King and Ed may prefer to live in communities where concealed carry is a rare thing, neighbouring New Hampshire not all that different from Nova Scotia (New Scotland). I can't speak for Ed but I believe that's what he was inferring. What's wrong with that?
Fox, I don't get hung up with language, grammar etc. I have four reference books 20 inches from my keyboard and make lots of mistakes. My closest friends are not articulate, country men, gentlemen, who I'd be honoured to have with me, anywhere, any time.
What's in their heads is what counts.
What's wrong with that you ask, King. I'll tell you.
What Ed advocates does zero to make things safer. What Ed advocates does zero to lessen crime or reduce the illegal use of firearms. And if those were the only problems, fine.
But what Ed advocates also provides cover for anti gun zealots, anxious to remove all firearms from everyone but government actors. What's wrong with it is that Ed's solution is about making his preference, his personal choice, mandatory for everyone. The socialist way.
I must say I'm pretty disappointed in you, King. This thread was started, no matter how much you protest, as a finger in the eye to other members. Instead of enjoying some peace and doubleguns, in less than week, you couldn't resist a poke.
A trend?
I'll tell you what a trend is. A trend is anti gun zealots dancing on the grave of victims, using events like Christchurch to advance their political agenda while doing NOTHING to stop whatever level of carnage exists. A trend is the MSM gleefully publicizing every possible detail, no matter how irrelevant, to keep the event in the public eye, all at the service of their bottom line. All the while, creating a publicity machine that inspires other crazies.
