I minored in statistics - IMO, there is no statistical evidence thatstands up to scrutiny. For that matter, if you guys want to bicker with me, I'd rather not sit here and drone on about percentages, numbers, variants, standard deviations and bias. I've seen a million good conversations go down the tubes with statistical data over on the politics board, it gets boring and redundant, if you want to do that,fine, but I will not respond. I twist and turn numbersfor a living, and this board is my break from work.

People do studies and put together numbers to say what they want them to say. I've done it. I know. It's not hard, it's not a new concept, it's the way this world turns, BT.

ccm - you and I support two different approaches. You support rallying to expandhunters' rights, I support not screwing up, and regulating ourselves in a sensible manner. Clearly, and again as noted above, an irreconcileable difference of opinion, both of which are viable, but it obviously reflects the differences in our personalities and our politics.

Let's keep the Assault Weapons Ban out of this conversation. I don't think anyone on this board,except a few NRA activists, would support Assault Weapons in the deerwoods. Assault weapons and hunting are wholly unrelated, and let's not commingle the two. This thread is limited to "Rifles in bad hands," and last I checked, we were attempting define what "bad hands" really are.You candiscuss Assault weapons all you like in the Political forum, or over at the NRA board.