Per SeaNymph:
And yet again, they ignore the criminal element.

I have no use for guns personally (although I recognize that others do)
and an extremely-low regard for the NRA.

Having said that....

A looooong time ago I lived in Hawaii for almost 10 years.

As a matter of fact - at that time - somebody could get beaten half to
death just walking down the street in *any* part of town or country.

Most places in the USA, you have an idea where to go and where not to go
for personal safety. .... Not so in the Hawaii of that time - the worst
could happen anytime anywhere without somebody even knowing what they
had done/not done to provoke it.

One phenomenon was theft from cars. You stop at a tourist spot, get
out of the car, look around, come back to the car, and there's Bla James
going through your glove compartment. No cops, nobody else around...
just 375# of Bla James.... so you keep your mouth shut and don't bother
the guy until he's finished with his business.

In that context of might-makes-right, the conventional wisdom was "Don't
mess with Filipinos because those guys carry *knives*".... So I have to,
however grudgingly, buy into the "Equalizer" aspect of the NRA's PR
efforts.

OTOH whether the "Equalizer" aspect of an armed public would outweigh
the inevitable gun battles and the probable emergence of relative
firepower as a determinant (as opposed to being armed vs unarmed) is
another issue that I do not claim to know enough to opine on.

i.e. If most people in Hawaii of that time carried handguns, maybe Bla
James would have a buddy and be packing a fully-automatic AR-15....
creating an even worse situation than unarmed vs armed....
--
Pete Cresswell

On 5/25/2016 10:13 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SeaNymph:
And yet again, they ignore the criminal element.

I have no use for guns personally (although I recognize that others do)
and an extremely-low regard for the NRA.

Having said that....

A looooong time ago I lived in Hawaii for almost 10 years.

As a matter of fact - at that time - somebody could get beaten half to
death just walking down the street in *any* part of town or country.

Most places in the USA, you have an idea where to go and where not to go
for personal safety. .... Not so in the Hawaii of that time - the worst
could happen anytime anywhere without somebody even knowing what they
had done/not done to provoke it.

One phenomenon was theft from cars. You stop at a tourist spot, get
out of the car, look around, come back to the car, and there's Bla James
going through your glove compartment. No cops, nobody else around...
just 375# of Bla James.... so you keep your mouth shut and don't bother
the guy until he's finished with his business.

In that context of might-makes-right, the conventional wisdom was "Don't
mess with Filipinos because those guys carry *knives*".... So I have to,
however grudgingly, buy into the "Equalizer" aspect of the NRA's PR
efforts.

OTOH whether the "Equalizer" aspect of an armed public would outweigh
the inevitable gun battles and the probable emergence of relative
firepower as a determinant (as opposed to being armed vs unarmed) is
another issue that I do not claim to know enough to opine on.

i.e. If most people in Hawaii of that time carried handguns, maybe Bla
James would have a buddy and be packing a fully-automatic AR-15....
creating an even worse situation than unarmed vs armed....

I'm a gun owner. We don't do anything other than target shoot, but we
both enjoy it.

There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't have
a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan to carry a
gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to purchase for 5
years, and I do plan to buy more guns

This is an interesting article.
http://www.cato.org/publications/com...yths-realities

On 5/25/2016 4:41 PM, SeaNymph wrote:

I'm a gun owner. We don't do anything other than target shoot, but we both enjoy it.

There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't have a
carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan to carry a gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to purchase for 5
years, and I do plan to buy more guns

This is an interesting article.
http://www.cato.org/publications/com...yths-realities




If you use your weapon in self defense, don't speak to anyone until you talk to your attorney.

Obviously it would be a good idea to memorize your attorney's contact information.

On 5/25/2016 6:18 PM, Bogarth wrote:

If you use your weapon in self defense, don't speak to anyone until you
talk to your attorney.

Obviously it would be a good idea to memorize your attorney's contact
information.


Cops: So, when did you say this shooting happened?
Bogarth: Oh, about 6 PM on Thursday night.
Cops: Did you call an ambulance?
Bogarth: No, I didn't.
Cops: Why is that?
Bogarth: Needed to talk to my attorney first.
Cops: You do realize this is Tuesday?
Bogarth: Well, my attorney was out of town for
Memorial Day Weekend.
Cops: And so he's been dead since Thursday?

Per SeaNymph:
There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't have
a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan to carry a
gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to purchase for 5
years, and I do plan to buy more guns

The perverse part of me is secretly waiting for the first state to pass
unlicensed concealed carry. A few years of that should smoke out some
of the truth.

It seems to me like the current "carry" situations are too heavily
loaded with responsible, reasonably-intelligent people..... -)
--
Pete Cresswell

On 5/25/2016 7:55 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:

The perverse part of me is secretly waiting for the first state to pass
unlicensed concealed carry. A few years of that should smoke out some
of the truth.

It seems to me like the current "carry" situations are too heavily
loaded with responsible, reasonably-intelligent people..... -)


http://www.gunlaws.com/ConstitutionalCarryIndex.htm

Maybe sooner than you think?

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On 5/25/2016 6:55 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SeaNymph:
There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't have
a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan to carry a
gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to purchase for 5
years, and I do plan to buy more guns

The perverse part of me is secretly waiting for the first state to pass
unlicensed concealed carry. A few years of that should smoke out some
of the truth.

It seems to me like the current "carry" situations are too heavily
loaded with responsible, reasonably-intelligent people..... -)


LOL
But I believe you're right. I think that many of the folks that take
carry classes take that responsibility very seriously. The class is
quite intense and, at least in Minnesota, the live fire requirement is
just as intense. It all revolves around safety and responsibility, as
it should.

On 5/25/2016 7:00 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 5/25/2016 7:55 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:

The perverse part of me is secretly waiting for the first state to pass
unlicensed concealed carry. A few years of that should smoke out some
of the truth.

It seems to me like the current "carry" situations are too heavily
loaded with responsible, reasonably-intelligent people..... -)


http://www.gunlaws.com/ConstitutionalCarryIndex.htm

Maybe sooner than you think?

Here in Minnesota, there seems to be no written law that actually
requires a firearm to be concealed, although I do hear that's its highly
recommended.

On 5/25/2016 7:45 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 5/25/2016 6:18 PM, Bogarth wrote:

If you use your weapon in self defense, don't speak to anyone until you
talk to your attorney.

Obviously it would be a good idea to memorize your attorney's contact
information.


Cops: So, when did you say this shooting happened?

Very nice, Stormy. ;-)
But at this point, say nothing. Time for a lawyer.
And try to enjoy the long weekend at the Sheriff's Hotel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

Bogarth: Oh, about 6 PM on Thursday night.
Cops: Did you call an ambulance?
Bogarth: No, I didn't.
Cops: Why is that?
Bogarth: Needed to talk to my attorney first.
Cops: You do realize this is Tuesday?
Bogarth: Well, my attorney was out of town for
Memorial Day Weekend.
Cops: And so he's been dead since Thursday?

SeaNymph
Wed, 25 May 2016 20:41:28 GMT in alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

On 5/25/2016 10:13 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SeaNymph:
And yet again, they ignore the criminal element.

I have no use for guns personally (although I recognize that
others do) and an extremely-low regard for the NRA.

Having said that....

A looooong time ago I lived in Hawaii for almost 10 years.

As a matter of fact - at that time - somebody could get beaten
half to death just walking down the street in *any* part of town
or country.

Most places in the USA, you have an idea where to go and where
not to go for personal safety. .... Not so in the Hawaii of that
time - the worst could happen anytime anywhere without somebody
even knowing what they had done/not done to provoke it.

One phenomenon was theft from cars. You stop at a tourist spot,
get out of the car, look around, come back to the car, and
there's Bla James going through your glove compartment. No
cops, nobody else around... just 375# of Bla James.... so you
keep your mouth shut and don't bother the guy until he's finished
with his business.

In that context of might-makes-right, the conventional wisdom was
"Don't mess with Filipinos because those guys carry *knives*"....
So I have to, however grudgingly, buy into the "Equalizer" aspect
of the NRA's PR efforts.

OTOH whether the "Equalizer" aspect of an armed public would
outweigh the inevitable gun battles and the probable emergence of
relative firepower as a determinant (as opposed to being armed vs
unarmed) is another issue that I do not claim to know enough to
opine on.

i.e. If most people in Hawaii of that time carried handguns,
maybe Bla James would have a buddy and be packing a
fully-automatic AR-15.... creating an even worse situation than
unarmed vs armed....

I'm a gun owner. We don't do anything other than target shoot, but
we both enjoy it.

There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't
have a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan
to carry a gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to
purchase for 5 years, and I do plan to buy more guns

This is an interesting article.
http://www.cato.org/publications/com...ol-myths-reali
ties




Nice article...You'll probably catch some flak for providing it.


--
MID:
Hmmm. I most certainly don't understand how I can access a copy of a
zip file but then not be able to unzip it so I can watch it. That
seems VERY clever!
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145716711400

On 5/25/2016 6:55 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SeaNymph:
There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't have
a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan to carry a
gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to purchase for 5
years, and I do plan to buy more guns

The perverse part of me is secretly waiting for the first state to pass
unlicensed concealed carry. A few years of that should smoke out some
of the truth.

It seems to me like the current "carry" situations are too heavily
loaded with responsible, reasonably-intelligent people..... -)

News flash! Move to Arizona. It's already there.

Unquestionably Confused wrote:
On 5/25/2016 6:55 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SeaNymph:
There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't
have a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan
to carry a gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to
purchase for 5 years, and I do plan to buy more guns

The perverse part of me is secretly waiting for the first state to
pass unlicensed concealed carry. A few years of that should smoke
out some of the truth.

It seems to me like the current "carry" situations are too heavily
loaded with responsible, reasonably-intelligent people..... -)

News flash! Move to Arizona. It's already there.

Arkansas also has unlicensed concealed carry in certain situations - but
it's an AG opinion on the legality , not a statutory done-deal . May depend
on who you ask ...

--
Snag

On Wed, 25 May 2016 19:55:06 -0400
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote:

Per SeaNymph:
There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't
have a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan
to carry a gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to
purchase for 5 years, and I do plan to buy more guns

The perverse part of me is secretly waiting for the first state to
pass unlicensed concealed carry. A few years of that should smoke
out some of the truth.

It seems to me like the current "carry" situations are too heavily
loaded with responsible, reasonably-intelligent people..... -)

that is already available and has been for some time.

On Wed, 25 May 2016 19:55:06 -0400
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote:

The perverse part of me is secretly waiting for the first state to
pass unlicensed concealed carry. A few years of that should smoke
out some of the truth.
In May, West Virginia will become the eighth state to implement some
version of permitless carry, joining Vermont, Alaska, Arizona, Kansas,
Maine, Wyoming, and Mississippi. According to the Law Center to Prevent
Gun Violence, at least 19 other states, including Utah and Kentucky,
are considering similar legislation.

On 5/25/2016 7:42 PM, Diesel wrote:
SeaNymph
Wed, 25 May 2016 20:41:28 GMT in alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

On 5/25/2016 10:13 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SeaNymph:
And yet again, they ignore the criminal element.

I have no use for guns personally (although I recognize that
others do) and an extremely-low regard for the NRA.

Having said that....

A looooong time ago I lived in Hawaii for almost 10 years.

As a matter of fact - at that time - somebody could get beaten
half to death just walking down the street in *any* part of town
or country.

Most places in the USA, you have an idea where to go and where
not to go for personal safety. .... Not so in the Hawaii of that
time - the worst could happen anytime anywhere without somebody
even knowing what they had done/not done to provoke it.

One phenomenon was theft from cars. You stop at a tourist spot,
get out of the car, look around, come back to the car, and
there's Bla James going through your glove compartment. No
cops, nobody else around... just 375# of Bla James.... so you
keep your mouth shut and don't bother the guy until he's finished
with his business.

In that context of might-makes-right, the conventional wisdom was
"Don't mess with Filipinos because those guys carry *knives*"....
So I have to, however grudgingly, buy into the "Equalizer" aspect
of the NRA's PR efforts.

OTOH whether the "Equalizer" aspect of an armed public would
outweigh the inevitable gun battles and the probable emergence of
relative firepower as a determinant (as opposed to being armed vs
unarmed) is another issue that I do not claim to know enough to
opine on.

i.e. If most people in Hawaii of that time carried handguns,
maybe Bla James would have a buddy and be packing a
fully-automatic AR-15.... creating an even worse situation than
unarmed vs armed....

I'm a gun owner. We don't do anything other than target shoot, but
we both enjoy it.

There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't
have a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan
to carry a gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to
purchase for 5 years, and I do plan to buy more guns

This is an interesting article.
http://www.cato.org/publications/com...ol-myths-reali
ties




Nice article...You'll probably catch some flak for providing it.


Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?

On 5/26/2016 8:11 AM, SeaNymph wrote:
Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?


Does anyone else get the feeling that our once
great and free nation is changing. Really being
fundamentally transformed, with liberals as Our
Nation's Leaders.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

It happens that SeaNymph formulated :
On 5/25/2016 7:42 PM, Diesel wrote:
SeaNymph
Wed, 25 May 2016 20:41:28 GMT in alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

On 5/25/2016 10:13 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SeaNymph:
And yet again, they ignore the criminal element.

I have no use for guns personally (although I recognize that
others do) and an extremely-low regard for the NRA.

Having said that....

A looooong time ago I lived in Hawaii for almost 10 years.

As a matter of fact - at that time - somebody could get beaten
half to death just walking down the street in *any* part of town
or country.

Most places in the USA, you have an idea where to go and where
not to go for personal safety. .... Not so in the Hawaii of that
time - the worst could happen anytime anywhere without somebody
even knowing what they had done/not done to provoke it.

One phenomenon was theft from cars. You stop at a tourist spot,
get out of the car, look around, come back to the car, and
there's Bla James going through your glove compartment. No
cops, nobody else around... just 375# of Bla James.... so you
keep your mouth shut and don't bother the guy until he's finished
with his business.

In that context of might-makes-right, the conventional wisdom was
"Don't mess with Filipinos because those guys carry *knives*"....
So I have to, however grudgingly, buy into the "Equalizer" aspect
of the NRA's PR efforts.

OTOH whether the "Equalizer" aspect of an armed public would
outweigh the inevitable gun battles and the probable emergence of
relative firepower as a determinant (as opposed to being armed vs
unarmed) is another issue that I do not claim to know enough to
opine on.

i.e. If most people in Hawaii of that time carried handguns,
maybe Bla James would have a buddy and be packing a
fully-automatic AR-15.... creating an even worse situation than
unarmed vs armed....

I'm a gun owner. We don't do anything other than target shoot, but
we both enjoy it.

There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't
have a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan
to carry a gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to
purchase for 5 years, and I do plan to buy more guns

This is an interesting article.
http://www.cato.org/publications/com...ol-myths-reali
ties




Nice article...You'll probably catch some flak for providing it.


Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince people
that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to ignore the
criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a child
to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if there were
guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the family member was
asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?

How is that any of their business? I suppose they did that in response
to mental or emotional issues with the child, which in this
administration makes it their business. That's what happens when the
pro-gun camp insists that crazy people are the real problem, not a
proliferation of guns. You just can't win I guess.

Stormin Mormon formulated the question :
On 5/26/2016 8:11 AM, SeaNymph wrote:
Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?


Does anyone else get the feeling that our once
great and free nation is changing. Really being
fundamentally transformed, with liberals as Our
Nation's Leaders.

Yep, and that's the reason Trump is doing so well in the republican
party this election season. People are fed up with liberal agendas
being foisted upon them.

On 5/26/2016 8:22 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
It happens that SeaNymph formulated :
And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?

How is that any of their business? I suppose they did that in response
to mental or emotional issues with the child, which in this
administration makes it their business. That's what happens when the
pro-gun camp insists that crazy people are the real problem, not a
proliferation of guns. You just can't win I guess.

I saw a web page a while back. Turns out that
pretty much all the school shooters were on
psych medicines, prescribed. So, it's very
possible the gun nuts are right (double entendre)
here.

Other item of note, the mass killings have all
been in gun free zones. So, the victims had no
way to shoot back. The loony left's answer?
make more gun free zones. Hello!

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On Thu, 26 May 2016 07:11:57 -0500
SeaNymph wrote:

On 5/25/2016 7:42 PM, Diesel wrote:
SeaNymph
Wed, 25 May 2016 20:41:28 GMT in alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

On 5/25/2016 10:13 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SeaNymph:
And yet again, they ignore the criminal element.

I have no use for guns personally (although I recognize that
others do) and an extremely-low regard for the NRA.

Having said that....

A looooong time ago I lived in Hawaii for almost 10 years.

As a matter of fact - at that time - somebody could get beaten
half to death just walking down the street in *any* part of town
or country.

Most places in the USA, you have an idea where to go and where
not to go for personal safety. .... Not so in the Hawaii of that
time - the worst could happen anytime anywhere without somebody
even knowing what they had done/not done to provoke it.

One phenomenon was theft from cars. You stop at a tourist spot,
get out of the car, look around, come back to the car, and
there's Bla James going through your glove compartment. No
cops, nobody else around... just 375# of Bla James.... so you
keep your mouth shut and don't bother the guy until he's finished
with his business.

In that context of might-makes-right, the conventional wisdom was
"Don't mess with Filipinos because those guys carry *knives*"....
So I have to, however grudgingly, buy into the "Equalizer" aspect
of the NRA's PR efforts.

OTOH whether the "Equalizer" aspect of an armed public would
outweigh the inevitable gun battles and the probable emergence of
relative firepower as a determinant (as opposed to being armed vs
unarmed) is another issue that I do not claim to know enough to
opine on.

i.e. If most people in Hawaii of that time carried handguns,
maybe Bla James would have a buddy and be packing a
fully-automatic AR-15.... creating an even worse situation than
unarmed vs armed....

I'm a gun owner. We don't do anything other than target shoot, but
we both enjoy it.

There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't
have a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan
to carry a gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to
purchase for 5 years, and I do plan to buy more guns

This is an interesting article.
http://www.cato.org/publications/com...ol-myths-reali
ties




Nice article...You'll probably catch some flak for providing it.


Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take
a child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked
if there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were,
the family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?


All part of the Regime medical care plans.

Stormin Mormon brought next idea :
On 5/26/2016 8:22 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
It happens that SeaNymph formulated :
And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?

How is that any of their business? I suppose they did that in response
to mental or emotional issues with the child, which in this
administration makes it their business. That's what happens when the
pro-gun camp insists that crazy people are the real problem, not a
proliferation of guns. You just can't win I guess.

I saw a web page a while back. Turns out that
pretty much all the school shooters were on
psych medicines, prescribed. So, it's very
possible the gun nuts are right (double entendre)
here.

Next thing you know, it will be the medical profession's job to alert
the police about guns in the home if some child presents with normal
adolescent features.

Other item of note, the mass killings have all
been in gun free zones. So, the victims had no
way to shoot back. The loony left's answer?
make more gun free zones. Hello!

Yeah, it is an insane idea. Not much thought behind any of their
hairbrained ideas if you ask me. What we really need is for the
responsible gun owners to outnumber the irresponsible ones.

SeaNymph
Thu, 26 May 2016 12:11:57 GMT in alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to
convince people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They
continue to ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all
idiots, imo.

I don't know the difference between the left or right in the context
you're using. Politics is something I freely admit to having very
little knowledge of. What little knowledge of the subject I do have
boils down to this: It's people who lie for your vote and pass laws
I'm supposed to obey whether I personally like them or not. I have no
real say in the creation of the law. Politicians seem to be a lot
like lawyers, with the exception of screwing an individual/company
over, the politician can screw thousands/millions more over with
ease. As far as your remaining commentary, I completely agree with
you.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member
take a child to the doctor. During the visit the family member
was asked if there were guns in the house. After confirming that
there were, the family member was asked if the ammo was kept
separately. Really?

Of course. Said parents could have gotten an unexpected visit from
child protective services and/or police depending on the answers the
child provides, too. I expect things will continue to get worse as
time marches on.


--
MID:
Hmmm. I most certainly don't understand how I can access a copy of a
zip file but then not be able to unzip it so I can watch it. That
seems VERY clever!
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145716711400

Stormin Mormon
Thu, 26 May 2016 12:32:27 GMT in
alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

On 5/26/2016 8:22 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
It happens that SeaNymph formulated :
And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member
take a child to the doctor. During the visit the family member
was asked if there were guns in the house. After confirming
that there were, the family member was asked if the ammo was
kept separately. Really?

How is that any of their business? I suppose they did that in
response to mental or emotional issues with the child, which in
this administration makes it their business. That's what happens
when the pro-gun camp insists that crazy people are the real
problem, not a proliferation of guns. You just can't win I guess.

I saw a web page a while back. Turns out that
pretty much all the school shooters were on
psych medicines, prescribed. So, it's very
possible the gun nuts are right (double entendre)
here.

Other item of note, the mass killings have all
been in gun free zones. So, the victims had no
way to shoot back. The loony left's answer?
make more gun free zones. Hello!


If you're a bad guy... wouldn't it make more sense to target a place
you can be reasonably certain doesn't have any realistic ability to
defend itself or it's people from you? You have gun(s), you're
reasonably certain they don't, because, it's a 'gun free zone'. Due
to the fact you're going to shoot people anyway, I suspect that
breaking the gun free zone law really isn't much concern to you at
this point.

We all know how this ends for the poor sobs stuck in the
building/outside nearby who have no realistic means in which to
defend themselves with.

If you take all the guns from the law abiding citizens, you'll
accomplish one thing and one thing only. Higher crime AND MORE
unnecessary deaths. Fact is, firing a gun isn't always necessary. The
mere fact it's there and you're staring down it's barrel is sometimes
all that's needed to get the message across to the would be car
jacker, thief, would be murdering *******, etc.

If you see people walking the street who have pistols visible on
them, you are more likely to **** with someone who isn't carrying.
The robbery, something else bad, you're planning might not go so well
for you if you try it on the person who's also carrying. They might
be deadly serious about NOT letting you just do your thing.

You have no way of knowing how quick they can get theirs out and
ready to rock, or, if they can take your weapon from you and shoot
you with your own gun. You do know they've got one too. Far better
odds to try whatever bad idea you have with someone who doesn't and
is around people who don't, either.

It's as stupid as attempting to hold up a police station, or,
military barracks. You'd have to be a ****ing suicidal idiot. You
know they're packing and they know how to use them!

I know several people who open carry what I call cowboy guns. They
carry these because, they don't actually have to get it out of the
holster to put lead in your happy ass. All they have to actually pull
off is swinging the holster towards you and pulling the trigger. It
has no slide/pressure build issue. IE: you just took a round from a
big gun, so it's not super important where it hit you. You're going
down with a life threatening wound.

And, what's worse, you just gave my friend the opportunity to
properly get his gun out and sighted on you, so it can be much more
accurate with the next round.








--
MID:
Hmmm. I most certainly don't understand how I can access a copy of a
zip file but then not be able to unzip it so I can watch it. That
seems VERY clever!
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145716711400

on 5/26/2016, Diesel supposed :
Stormin Mormon
Thu, 26 May 2016 12:32:27 GMT in
alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

On 5/26/2016 8:22 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
It happens that SeaNymph formulated :
And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member
take a child to the doctor. During the visit the family member
was asked if there were guns in the house. After confirming
that there were, the family member was asked if the ammo was
kept separately. Really?

How is that any of their business? I suppose they did that in
response to mental or emotional issues with the child, which in
this administration makes it their business. That's what happens
when the pro-gun camp insists that crazy people are the real
problem, not a proliferation of guns. You just can't win I guess.

I saw a web page a while back. Turns out that
pretty much all the school shooters were on
psych medicines, prescribed. So, it's very
possible the gun nuts are right (double entendre)
here.

Other item of note, the mass killings have all
been in gun free zones. So, the victims had no
way to shoot back. The loony left's answer?
make more gun free zones. Hello!


If you're a bad guy... wouldn't it make more sense to target a place
you can be reasonably certain doesn't have any realistic ability to
defend itself or it's people from you? You have gun(s), you're
reasonably certain they don't, because, it's a 'gun free zone'. Due
to the fact you're going to shoot people anyway, I suspect that
breaking the gun free zone law really isn't much concern to you at
this point.

We all know how this ends for the poor sobs stuck in the
building/outside nearby who have no realistic means in which to
defend themselves with.

If you take all the guns from the law abiding citizens, you'll
accomplish one thing and one thing only. Higher crime AND MORE
unnecessary deaths. Fact is, firing a gun isn't always necessary. The
mere fact it's there and you're staring down it's barrel is sometimes
all that's needed to get the message across to the would be car
jacker, thief, would be murdering *******, etc.

If you see people walking the street who have pistols visible on
them, you are more likely to **** with someone who isn't carrying.
The robbery, something else bad, you're planning might not go so well
for you if you try it on the person who's also carrying. They might
be deadly serious about NOT letting you just do your thing.

You have no way of knowing how quick they can get theirs out and
ready to rock, or, if they can take your weapon from you and shoot
you with your own gun. You do know they've got one too. Far better
odds to try whatever bad idea you have with someone who doesn't and
is around people who don't, either.

It's as stupid as attempting to hold up a police station, or,
military barracks. You'd have to be a ****ing suicidal idiot. You
know they're packing and they know how to use them!

I know several people who open carry what I call cowboy guns. They
carry these because, they don't actually have to get it out of the
holster to put lead in your happy ass. All they have to actually pull
off is swinging the holster towards you and pulling the trigger. It
has no slide/pressure build issue. IE: you just took a round from a
big gun, so it's not super important where it hit you. You're going
down with a life threatening wound.

And, what's worse, you just gave my friend the opportunity to
properly get his gun out and sighted on you, so it can be much more
accurate with the next round.

It always cracks me up to hear about some would be robber doing a
holdup in a bar which just happens to be where off-duty cops hang out.
Announcing an establishment as a 'gun free zone' is like painting a
target on the door.

Diesel pretended :
SeaNymph
Thu, 26 May 2016 12:11:57 GMT in alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to
convince people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They
continue to ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all
idiots, imo.

I don't know the difference between the left or right in the context
you're using. Politics is something I freely admit to having very
little knowledge of. What little knowledge of the subject I do have
boils down to this: It's people who lie for your vote and pass laws
I'm supposed to obey whether I personally like them or not.

The way I understand it is in the way the Constitution is interpreted.
On the left are the liberals who think the words should be interpreted
in the context of today's reality despite what the words actually are,
and on the right are the conservatives who think the words should be
interpreted in the context of the framer's actual words and what they
meant at the time of the framing.

You are spot on that both sides lie to the people to get their agenda
to win and laws to get passed despite what the people (who are supposed
to be in charge by way of congress) actually want.

Our system of collecting and counting votes has far too many degrees of
separation between the people's wishes and the eventual decision and
now liberals want to remove the safeguard the framers put in place to
forbid the power from being taken completely away from them. They're
even using PTSD as an excuse for disarming our combat veterans.

On 5/26/2016 7:19 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 5/26/2016 8:11 AM, SeaNymph wrote:
Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?


Does anyone else get the feeling that our once
great and free nation is changing. Really being
fundamentally transformed, with liberals as Our
Nation's Leaders.

I've had that feelings for years now, about 8 years.

On 5/26/2016 7:25 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
Stormin Mormon formulated the question :
On 5/26/2016 8:11 AM, SeaNymph wrote:
Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?


Does anyone else get the feeling that our once
great and free nation is changing. Really being
fundamentally transformed, with liberals as Our
Nation's Leaders.

Yep, and that's the reason Trump is doing so well in the republican
party this election season. People are fed up with liberal agendas being
foisted upon them.

Not only are they fed up with the liberal agenda, they're fed up with
the do nothing republicans as well.

On 5/26/2016 7:22 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
It happens that SeaNymph formulated :
On 5/25/2016 7:42 PM, Diesel wrote:
SeaNymph
Wed, 25 May 2016 20:41:28 GMT in alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

On 5/25/2016 10:13 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SeaNymph:
And yet again, they ignore the criminal element.

I have no use for guns personally (although I recognize that
others do) and an extremely-low regard for the NRA.

Having said that....

A looooong time ago I lived in Hawaii for almost 10 years.

As a matter of fact - at that time - somebody could get beaten
half to death just walking down the street in *any* part of town
or country.

Most places in the USA, you have an idea where to go and where
not to go for personal safety. .... Not so in the Hawaii of that
time - the worst could happen anytime anywhere without somebody
even knowing what they had done/not done to provoke it.

One phenomenon was theft from cars. You stop at a tourist spot,
get out of the car, look around, come back to the car, and
there's Bla James going through your glove compartment. No
cops, nobody else around... just 375# of Bla James.... so you
keep your mouth shut and don't bother the guy until he's finished
with his business.

In that context of might-makes-right, the conventional wisdom was
"Don't mess with Filipinos because those guys carry *knives*"....
So I have to, however grudgingly, buy into the "Equalizer" aspect
of the NRA's PR efforts.

OTOH whether the "Equalizer" aspect of an armed public would
outweigh the inevitable gun battles and the probable emergence of
relative firepower as a determinant (as opposed to being armed vs
unarmed) is another issue that I do not claim to know enough to
opine on.

i.e. If most people in Hawaii of that time carried handguns,
maybe Bla James would have a buddy and be packing a
fully-automatic AR-15.... creating an even worse situation than
unarmed vs armed....

I'm a gun owner. We don't do anything other than target shoot, but
we both enjoy it.

There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't
have a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan
to carry a gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to
purchase for 5 years, and I do plan to buy more guns

This is an interesting article.
http://www.cato.org/publications/com...ol-myths-reali
ties




Nice article...You'll probably catch some flak for providing it.


Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?

How is that any of their business? I suppose they did that in response
to mental or emotional issues with the child, which in this
administration makes it their business. That's what happens when the
pro-gun camp insists that crazy people are the real problem, not a
proliferation of guns. You just can't win I guess.

I'm pretty sure that whole thing came right from this administration. I
believe this administration has given physicians freedom for asking for
this information in certain cases.

That being said, the child was 5 and was at the doctor's office for
scheduled immunizations.

On Thu, 26 May 2016 17:22:31 -0000 (UTC)
Diesel wrote:

It's as stupid as attempting to hold up a police station, or,
military barracks.

Military stateside are disarmed.
Ft. Hood.

Veterans know that.

On 5/26/2016 2:44 PM, SeaNymph wrote:
On 5/26/2016 7:19 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
Does anyone else get the feeling that our once
great and free nation is changing. Really being
fundamentally transformed, with liberals as Our
Nation's Leaders.

I've had that feelings for years now, about 8 years.


It's taken that long to get out from the Bush 5% unemployment rate.


--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

Per Diesel:
It's as stupid as attempting to hold up a police station, or,
military barracks....... You
know they're packing and they know how to use them!

Allowing GI's go have live ammunition outside of a combat zone does not
ring true to me.... maybe it's so... but it clashes with my perception
of command and control.
--
Pete Cresswell

SeaNymph was thinking very hard :
On 5/26/2016 7:25 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
Stormin Mormon formulated the question :
On 5/26/2016 8:11 AM, SeaNymph wrote:
Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?


Does anyone else get the feeling that our once
great and free nation is changing. Really being
fundamentally transformed, with liberals as Our
Nation's Leaders.

Yep, and that's the reason Trump is doing so well in the republican
party this election season. People are fed up with liberal agendas being
foisted upon them.

Not only are they fed up with the liberal agenda, they're fed up with the do
nothing republicans as well.

Well, they *did* close down the government a couple of times. So,
that's something.

on 5/26/2016, SeaNymph supposed :
On 5/26/2016 7:22 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
It happens that SeaNymph formulated :
On 5/25/2016 7:42 PM, Diesel wrote:
SeaNymph
Wed, 25 May 2016 20:41:28 GMT in alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

On 5/25/2016 10:13 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SeaNymph:
And yet again, they ignore the criminal element.

I have no use for guns personally (although I recognize that
others do) and an extremely-low regard for the NRA.

Having said that....

A looooong time ago I lived in Hawaii for almost 10 years.

As a matter of fact - at that time - somebody could get beaten
half to death just walking down the street in *any* part of town
or country.

Most places in the USA, you have an idea where to go and where
not to go for personal safety. .... Not so in the Hawaii of that
time - the worst could happen anytime anywhere without somebody
even knowing what they had done/not done to provoke it.

One phenomenon was theft from cars. You stop at a tourist spot,
get out of the car, look around, come back to the car, and
there's Bla James going through your glove compartment. No
cops, nobody else around... just 375# of Bla James.... so you
keep your mouth shut and don't bother the guy until he's finished
with his business.

In that context of might-makes-right, the conventional wisdom was
"Don't mess with Filipinos because those guys carry *knives*"....
So I have to, however grudgingly, buy into the "Equalizer" aspect
of the NRA's PR efforts.

OTOH whether the "Equalizer" aspect of an armed public would
outweigh the inevitable gun battles and the probable emergence of
relative firepower as a determinant (as opposed to being armed vs
unarmed) is another issue that I do not claim to know enough to
opine on.

i.e. If most people in Hawaii of that time carried handguns,
maybe Bla James would have a buddy and be packing a
fully-automatic AR-15.... creating an even worse situation than
unarmed vs armed....

I'm a gun owner. We don't do anything other than target shoot, but
we both enjoy it.

There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't
have a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan
to carry a gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to
purchase for 5 years, and I do plan to buy more guns

This is an interesting article.
http://www.cato.org/publications/com...ol-myths-reali
ties




Nice article...You'll probably catch some flak for providing it.


Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?

How is that any of their business? I suppose they did that in response
to mental or emotional issues with the child, which in this
administration makes it their business. That's what happens when the
pro-gun camp insists that crazy people are the real problem, not a
proliferation of guns. You just can't win I guess.

I'm pretty sure that whole thing came right from this administration. I
believe this administration has given physicians freedom for asking for this
information in certain cases.

That being said, the child was 5 and was at the doctor's office for scheduled
immunizations.

Then it is none of their business. That is just wrong.

On 5/26/2016 4:41 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
SeaNymph was thinking very hard :
Yep, and that's the reason Trump is doing so well in the republican
party this election season. People are fed up with liberal agendas being
foisted upon them.

Not only are they fed up with the liberal agenda, they're fed up with
the do nothing republicans as well.

Well, they *did* close down the government a couple of times. So, that's
something.

Would be nice if the do nothing Republicans
would block legislation like Affordable
(scuse me while I vomit) Care Act.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On 5/26/2016 2:44 PM, SeaNymph wrote:
On 5/26/2016 7:19 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 5/26/2016 8:11 AM, SeaNymph wrote:
Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?


Does anyone else get the feeling that our once
great and free nation is changing. Really being
fundamentally transformed, with liberals as Our
Nation's Leaders.

I've had that feelings for years now, about 8 years.

If the GOP wasn't so dead-set on maintaining the status-quo they could
easily stave off all the nonsense the minority liberals are pushing.
That's one of the reasons I like Trump, he doesn't care about "the way
things used to be", he's interested in putting the US back on top
economically and to hell with all this PC nonsense.

--
dvus

On 5/26/2016 3:41 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
SeaNymph was thinking very hard :
On 5/26/2016 7:25 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
Stormin Mormon formulated the question :
On 5/26/2016 8:11 AM, SeaNymph wrote:
Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?


Does anyone else get the feeling that our once
great and free nation is changing. Really being
fundamentally transformed, with liberals as Our
Nation's Leaders.

Yep, and that's the reason Trump is doing so well in the republican
party this election season. People are fed up with liberal agendas being
foisted upon them.

Not only are they fed up with the liberal agenda, they're fed up with
the do nothing republicans as well.

Well, they *did* close down the government a couple of times. So, that's
something.

I think there are times with nothing ends up being better than something

On 5/26/2016 5:34 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 5/26/2016 4:41 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
SeaNymph was thinking very hard :
Yep, and that's the reason Trump is doing so well in the republican
party this election season. People are fed up with liberal agendas
being
foisted upon them.

Not only are they fed up with the liberal agenda, they're fed up with
the do nothing republicans as well.

Well, they *did* close down the government a couple of times. So, that's
something.

Would be nice if the do nothing Republicans
would block legislation like Affordable
(scuse me while I vomit) Care Act.

I don't know if that was even possible. Besides the republicans, who
didn't vote for it, there were 34 democrats who didn't vote for it either.

On 5/27/2016 6:05 AM, dvus wrote:
On 5/26/2016 2:44 PM, SeaNymph wrote:
On 5/26/2016 7:19 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 5/26/2016 8:11 AM, SeaNymph wrote:
Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?


Does anyone else get the feeling that our once
great and free nation is changing. Really being
fundamentally transformed, with liberals as Our
Nation's Leaders.

I've had that feelings for years now, about 8 years.

If the GOP wasn't so dead-set on maintaining the status-quo they could
easily stave off all the nonsense the minority liberals are pushing.
That's one of the reasons I like Trump, he doesn't care about "the way
things used to be", he's interested in putting the US back on top
economically and to hell with all this PC nonsense.


I believe you are right about the GOP. I believe those in charge are
absolute idiots, not willing to take a stand. The democrats are very
quick to blame things on republicans, but the republicans never seem to
fight back or stand up for anything.

On 5/26/2016 3:46 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
on 5/26/2016, SeaNymph supposed :
On 5/26/2016 7:22 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
It happens that SeaNymph formulated :
On 5/25/2016 7:42 PM, Diesel wrote:
SeaNymph
Wed, 25 May 2016 20:41:28 GMT in alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

On 5/25/2016 10:13 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SeaNymph:
And yet again, they ignore the criminal element.

I have no use for guns personally (although I recognize that
others do) and an extremely-low regard for the NRA.

Having said that....

A looooong time ago I lived in Hawaii for almost 10 years.

As a matter of fact - at that time - somebody could get beaten
half to death just walking down the street in *any* part of town
or country.

Most places in the USA, you have an idea where to go and where
not to go for personal safety. .... Not so in the Hawaii of that
time - the worst could happen anytime anywhere without somebody
even knowing what they had done/not done to provoke it.

One phenomenon was theft from cars. You stop at a tourist spot,
get out of the car, look around, come back to the car, and
there's Bla James going through your glove compartment. No
cops, nobody else around... just 375# of Bla James.... so you
keep your mouth shut and don't bother the guy until he's finished
with his business.

In that context of might-makes-right, the conventional wisdom was
"Don't mess with Filipinos because those guys carry *knives*"....
So I have to, however grudgingly, buy into the "Equalizer" aspect
of the NRA's PR efforts.

OTOH whether the "Equalizer" aspect of an armed public would
outweigh the inevitable gun battles and the probable emergence of
relative firepower as a determinant (as opposed to being armed vs
unarmed) is another issue that I do not claim to know enough to
opine on.

i.e. If most people in Hawaii of that time carried handguns,
maybe Bla James would have a buddy and be packing a
fully-automatic AR-15.... creating an even worse situation than
unarmed vs armed....

I'm a gun owner. We don't do anything other than target shoot, but
we both enjoy it.

There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't
have a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan
to carry a gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to
purchase for 5 years, and I do plan to buy more guns

This is an interesting article.
http://www.cato.org/publications/com...ol-myths-reali
ties




Nice article...You'll probably catch some flak for providing it.


Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince
people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to
ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a
child to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if
there were guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the
family member was asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?

How is that any of their business? I suppose they did that in response
to mental or emotional issues with the child, which in this
administration makes it their business. That's what happens when the
pro-gun camp insists that crazy people are the real problem, not a
proliferation of guns. You just can't win I guess.

I'm pretty sure that whole thing came right from this administration.
I believe this administration has given physicians freedom for asking
for this information in certain cases.

That being said, the child was 5 and was at the doctor's office for
scheduled immunizations.

Then it is none of their business. That is just wrong.

I couldn't agree more.

On 5/26/2016 12:58 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
Diesel pretended :
SeaNymph
Thu, 26 May 2016 12:11:57 GMT in alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:
Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to
convince people that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They
continue to ignore the criminal element and frankly, they're all
idiots, imo.

I don't know the difference between the left or right in the context
you're using. Politics is something I freely admit to having very
little knowledge of. What little knowledge of the subject I do have
boils down to this: It's people who lie for your vote and pass laws
I'm supposed to obey whether I personally like them or not.

The way I understand it is in the way the Constitution is interpreted.
On the left are the liberals who think the words should be interpreted
in the context of today's reality despite what the words actually are,
and on the right are the conservatives who think the words should be
interpreted in the context of the framer's actual words and what they
meant at the time of the framing.

You are spot on that both sides lie to the people to get their agenda to
win and laws to get passed despite what the people (who are supposed to
be in charge by way of congress) actually want.

Our system of collecting and counting votes has far too many degrees of
separation between the people's wishes and the eventual decision and now
liberals want to remove the safeguard the framers put in place to forbid
the power from being taken completely away from them. They're even using
PTSD as an excuse for disarming our combat veterans.

I want less government, not more. Seems the liberals want total control.