but the idea would be to fight for these proposals then compromise in the middle.
We've talked a lot about that sort of strategy here, especially since Sandy Hook.
There are some practical problems. First, you've got to have somebody seriously credible and with the position to accomplish it, who will introduce this sort of legislation. Without introducing legislation, there's no compromise -- no forum for give an take. Just words.
But not only does somebody have to propose this legislation (which is going to bring down huge outcry from the middle, left, and some of the right who don't quite agree that we need to repeal NFA, for example) but there have to be lots of co-sponsors, and enough support for the bill to get at least the first step or two through the congressional bill-making process.
Tons of bills are introduced every year which are just pie-in-the-sky proposals from lawmakers who want to get their names in the papers and want to show their die-hard supporters that they're "really trying" to accomplish whatever.
So sure, maybe Ted Cruz can introduce his new "Repeal the NFA" bill and Barbara Boxer can introduce her "Turn In All Your Guns" bill -- and there will be a lightly attended press conference for each, and the bills will be read into the Congressional Record, and then no one will ever hear of either bill again, ever.
There is political wheelin' and dealin' where -- if they agree that they actually want something to happen -- two sides of an issue will sit down and work out something they both could maybe live with. But not much on extremely divisive issues like gun control.
In order to get any compromise at all from "THEM" we'd have to be within spitting distance of actually passing our NFA repeal bill. And we're miles ... or decades ... away from that. So for now this idea of negotiating a compromise is sort of like one guy standing in New York City and one guy standing on the west coast of France and they're saying they want to take a few steps toward meeting in the middle.
In the end, neither side really wants to pass new bills. They would if they could get it easily, but they don't want it bad enough to betray their bases by giving away things that their folks at home hold dear. Besides, there's SO much political emotion and inertia churned up by having juicy us-vs-them arguments. It keeps the voters coming out and keeps the campaign donations rolling in. Gives the candidates clear enemies to lead their sides' charge against.