ethanboris wrote:bentaz wrote:SO STILL NO STANCE ON THE NFA THEN?
The NFA is an aggreement between the states that they will follow the general line. We haven't seen any proposed legislation to amend the Firearms Act come before Parliament yet. We will fight it when it does come up.
Ethan, do you think this exact relaxed attitude, at leats to me - demonstrating lack of teeth and foresight on behalf of SFFP, is what makes people here vote LDP and OneNation? Consider this, when people vote for a firearms friendly party, they are voting for that policy and that policy alone. All your other initiatives are not unique. For example, regardless whether I agree or disagree with OneNation, frankly I don't care about any other policies. Only those that let me enjoy my firearms. Your response just pushed me a little further that way.
We are not stupid. If you haven't touched on NFA by now, which you should have, because that's in your freaking party name! Then say that. Deflecting with what you thought was an elegant response is an insult. Especially from SFFP.
I would have thought that time to act is now, early, to signal position. Strike the iron while it's hot, if you will. Or what - you guys can't get an article into every major newspapers, big guy abusing the battler? Slow errosin of democracy, when police makes the laws? I'd read that headline. Seriously? You got nothing?
Strategically speaking, sending a clear signal early demonstrates that you will show aggression later. Which is not in anyone's best interest and would make all parties involved think twice about making LAFOs into scapegoat or the red herring if you will.
I'd like to understand why SFFP wasn't and isn't the loudest voice right now, protesting the NFA?
p.s.
I am just asking questions, but you're playing for votes... No more insulting deflections please.