TexasCHLforum.com

K.Mooneyham wrote:The mindsets between those people and the majority of us who post on this forum are so far apart that I do not believe that gap can ever be bridged, not that it should be bridged.

I keep trying, on a 1-on-1 basis to change minds with facts, but I believe that pool of "undecideds" has shrunk to almost nil. Probably 95% or more of the population has already made up their minds about this one way or the other, and neither side is willing to budge. OUR should not budge an inch. Not one inch. Since the 1960s, our side is the side that has budged. No more. It is time for the pendulum to swing the other way. The status quo is unacceptable, and further loss of rights is unacceptable.

Here's what it is ultimately going to boil down to: We have guns; they do not. Plain and simple. Who's going to enforce their fascist policies? The military? Please. Check out these maps. These are our sons and daughters. The gungrabber states are SHAMEFULLY under-represented in the military:


Is Michael "my bloomers are in a twist" Bloomberg going to send the NY National Guard to confiscate guns in Texas? Will he send the NYPD? Phhht! If Obama were to issue a confiscation order, the question isn't whether or not the military or federal agencies tasked with carrying it would mutiny; the question is what minority percentage of them won't mutiny. Every single one of them who ever contemplates, even as a passing fancy, what would happen in that scenario understands that their own life expectancies would shrink to hours and days, rather than weeks, months, or years, if they were to ever try and disarm the nation. There are at least 100 million gun owners, owning over 300 million guns. What are they going to do, use WMD to beat us?

They won't stop pushing. I'm not budging another inch. There are only two possible outcomes: 1) they back the heck off; and 2) violence. The difference between someone like me and someone like the author is that I am hopeful for (1) and prepared for (2); while he is unwilling to (1) and heedless to (2). If/when it comes to it, more of them are going to die than us.

I call that "the Rosanna-Danna letter." ..........Nevermind!

It's a New Yorker, writing a "2nd Amendment is about hunting" article in the New York Times blog. I can predict some other things about him:

1. Betcha he's a democrat.
2. Betcha he thinks Bloomberg is a good mayor and MAIG is a good thing.
3. Betcha he supports Obamacare.
4. Betcha he voted for Obama.
5. Betcha he thinks 1st Amendment only contains the establishment clause, and that the free exercise clause has been deprecated out of it.
6. Betcha he thinks that government solves more problems than it creates, and therefore we need more of it.
7. Betcha that to him, more government is NOT tyranny.
8. Betcha he naturally resents the idea of people who would tell him to go jump off a cliff for suggesting to them that they shouldn't worry about his desire to double or triple the burdens of government.

Who cares what he thinks? Gun owners grow his food. Gun owners built his infrastructure. Gun owners defend his liberties in uniform. Gun owners patrol his streets and keep him safe. Worms like him are hothouse orchids who cannot live and thrive in the wild without gun owners.

Who cares what he thinks? People like him are the ones who are going to push us to the point of having to resist tyranny or surrender liberty. I don't like it, but I firmly believe that this is where we are headed, and that the situation is nearly beyond redemption. When it comes, people like him are going to die off, and the world will be better without him.