How would the Left feel about that?

His immediate response was “well the guns just have go !”. I then asked him what his understanding of the Second Amendment was. He said ” the Second Amendment was written over two hundred years ago, it has no place in modern society”. After an intense yet rational and well structured 10 to 15 minute conversation about the difference between a LIST, a LAW and someones RIGHTS, it was like someone turned a light on in his head. (I have never seen this before to this extent) He stood in front of me slack jawed, no one had ever explained things to him in such a way before. He had never really understood what the differences were, nor what the actual function of the Second Amendment was designed to accomplish. Most people in the general public also do not properly understand the issue and so their conversation is mostly a flailing emotional mess that can never come to a rational conclusion.

I again saw him this morning and he again seriously thanked me for changing his understanding. He now has something concrete to further think about and a point from which to have a more informed and intelligent conversation about this simple yet complex subject.

Hope springs eternal……………In America.

PeterF: referencing the identify store fronts reCAPTCHA’s, is it just me… or is the signage always (99%) in Spanish? (what’s that all about?)
I get that challenge far more than any of them.

P.S. I have discovered a capitalist plot promulgated by the reCAPTCHA organization. Their constant requirement to identify store fronts is a thinly veiled attempt to get us to spend money.

Innocent people like Senator Ted Kennedy. Getting off the list is a problem. Even the influential Kennedy took six months of pulling strings to get off the list. How long does it take someone who has no political pull at all?

From the article: “too many of our children, too many of our sisters and brothers, our mothers and fathers, our friends, our cousins are dying by guns and we have to do something about it.”

Of course we have to do something about it, but we have to do something intelligent about it. We have to learn the lesson of France, which completely disarmed its population yet suffers terrible terrorist gun attacks. In the case of Charlie Hebdo, the onsite police officer who was “protecting” the publishing company was unarmed, like the people inside the building, and like the rest of the country. The unarmed officer was the first victim of the terrorists.

We have to learn the lesson of Orlando and the airline marshals. The armed police officer guarding the nightclub was an obvious first target, yet airliners use undercover armed air marshals so that the terrorists don’t eliminate the marshal before wreaking havoc in the air. Few terrorists have tried to attack US airliners after the air marshal program started, and the ones who tried were surreptitious in lighting their shoe bomb and underwear bomb so as to avoid gaining the attention of any air marshal that might be on board.

We have to learn the lesson of Pamela Geller’s Mohamed Cartoon Contest. The unarmed security guard was the first terrorist target (wounded, not killed), but the armed police were there and ended the attack before it could get to the point of killing the unarmed security guard.

Having armed personnel will not always work, as a uniformed defender becomes the first target. But as we have learned, even a lone non-uniformed defender presents a greater threat to the terrorists than they seem willing to take on.

If we eliminate the guarantee that the terrorists have gun-free/defense-free attack-zones, then they will have to look for other ways to wreak their havoc, and our rights need not be abridged in order to accomplish this.

But it is too much to ask Democrats to do anything intelligent about it. It is too hard for them to use logic or learn any lessons from life. These are precious snowflakes who need their safe-zones — and Congress (unlike We the People) gets enough armed guards to discourage terrorist attack. I guess we now know who the government thinks the important people are, and it ain’t us.

I guess if you are an old fogey, it does hurt to sit on the floor but you can tell they didn’t plan on sitting on the floor very long by the clothes they were wearing.

They would rather leave everyone defenseless as long as they are able to push their agenda forward. There is no law that could have been passed, or that they propose that would have stopped the Orlando shooter. The FBI AND Homeland Security both gave the guy a pass!

That’s why I say that these people at their core rejoice when some crazed nut creates some reason to senselessly kill innocent people. It is a part of their sickness, liberalism really is a sickness.

When they do that then they will have some sort of credibility, otherwise they are I.D. (intellectually dishonest)

A disconnected stunt, let them sit there until Congress resumes.