Quote of the Day: Joe

I’m going to quote Joe’s comment on his quote of the day.

I remember the concealed carry fights of 15+ years ago. There were a lot of people that wanted “Vermont Carry” rather than licensing. It was believed there was no path to “Vermont Carry” once we had “Shall Issue” carry. It was believed that we were giving up too much by allowing the government to license a right. That we now appear to be on a roll to “Constitutional Carry” in many states proves that fear was unfounded. We are winning because were willing to accept what we could get rather than what we believed was due to us.

Now of course I have another grim angle. The anti-rights lobby still exists because they have all but abandoned their true, but losing goal, to ban the sale and possession of all firearms by civilians. Instead they have a litmus where if it inconveniences or restricts lawful gun owners in any way, they approve of it.

Magazine bans won’t ban guns or their sale, but it inconveniences and restricts lawful gun owners.

Micro-stamping won’t ban guns or their sale, but it inconveniences and restricts lawful gun owners.

Making private transfers illegal won’t ban guns or their sale, but it inconveniences and restricts lawful gun owners.

etc etc etc

We need to do the same. I think sometimes we can be our own worst enemy by wanting something perfect at the expense of something better, or getting complacent with gun laws in your permissive jurisdiction while lawful Americans rot in Massachusetts, Illinois, New York, California, and other 3rd world dictatorships.

This is one of the reasons why I support national concealed carry. I linked Say Uncle just so you can see the comments. Yeah national concealed carry might turn into some hideous boogie-man, but that would require the anti-rights people to initiate that, and we can fight them and stop them. Meanwhile imagine your carry permit holding the same weight as your driver’s license? If you by chance are traveling on the boarder of two states you don’t have to worry that maybe the winding interstate you’re driving on may occasionally meander onto the wrong side of the fence. You can travel to other states and not be forced to engage in multiple safeguards or paranoid acts because you’re traveling through a restrictive state.

Think about it this way. How would it make you feel if the Brady Campaign or the Joyce Foundation ONLY proposed and supported legislation that called for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment?

They wouldn’t last long, would they?