Replies

I went to the site you linked, and I was reading along with no major alarm bells ringing until I came to this paragraph:

Gun ownership is indeed a right - but it is also a grand responsibility. With responsibility comes the interests of society to ensure that guns are used safely and are used by those with proper training and licensing. If we can agree on this simple premise, it should not be too difficult to work out the details and find a proper compromise.

Whoever wrote that is either a dangerous, conscious enemy of our liberties or is completely ignorant of the history of "reasonable" restrictions on the people's right to arms. Practically every nation in western Europe now has severe restrictions on gun ownership and/or total bans of all guns except for a few specialized types that are only suitable for hunting or formal target shooting. Most of those same nations had few or no restrictions on ownership or possession of guns at the beginning of the 20th century, but after the imposition of "reasonable" gun laws on the common people became acceptable the definition of the term "reasonable" began to change radically. The American gun owning community has been pointing out for the last 75 years or more those examples of how the devious, deceptive anti-gun faction operates, yet the yo-yo who wrote the article at your linked site still expects us to let down our guard and tolerate "reasonable" gun control laws without endangering our RKBA.

To quote Bugs Bunny, "what a maroon"! I don't believe the millions of gun owners in America will tolerate any further gungrabber incursions into our 2nd Amendment rights without fomenting a major league political meltdown of the party or faction of a party that attempts to do that. I think that the majority of gun owners who care about the RKBA are now sufficiently aware of the treacherous and lying tactics of our enemies that they won't be nearly as willing to tolerate their assaults on the 2nd Amendment without fighting back harder and with more determination than the antis can handle. Or at least that's my hope and prayer for the survival of the RKBA for my kids' sake.

More familiar BS from 'Steve Mount':

"-- With the historical context set above, a look at the current interpretations of the 2nd Amendment are appropriate.

These interpretations tend to lean in one of two ways. The first is that the amendment was meant to ensure that individuals have the absolute right to own firearms; the second is that the amendment was meant to ensure that States could form, arm, and maintain their own militias.

Either way, it is a bar to federal action only, because the 2nd Amendment has not been incorporated by the Supreme Court to apply to the states.

This means that within its own constitution, a state may be as restrictive or unrestrictive as it wishes to be in the regulation of firearms; likewise, private rules and regulations may prohibit or encourage firearms.

For example, if a housing association wishes to bar any firearm from being held within its borders, it is free to do so. --"

I don't believe the millions of gun owners in America will tolerate any further gungrabber incursions into our 2nd Amendment rights without fomenting a major league political meltdown of the party or faction of a party that attempts to do that.

I think that the majority of gun owners who care about the RKBA are now sufficiently aware of the treacherous and lying tactics of our enemies that they won't be nearly as willing to tolerate their assaults on the 2nd Amendment without fighting back harder and with more determination than the antis can handle.

Couldn't have said it better or more accurately.

Check out this animated color map of the right to carry in the US from 1986-2006. It's a real beaut!

http://www.freerepublic.com/~jdege/

Looks like Illinois is the slacker State...