How The Other Side Thinks

[MadDogs]

Ignorance is bliss(although wilful ignorance can be very dangerous). Apparently some people don't understand the purpose of the supreme court(or care to have an understanding of American history; what "militia" meant at that time)...SCOTUS doesn't create anything. They merely interpret, and in the case of Heller they got it 100% right. Now if they would just take up a carry case and do the same, we could have precedent that not only secures the right to keep, but also the right to bear.

Regardless of what happens with any elections, I think we need to draw a hard line against any further gun laws and make it very clear that we will not comply.

Agreed!

 

[Poke78]

Agreed that the anti-gun rights people try to validate their point with “emotion” rather than fact. But with that said, we need to understand their thought process to be able to effectively counter their emotional, sans fact arguments.

Most important … for those that view our rights as a critical issue for an election …. Is that our votes matter.

While “confiscation” would not likely happen, banning ammo, restricting weapons or accessories as well as prohibitive taxes could limit our rights. Elections have consequences.

Not much to disagree about there as there is plenty of evidence to back up your points on elections and alternative methods to achieve their desired ends. One small niggle: the rights are not limited, only the ability to exercise them. The rights exist without the permission of man or his laws...that's why they're called rights.