We have all heard it before. Some sort of anti-gun politician is preaching their misguided agenda to the masses. They then suggest loads of gun control measurements that we, the knowledgeable, know will not make any difference. They don't care, they don't want to make a difference. Anyhow, their terrible ideas are all shot down due to the many logical people left in this country. They then ask for a compromise and riddle off the measures that they deem most important.
The definition of "compromise" as given by the merriam-webster dictionary is:
"an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions"
If a democrat compromises by lessening the amount of laws they want enacted, that is no compromise. A compromise needs both sides to get something they want. The pro gun side doesn't want any useless laws passed, so reducing the amount is not compromising. This is like your wife coming home saying she wants four cats, you say that you do not want any cats, and then you "compromise" and she gets two cats. Again, you get nothing that you want, and she still gets what she wants... just not completely.
A good compromise with regards to gun control would be the pro gunners saying
"Okay, we will pass the law allowing universal background checks, but we want to allow suppressors to be bought without filling out a form and paying an extra $200."
That is a proper compromise. Both sides get something they want by allowing a little something that they don't want. It is important you realize this when you hear this shady tactic being used. And that is exactly what it is... a shady political tactic.
The pro gun politicians need to remember this too, as I see them fall for it time after time.
No comments:
Post a Comment