[Osborn F Enready]

Sonart said: I've shown where, based on data, the United States is the most gun murderous wealthy nation on earth and, depending on which criteria you go by, the 8th to 24th most murderous, gun addled nation on earth, period.

Your crazy....

In a land where you have the freedom to fail and to succeed, and to operate in life as you see fit, there will be more "monumental failures" as much as more "monumental successes" compared to a "nation or state" that attempts to dictate every aspect of a persons life.

In a land where risk to fail or succeed is valued over security, is it any wonder there are higher death rates, higher suicide rates, higher death rates for bad eating habits, or detrimental habits such as smoking, extreme sports, etc?

NO, its common sense. Not all people value life equally, and many live life to enjoy it, not simply to be "one of the Joneses."

You are making a strawman argument. INDIVIDUAL CHOICE is the cause, and some people making bad choices are the effects.

-Guns aren't the cause.
-Fatty foods aren't the cause.
-Lack of education on how to be healthy isn't the cause.

Those are all products of people owning their own bodies, deciding how THEY want to live and die, and doing things as THEY see fit.

Yes, there are exceptions, but the bulk of the people live as they do because that is what they choose to the extent they can affect their life.

This affects national averages, statistics, and the fact is, this isn't a nation based on "achieving the highest statistics" regarding anything other than LIBERTY.

Sonart said: Of course, your response will be to blame the media, not guns. But the media only reflects the culture that surrounds it, and the culture that surrounds all Americans is one that revels in gun violence.

Nonsense, I blame idiots who can't understand cause and effect, and instead decide based on "emotion" and "subjective morals" what are better everyone, when it isn't their place, isn't their right and isn't their business.

Welcome to that club.

Sonart said: As several have pointed out, no... not against the modern U.S. military. As to your point about soldiers not firing on American citizens -- if those citizens are ARMED, as you advocate, then you bet our troops will fire. Again, the Civil War proved that.

The Civil War didn't prove anything of the sort. The idea of individual liberty is what gave backbone to those who fought the oppressors in the South, just like if a revolt were to happen today, the backbone would come from individual liberty, not supporting a police state.

Sonart said: Maybe, but not nearly to the point of armed rebellion... not anywhere near. But you and your pals go right ahead. We'll be right behind you.

Where is that line Sonart? You have no idea, nor do I, but time will tell, won't it. When that time comes, there will be two types of people.... those who are prepared, and those who aren't.

I am proud to say I am one who is prepared.

Sonart said: These are the reasons the gun lobby hasn't challenged laws before the Supreme Court??? This is just plain silly, laws are challenged on constitutional questions every year, without violence.

How many that directl influence the right to property, self-defense and self-ownership?

Sonart said: Please share with me when a recent Supreme Court ruling has resulted in bloodshed?

O.J. Simpson trial, and that wasn't even a trial that affected ANYONES lives except OJ, the victims and famillies.

Why does "recent" or "Supreme Court" have anything to do with anything? Are you saying because it hasn't happened RECENTLY, it can't happen?

Sonart said: Or is it just the naturally violent nature of gun owners that you somehow don't trust?

I think you would know better than to utter such nonsense in relation to my position, even though you yourself are a gun owner and a hypocrite.

Sonart said: Once again, just because it's not ILLEGAL for you to own a gun, doesn't mean you have the RIGHT to. It's not illegal to own a dog, either. That doesn't mean I have a Constitutional Right to own one.

So you don't understand what a "right" is, basicly? Why not just admit that you don't understand?

Sonart said: I told you, unlike some here, I've actually read the dang thing.

You wouldn't have to keep saying it, if you showed evidence of that fact when you typed.

You sound like Hillary trying to explain why she doesn't understand everyone thinks she is a liar, even though she keeps saying she isn't.

Sonart said: Beyond that, you can leave the country or start the revolution... you're call.

Thanks for stating the obvious, but your permission was not asked for or necessary.

Sonart said: Are they legal now? My dad, a WWII veteran, owned a 30.06 hunting rifle, a 30.30 Winchester, an M1 Carbine, a 12 gauge and 10 gauge shotgun, a .45 semi-automatic pistol, a .22 semi-automatic pistol. He had a Thompson submachine gun before I was born, but had to give that up.

Depends on the state you live in, and to what extent your representatives have violated your rights regarding the right of individuals to keep and bear arms.

Sonart said: Well it would surprise the hell outta me and I think such a possibility exists only in a very few fevered minds.

Well, we all have a right to our opinions, don't we.

Sonart said: And armor... and artillery.... and air support.... and training.

Try reading a little, you don't know what you're talking about.

How many civillian aircraft are there?
How hard is it to make a lauched projectile weapon?
How hard is it to train with experienced people?

As I said, all of those are ireelevant, except the training.

Guerillas have advantage in a revolt, regardless of who the military is.

You can deny this, but you can't prove me wrong, and your tactical sense seems about as educated as a 5th grader who watches GI JOE.

Have you noticed what is happening in Iraq Sonart?
Did you notice what happened to the USSR in Afghanistan Sonart?

You really have no clue.

Sonart said: Nah, not that many, I'm afraid. The vast majority would defend the U.S. government.

Well, as an ex-military man, who knows several others in my area who are on my side of the argument, I disagree with your "opinion".

Shawmutt said: I'm serious when I stated that if you have the documentation to back that up I'd be interested in learning about it.

I will do a little more looking when I can find the time, and send you some results.