Recommended Posts
QuoteQuoteFor example, based on a U.S. Department of Justice study, in 1995 there were 8.8 assaults per 1,000 persons in the United States, compared with 20 assaults per 1,000 in England and Wales (their statistics are grouped). Robberies in England and Wales were 1.4 times higher, and burglary was nearly double the U.S. rate. Since then, British figures for violent crime have climbed, while ours have dropped. You are now six times more likely to be mugged in London than in New York.
Do you have links to the ACTUAL studies, as opposed to a pro-gun site reference?
We had this issue in another thread, that in the US they were measuring actual crime reports while the UK figures came from a survey rather than actual reports.
I missed where any of those studies actually made a dishonest comparison of informal surveys in one country to reported crimes in another. The thread you link compared crime among EU countries. Was a comparison to US crime even made in that thread?
Did the comparison of survey to official reports actually happen? Or is this just an attempt to confuse the issue?
rushmc 23
QuoteQuote
To be fair, many gun enthusiasts did object to the violation of habeas corpus, the NSC's censorship of Flynt Leverett's article for the NTimes, and to Bush's warrantless wiretapping. Not all gun enthusiasts are fascists.
Did you happen to hear the courts ruling on habeas corpus today? It apears to me this court does not agree there was a "viotlation" here
It was a 5 to 4 decision. It decided the case, to be sure, but it hardly reflects a mandate of opinion.
P.S. - for what it's worth, I think it will go down in long-term history as one of the SCOTUS's more shameful anti-Constitutional decisions, right up there with the infamous Dred Scott decision.
Well, you may think it is anti whatever, but the written ruling was right on the money.
Never, in the history of US courts has this been done for non-citizens or those not on US soil. To start it now would be crazy
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
mr2mk1g 10
I think Kallend mixed up his threads and was actually referring to this one which took place at about the same time - see here:
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2657534#2657534
and
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2658662#2658662
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2657534#2657534
and
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2658662#2658662
mr2mk1g 10
Nightingale, there were 46 homicides in the UK involving firearms last year. Just let that sink in a moment – 46 out of a population of more than 60 million. That's the lowest level we've had since the 1980's.
Yes overall gun crime has been increasing in this country. Much of the statistical increase however is related to the fact that all incidents involving imitation weapons and BB guns are now classified as "firearms offences".
The statistics you quote regarding violent crime in the UK are just plain wrong. Crime in general in the UK, together with violent crime, has dropped significantly over recent years.
To quote the most recent Home Office publication on the subject (for reporting year 05/06); "Since peaking in 1995, BCS crime has fallen by 44 per cent, representing 8.4 million fewer crimes, with domestic burglary and all vehicle thefts falling by over half, (59% and 60% respectively) and violent crime falling by 43 per cent during this period."
Yes overall gun crime has been increasing in this country. Much of the statistical increase however is related to the fact that all incidents involving imitation weapons and BB guns are now classified as "firearms offences".
The statistics you quote regarding violent crime in the UK are just plain wrong. Crime in general in the UK, together with violent crime, has dropped significantly over recent years.
To quote the most recent Home Office publication on the subject (for reporting year 05/06); "Since peaking in 1995, BCS crime has fallen by 44 per cent, representing 8.4 million fewer crimes, with domestic burglary and all vehicle thefts falling by over half, (59% and 60% respectively) and violent crime falling by 43 per cent during this period."
kallend 2,146
QuoteNightingale-
don't bother with Kallen, he wouldn't follow the links I provided because they were on an NRA and GOA site, even though the links were to .gov sites. He isn't interested in facts.
Put your time to better use, pass the bar. Good luck on the test!!
The links to the .gov sites did NOT have the conclusions in them that you claimed, as I already wrote in this thread.
That's why it is IMPORTANT to go to the original data and not someone else's possibly bogus conclusions. I do not parrot stuff off the Brady site, and you should not parrot stuff of the NRA site. Neither can be trusted.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
kallend 2,146
QuoteI think Kallend mixed up his threads and was actually referring to this one which took place at about the same time - see here:
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2657534#2657534
and
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2658662#2658662
Thank you.
THAT is why it is important to go to original data and not to some version that has been massaged in some unspecified way to prove a point. Don't believe Brady, don't believe the NRA, and especially don't believe Lott (who has been shown to have falsified his data). You can believe the FBI, and you can believe the UK Home office.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Gawain 0
On a tangent, I'm reflecting on the title of this thread, and I'm trying to imagine what a real shitstorm would be like? Would it be falling pieces of poop? Or, would it be a tornado-like-effect, with pieces of feces flying around? 
Okay, let the intelligent discourse continue...
Okay, let the intelligent discourse continue...
So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!
QuoteQuoteNightingale-
don't bother with Kallen, he wouldn't follow the links I provided because they were on an NRA and GOA site, even though the links were to .gov sites. He isn't interested in facts.
Put your time to better use, pass the bar. Good luck on the test!!
The links to the .gov sites did NOT have the conclusions in them that you claimed, as I already wrote in this thread.
That's why it is IMPORTANT to go to the original data and not someone else's possibly bogus conclusions. I do not parrot stuff off the Brady site, and you should not parrot stuff of the NRA site. Neither can be trusted.
Funny, you seem to think being given the actual data on which some conclusions were made is insufficient (data which can easily confirm or refute those conclusions), but the google search results of my+lai+colin+powell somehow proves that Colin Powell attempted to cover up the My Lai Massacre.
Double standard?
kallend 2,146
Quote
Double standard?
Fabricated any good quotes today?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
kallend 2,146
QuoteOn a tangent, I'm reflecting on the title of this thread, and I'm trying to imagine what a real shitstorm would be like? Would it be falling pieces of poop? Or, would it be a tornado-like-effect, with pieces of feces flying around?
Okay, let the intelligent discourse continue...
Just wait until you are a parent and your infant child gets stomach flu.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
QuoteQuote
Double standard?
Fabricated any good quotes today?
It seems like just about every day you spew some new non-sense. And all you have to come back with is an isolated, arguably dishonest quote. LOL
And you should know the title of this thread shouldn't be taken literally. Just wanted to make sure so you don't come back in a week or so whining and moaning about the dishonesty of it all.
Zipp0 1
The great thing about gun ownership is that when you're holding a loaded one, it's pretty hard for someone to take it from you.
They can pass any law they want, frankly. As long as I have GPS (or a map) and a shovel, I'll always have a gun.
There are millions and millions with the same attitude. So good luck on taking them away.
--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.
They can pass any law they want, frankly. As long as I have GPS (or a map) and a shovel, I'll always have a gun.
There are millions and millions with the same attitude. So good luck on taking them away.
--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.
Richards 0
QuoteHowever, what happens next time when your carrying a gun and you get approached one night on the street by a bum who wants some spare change. You think hes gonna rob you when he gets to close for comfort so you blow his brains all over the pavement and all he wanted was some quarters.
Bit of a straw man argument. Having a gun handy in case the bum does mean harm and pull a weapon of his own does not mean blowing away everyone who looks intimidating. It simply allows you to not be a victim if he does mean harm.
QuoteJust so you know chances are YOU WOULDNT HAVE 3 BULLETS LODGED IN YOU IF GUNS WERE ILLEGAL!!!! THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT! IF GUNS WERE BANNED IN THE FIRST PLACE YOU WOULDNT HAVE BEEN SHOT BY ONE AND THEREFORE WOULDNT FEEL THE NEED TO CARRY ONE FOR PROTECTION WHICH COULD IN TURN CAUSE MORE HARM.
I could be wrong but i do beleive guns are banned in Columbia and Northern Ireland. If that is the case I would speculate that both of those places have a history of minimal gun violence.
My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Mexico
The United Mexican States or Mexico (Spanish: Estados Unidos Mexicanos or México) has some of the strictest gun laws in the world. It is in many ways similar to the United Kingdom, except with much more severe prison terms for even the smallest gun law violations. On the other hand, possession of non-military-caliber small arms by citizens is largely a non-issue. Gun politics are thus not the major issue in Mexico that they are in the neighboring United States, since few Mexican citizens have any gun law difficulties.
Contents [hide]
1 Constitutional right to bear arms
2 Gun licensing and legislation for Mexican citizens
2.1 Ley Federal de Armas de Fuego y Explosivos (Federal Law of Firearms and Explosives)
3 Gun licensing and legislation for US citizens, and citizens from other countries
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
[edit] Constitutional right to bear arms
Mexican constitutional rights have long included the right to bear arms. The 1857 Constitution included the right to bear arms:
Artículo 10: Todo hombre tiene derecho de poseer y portar armas para su seguridad y legítima defensa. La ley señalará cuáles son las prohibidas y la pena en que incurren los que las portaren. [1]
Article 10: Every man has the right to have and to carry arms for his security and legitimate defense. The law will indicate which arms are prohibited and the penalty for those that will carry prohibited arms.
These rights have subsequently been reduced somewhat through the gradual changing of constitutions and laws. The Constitution of 1917 (Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos de 1917), the current constitution in force and heavily-amended, grants Mexican citizens (and, theoretically, perhaps, all inhabitants) the right to possess firearms. However, this right does not include military firearms suitable for use in a militia, unlike in the United States where the Second Amendment is often interpreted as only protecting arms suitable for use in militias.
Originally, this right consisted of the following:
Artículo 10: Los habitantes de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos tienen derecho a poseer armas en su domicilio, para seguridad y legítima defensa, con excepción de las prohibidas por la ley federal y de las reservadas para el uso exclusivo del Ejército, Armada, Fuerza Aérea y Guardia Nacional. La ley federal determinará los casos, condiciones, requisitos y lugares en que se podrá autorizar a los habitantes la portación de armas. [2]
Article 10: The inhabitants of the United Mexican States have a right to arms in their homes, for security and legitimate defense, with exception of the prohibited arms for use by federal law enforcement and of the reserved arms for the exclusive use of the Army, Navy, Air Force and National Guard. Federal law will determine the cases, conditions, requirements, and places in which the carrying of arms will be authorized to the inhabitants.
This right did not address the right of possession of arms outside one's home. Subsequently, under the constitution of 1917 as amended, arms for the Air Force no longer were included as being reserved for their exclusive use, and the right became:
Article 10. The inhabitants of the United Mexican States are entitled to have arms of any kind in their possession for their protection and legitimate defense, except such as are expressly forbidden by law, or which the nation may reserve for the exclusive use of the Army, Navy, or National Guard; but they may not carry arms within inhabited places without complying with police regulations. [3]
[edit] Gun licensing and legislation for Mexican citizens
[edit] Ley Federal de Armas de Fuego y Explosivos (Federal Law of Firearms and Explosives)
Generally, citizens are restricted by law to:
pistolas (handguns) of .380 Auto or .38 Special revolvers or smaller in either case,
escopetas (shotguns) of 12 gauge or smaller, with barrels longer than 25 inches, and
rifles (rifles) bolt action and semi-auto.
Handguns in calibers bigger than those mentioned above are forbidden from private ownership.
Examples of firearms that are legal for citizens to own include .380 ACP pistols; .38 Special revolvers, 12 gauge shotguns (no short-barreled shotguns are allowed) and rifles in any caliber up to .30 caliber.
Permits for the transportation and use of such non-military caliber firearms are issued for one year terms by SEDENA (Secretaría de la Defensa Nacional) and may be applied for up to 10 firearms, total, for each designated and planned use that is legally authorized. These uses may include hunting or shooting at a club or national competition. Permits are very easy to obtain, and may be only obtained by citizens belonging to a shooting club.
There is only one legally authorized retail outlet in Mexico City: UCAM (Unidad de Comercialización de Armamento y Municiones), run by the Army and able to sell firearms. It is owned by, and is part of, the government. Although there is no legal limit on how many firearms an individual can own, once any individual has purchased ten firearms from the only retail governmental outlet, he cannot get a permit to buy any more. However, private party sales are legal and are largely uncontrolled, and wealthy gun-collecting citizens thus can legally buy more firearms from other private owners.
Collector permits, somewhat analogous to the FFL Category 03 Curio & Relic permits issued in the United States, are easy to obtain from the Mexican Government and allow the ownership of a wide range of firearms, even including military firearms. For those holding collector permits, regular visits by the local military authority to inspect the storage location to make sure it has the necessary security measures to avoid the guns being stolen are a recurring fact of life.
CCW licenses are issued but are hard to obtain for anyone not wealthy and without political connections. In the event that an application is denied, the denial may theoretically be appealed at a District Court, but this never occurs in practice. Prior to 2002, CCW licenses could be obtained authorizing military caliber pistols. However, these CCW licenses were all cancelled, and re-issued to authorize only up to .380 ACP caliber pistolas.
Transportation licenses are required for transporting guns. Transportation must be with the firearm unloaded and in a case. There are no public shooting ranges such as in the U.S. and other countries.
[edit] Gun licensing and legislation for US citizens, and citizens from other countries
The US Department of State warns US citizens against taking any firearm or ammunition into Mexico without prior written authorization from the Mexican authorities. Entering Mexico with a firearm, or even a single round of ammunition, carries a penalty of up to five years in prison, even if the firearm or ammunition is taken into the country unintentionally. Furthermore even a single round of 9 mm ammunition, being a military caliber cartridge, carries even heavier jail-time penalties. The only way legally to import firearms and/or ammunition into Mexico is to secure a permit in advance from the Mexican Embassy in Washington, D.C. or from a Mexican consulate.
The United Mexican States or Mexico (Spanish: Estados Unidos Mexicanos or México) has some of the strictest gun laws in the world. It is in many ways similar to the United Kingdom, except with much more severe prison terms for even the smallest gun law violations. On the other hand, possession of non-military-caliber small arms by citizens is largely a non-issue. Gun politics are thus not the major issue in Mexico that they are in the neighboring United States, since few Mexican citizens have any gun law difficulties.
Contents [hide]
1 Constitutional right to bear arms
2 Gun licensing and legislation for Mexican citizens
2.1 Ley Federal de Armas de Fuego y Explosivos (Federal Law of Firearms and Explosives)
3 Gun licensing and legislation for US citizens, and citizens from other countries
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
[edit] Constitutional right to bear arms
Mexican constitutional rights have long included the right to bear arms. The 1857 Constitution included the right to bear arms:
Artículo 10: Todo hombre tiene derecho de poseer y portar armas para su seguridad y legítima defensa. La ley señalará cuáles son las prohibidas y la pena en que incurren los que las portaren. [1]
Article 10: Every man has the right to have and to carry arms for his security and legitimate defense. The law will indicate which arms are prohibited and the penalty for those that will carry prohibited arms.
These rights have subsequently been reduced somewhat through the gradual changing of constitutions and laws. The Constitution of 1917 (Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos de 1917), the current constitution in force and heavily-amended, grants Mexican citizens (and, theoretically, perhaps, all inhabitants) the right to possess firearms. However, this right does not include military firearms suitable for use in a militia, unlike in the United States where the Second Amendment is often interpreted as only protecting arms suitable for use in militias.
Originally, this right consisted of the following:
Artículo 10: Los habitantes de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos tienen derecho a poseer armas en su domicilio, para seguridad y legítima defensa, con excepción de las prohibidas por la ley federal y de las reservadas para el uso exclusivo del Ejército, Armada, Fuerza Aérea y Guardia Nacional. La ley federal determinará los casos, condiciones, requisitos y lugares en que se podrá autorizar a los habitantes la portación de armas. [2]
Article 10: The inhabitants of the United Mexican States have a right to arms in their homes, for security and legitimate defense, with exception of the prohibited arms for use by federal law enforcement and of the reserved arms for the exclusive use of the Army, Navy, Air Force and National Guard. Federal law will determine the cases, conditions, requirements, and places in which the carrying of arms will be authorized to the inhabitants.
This right did not address the right of possession of arms outside one's home. Subsequently, under the constitution of 1917 as amended, arms for the Air Force no longer were included as being reserved for their exclusive use, and the right became:
Article 10. The inhabitants of the United Mexican States are entitled to have arms of any kind in their possession for their protection and legitimate defense, except such as are expressly forbidden by law, or which the nation may reserve for the exclusive use of the Army, Navy, or National Guard; but they may not carry arms within inhabited places without complying with police regulations. [3]
[edit] Gun licensing and legislation for Mexican citizens
[edit] Ley Federal de Armas de Fuego y Explosivos (Federal Law of Firearms and Explosives)
Generally, citizens are restricted by law to:
pistolas (handguns) of .380 Auto or .38 Special revolvers or smaller in either case,
escopetas (shotguns) of 12 gauge or smaller, with barrels longer than 25 inches, and
rifles (rifles) bolt action and semi-auto.
Handguns in calibers bigger than those mentioned above are forbidden from private ownership.
Examples of firearms that are legal for citizens to own include .380 ACP pistols; .38 Special revolvers, 12 gauge shotguns (no short-barreled shotguns are allowed) and rifles in any caliber up to .30 caliber.
Permits for the transportation and use of such non-military caliber firearms are issued for one year terms by SEDENA (Secretaría de la Defensa Nacional) and may be applied for up to 10 firearms, total, for each designated and planned use that is legally authorized. These uses may include hunting or shooting at a club or national competition. Permits are very easy to obtain, and may be only obtained by citizens belonging to a shooting club.
There is only one legally authorized retail outlet in Mexico City: UCAM (Unidad de Comercialización de Armamento y Municiones), run by the Army and able to sell firearms. It is owned by, and is part of, the government. Although there is no legal limit on how many firearms an individual can own, once any individual has purchased ten firearms from the only retail governmental outlet, he cannot get a permit to buy any more. However, private party sales are legal and are largely uncontrolled, and wealthy gun-collecting citizens thus can legally buy more firearms from other private owners.
Collector permits, somewhat analogous to the FFL Category 03 Curio & Relic permits issued in the United States, are easy to obtain from the Mexican Government and allow the ownership of a wide range of firearms, even including military firearms. For those holding collector permits, regular visits by the local military authority to inspect the storage location to make sure it has the necessary security measures to avoid the guns being stolen are a recurring fact of life.
CCW licenses are issued but are hard to obtain for anyone not wealthy and without political connections. In the event that an application is denied, the denial may theoretically be appealed at a District Court, but this never occurs in practice. Prior to 2002, CCW licenses could be obtained authorizing military caliber pistols. However, these CCW licenses were all cancelled, and re-issued to authorize only up to .380 ACP caliber pistolas.
Transportation licenses are required for transporting guns. Transportation must be with the firearm unloaded and in a case. There are no public shooting ranges such as in the U.S. and other countries.
[edit] Gun licensing and legislation for US citizens, and citizens from other countries
The US Department of State warns US citizens against taking any firearm or ammunition into Mexico without prior written authorization from the Mexican authorities. Entering Mexico with a firearm, or even a single round of ammunition, carries a penalty of up to five years in prison, even if the firearm or ammunition is taken into the country unintentionally. Furthermore even a single round of 9 mm ammunition, being a military caliber cartridge, carries even heavier jail-time penalties. The only way legally to import firearms and/or ammunition into Mexico is to secure a permit in advance from the Mexican Embassy in Washington, D.C. or from a Mexican consulate.
Quotethere are other sources, I have read them, and they seem to be in complete agreement.
jarrodh 0
Quote
Quit attributing things to me I never said ok?
You never called anyone a libtard???
I will quote DIRECTLY FROM YOUR FIRST POST
QuoteIf you want to see the twisted, inept, feeble mind of the libtard in action, read on.....
By calling someone a libtard you are referring to them as a liberal retard, therfore insulting all liberals, including the author of that article who referenced prominent democrats therefore insulting them as well. You started the name calling attitude of this thread with the first line of your post.
QuoteFirst of all I don't care if you like me, in fact if you can't stand me it is all that much better.
I dont know you. How am I supposed to form an opinion about a person on the basis of one thread about one single issue. I disagree with your attitude towards people whom you disagree with but I do not dislike you.
(I still think your a Heston wannabe though
)2 BITS....4 BITS....6 BITS....A DOLLAR!....ALL FOR THE GATORS....STAND UP AND HOLLER!!!!
Hey did you even realize that my first post was taken verbatim off a website?
The next time you attribute words to someone make sure you know whether or not they were the author.
You could have just asked me, butthat would be too easy.
Hey has anyone else ever seen me use that term?
As for calling me a Heston wannabe, wow you just showed lots of people how smart you are.
As a matter of fact what did Charlton Heston do to you?
The last time I checked he led an honorable life, was a good huband to his wife, a great father to his children, was generous and kind, looked out for the rights of others, put his beliefs before his career.
Yeah no wonder you make fun of a dead guy.
The next time you attribute words to someone make sure you know whether or not they were the author.
You could have just asked me, butthat would be too easy.
Hey has anyone else ever seen me use that term?
As for calling me a Heston wannabe, wow you just showed lots of people how smart you are.
As a matter of fact what did Charlton Heston do to you?
The last time I checked he led an honorable life, was a good huband to his wife, a great father to his children, was generous and kind, looked out for the rights of others, put his beliefs before his career.
Yeah no wonder you make fun of a dead guy.
I think your a britney spears wannabe.
jarrodh 0
QuoteI think your a britney spears wannabe.
LOL......... Ok
2 BITS....4 BITS....6 BITS....A DOLLAR!....ALL FOR THE GATORS....STAND UP AND HOLLER!!!!
NRA Publications Suspends Ties to Jim Zumbo
Thursday, February 22, 2007
(FAIRFAX, VA) – The following statement was issued by the National Rifle Association of America.
Comments expressed by outdoor writer Jim Zumbo reflect neither the opinions of the National Rifle Association and America’s gun owners, nor are they an accurate portrayal of facts in regard to semi-automatic firearms lawfully owned by millions of citizens. Therefore, NRA Publications has suspended its professional ties with Mr. Zumbo.
The ensuing wave of grassroots response in support of the Second Amendment is a clear indication that America’s gun owners will act swiftly and decisively to counter falsehoods or misrepresentations perpetuated by any member of the media – whether it is one of the major networks or a fellow gun owner.
That depth of feeling and the unanimity of the response from the nation’s firearms owners sends a message to the new Congress. It says that millions of people understand the issue of semi-autos and will resist with an immense singular political will any attempts to create a new ban on semi-automatic firearms.
At the root of this grassroots response is the basic truth that ‘gun control merely makes the innocent pay the price for the guilty’ and our folks fully understand that their rights are at stake. It says that for the enemies of the Second Amendment there is no chance that the kind of divide and conquer propaganda strategy which preceded the 1994 ban on semi-auto firearms will ever succeed again.
It is our hope that Mr. Zumbo will use his energy and talent to help preserve our Second Amendment, America’s First Freedom, by ensuring that no one else falls prey to the tragic demonization of gun owners.
Find this item at: http://www.nraila.org/CurrentLegislation/Read.aspx?ITNDrop=8952-N
Thursday, February 22, 2007
(FAIRFAX, VA) – The following statement was issued by the National Rifle Association of America.
Comments expressed by outdoor writer Jim Zumbo reflect neither the opinions of the National Rifle Association and America’s gun owners, nor are they an accurate portrayal of facts in regard to semi-automatic firearms lawfully owned by millions of citizens. Therefore, NRA Publications has suspended its professional ties with Mr. Zumbo.
The ensuing wave of grassroots response in support of the Second Amendment is a clear indication that America’s gun owners will act swiftly and decisively to counter falsehoods or misrepresentations perpetuated by any member of the media – whether it is one of the major networks or a fellow gun owner.
That depth of feeling and the unanimity of the response from the nation’s firearms owners sends a message to the new Congress. It says that millions of people understand the issue of semi-autos and will resist with an immense singular political will any attempts to create a new ban on semi-automatic firearms.
At the root of this grassroots response is the basic truth that ‘gun control merely makes the innocent pay the price for the guilty’ and our folks fully understand that their rights are at stake. It says that for the enemies of the Second Amendment there is no chance that the kind of divide and conquer propaganda strategy which preceded the 1994 ban on semi-auto firearms will ever succeed again.
It is our hope that Mr. Zumbo will use his energy and talent to help preserve our Second Amendment, America’s First Freedom, by ensuring that no one else falls prey to the tragic demonization of gun owners.
Find this item at: http://www.nraila.org/CurrentLegislation/Read.aspx?ITNDrop=8952-N
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites