If you're referring to me.... I'm still here. I just thought I'd let you guys rant and rave among yourselves, for a while. Feel better ?

Still have not come up with any facts to back up the anti's claims yet, I presume!
Let me give you a little hint, and save you some trouble, you won't find any! The anti's rhetoric is all based on lies and half truths!
If you are an anti trying to "targetpunch" a few gun owners over to the anti' side, you might as well move on! You will sway very few people here, if any!
If you are a true gun lover, wake up and smell the coffee! You've been duped into believing the anti's smoke screen! It happens, they play on emotions, not facts! Start really being one of us, start supporting the Second Amendment!

Several of the posters have said what they would do if the government came to confiscate their arms. But only one or two said anything about the consequences of a stance to their families. One thing that came apparent in Canada when the government polled rural people to ask about gun control was that there was a high proportion of rural wives who thought controlling weapons was a good thing. In the province of Alberta the government was very much against the federal gun registry, but they tempered their opposition when they saw what people felt. Of course, since that time the registry costs have ballooned to nearly $2 billion dollars, so the majority of people now recognize that the same amount of money could have been much more effectively spent fighting crime, suicide and accidents - the reasons the gun law supporters gave for needing the law.

Hey jgttechjunkie might have clued us in on someones identity!

Some of the problems gun owners face come from a general culture that is bent on demonizing guns. Most "action" movies have plenty of gun play - there is no regard in them for public or personal safety, people seem to be able to wander around streets shooting with no consequences, it appears that police are drawing their weapons every hour they are on patrol. The net effect is to convey the impression that guns are dangerous and evil, so they should be banned. If I recall there was an effort early in the AIDS epidemic to have "safe sex" built into movies, and there also was an effort made to not have attractive leads smoke. The movies showed visible minorities as brain surgeons and judges, and women playing career roles well before progress was made in these areas in real life. It was part of an effort to change society. So why can't they have more realistic and safer handling of guns?

That would be boring and wouldnt get people to watch the stuff. but your right hollywood has a big influence on the idiots of the world.

Fascinating. You still haven't gotten it, have you? Read back, through my posts on this topic.
AT NO TIME, IN ANY OF MY POSTS.....have I advocated gun control. My initial comments (my 1st post) were specifically written to take issue with the (far-fetched notion) that we are on the verge of extreme gun control measures in this country (which, for political reasons, we are NOT.) It was further designed to assert that we, as gun owners, in order to forestall the possibility that the "antis" could EVER gain a majority - need to do certain things.... such as keeping informed and voting. The truly amazing thing is that I also asserted that we (as gun owners) need to pay attention (by means of discussion and compromise, where necessary) to our PUBLIC IMAGE ... an iminently logical point of view. You may not care, but, in the greater context of politics and public policy - appearances DO count. The main point that I took issue with (in my later posts) was the willingness of many of you to commence violent action, at the drop of a hat, (up to and including an armed insurrection).... to "fight off" a completely ficticious, HYPOTHETICAL situation !!!
Apparently, my use of the word "compromise" created a firestorm of epic proportions. I would remind you all that.... it's just a word - which represents an idea. It is NOT a concrete thing.... that will fall out of the sky and hurt you (or anyone else). How can adult human beings be so TERRIFIED of a WORD... let alone the idea behind it ? I am mystified by this.
As to your insistence that I come up with proof that gun control works..... get it through your thick skulls, dummies... I never advocated it in the first place ! (There, I said it again.... did you get it THIS time ?)
Also, as I stated before, in one of my previous posts, I never expected to sway anyone. I expressed an OPINION.... in answer to a thread posted on this forum. I am a registered user, just like you. As such, I have as much right to post opinions on this forum as anyone - whether or not YOU happen to agree with them. Those of you who steadfastly insist on your rights.... should take a lesson in the concept of DEMOCRACY. You are violently disposed to protect YOUR rights (including free speech, I am sure)..... but, you cannot stomach ANY alternate viewpoints !!! Terribly ironic, wouldn't you say ?
Lastly, I am a gun enthusiast, just as you are. I have NOT been duped into believing anything, by anyone. I march to the beat of my OWN drummer, not in lockstep with those who seem pathologically incapable of considering multiple points of view. I have no need to defend any of my beliefs, certainly not to you. Your comment : "Start really being one of us, start supporting the Second Amendment".... what a REVOLTING idea.... that I should "start really being one of you". As a responsible gun owner.... I support the Second Amendment. What I do NOT support, nor will I EVER support, are people who espouse violent philosophies of settling political issues by means of murder and mayhem ! Start really being one of you ? The sun will cease to shine before that will happen.... You all need to understand that the Constitution, which you all SAY that you hold so dear.... DOES NOT support the concept of a violent overthrow of the government. I suggest you ACTUALLY READ the document, if you have doubts of this. The phrase referring to the people's right to "alter or abolish" the government - refers to LEGAL MEANS - not by armed insurrection. The entire body of law established in this nation, since that document was created, including many of the writings of the founding fathers, recognizes and codifies that what many of you have proposed - namely violent revolution to overthrow the government (if the hypothetical events that are the subject of this thread ever came to pass) - would be, in fact, SEDITION. If these acts were committed during wartime, the law provides that this would constitute TREASON. Count yourselves lucky that we are free enough here that you cannot be prosecuted for what you have advocated.
Now, I have really wasted far too much time on this subject. If you so choose, by all means, rant and rave away to your "hearts desire".

I'm glad that you are an obedient sheeple.

Do whatever the nice officer tells you to do because its a law.
What's that officer? You want me to turn in my SKS because they are now banned? Certainly, I'll do it just to be a good citizen and neighbor. Oh, and you now want my handguns? Here you go officer, I guess I really didn't need these anyway.
You now want my sniper rifle? I don't have a sniper rifle... What's did you say officer, a scoped deer rifle is a sniper rifle? Ok, I guess you are right, I'll hand it over to you to do my patriotic duty tothe state and do what's best for collective society.
What's that officer? You want me to get on one cattle car and my wife and kids on another? Why sure, you are carrying out the law, so I will obey.



[:@]

"From time to time the tree of liberty needs to refreshed with the blood of patriots." Thomas Jefferson.

I'm not advocating violent overthrow of the US Gov't with the above quote, TP. I just wanted to remind you of the mindset of the framers of the Constitution. They had just overthrown an oppressive regime by force of arms and forsaw a time when the "Altering or abolishment" of the government might be necessary again.

TP you can straighten out alot of questions we have about you by just answering this one question, I have asked you to answer it honestly now about 3 times. DID YOU VOTE FOR GORE IN 2000?