Why we should always start the discussion with a full cake

[sqlbullet]

Many years ago I heard gun control in the US compared to a cake.  The cake is all things guns.

The gun control people don't like that we have such a big cake, so they take 50% of it.  It is only fair that we divide it down the middle.  So we conceded and give up fully automatic guns, short barreled rifles and shotguns and suppressors ('34 NFA).

A new generation comes along and wants the cake we have, it is only fair we divide it down the middle.  So we give up cheap imports, all sales now go through FFL, concede to form 4473 ('68 GCA).

A new generation comes along and wants the cake we have, and it is only fair we divide it down the middle.  So we give up our full auto tax stamps, and then normal capacity mags, bayonet lugs, other imports ('86 and '94).

For those keeping track, we now have 12.5% of our cake.

See, each time they wanna re-open the debate, we should be negotiating to get some of our cake back.  Wolfie suggested something similar with exchanging universal background checks for national reciprocity on CCW.  While I wouldn't necessarily agree with that one, I can imagine lots of good compromises.  If they want something as expansive as Universal background checks, then I want new full auto tax stamps, removal of suppressors and short barrels from the NFA, and a removal of all import restrictions.

If we don't learn to negotiate for some cake back, this is where we will be someday:

http://www.sportingshootermag.com.au/news/gun-control-lobby-begins-attack-on-bolt-action-rifles

[The_Shadow]

Yep, they will keep hammering until the nail is so deep, that you will destroy the board it's nailed into if you try to remove it!

The Nail being "We the People" the Hammer is Gun Control and the board being the all of our rights, freedoms and the Second Amendment!   

By the way they know the Cake old but it still doesn't totally crumble, it wasn't Gluten free! 

[Wolfie]

Why not negotiate fully autos back in?

Sounds good to me.