however. Since he felt threatened (you prefer to substitute your own paranoia for my more likely prosaic explanation), then he should have an ARMED bodyguard.

What makes you think 150,000,000 other Americans can't take the same action?

Gun-control has ALWAYS been about only "elites" having guns, right?

by a small minority of gun nuts.

for that reassurance!

BTW, let me know who that "small minority" is so I can watch out for them before I nod off to sleep.

The revolvers on button is on top and out of the way IMHO, and my brothers 380's switch is kind of flaky.

Get the Ruger LCP or LCR instead. I also recommend the S&W 642 like my wife carries...sweet shooting little pistol.

or an LCP.

Were were just talking about this today at work. A friend of mine is thinking about a LC9...For me I'm not stuck up on having a SD pistol with a safety so I really liked the LC9 that I looked at. The safety is perfectly sized, somewhat recessed and easily operated. Or if you so desire just leave it off. I didn't pull the trigger so I don't know about that.

I'm a pretty big fan of rugers, I've owned (and own) several and haven't been disappointed yet, they work and they're affordable.

my cop siblings loved their Smith and Wessons. In the woods, I'll take Single Six or Bearcat over just about anything.

... in .357. I also can't get enough of my Ruger GSR.

without independent reporting? Just a little hypocritical. BTW, what exactly did CNN say? Does MM provide evidence that contradict what Cox told CNN? As usual, no. Brock still has the same spots when he said Anita Hill was "a little nutty and a little slutty."

He should write a follow-up on the NRA Noise Machine.

read Blinded by the Right as well. Basiclly, he switich sides after he realized his "friends" were homophobic assholes when he came out and American Spectator fired him when he did not write an ugly enough hit piece on Mrs. Clinton, even though his previous screeds were. Since he was a city boy, I'm guessing his view on guns pre dates his enlightenment.

I notice you did not address my post. So?????/

... it's time to rethink your argument.

...63% of Americans don't own guns at all, so how can their opinion on the matter be informed?


If you showed those 63% a picture of a rifle classified as an "assault weapon" (per 1993 federal ban) and a "sporting semiautomatic rifle" (also per the 1993 federal ban), would they really think the ban did anything? Would they really feel safer? Would they really think society is better served?

63% of the American people have this viewpoint, and they've never had it challenged by either research or practical experience.


"Assault weapon" is an arbitrary and pejorative term. If you, or any body else, is serious about trying to stop mass shootings or militaristic weapons culture, then you'd come out and simply ban semi-automatic long guns. All of them. No exceptions.

Lever action, okay. Bolt action, okay. Pump action, okay. Break-action, okay. But no self-loading long guns.

No AR-15s, no Garands, no AK-47s, no SKSs, no BARs, no 742s, no FALs, no Mini-14s...

Bolt, break, lever, pump.

I'll really chastise the next guy from the NRA who phones up asking for money: they need to stand up for "Assault Weapons" more consistently- and tell the truth about Romney, or any other opportunistic sap (Mr President!) who publicly pines about banning our rights...

I am really glad that you pointed out this shortcoming, and I'll dutifully bring it to their attention.

Thanks for the tip. I want the NRA to consistently defend Semiautomatic Rifles at every chance- that's what we expect, that's what we should get.

Rest assured, this'll go straight to Wayne LaPierre.

Thanks to the internet, there will never be another "assault weapons ban".

Either it will get watered down to another cosmetic features ban that will easily be danced around by changing the cosmetics of the firearms, or they will go balls-to-the-wall and try to ban all semi-automatic guns.

And when they do that, the internet is going to be there full-bore pointing out that this:

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQgjl9uqxRldi49LVD6X8hyguuymGEB1eLwLng1QJ1iNXACwRGx2rfhwChy_g

Is functionally no different than this:

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTFS-UeCuLNSKDUFuZPlDF42cBoe8l9wXcbDhCsFQUI2XGG3PkXTucgJWFD9A

No one is going to tolerate the banning of grandpa's semi-automatic deer rifle, and you can't ban semi-automatic rifles without doing that.

On top of this, the internet is going to be there pointing out that only about 300 people are killed every year by rifles of all kinds, let alone "assault rifles".

And that will be the end of that.