"Joseph Meehan" wrote in message
...
Joseph Meehan

Dia 's Muire duit



"Oren" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 17:19:12 -0500, "Joseph Meehan"
wrote:

Some will love this line! -------- I am of the opinion that as long
as
there is not persuasive studies one way or the other: I CAN NOT SUPPORT
ANTI-GUN LAWS.

Bumped your head? Didn't you exclaim and advocate government taking of
guns?

What I do believe we need is a good solid study. It appears it would
require not just a new look at existing data, but new data collection,
collecting the data that will provide answers.

My gun has answers; simply, easy and effective.


Oren
--

Meehan

Dia 's Muire duit



What I have believed was that if the data supported it, that I would
support making private ownership of guns illegal. I do believe that we
would be better off with private ownership of guns illegal, but I am not
willing to support a change in the law forcing people to give up their
guns, based on what I believe to be true. If I knew it to be true, then
that would be different.

All the the time I have spent on this subject as changed my thinking in
one way. I expected to find that there was good evidence to support
making guns illegal, but I have not found that. What I have found it the
evidence seems to be weak at best and about equally weighted both ways.

Joseph:

I really think that what you said you read that you didn't really read what
the other person had said. Had you read what the other person had said,
then you would and could not say that you thought what they had said was
what they actually meant to say, but that you inferred into what you read
what they said was not really what they said at all. And then there's
the chance that what they said was actually what they said and you missed it
entirely or that you did not allow a difference of opinion of what they said
from any opinion other than your own. And as for what you say, I am never
sure of what you said, and even when I read what you said, I can see it's
what you said, but I am never sure that you intended to say what you said
because you change what you say about what you said so many times. So,
please just say what you say, and what you said about what you said, and let
other people say what they say without the need to correct what they said,
or your perception or imperception of what they actually said. And take
into account that what they said is not actually what they meant to say and
that what you heard them say is only what you meant to hear and not what
they intended to say, but only what you wanted to hear.

It just doesn't get any clearer than that, you blockhead.

Steve