Originally Posted By: King Brown
There's an informative and intelligent conversation on the Second Amendment currently on the Parker board, a model of respectful discourse of varying opinions of changing legislation.

Are you open to a different opinion?

I see some folks finding 'respectful discourse of varying opinions' informative and intelligent conversation, but is it informational on preserving the 2nd Amendment?

If a fellow says restrictions aren't really so....because I like shotguns or I'm off to a different part of the country, is he providing useful information? How about a couple of folks going back and forth about whose great gramps trained with which militia. Or, how about one of those fellows is asked about where he got his 'opinion' and it couldn't quite be figured out?

I feel bad for the fellow that comes 'here for information and it's pleasing---and a tribute to the board---to see opinions from a community than partisan politics'. Are they getting information, or being conditioned to respond to feelings. I suppose it might be advantageous not to share who's the arbiter of determining 'public interest'. Sorry about the uninformational opinion.