What if?

[Kypt]

Let's say "they" got their way and all their horseshit "to reduce crime" laws went through, like a permanent AW ban and whatnot.

Once the crime doesn't go away, what do they blame then?

[PisnNapalm]

They will blame Barney. He's the one that turned them into friggin pussies.

[PA Rifleman]

It's not about fixing the problem nor helping anyone on the street, Kurt. It's about perpetuation of power and the carnival atmosphere of the fight. Many have built their political careers pushing for gun control, and giving them what they want won't make them go away. They need to keep the media's attention, so they demand more and more.

Just review the arguements for previous "reasonable gun control"...Brady...1994 Assault weapons [sic] ban, 1989 import ban, 1986 freeze on transferrable machine guns, gun control act of 1968, and 1963. Each one promised to make us safer. Columbine, VA Tech, Stockton, et al still happened. When confronted with this, the anti-gunners attempt to prove the existence of a negative by claiming how much worse it *could* have been.

The core orchestrators of the gun control movement are very aware it's all about propaganda and not facts or sense. Note how silent Brady and the other various gun control raconteurs were immediately after 9/11/2001 and for several years afterward. They're smart enough to know that had they continued to sling their crap around too soon after 9/11, they'd have serious public backlash against them.

Further, your gun rights are being traded to perpetuate the careers of Ted Kennedy, Chucky Schumer, Ed Rendell, et al.

If they win, they'll simply repeat the cycle -- more laws & more restrictions. They'll ignore all crime stats except the one that appear to prove their point. Out of control crime, no matter how bad, will not change their beliefs. They (and possibly you as a collateral casualty) will die clinging to these articles of faith. The decisive battle ground is the everyday US citizens that aren't in this fight full-time either way.

This cycle, if left unchecked, will completely consume our dwindling rights since it's a one-way degenerative process. Just look east to England or Australia. Further, your gun rights are being traded to perpetuate the careers of Ted Kennedy, Chucky Schumer, Ed Rendell, et al.

They are fully aware you, me and 99.999% of gun-owning US citizens aren't the problem and never will be. It's about emotional appeasement to inexperienced, sheltered misinformed people that want action, even if it's the wrong move. It's a zero-loss proposition from the anti's point, and gun laws are generally never repealed (2004 ban expired, unlikely that'll be allowed again).

This is why it's so important to fight them during deliberations at the outset rather than concede to "reasonable" gun control.

With Hillary Clinton or Barak Obama as the next President-apparent, there will *very* likely be a heavy Federal push for gun control as well.

UPDATE 02 Aug 07 - found this as well:

You will also not be successful with [convincing] the anti-gun ideologues, people like Charles Schumer and Dianne Feinstein. These people have made a conscious choice to oppose firearms ownership and self-defense. They almost always gain power, prestige, and money from their anti-gun politics. They are not interested in the facts or in saving lives. They know the facts and understand the consequences of their actions, and will happily sacrifice innocent people if it furthers their selfish agenda. ... They only respond to fears of losing the power, prestige and money that they covet.

(source link)