Don't believe the (Neuro) Hype?

spencer60 • 8 hours ago −
The fundamental problem with the approach mentioned in the article is that both sides need to be honest about their actual goals for it to possibly work.

On the pro-rights side it's pretty simple. We want the government to respect the Second Amendment the same way it respects the other constitutional rights.

At a minimum, any legislation impacting the right to keep and bear arms should fall under the 'strict scrutiny' aspect of our legal system.

That means that the benefit to public safety must be proven, and the harm to the right minimized, in order to pass constitutional muster.

The problem comes up with the gun control lobby's side of the 'negotiation'.

The plain truth is that they want to eliminate the Second Amendment, and remove the right to keep and bear arms from our Constitution.

This is not paranoia...Leaders in the gun control lobby have publicly said this many, many times over the last 30 years, usually when talking to their 'base'.

Spend 15 minute with any search engine and you will have no problem finding this to be the case. You can start with Sen. Feinstein and her 'turn them all in' quote.

Yet they know that this is an impossibility in the current political environment. They would lose all of their support in a heartbeat if they openly stated this for public consumption.

Negotiation requires that both sides are honest about their goals, yet the gun control lobby cannot do that.

Instead they must operate under the subterfuge that they want to limit firearms only for criminals, while in reality trying to pass laws that only affect law abiding citizens.

Until the gun control lobby has the intellectual honesty to publicly support their true position, there can be no 'negotiation' of any kind with them.