Townhall.com
Derek Hunter
March 4, 2018

Democrats, in a feat of political exploitation unrivaled in the 21st century, are now using the kids from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School to sign fundraising emails. Part of me had hoped the party of grave-dancing would find using children in this way would be a bridge too far, but the rest of me knew they didn’t have it in them to be tactful, decent people. After all, every left-wing activist group had, one day after the shooting, started sweeping into town to organize what they and their fellow travelers in the media all claimed was an “organic, grassroots” response to the tragedy. If they couldn’t wait 24 hours before attaching the marionette strings to those kids, the fact that they waited 2 weeks before attempting to use them to line their own pockets is as close to decency as they’re going to get.

With that in mind, and as liberals line up behind a shield made of children to march on the Second Amendment, it’s important to remember what happens when you attempt to compromise with people whose ultimate goal is your obliteration and why no amount of compromise will ever be enough.

There is an example from our recent past that shows how compromise works when it comes to big government liberals. It may not be perfect, and it isn’t pretty, but it is what happens when you accept the concept of diminishing the rights of innocent people over the actions of the guilty.

You have to dig in your heels and make clear you will never, ever acquiesce to their demands. This has been the tactic of the National Rifle Association when it comes to the Second Amendment, and it is the correct choice. But it hasn’t been the choice made by others in the past.

One particular group that has seen “compromise” used as a way to strip them of their rights is smokers. Now smokers aren’t exactly a group of people who are going to elicit a lot of sympathy or concern from people (junkies, sure, but people who use a legal product are fair game when it comes to attack, which is weird). But what happened to smokers is a useful tool for illustrating why the American people should not compromise with liberals when it comes to one of our fundamental freedoms.

Comedian and podcaster Adam Carolla has made this point many times on his show, so I can’t take credit for it. But it certainly exemplifies how a slope quickly becomes slippery and, if your interest is simply compromise, you can compromise your rights away.

To paraphrase Carolla, there was a time when you could smoke in restaurants. They are private property, and if the owner wanted to allow smoking, smoking was allowed. Then the government (liberals) decided smokers should be herded into their own area of a restaurant, the “smoking section.” So they went so smokers in the main dining room and said, “We’re going to need you to sit over here, in this side room You can smoke all you want, we just don’t want other people to smell it while they’re eating. You understand, right?”

Smokers, not wanting to cause a scene and knowing some non-smokers could be annoyed, happily complied.

Then the government comes back and says, “We’re going to need you to move to the bar area when you smoke. People are drinking there, and eating here, so it’d just be better if you moved over there.”

Smokers picked up their ashtrays, “Sure thing,” they said, and moved to the bar.

The government comes back and says they need smokers to step out front. “If you could just stand out front and smoke, that would be much better for everyone, OK? Don’t worry, there’s an awning and a heater, so you’ll be protected from the weather.”

Smokers picked up and moved outside.

“If you could move 50 feet from the door, that would be very helpful,” the government said next. “People smell smoke as they walk in the door and we don’t want that. Thanks.”

And now smokers are stuck down the block, wet and wondering how this happened. If someone had come up to them at first and said, “Hey, get down the street if you want to smoke,” it never would have happened, they wouldn’t have stood for it. But little by little, inch by inch, they moved because each move was small and seemed like a compromise.

Now smokers are never getting back inside, even if the owners of a bar or restaurant want them to. Their rights are gone, the private property rights of the owners are gone, and it was all done in the name of compromise.

There is no compromise with someone who doesn’t want you to exist, there is only incrementally losing ground until you no longer exist. A right diminished will never return, government does not cede back power once seized.

The NRA is right to hold its ground, it’s why the organization exists in the first place. Liberals are not honest brokers when it comes to the issue of guns, and neither is the media. Trying to appease leftists never works because nothing short of everything they want is ever enough for them.

If people who support the Second Amendment start to compromise with liberals whose ultimate goal is to strip everyone of their right to defend themselves, it won’t be too long before they’re out on the street in the rain with the smokers. Never give them an inch.

Link

Possibly the most lucid description of the liberal play book yet.

Smokers already felt guilty about their harmful habit, so they moved along without a fight. Owners probably felt guilty about moving them , but maybe some nonsmokers had complained.

Now they want us to feel guilty because we own guns and somebody who owned guns killed kids.

Thanks,

RMD

If they start shaving along the edges of the 2an Amendement, they will not stop until there is nothing left but a pile of sawdust on the ground.

Succinct and powerful. Thank you for posting this.

As I read this and forwarded it to an "anti" friend it occurred to me that a much better example than smokers would have been the American Indian. Talk about a group that really got royally screwed by the government!

quote:

There is no compromise with someone who doesn’t want you to exist

This needs to be said LOUD and often.

The true victory here is if they can get another Republican president to sign gun control lending bipartisan credibilty to the gun control movement. Long game Progressivism.

quote:

Originally posted by KMitch200:

quote:

There is no compromise with someone who doesn’t want you to exist

This needs to be said LOUD and often.

As a corollary, it's fundamentally flawed to "compromise" with someone who gives up nothing

Certainly this is a picture of many products deemed unhealthy, but the difference couldn't be more clear. Second Amendment rights are not product dependent, but rather based on personal and societal security. I fail to see how this comparison helps make our stand to not give up any ground, as smoking is a choice, not a right.

quote:

Originally posted by TRshootem:
Certainly this is a picture of many products deemed unhealthy, but the difference couldn't be more clear. Second Amendment rights are not product dependent, but rather based on personal and societal security. I fail to see how this comparison helps make our stand to not give up any ground, as smoking is a choice, not a right.

Private Property rights are as old as self-defense rights. Look at the the progressive chipping away of the restaurant owner's rights in the OP's article and then look at the timeline below for how many rights gun owners have already had chipped away:

1934 National Firearms Act - gun banners give up nothing in their "compromise"

1968 Gun Gontrol Act - gun banners give up nothing in their "compromise"

1986 The Firearm Owner's Protection Act - gun banners give up nothing in their "compromise"

1993 The Brrady Handgun Violence Act - gun banners give up nothing in their "compromise"

1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act - gun banners give up nothing in their "compromise." Fortunately, it had a 10 year sunset in it.

---

Ego is the anesthesia that deadens the pain of stupidity

DISCLAIMER: These are the author's own personal views and do not represent the views of the author's employer.

Overall, there has been a total failure in solving the problem. It is drugs that messed up the minds of these people and guns are only a means used by them to kill people. They could have used any other methods like knives, bombs, gasoline, vehicles, etc. to inflect death.

The FDA should have never approved the use of these drugs. We also have the drugs used by Bipolar patients which can cause suicide if not used correctly. Also the pain killer drugs that have caused many deaths since the reaction by the body requires more of the pain killer drugs to releave the pain.

So overall, there is a big expense to combat the problem and the interfiber of the country is being destroyed.

quote:

Originally posted by TRshootem:
I fail to see how this comparison helps make our stand to not give up any ground, as smoking is a choice, not a right.

Then you've clearly missed the point entirely.

quote:

Originally posted by Gene Hillman:
As I read this and forwarded it to an "anti" friend it occurred to me that a much better example than smokers would have been the American Indian. Talk about a group that really got royally screwed by the government!

Great minds think alike...LOL. Same thought I had, after just reading about the horrific winter conditions up on the Blackfeet Reservation, north of us.

We can not compromise. Hopefully the President doesn't abandon us.

Miles have already been given on the 2nd Amendment. If not an inch was given, there'd be no federal, state or local gun laws, including the gun control acts of '34 and '68. So, unfortunately, that ship has already sailed.

agree 100%

somebody post the cake cartoon

-------------------------------

quote:

somebody post the cake cartoon

you da man

--------------------------------

Most excellent!