Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (22311)	6/26/2006 7:04:51 PM
From: Jim S	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543981

Lane, I'm not sure what you mean by "near stasis." There have been some good gains, and a few losses, WRT gun issues in the last few years. More states have passed their versions of "shall issue" laws, and the recent law to protect gun manufacturers and dealers from frivilous lawsuits was a major gain. The Congress allowed the "assault weapons ban" to expire. And more. This isn't stasis, IMO. I will agree that it is nibbling at the margins of the larger issue, though.

To: Lane3 who wrote (22311)	6/27/2006 5:35:17 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 543981

If your argument is that we haven't been in near stasis for a very long time, I take your point. The question is where do we go from here. I don't see anything significant in kind. And the changes in volume would have to be large to be disruptive to the status quo. Ergo near stasis. I would probably buy "near stasis" as the current condition, and to the extent that there is a movement it may still be away from gun control. OTOH I have no reason to think that this stasis will continue indefinitely. If we could be sure of no significant change in the next hundred years than the argument would be less important (but even than worth having if your interested in it).