Let me put itanother way....another simple analogy.

Let say we have fifteen people on the planet, and they are all sitting in a court room. The case before the court: Bowhunting vs. No Bowhunting...

At the plantiff's table sits Wayne Pacelle (Wayne's STATED mission is to eliminate bowhunting in all 50 states). At the defendant's table sits Badgergirl (a hunter). The judgerepresents the government. Thejury represent the 80% of the population that doesn't hunt.

Wayne starts his arguement. He shows picture after picture ( we know they're out there) of various animals with arrows sticking out their heads and bodies (it is hard to show evidence of bullets sticking out of same). Hispointsare pretty convincing to the jury..."it is just inhuman and wrong", he states. "It is a waste of natural resources", he says.

The judge (the government) makes the claim that a bow (not a gun mind you, and the reason why we need bowhunter training)in the hands of a competent, properly trained, and skilledindividual is a valuable means of controlling/preserving wildlife. The jury sits up and pays attention here...

At the defendant's table, Badgergirl, standing over her lawnmower, replies "I learned how to operate this lawnmower on my own. I do not need your stinking training, nor do I needyou meddling in my affairs!" All the while, Wayne is holding a picture in one handand pointing to it with the other. Wayne is grinning from ear to ear...The jury has his complete attention.

How many of you think the defendant will win this case? Badgergirl?

Again, a small price to pay to play!