratic residents of his state can get behind, some of which appear in a bipartisan Senate plan considered this week in light of the Uvalde shooting.

“Universal background checks, red flag laws, safe storage laws — these are things that most Texans agree with,” O’Rourke said.
O’Rourke: Time to find ‘common ground’ on gun control

Spread the love

By awa

12 thoughts on “Finding Common Ground”
  1. The gun control advocates remind me of that person at work who is always trying to hand off work to other people, claiming :it will make it better for everyone.” I’m not sure how me doing your job, plus my own makes it better for everyone.
    Curiously, the people pushing for that all seem to be lazy, childlike, liberals.
    By the way, didn’t Beto read the majority opinion, where it clearly says “polls” do not weigh into the legality of the issue? Yet… here he is pushing polls as a reason to infringe rights.

  2. O’Rourke’s definition of common ground is they slowly encroach on our ground and never give up on any of theirs.

  3. Compromise: A settlement of differences by consent, reached by mutual concessions.
    Capitulation: to surrender, often after a negotiation of terms.

    Congressional “compromises” are never compromises, they’re capitulations. In a compromise we’d get something of value out of it. Instead, its always “well it could have been worse.”

  4. My idea of “common ground”??? Until I commit a crime and get convicted leave me the F alone! And yes, suppressors and sbrs should be off NFA list. It was a snarky move back in the day because “only criminals” use silencers..some where I have a copy of the Sears catalog from 1927. You could order a Thompson submachinegun and have it MAILED to your house…imagine THAT

  5. There is no common ground with those who seek to destroy you. And Beta seeks to destroy the 2nd Amendment. His “common ground” is simply a first step, a means to an end.
    It is right and proper to object at the first infringement of our liberties. It’s never the last.
    If you want compromise, give me something for what I give up. I’ll give up on “enhanced” checks, But I want 50 state reciprocity. I’ll negotiate on age to buy “assault weapons,” but I want suppressors off the NFA list. I can talk about “red flag laws” (if there is legitimate due process; the potential for abuse here is HUGE), but I want the whole SBR thing ended.
    Compromise means compromise. Both sides get something, and give up something. Beta’s not interested in compromise. He’s interested in capitulation. A little at a time.

    1. Yep. Bobby Frank’s idea of “compromise” is “We’ll only infringe on your rights a little, while giving nothing back.”

      While laying the groundwork for more infringements.

      RE: “red flag laws”: I might accept them, IF there are harsh punishments for those who abuse the system. I mean “harsh” as in, known-false reports are felonies punishable by at least as much as the “reportee” would have gotten. Plus, the false reporter must cover the “reportee’s” legal defense costs and pay all costs involved in restoring the “reportee’s” rights and property. And any attorney who assists a false reporter in filing abusive “red flags” gets disbarred.

      (Note: The disbarment clause doesn’t apply to an attorney who defends the false reporter against the related criminal charges; even “red flag” abusers have Constitutionally-protected rights to legal representation in civil and criminal proceedings. And THAT is a key difference between us and the freedom-hating Left.)

      IOW, vindictive false reporting should HURT, and hurt BAD.

  6. Common ground? They don’t have firearms. Those that do want to keep them for protection. Who makes the final decision? It doesn’t take much logic to understand the answer.

  7. “…these are things that most Texans agree with,” O’Rourke said.”

    No. These are things the locusts swarming here from blue states agree with. Texans by and large, do not agree.

Only one rule: Don't be a dick.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.