How The Gun Control Lobby Plans To Kill The Second Amendment

Over the past decade, major media outlets have run countless stories with such titles as “It seemed like a gun control compromise could be on the way” (The Washington Post) and “Compromise Is Possible In The Gun Control Debate” (The Huffington Post). The word “compromise” is one that is widely used by supporters of gun control because it implies, at least from their point of view, that there is a middle ground in the issue.

However, one story title from The Federalist nailed the problem when the word “compromise” is used in this issue “Why Does ‘Compromise’ Always Mean Gun Control Wins?“. Every call from opponents of the Second Amendment means greater restrictions and/or potential bans on particular firearms, while law-abiding gun owners get nothing in exchange.

How is that remotely a compromise?

As TheTruthAboutGuns.com has spelled out clearly, “‘Compromise” is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as ‘an agreement or settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.”