[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Sonart "Is that a gun in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?" -- Mae West

Why I'm happy to see you. Did you really have to ask?

Quote by: Sonart An "irrational" fear of anything is the sign of a sick mind, Milton. Fearing deadly weapons in the hands of basically anyone that wants one is entirely rational.

Thus the need to have the ability to meet force, with force.

Quote by: Sonart For someone so smart, you really are stupid, Milton. Not having a "Right" to own firearms is not the same as not being legally able to. Gun control legislation has only nibbled at the edges of gun ownership... no machine guns,no assault rifles, waiting periods, criminal or mental restrictions, etc. And thanks to the NRA's 'Big Lie' that we all do have that right, and Congressional pandering to gun owners who believe it, the loopholes are immense. Gun shows and private sales are practically immune from any regulation, 3rd party transfers, gun dealer immunity from liability, back door sales by manufacturers.

Again, I disagree with the contention that "arms" = "guns", and your whole hypothesis rest on the assumption that this was original intent. I happen to think the Framers were wiser, and declared that the citizen must have the right to defend themselves from any aggressor, and thus chose "arms", and not "muskets".

Quote by: Sonart We're in this "mess" because America is literally awash in guns... 200,000 million of them. Only when DC took the final desperate step of banning handguns -- and the Bush League finally tipped the Supreme Court -- did the gun lobby finally rise up to challenge the current law of the land.

So, an idea that guns are inherently dangerous surfaces 225 years after the countries inception, and now your law, and order people think it's time to address a cultural problem? Gimme a break.


You people are rying to idiot proof the Earth, and I don't approve. I shall not bare the burden of every individual to lazy, or stupid to educate themselves about the requirements for life on Earth.


If you want to, do it through volunteer organizations, or charity.

Quote by: Sonart [I advocate voting for people who supported things like the Bradey Bill, not those who opposed it. What's your recommendation? Ron Paul?

Obviously. At least any answer he may offer to your problem will lie within the bounds of the Constitution, and you can sleep well knowing you will not be complicit due to association with him. (I'm offering a preemptive Shut up to GHooK )

Quote by: Sonart [Besides, this is a pathetic, loaded question.

No it's not. It's at the very heart of why I accuse you of agenda driven behavior.

Quote by: Sonart I can't control what people do once they're in office or the compromises they feel obliged to make. I can only vote for those who I think are more likely to support my views, and that sure as hell isn't John McCain or Ron Paul.

Oh, but you're the one telling me that voting them out of office is "my voice" in government, and yet you guys aren't even willing to admit fault on the part of the people involved, let alone remove them from office for legislating outside of your political philosophy.


Democrats are unaccountable, accross the board, anywhere you find one. They sign all of the Republicans bad laws, and they create a bunch of their own. They're corrupt top to bottom.


The classic definition of insanity is doing the same thing over, and over again, and expecting a different result. Well, that's what you guys are going when you advocate voting for people who can be proven to have voted for the status quo, again, and again.


Snap out of it, vote for real change. Ron Paul 08