For you anti-gun folk

[angelofdeath]

maintain natural point of aim....take note of distance to target, windage....let the rifle relax in your support hand and do not grip it....maintain steady breathing and pay attention to the sway of your iron sights with your breathing...round chambered, safety off...take a breath and gently sqeeze the trigger as your exhale...make sure to keep your finger movement at a minimum, even your bodys heart beat can affect where the round will go...check your shot and adjust your sights/aim accordingly......shooting a rifle is a beautiful art maybe you should try it...then you will understand why some of us want to own ARs and Ak47s...

 

squeeze... dont pull

watch... dont blink

move ... dont wait

kill... dont think

[Decyferon]

I meant petty crimes like robberies or muggings with guns. A murder is murder whether with bare hands or a gun.

 

What I meant about the baseball bat comment was I would rather have the bat and a robber without a gun than live somewhere where every petty criminal can be armed to the teeth. Like I said before it is the easy accessability of guns to criminals due to the right to bear arms that is why so many criminals in America have guns.

 

Obviously disarming the military is just silly and I don't see how that has any bearing on the subject of gun ownership in the general populace.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

I meant petty crimes like robberies or muggings with guns. A murder is murder whether with bare hands or a gun.

 

What I meant about the baseball bat comment was I would rather have the bat and a robber without a gun than live somewhere where every petty criminal can be armed to the teeth. Like I said before it is the easy accessability of guns to criminals due to the right to bear arms that is why so many criminals in America have guns.

 

Obviously disarming the military is just silly and I don't see how that has any bearing on the subject of gun ownership in the general populace.

 

What is the difference between being robbed by someone with a gun or with someone with a knife? Your life is still at risk, and you are still having your possessions stolen. The penalty should be the same for both.

 

The increase in penalty should basically be used if violence is used or the amount being stolen is more severe. Just like assaulting someone while shouting our a racial slur shouldn't really constitute a "hate crime" and be given a stiffer penalty.

 

Disarming the military isn't silly. A standing army isn't necessary.

[Decyferon]

Sorry was on my wife's iphone so couldn't type out a complete answer. I meant if the gun was used during hte crime then it should be harsher. I am just chucking out ideas really because gun crime is a huge problem in the US I don't read so much about knife crimne in the US so I was looking at tackling the more serious problem. I know it is no solution but maybe in some cases it might deter someone from using a gun.

 

It would be silly to disarm the military, what good will they be in fighting these wars with no weapons? I can't see why you think the military should be disarmed when the population isn't.

[FUCKMUNI]

someone else said this im copy pastin.....

 

Liberals are about freedom.....It is exactly the opposite. Unbelievable.

 

How are they on the side of freedom when it is they who are trying to restrict free speech when it is against their particular point of view?

 

How are they on the side of freedom when contrary to natural law they restrict the individual's right and therefore ability of self defense?

 

How are they on the side of freedom when they are for seizing personal property and therefore ones productive time on earth in order to redistribute it to others?

 

How are they on the side of freedom when they demand that you purchase a health care policy or face oppressive fines or prison or both?

 

How are they on the side of freedom when they demand to come into your home to dictate the flow of water in your toilet, the types of light bulbs you use, whether you may barbeque your meals, or have a nice fire on a cold winter night?

[angelofdeath]

I meant petty crimes like robberies or muggings with guns. A murder is murder whether with bare hands or a gun.

 

What I meant about the baseball bat comment was I would rather have the bat and a robber without a gun than live somewhere where every petty criminal can be armed to the teeth. Like I said before it is the easy accessability of guns to criminals due to the right to bear arms that is why so many criminals in America have guns.

 

Obviously disarming the military is just silly and I don't see how that has any bearing on the subject of gun ownership in the general populace.

 

ilotsmybrain made a good point about the crime aspect. no difference in robbing someone with a gun or a pencil really... the end result is still the same.

as for justice and restitution.. i believe in the 2 teeth for a tooth, plus expenses to capture.

 

the overall stance is that guns are not needed. you do not need a gun to protect yourself. people shouldnt own guns. cops dont have guns, they have billy clubs, right? why stop there? why not disarm the military? be a bright shining example that gun control works and leads to a peace loving society!

 

or are you admitting truth to the armed deterrence theory? that a person or entity that is armed is less likely to be involved in a conflict, AND that when the person is armed they have a means to fight back. if this applies to a collective defense mechanism, why cant you allow citizens to protect their house or neighborhoods with the best means of defense, namely firearms?

 

if you have an disarmed UK, give it 20 minutes and the people who hate the Uk will be running over the entire country while everyone is trying to fight off and invaders ak 47 fire with suppressive fire in the form of rocks and bricks.

 

i like the swiss model. armed to teeth. perfectly neutral. armed citizens. freedom. no crime. very little problems.

 

if we are to look at gun availability as the sole factor in crime, we can easily look to rural america to find that the people with the most amount and the craziest variety including legal NFA/class III weapons (full auto) are the least likely to use them. the swiss model is another example of full auto machine guns in the hands of private citizens with virtually no crime to speak of.

[angelofdeath]

agreed...liberal by its original definition, (which is what liberals still try to cling to today) is basically the philosophy i am promoting on this board. laissez faire, decentralized government, maximum individual freedom. however, if you notice the amount of disagreements i get into with modern liberals on this board, you can see the ideological disconnect from the philosophy of the great classical liberal freedom lovers and the statist liberals of today.

[Decyferon]

someone else said this im copy pastin.....

 

Liberals are about freedom.....It is exactly the opposite. Unbelievable.

 

How are they on the side of freedom when it is they who are trying to restrict free speech when it is against their particular point of view?

 

How are they on the side of freedom when contrary to natural law they restrict the individual's right and therefore ability of self defense?

 

How are they on the side of freedom when they are for seizing personal property and therefore ones productive time on earth in order to redistribute it to others?

 

How are they on the side of freedom when they demand that you purchase a health care policy or face oppressive fines or prison or both?

 

How are they on the side of freedom when they demand to come into your home to dictate the flow of water in your toilet, the types of light bulbs you use, whether you may barbeque your meals, or have a nice fire on a cold winter night?

 

none of this is applicable where I live, if that is what a liberal in the US stands for then they are not a liberal.

[Decyferon]

ilotsmybrain made a good point about the crime aspect. no difference in robbing someone with a gun or a pencil really... the end result is still the same.

as for justice and restitution.. i believe in the 2 teeth for a tooth, plus expenses to capture.

 

the overall stance is that guns are not needed. you do not need a gun to protect yourself. people shouldnt own guns. cops dont have guns, they have billy clubs, right? why stop there? why not disarm the military? be a bright shining example that gun control works and leads to a peace loving society!

 

or are you admitting truth to the armed deterrence theory? that a person or entity that is armed is less likely to be involved in a conflict, AND that when the person is armed they have a means to fight back. if this applies to a collective defense mechanism, why cant you allow citizens to protect their house or neighborhoods with the best means of defense, namely firearms?

 

if you have an disarmed UK, give it 20 minutes and the people who hate the Uk will be running over the entire country while everyone is trying to fight off and invaders ak 47 fire with suppressive fire in the form of rocks and bricks.

 

i like the swiss model. armed to teeth. perfectly neutral. armed citizens. freedom. no crime. very little problems.

 

if we are to look at gun availability as the sole factor in crime, we can easily look to rural america to find that the people with the most amount and the craziest variety including legal NFA/class III weapons (full auto) are the least likely to use them. the swiss model is another example of full auto machine guns in the hands of private citizens with virtually no crime to speak of.

 

There are police in this country with guns, they are there when a major crime goes down and criminals are using guns, generally these are bank robberies and other more severe crimes.

 

I do believe a country needs a military for protection, I don't believe these armies should be wandering around in the middle east putting their noses in countries they have no right to do so. Obviously if an army was disarmed then anyone could stage a military coup in that country so I think you do need to have a line of defense.

 

AOD you know my arguement, I have no problem or issues with responsible gun owners, I just think that the readily access of guns in the US is a bad thing because it means so many guns get into the hands of people that really shouldnt be using them, these people, if guns weren't so readily available wouldn't have them and gun crime wouldn't be so much of an issue. I don't see a problem with responsible people like yourself having the right to defend yourself, because so many criminals have guns I see no problem with you having them, in theUK where guns are not so common I don't see why people need access to them.

[MoonsOfSulkendastron]

ilotsmybrain made a good point about the crime aspect. no difference in robbing someone with a gun or a pencil really... the end result is still the same.

as for justice and restitution.. i believe in the 2 teeth for a tooth, plus expenses to capture.

 

the overall stance is that guns are not needed. you do not need a gun to protect yourself. people shouldnt own guns. cops dont have guns, they have billy clubs, right? why stop there? why not disarm the military? be a bright shining example that gun control works and leads to a peace loving society!

 

or are you admitting truth to the armed deterrence theory? that a person or entity that is armed is less likely to be involved in a conflict, AND that when the person is armed they have a means to fight back. if this applies to a collective defense mechanism, why cant you allow citizens to protect their house or neighborhoods with the best means of defense, namely firearms?

 

if you have an disarmed UK, give it 20 minutes and the people who hate the Uk will be running over the entire country while everyone is trying to fight off and invaders ak 47 fire with suppressive fire in the form of rocks and bricks.

 

i like the swiss model. armed to teeth. perfectly neutral. armed citizens. freedom. no crime. very little problems.

 

if we are to look at gun availability as the sole factor in crime, we can easily look to rural america to find that the people with the most amount and the craziest variety including legal NFA/class III weapons (full auto) are the least likely to use them. the swiss model is another example of full auto machine guns in the hands of private citizens with virtually no crime to speak of.

 

I still think you cats should consider the possibility that guns do not own a mind, and that people CHOOSE to commit crime. The availability of guns because of lack of laws or whatever isnt the problem. Instead of arguing about gun laws and how they should be more/less controlled, get a little deeper, to the root of the issue: Why is it that people want to commit crime(including utilizing the gun as a tool to complete crime)?

 

Its peoples mentality of it being acceptable to commit crime in the first place that you should be worried about. Psychologically the feel nothing towards their fellow human...thats the problem. Not the tools they use or the laws that control them.

 

just like society forces us to accept homosexuals as "normal, just different". its not normal to commit crimes...THERES A PSYCHOLOGICAL PROBLEM!!!!

[Decyferon]

damn man, we are having a hard enough time dealing with just guns now we have to look at crime in society as a whole and the psychological reasoning behind it.

 

There are so many factors, some people are just fucking lazy and don't see why they should work for the things they want, other people are born into it and no no difference and don't try and improve their situation, other people are just stuck in a bad place can't get a job that provides can't get help from anywhere and have no other option, other people are just unhinged and like to be violent and criminal in their actions.

 

To say guns don't change people isn't really true, SOME people get a self inflated sense of security or of power when they hold a gun just like the self inflated ego of someone using coke.

 

There is nothing different about a homosexual they don't choose who they are attracted to, they don't have an choice in the matter, a person always has a choice whether they commit a crime or not

[nsmbfan]

just wanted to say LOL @ Fort Hood, not for the tragedy, for the blow it dealt pro-gun folks.

 

simply because of the comment made in regards to : "You never see shooting sprees in miltary bases, police stations, or gun shows - EVERYBODY HAS GUNS THERE!"

 

just lol.

 

and Decy wants to secretly be an American.

[Decyferon]

just wanted to say LOL @ Fort Hood, not for the tragedy, for the blow it dealt pro-gun folks.

 

simply because of the comment made in regards to : "You never see shooting sprees in miltary bases, police stations, or gun shows - EVERYBODY HAS GUNS THERE!"

 

just lol.

 

and Decy wants to secretly be an American.

 

HAHAHA secretly want to be American, damn you busted me, I was just chowing down on some MacD's while burning a huge V8 engine in the car for no reason!! Nah I am happy to be british, not proud just happy.

 

I would like to come to America though, while I do generally conflict with people on here there are a lot things I like about America and would definitely visit when my son is older, I just wouldnt want to live there.

 

also I would get flamed to fucking hell and back for saying that Fort Hood comment

[nsmbfan]

yea, you only need to see about 1/4 of america anyways. it tesselates, naming the roads after the trees they knocked down, and shopping malls in every shape size and flavor. all selling goods from Taiwan.

 

if you're into culture, we haven't any. that being said i'd rather eat my Faux Burger from McDonalds than EVER eat cod fish... or any type of fish... no matter how many "chips" come with it.

[Decyferon]

I fucking hate fish and chips, I am not what you would call a normal british guy, I fucking hate football, I don't really drink, I have no interest in fish and chips, have no interest in getting slaughtered every friday and saturday and have a fight in the street. I am not patriotic at all about England the vast majority of this country is a shit hole - then again I also fucking despise MacDonalds.

 

I am not bothered about the culture of the US there are just a few places I would like to visit thats all

[angelofdeath]

just wanted to say LOL @ Fort Hood, not for the tragedy, for the blow it dealt pro-gun folks.

 

simply because of the comment made in regards to : "You never see shooting sprees in miltary bases, police stations, or gun shows - EVERYBODY HAS GUNS THERE!"

 

just lol.

 

and Decy wants to secretly be an American.

 

its funny you mention this... because the govt. doesnt even trust soldiers to carry their own arms on military bases, yet they are allowed to have any ordnance they want in the combat zone.

[shai]

That's a no-brainer. It's called "naked self-interest on the behalf of the brass." There's an enemy to shoot at on the battlefield and lots of medals and promotions to be had.

 

But when you tell Private Pyle that he has to sleep with his gun and he gets his hands on some live ammo after 13 weeks of hell on earth, it's gonna get weird.

[lord_casek]

I fucking hate fish and chips, I am not what you would call a normal british guy, I fucking hate football, I don't really drink, I have no interest in fish and chips, have no interest in getting slaughtered every friday and saturday and have a fight in the street. I am not patriotic at all about England the vast majority of this country is a shit hole - then again I also fucking despise MacDonalds.

 

I am not bothered about the culture of the US there are just a few places I would like to visit thats all

 

 

I dig how you brits call it "MacDonald's".

[MoonsOfSulkendastron]

damn man, we are having a hard enough time dealing with just guns now we have to look at crime in society as a whole and the psychological reasoning behind it.

 

There are so many factors, some people are just fucking lazy and don't see why they should work for the things they want, other people are born into it and no no difference and don't try and improve their situation, other people are just stuck in a bad place can't get a job that provides can't get help from anywhere and have no other option, other people are just unhinged and like to be violent and criminal in their actions.

 

To say guns don't change people isn't really true, SOME people get a self inflated sense of security or of power when they hold a gun just like the self inflated ego of someone using coke.

 

There is nothing different about a homosexual they don't choose who they are attracted to, they don't have an choice in the matter, a person always has a choice whether they commit a crime or not

Psychological reasoning is the basis for ANY decision dude...including whether or not to use a gun in a crime.

 

My point would be to change the factors then:

People are lazy. 1)liberals like to hand out un-lazy, hard working peoples money. This being the case, why would you work?! 2)media has people like that thinking everything is given to you in life, i.e. Paris Hilton, other privelaged reality TV young celebrities. Real life proves that hard work will get you what you want, but everyone in Hollywood has people thinking its handed out for free.

 

People are born into it. 1)Again, YOU CHOOSE how you want to live your life. Cant blame it on others. There are many people that come from nothing and hopeless situations to extreme success. 2)Everyone knows theres a better life, they just CHOOSE not to do what it takes to achieve it. (Loyal to 'da hood, yo!) If they dont try, they got nothin to complain about.

 

People are stuck in a bad place. 1)this is not an eternal position unless they allow it to be. Just do what it takes 2)external help can aid in getting out of ones circumstances, but dont rely on that ish-then you become lazy. 3) There is ALWAYS another option other than crime...

 

Unhinged violent people. 1)Most are or will be in prison. 2) These types are going to be violent no matter what, guns or not.

 

The amount of people that get enough of an ego boost with a gun in their hand to go commit crime is so miniscule it shouldnt even be factored in. I feel REAL GOOD and powerful when i hold guns; but i choose not commit a crime with one. Id like to, but I have self control.

 

-point being all of these things are still a choice influenced by other factors. Limit the factors.

 

SOMETHING happened to homosexuals that messed them up so much that they feel attracted to the same sex, whether it be uncle fondlin' or relating more to their mom growing up. They were not born that way, its not natural, its a confused/unfortunate psychological problem. They choose to be normal, or choose to blame it on whatever happened and accept it as "thats just the way i am. Accept me." instead of dealing with the underlying issues.

Same as criminals that use guns. Somthing happened- traumatic experience, violent homelife, whatever. They were not born to commit crime, its a mental issue, and those issues indeed have an influence on their choice to commit the crime.

 

too far fetched?

[FUCKMUNI]

just wanted to say LOL @ Fort Hood, not for the tragedy, for the blow it dealt pro-gun folks.

 

simply because of the comment made in regards to : "You never see shooting sprees in miltary bases, police stations, or gun shows - EVERYBODY HAS GUNS THERE!"

 

just lol.

 

and Decy wants to secretly be an American.

 

the victims at ft hood were not armed army policy is that in rear bases you cannot have weapons you have to draw it from the armory if you are going to the range.....mr alluh akbar was gunned down by a cop...if the victims were armed like at foward operating bases Mr hassan would have been pumped full of lead and the death count would be lower

[MoonsOfSulkendastron]

America is a society of instant gratification...fast food, drive thru banks, credit cards...people gotta have it now! Why take 5 years to become successful when you can stay in the ghetto and get rich instantly by committing crimes?

[Decyferon]

Psychological reasoning is the basis for ANY decision dude...including whether or not to use a gun in a crime.

 

My point would be to change the factors then:

People are lazy. 1)liberals like to hand out un-lazy, hard working peoples money. This being the case, why would you work?! 2)media has people like that thinking everything is given to you in life, i.e. Paris Hilton, other privelaged reality TV young celebrities. Real life proves that hard work will get you what you want, but everyone in Hollywood has people thinking its handed out for free.

 

People are born into it. 1)Again, YOU CHOOSE how you want to live your life. Cant blame it on others. There are many people that come from nothing and hopeless situations to extreme success. 2)Everyone knows theres a better life, they just CHOOSE not to do what it takes to achieve it. (Loyal to 'da hood, yo!) If they dont try, they got nothin to complain about.

 

People are stuck in a bad place. 1)this is not an eternal position unless they allow it to be. Just do what it takes 2)external help can aid in getting out of ones circumstances, but dont rely on that ish-then you become lazy. 3) There is ALWAYS another option other than crime...

 

Unhinged violent people. 1)Most are or will be in prison. 2) These types are going to be violent no matter what, guns or not.

 

The amount of people that get enough of an ego boost with a gun in their hand to go commit crime is so miniscule it shouldnt even be factored in. I feel REAL GOOD and powerful when i hold guns; but i choose not commit a crime with one. Id like to, but I have self control.

 

-point being all of these things are still a choice influenced by other factors. Limit the factors.

 

SOMETHING happened to homosexuals that messed them up so much that they feel attracted to the same sex, whether it be uncle fondlin' or relating more to their mom growing up. They were not born that way, its not natural, its a confused/unfortunate psychological problem. They choose to be normal, or choose to blame it on whatever happened and accept it as "thats just the way i am. Accept me." instead of dealing with the underlying issues.

Same as criminals that use guns. Somthing happened- traumatic experience, violent homelife, whatever. They were not born to commit crime, its a mental issue, and those issues indeed have an influence on their choice to commit the crime.

 

too far fetched?

 

Whilst your comments about crime make sense, your comments about homosexuality are completely off base and have no bearing in reality. People are not turned homosexual it is how they are, there isn't a problem with them, there are no underlying issues. What is it with some many people being so homophobic or ignorant towards homosexuals on this site. I have know plenty of gay people and there is nothing wrong with them, they respect if your not gay, they will not make moves on you and they tend to be very nice genuine people.

 

To say it is unnatural is complete garbage, that is just some ingrained religious bullshit that says it is unnatural.

[angelofdeath]

^^ i think the guy was trying to say that you are not 'born' gay... you BECOME gay

[Decyferon]

and I was disagreeing with him, it isn't a life choice like being a smoker, it is something you have no control of and is within you from birth lol but this thread isn't about that

[nsmbfan]

no matter how many threads exist, the same topics keep showing up.

 

and the same stupid comments along with them.

 

but my cousin was born gay. gay as a handbag full of rainbows. we knew something was weird with Nathan when he was 4 or 5 years old. some people are just gay. some people are fat. mostly there's more fat people than gay people.

[MoonsOfSulkendastron]

cool. funny how all the same topics do come up!

Wrong thread, but religion aside, would not natural selection weed out homosexuals? they cant reproduce...

(reply Decy then lets can it-off topic-my bad);)

[MoonsOfSulkendastron]

Crap.

Im not homophobic-be gay i dont care. Just dont force it down my throat(no pun intended) and tell me i must accept it!

ok done.

 

Is there always legislation coming thru about guns? Like a constant flow? I never hear about it anymore

[Decyferon]

cool. funny how all the same topics do come up!

Wrong thread, but religion aside, would not natural selection weed out homosexuals? they cant reproduce...

(reply Decy then lets can it-off topic-my bad);)

 

just to reply then we can get on with the topic of shooting things!!

 

I don't think natural selection would weed out homosexuals, because there are plenty of hetrosexual people that cannot have babies or don't want to have babies. A gay person can reproduce and there are a lot of gay families that have children, just because the baby isn't carried or fertilised by one part of the couple doesn't mean they cannot reproduce.

 

Maybe in the animal world it would play more of a part because they don't have the same kind of technologies and science that we have.

[angelofdeath]

Crap.

Im not homophobic-be gay i dont care. Just dont force it down my throat(no pun intended) and tell me i must accept it!

ok done.

 

Is there always legislation coming thru about guns? Like a constant flow? I never hear about it anymore

 

i think the dems are to busy trying to cram healthcare down peoples throats, that guns are taking the back burner at present.

 

current gun legislation.

http://gunowners.org/111anatb.htm

 

the biggest threat is the gun registration bill that requires a permit for all hand guns and semi's even ones that are already owned. the license is revokable for any number of reasons, leading to confiscation of previously legally owned guns. the funny thing is in this bill you are required to lock your guns up and keep them unloaded, therefore making a loaded gun ready to repel any attack by an intruder or murderer ILLEGAL.

[angelofdeath]

also:

 

Gun rights, control groups find fight in health debate

FRIDAY, 21 AUGUST 2009 00:00

By Jordy Yager

 

A Virginia-based gun rights group has taken issue with the Democrat-led healthcare proposals, saying that the proposed plans could strip citizens of their rights to own a gun.

 

The Gun Owners of America group, which boasts more than 300,000 members, has been warning its ranks that the proposed healthcare legislation would compile the information of Americans into a government database. The group says that by using this data, the government could deem a citizen “medically unfit” to carry a gun.

 

“All of the proposals that we’re aware of would handle people’s health data that way,” said Larry Pratt, executive director of the group.

 

“And then you end up having a gazillion people lose their gun rights because of some medical record that someone doesn’t like, where they say, ‘Oh, that might be a danger to their self or others.’ No trial, no due process, just gone.”

 

The group also objects to Health and Human Services Secretary Katherine Sebelius, saying that she is prone to restrict gun rights.

 

“It wouldn’t be any problem for her to drag up some old discredited study from the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] and say, ‘Guns are contagious and they’re a public health menace. This is another reason for someone to pay a surtax on their insurance because they’re causing all of that trouble in the emergency room,'” Pratt said. “That means that we have a dog in this fight.”

 

But Paul Helmke, president of the gun control group Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said Pratt has the wrong linkage between gun rights and healthcare.

 

“One of the burdens on our healthcare system are the 70,000 to 80,000 people that suffer gunshot wounds every year and survive, ending up in wheelchairs, or showing up in emergency rooms without insurance after being shot. There is a connection [between healthcare and gun rights] but it’s not the connection that Larry Pratt is talking about. We as a society are paying a large portion of the cost for this gun violence.”

 

While Pratt said he has not expressly asked his group’s membership to brandish their firearms at political forums, he fully supports the demonstrators who were seen earlier this week with their licensed guns protesting outside the Phoenix convention center where Presdent Barack Obama was speaking.

 

Pratt said it helps draw attention to their objections of the healthcare bill and that it could help spur the public to not be shocked when citizens are seen carrying legal firearms in public.

 

“I think it’s been helpful,” Pratt said. “These fellas hit the jackpot with national publicity. Hopefully a discussion [will result] that will make it plain that good gun control is when a cop or a citizen has their gun in their holster. Just as we’d typically be unalarmed to see a cop with a piece on his hip, we shouldn’t have any different reaction to anybody else. A cop is just us with a uniform.”

 

But Helmke, a former mayor of Fort Wayne, Ind., says that the presence of guns makes attendees at these forums nervous and it stifles political debate.

 

“Our system of government is built on a robust system of public debate and how much are you going to argue with a guy that’s carrying a gun?” Helmke said. “It’s a level of intimidation, a level of bullying that is inappropriate in our public discourse. You worry enough about people carrying signs on sticks; well, guns are a whole new level of escalation. It endangers people at these events.”

 

© 2009 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp