I'd be fine if they just declared the Brady Campaign to be correct on all points and disbanded for all time.

Ban all guns now!

for clever and effective new wording for their tried-and-true standbys "Guns don't kill people..." and "If only those 6 year-olds had been armed..."

The insanity has finally reached the point of indefensible.

Gun-looney attacks congresswoman - "but if one of her aides had a concealed weapon, all would be well".
Gun-looney attacks movie theater - "but if a movie goer had a concealed weapon, all would be well".
Gun-looney attacks kindergarten - crickets...because there is absolutely no rejoinder that ends with ",all would be well".

Let's start a conversation of "hierarchy of rights". I think my child's right to survive kindergarten trumps you're right to own an arsenal befitting a third world warlord. Yeah - I know - "It's complicated"...but seriously, isn't that what it all really boils down to.

http://www.facebook.com/NoTeaParty


(I know ... IF they have a soul.)

Legal hard alcohol means young children will have easier access to hard alcohol, but I don't think young children should drink hard alcohol.

In my opinion, saying my support for legal hard alcohol means I support an individual's right to give young children hard alcohol misrepresents my actual position.

I'm not a gun guy, but I do think your argument is hyperbole. The NRA's position does make gunning down children easier, just like my position makes giving children alcohol easier, but neither of us advocate for those things.

Just check many of the postings in the last couple hours and see how many list RBKA forum as their main forum. Business as usual.

I would also like to point out that my "favorite" group and forum doesn't include RKBA. They're GD and Religion.

If you have the ability to argue against my argument, then you should do so. Show me the errors of my ways.