Craig Libhart made a perfectly reasonable post on legislation ploughed thoroughly on an earlier thread but as president of an association integral to our enjoyment of sporting firearms. A member seemed to caution that it was politics.
Politics is everything. Some call it the art of life: choosing dogcatchers and presidents, who gets the keys to the car tonight, to you can't wear those clothes to school. For my money, cpa's take on politics has it right:
"No question in my mind that the implementation of the regulation is political, but I don't see the discussion as political, unless one chooses to make it such." Some choose to make it partisanly political but the last word should be Brian's:
"I am disappointed that the ACGG did not mention that the regs are in regsrds to Military Firearms (defined as "defense articles" and "significant military equipment". NOT civilian firearms. Leaving this information out only adds to the problem of spreading misinformation."
King, you and Brian seem to be hanging your hat on the specifics of the language used, not intent. The intent is clear and the implementation will be guided by the twisting of the language to serve the purposes of the anti gun faction.
As it is now and ever was. That IS the way politics works. You and I both know that, don't we? (That's rhetorical. LOL)
