Ed, do you recall frantically trying to bait us into foolish discussions about restricting and giving up entire classes of firearms to appease the Anti-Gunners? Do you recall saying:
The most onerous restrictions, infringements, and outright bans on firearms in the U.S. have occurred at the State and Local level. The 2008 Heller and McDonald Supreme Court cases were about restrictions that happened at the LOCAL level in Washington D.C. and Chicago. You are making the argument that free and law abiding U.S. citizens should be able to have their Constitutional and Civil Rights taken away from them simply because they have the misfortune to live in a jurisdiction governed by Anti-Gun Liberal Left Democrats. It makes little difference where infringements upon the 2nd Amendment come from Ed. Free and law abiding people still lose some of their freedom.
Here's something for you all to think about. I don't expect Ed Good, King, or dla (sic) to accept it because they have a demonstrable agenda. King has told us that these anti-gun laws are OK because majorities vote for the representatives who pass the laws. Using that logic, it would be OK for white majorities to elect representatives who would reimpose slavery upon blacks. Obama has repeatedly told us that he doesn't expect that his new Universal Background Checks will stop all of the gun violence. But he has used the old argument of "shouldn't we at least try if it will save even one life?"
Sounds reasonable until you remember that Obama adamantly opposed "Kate's Law" and promised to veto any law that would imprison murderous illegal aliens who repeatedly sneak back into the United States and break our laws and kill innocent citizens like Kate Steinle.
No political debate. Just the facts.
