On Jul 19, 12:17*am, "David R.Birch" wrote:
rangerssuck wrote:
On Jul 18, 7:49 pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 17:28:21 -0700 (PDT), rangerssuck

wrote:
A tired straw man. Perhaps that is because there are far, far more
guns carried by police than citizens with CCW permits.
Where the hell did you get THAT factoid..erronious as it is?

Gunner

Your homework assignment is to produce the number of concealed carry
permits in New Jersey, as well as the number of firearms carried by NJ
law enforcement officials, with serious documentation to back up both
numbers.. If you can't or won't, I'll consider that the end of this
conversation.

The problem is that NJ is a "may issue" concealed carry license state,
whereas most states are "shall issue". This means you only get a
license if you're the CLEO's buddy. Your statement above is only
applicable in NJ, a state not noted for embracing human rights.

David

This entire conversation has been about New Jersey. Why would I have
made a statement that did not apply to NJ?

Now I'm still waiting for Gunner to provide proof that my statement
was .erronious [sic]. As usual, he has applied his tunnel vision to
jump all over an "anti-gun" statement made by a "liberal" without
bothering to read the context.

You may consider the fact that NJ being a "may issue" state to be a
problem. I, and the majority of NJ voters do not. Nor do we consider
carrying weapons a "human right."

On that subject (and this was started in another thread which has
become so polluted with Gunner's vitrio; that I will no longer
participate in it), I asked about the "well regulated militia" clause
in the second amendment. Gunner stated that I, whether I knew it or
not was a member of such a militia. Without sarcasm, without foul
language, would you or Gunner (or anyone else) care to explain that
statement?