AJ,
You're saying they'd shut up, because they'd be afraid of us?
Of course, they'll up the ante at first, scream bloody murder, and push back in whatever way they can, but if it was consistent, and nationwide, then yes, they'd eventually shut up out of fear, or at least out of frustration. Either would be acceptable.
And while the anti-RKBA movement is full of well-meaning idiots at the lower rungs who merely wring their hands "for the children" (sniff)... the middle managment and leadership of these groups and movements certainly are after RKBA because of US, and not the individual atrocity they're citing. And if you look back, any of the large sweeping gun control movements that actually got passed into law where because the government, state or federal was AFRAID of the people.
Jim Crow/Antebellum Reconstruction gun laws. - Afraid of free blacks and what they might do with guns.
NFA '34. - Was it REALLY over prohibition and the mob? No. The much larger concern was the Great Depression, and labor union strife.
GCA '68. - That was obvious, MLK, JFK, RFK etc. were flashpoints, but the much larger worry was that "the nuts" were among the populace at large. And all the other riots, Detroit, Watts, DNC convo in Chicago added to it too.
AWB '94. - Terrified of the militia movement.
It has ALWAYS been about disarming US en-masse, it has never really been about "crime" other than as window dressing and misdirection. The people who are against us at the top aren't stupid, they know full well a nutball kid could do more damage (and much more horrific for the survivors) with a bucket of gasoline and a road flare. And they know what happened to alcohol in Prohibition. It simply went underground, and became a valuable commodity worth killing over. They know guns won't be any different. And they know as well as we do that a criminal willing to commit murder does not care if his gun is illegal.
So it's always been US that scares them. They can't come right out and say that, or they lose elections and get spanked like they did in '94, but we all know what it actually is.
We saw the first signs of giving up out of frustration rhetoric from the anti's in editorials after Sandy Hook. I don't want to be crass, but in the American collective-subconscious mass-shooting carnage-o-meter, grade school kids are like a "10", while high schools or colleges are more like a "5". As long as the number of victims is in the double digits, their ages and demographics tug at everyone's heart strings more than the actual body count IMO. In that sense, the Parkland Shooting reaction is much more astroturf, and is really only having it's volume cranked up to eleven because Trump is in office. And unfortunately, as the MSM and the Left often does, they manage to substitute their noise level for actual grass-roots support, to the point even RINO politicians will fall for it.
The tit-for-tat against the newspapers printing CCW databases I cite above is a perfect example. When our side actually gins up a bit of Honeybadger attitude, and actually goes after them (within the confines of the law) in a way that
hurts, they fold like a cheap suit.
It certainly wouldn't be a "one and done" thing, and our side would need some serious organization to pull it off. Do what we can to filter out false-flag agents provocateur and push the fat bubba neckbeard with the Tapcofarked SKS who was either too stupid or stubborn to get the memo of "Dress Business Casual" to the far back, and keep him away from any press that actually have the balls to come out for some soundbites. Probably would have to pass out security lanyards with difficult to fake badges or papers in them. And deny them to anybody who hasn't been vouched for, attended the pre-protest seminar, and/or shows up not following the dress code. Then make it clear if you don't have a badge, we'll tell law enforcement (who most assuredly will be there) that so-n-so is not with us, and we're concerned they're an agitator, and might do something.
