It was the Internet’s fault, the blogger’s fault and the hardcore unrelenting supporters that hold to the founding Father’s intent that the 2nd Amendment wasn’t about “Sporting Weapons’ but the current ‘arms of the day’ to defend U.S. citizen’s from enemies aboard and quislings from within.

That brought the ‘doom’ to zumbo the piriah.

Bigot’s of the 2ndAmendment civil rights never can see past their elitist nose at what civil rights are at stake, so long as they can hunt. Slavery was fashionable one time as well, and it’s practitioners didn’t get the civil rights violations they perpertrated & defended doing so as well. And without a truliy embraced & practiced ‘Right to bear arms’ we will all be slaves to some sort of tyranny in the future. History teaches to this fact repeatadly.

The only guaranteed way to fail is to do nothing.

Dirt, take this post and send it to your buddies. The lady lobbied harder. She won one fight. Battle’s not over, not by a long shot. She is a public servent. Despite there big feakin’ titles they are given, still servents. There is always away, but you can’t lay down for a second. Remember, petition. Right in the first ammendment. Start a petition to bring this woman to a public hearing so the public has the right to interview her. If she backs down or dodges a petitioned public request to have a public forum to discuse and issue send it to your opinion page in your paper, one for us. Then go to the next move. Dogged determination my friend, it is what we got.

The big problem is we are dealing with two seperate levels of government here. Federal and State. You notice that the laws all seem to originate at the state level. Then are presented as working models in congress. You have to win in your back yard and win nationally. And state law is the most important. Because it is allready proven the state can have a different stance if it wants despite federal mandate. The feds may try to tax or cut funding, which sucks, but many states have made different hunting regs, auto regs, etc. All arguments that are worth it take an insane amount of effort on the part of an individual wishing to maintain there rights. But when combined with the efforts of there friends an effective lobby begins to form.

Our fore fathers got shot and killed for there belief system. God willing it never comes to that again. That is why we decided to start this who republic. Any yes it is a republic I agree. The popular vote is hung up by the fact we have to elect mediators to represent our causes. And of course those we choose to trust can stab us in the back. I think that is why everyone is pissed(or that seems to be a common thread)
But the system is not ready for instint action. This whole event illistrates this pretty clear. A lot of people acted, then thought. But it the power of cumminication and fore thought that is the tool of the common man and the one we must use to wage a proper movement. That is why the desire to regulate the internet is so big. Same problem. Access to technology, how much can we have. And that is our fight. To keep every stinking right we have and fight to the bitter end. Hence, the second ammendment. And on down the list. We have a right to assemble. And this technology allows us to assemble like never seen before. Now, what will we do with it?

And straightarrow my friend, I like what you said. But remeber, keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. I also to hope we can keep our guns, and hopefully the right to still use them. I would hate to keep the right to have one but it can only sit in my house for defensive purposes. Seems like a big waste of a perfectly good machine. But you are right. You have to have one to use it first.

You guys kicks ass! Keep up the good fight. Unfortunately this medical deal in my life is pulling harder at my strings. I want to keep up our talk guys, but I am currently engaged on a full front assult from the medical establishemnt. It is a battle I must fight or someone I love could die here men. Please feel free to talk about my statements but I am about to jerk the old plug on my internet because of time and expense. I will look you up from the coffee shops or my pulbic library(the best damn entertainment in town by the way) and try and post here and there when I have more time. Hopefully I can respond to your statements.

“Insert profound statement by really famous dead person here”-(this is a joke, try to laugh a little)

We are already fighting for them, and ourselves. They are begging to be eaten by the hungry tiger of tyranny last. So it is very much not our call. It is their call as to whether they will join all holders of rights under the second amendment in trying to reach a peaceful restoration of our rights. To date, most have not.

I do not understand this, because I have been hunting since I was 9, until I could no longer use the meat, then I quit hunting. No sane man kills for the sake of killing. But even when I was an avid hunter, who might walk 20 or more miles a day hunting, I understood that my hunting was a by-product of a much more important right and not the reason for that right.

When hunters, trap shooters, cowboy shooters, etc. realize what I knew at 9, they will join us in protecting the actual right and not the by- products of it. But it really isn’t our call, they must join us, we can’t force them, we can only try to convince them. Until such time as peaceful no longer works then we must consider them on the other side if they didn’t help us avoid such a tragedy in the best hope of mankind in history, The United States of America.

http://www.memorableplaces.com/m1garand/joinordie.html

When I write them to express my disagreement with a policy or position they respond with a thank-you note for supporting them – it’s frustrating but quite clear that I have no voice. My “representatives” have no fear of a hunter or shooter backlash because it has no effect on them – they are insulated. This area is so deep-blue that even the NRA Member’s Council which used to throw fund-raising banquets that I used to attend as a Sponsor, had none this year and dissolved. There are no visible lobbying efforts or influence pedaling on the positive side for gun-rights.

Hunters meanwhile are rewarded by not having to associate with Black Rifles because they are banned. Some of the guys in my club hunt and also shoot black rifles they acquired (and registered) before the ban took effect – I’m too late and there is no sunset provision on the ban. I don’t and can’t have one – I have a bunch of obsolete antiques, an M1 Garand, an M1 Carbine, and an M1898 Krag. The guys in my club who do hunt are all of a similar age and income-strata, and while I’ve never been invited to hunt I’m also not interested in spending that amount of close-up time with them.

From my understanding of the latest AWB proposal, the Garand and Carbine are slated to be banned as well because of their “military-design” or some words to that effect.

One thing that I should mention about your comments about Zumbo only having one vote:

In a true democracy you’d have a point, but we’re a Republic, with elected representatives, who can be influenced through lobbying, interests, etc. Zumbo also has huge sway with hundreds of thousands of other voters. This is why his statements were so damaging. His single vote doesn’t really matter, it’s the influence those statements can have on the political process that are the problem.