Quote Originally Posted by Husar View Post
As for the whole gun thing, there's fewer special interest groups but it's already just as hopeless. And even the winning side isn't happy as long as they haven't shot their opposition so deep into the ground that they can even arm toddlers and dogs it seems. Because you know it's a slippery slope, today you allow gays to carry guns and tomorrow they'll want guns for their dogs and goats.

This is a problem. We've forgotten how to compromise. Today, it sounds like compromise when you get 5 opposition Senators to sign on to your bill. That is a vote, not a compromise. A compromise entails one group winning some, losing some for their idea of what will sove a percieved problem. Then, the other side wins some and loses some for their idea of what will solve a related percieved problem. This is required in todays government and that is a good thing.

To me, a flat bill would include a requirement that all sales undergo an easy to obtain federal background check. The end. This could be spot checked and you can be slapped with jail time or a fine if you are caught breaking this law. This is not an infringement. Instead, Democrats wanted to increase record keeping requirements and create an early draft of a gun registry which would include every gun sold on a 40 year delay (when FFL's retire or close down they must submit all records to the ATF). Equally intense, Republicans were pushing for concealled carry reciprocity on top of it.

If we keep it simple, without a record keeping requirement we will most likely pass it. This will be good for everyone - it is litterally a win/win. This is a compromise, and only Tom Coburn could see it. We should all be ashamed, if there is shame going around.