Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 11:03:48 -0700 From: rsrchsoc@ionet.net (John Wilde) Subject: [lpaz-discuss] Re: Hanson's SB1297 Response To: AZRKBA@asu.edu (Right to Keep and Bear Arms in Arizona) Reply-To: lpaz-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Enrico,
I am going to have to disagree with you on that. The Anti's have yet to give one thing relateld to their ultimate goal. Confiscation. That is the principle upon which they have built their strategy. What they have been willing to do is compromise the route or routes that they are willing to take to reach ultimate confiscation. The key is no matter which road you are on with the anti's they all lead to the same place. Confiscation.
At the same time, those claiming to support the principle of a citizen's right of self-defense, but who have shown a willingness to compromise that very principle, have joined the Anti's at the bargaining table. In other words those so called pro-gun compromisers have joined the anti's on one of the roads to onfiscation. All the pro-gun compromisers have done is delay the Anti's goal, not stopped it
By way of example, in Arizona there is a very good likelyhood that we are going to amend our constitution to repeal the income tax. The principle here is the elimination of the income tax. I am willing to compromise how long it takes to get there, whether it be 2 years or 6 years or 10 years or somewhere in between.
The principle we should be fighting for is the unrestricted right to self-defense. I am willing to let it take a couple of years, instead of now. But that is the extent to which I am willing to compromise. My road is towards unrestricted self-defense. We won't get there if we walk along the road the Anti's are taking. It is time to turn around and get on our road. Anything less, guarantees confiscation at some time in the future.
g'day John Wilde
Enrico Rodrigo wrote:
> >The first question that should be asked of the antis is
> >"What are *you* willing to give up?"
>
> We don't need to ask this question, because we already know the
> answer. They'll give up only as much as is necessary to incrementally
> advance their agenda. They wanted, for example, a complete ban on
> handguns, but they accepted a ban on magazines holding in excess of
> ten rounds. The antis understand the inevitability of compromise
> and how to compromise in their favor.
>
> The pro-gun people don't get this. They foolishly believe either that
> compromise can be avoided, or, even worse, that it's starting point
> must be the mere preservation of constitutional rights.
>
> If you don't compromise, your only other options are acquiescence or
> violence.
>
> If you do compromise, you've got to start by asking for more than
> what you want.
>
> Because the starting point for pro-gun compromisers has been limited
> to the preservation of our constitutional rights, it's no surprise
> that we're gradually losing them.
Community email addresses: Post message: lpaz-discuss@onelist.com Subscribe: lpaz-discuss-subscribe@onelist.com Unsubscribe: lpaz-discuss-unsubscribe@onelist.com List owner: lpaz-discuss-owner@onelist.com Web site: www.ArizonaLibertarian.org
Shortcut URL to this page: http://www.onelist.com/community/lpaz-discuss
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/