BTW... of the four people I quoted regarding anti-gun politics, all are still alive and activley seeking more rigorous gun control measures, two still hold office in Congress, and one could posibly be back in the Whitehouse as First Gentleman(?), so who's stupid?

"I do wonder, however, just how the economy plans to target only gunowners for financial hardship."Are you bloody stupid? The middle class is being hammered, it isn't just gun owners retard that are going to be economically slammed. You are just being purposefully obtuse, avoiding the issue, thinking that if you keep your head in the sand long enough that things will just magically work out swell.

Do you want to know how you'll lose your guns? Watch 'Frontline: Can you afford to retire?' and you'll see. One person on that program mentioned that he had to sell all his guns in retirement to raise some money to make ends meet. Those in power aren't going to take your guns, there isn't going to be any sort of police action to go find and collect them, they are going to get you to willingly trade them to pay for next months food bill (or to pay for some other necessity like health care).

And one more I just couldn't resist."Damn it," he [Ed Crane, president of the Cato Institute] said, "these people [Cuban rafters and Haitian boat people] get on board things made out of oil drums, orange crates, balsa wood, and cardboard boxes; they cross hundreds of miles of shark-infested ocean, suffer hunger, thirst, and exposure, and brave treacherous currents, high seas, and storms just to come to America. I say they're citizens. Give them their passports right on the Florida beach -- no oaths, no exams, no forms to fill out. These are the kind of people we want in America!"Bill [Clinton] hates them and he fears them, especially the Cubans. Bill knows the Cubans are crazy. Only crazy people would flee from a country with free medical care, guaranteed employment for life, and first-rate gun control. The president and his sanctimonious twit of a wife have worked for decades to build a society like this, and here people are taking their lives in their hands to get away from it.

"Be prepared to fight for your second amendment rights I would put nothing past those leftwing Democrats."What is it with the chicken little routine? What has anyone said that lends you to believe that? Start living in reality rather than fantasyland. Start actually listening to what the elected people say rather than all the full-of-fecal-material pundits. Stop being tools, start thinking for yourself.

Be prepared to fight for your second amendment rights I would put nothing past those leftwing Democrats.Has everyone forgotten what happened under Bill boy Clinton and his dyke Attorney General Reno. They brought us Waco texas and Ruby Ridge!

Golly!A mountain of evidence dating back to 1240 A.D. that Moslems hate non-moslems... whew! How could ol'Dubbya uv missed that?There was no specific information about an attack.Why?Because Clinoccio and Co had spent the previous eight years dismantling our Intelligence agencies until they were virtually ineffective and more dysfunctional than the Osbornes.A mountain of evidence gathered by whom?, and spread out amongst how many agencies? (who by-the-way were not sharing much info, if you'll recall)Our Justice department in the years leading up to 9/11 was preoccupied with internal politics and gave no credence and made no effort to track down or stop Al Quaida for almost ten years, and then they did something and you (and all the rest of your Bush-hating liberal friends) want to throw it all on Bush like he had a crystal ball and the keys to the kingdom and really could have stopped it from happening.President Bush answered that question best, "We have to be right 100% of the time, Bin Laden only has to be lucky once for it to happen again."

zounds needs go to CENSORED. shut the CENSORED up zounds.

Boar Slayer,A lil info about me.At the time of Waco, I was a full time LEO working in the Southeast.The opinion you stated about cop killers signing their own death sentence still rings true to me today. We see eye to eye on that, brother.Waco was a media circus and the real person who got that officer killed wasn't the religious nut that pulled the trigger, it was the incident commander who followed Janet Reno's orders to let the TV news crew film ATF agents bum-rushing an armed compound - live.Why didn't the ATF and local LE arrest David Koresh off site during the many, many oportunities he gave them. Without Koresh, it is widely understood that the BD's would have eventually surrendered with no loss of life.Instead, they waited untill he was inside of a fortified stronghold and then announced their coming on national television and created a bloody standoff.Regarding the rest of your post, I also agree heartily with you. We do live in a different age after 9/11, and we do have to be more cautious. As I've already said, President Bush didn't create our current situation, he inherited it. I shudder to think where we'd be if Billary were in office during 9/11. Worse yet if Gore or Kerry were at the helm. We'd be paying Al Quaida restitution, no doubt.Always remember, though, that "reasonable restrictions" much like what you are agreeing to regarding private phone calls, are what the anti's are calling assault weapons bans and saturday night special bans, etc.You and I, brother, see it the same, I'm sure. The Bill of Rights doesn't need tweaking or interpreting. It says what it says in plain words.

Zounds,In this final response I'll concede that President Clinton was not yet elected during the Ruby Ridge debacle. I must correct you, however, in your comment regarding the BATF and it's role in the attack on the Weaver family. While it is true that they initiated the investigation, it was the FBI and U.S. Marshalls who killed the weavers, not BATF agents. There is no record of BATF involvement in the actual shootings. Just to keep the facts straight.Clinton did promote one of the people most responsible for this outrageous (your terminology) abuse of power, Janet Reno, to Attorney General soon after the incident at Ruby Ridge. Furthermore, he was sitting in office when she gave the order to burn Waco and the Branch Davidians to the ground in a very similar "outrageous" act by federal law enforcement, so any assumption that Ruby Ridge would have turned out differently with a Democrat in office is moot.My point, if it is not wasted, is that we as a country cannot afford to have elected officials who have "axes to grind" or "single issue political agendas". The beauty of the two party system is that politicians cannot afford to stray very far to the left or right of center without losing votes.I will not attempt to defend President Bush's homeland security policy other than to say it was approved almost unanimously by Congress when it was enacted. I would be the first to say that he is not the best president we've ever had. He's just the best one we've had to choose from in the past two elections.

BOHICA indeed! Talk about taking a fist to the old keister, look what's already happened:While NRA "A" rated John Murtha was smoke-screened as Pelosi's choice for House Speaker,some NRA "F" rated bozo got the job instead.Mark me words, laddies and lassies, by the time our tax returns are due next year, another assault weapons bill will be signed, sealed and delivered.Monsieur Petzal is right on the money.

Zounds,Actually I'm a brandy man, not a crack man, however, point taken.What evidence do you offer to support your "raving lunatic theory"?On the other hand, almost every one of the gun cases that went fully through the courts during the 1990's were found lacking in evidence or there were other obvious errors comitted by the BATF during the investigations.They closed almost all of their cases by threatening homeowners with the loss of their homes and lengthy jail terms. Many folded and pled guilty in plea bargains to crimes they later stated that they never committed or didn't understand.Ruby Ridge is a prime example of overzealous enforcement of existing gun laws. It began as entrapment, followed by harrassment and strongarm tactics which left three people dead.BTW, several of the FBI agents involved in that incident lost their jobs as a result of their actions, which is as close as the FBI comes to admitting a mistake.Again, if you are content to call names, that's fine with me. Otherwise, show me your "truth".

All name calling aside, it seems odd to me that Ms. Pelosi swears to advance the cause and never waver on a woman's right to choose (the life or death of her unborn fetus), but she would deny that same woman the means to defend herself from an attacker.If Liberal Folks wish to be taken more seriously by others who are more mainstream, perhaps a less outrageous position might be championed.Just some thoughts and observations...The liberal viewpoint is that each of us is unique and should be respected and supported no matter how unorthodox or bizzare our behaviors may seem to others. This viewpoint extends to our personal choices ie; drug use, abortion, sexual activity, and other "lifestyles" that directly impact our communities and the people around us. In each of these scenarios the liberal position is that it's a matter of personal freedom and must be treated with a passionate Hands-Off by governmental regulation...UNLESS...That choice or lifestyle includes gun ownership or hunting, then the free thinking liberal becomes as draconian as any Nazi, wanting doors kicked in and homes invaded followed by questionably legal confiscations of personal property and jail terms for technical violations of obscure laws.America doesn't even treat drug dealers like that, but Janet Reno and company made a habit of doing it to private gun collectors who ran afoul of her dragnet.Go Figure!If gun owners seem a little preoccupied with this, it's because we've already lived the lesson of having our 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment Rights "re-interpreted" by liberal politicians.P.S.And before you ram the tired old "Guns Kill People" crap down my throat, AIDS has killed more than 3 million people and the number is still climbing, and it wasn't spread by the NRA.I'm democratic enough to concede that an idiot is equal to a genius in most situations, but I draw the line when one concludes that two idiots are superior to one genius.

As we all know, politicians work only to be reelected. Because of that, they will respect (kowtow to) only those voting blocks that are both large and influential.For our interests that means the NRA.There are two things we can do to make the politicians respect our rights: 1) If you don't belong to the NRA - join. You may not agree with everything that they do, but that is probably true of every organization with which you are affiliated. 2) If you do belong to the NRA, sign up at least one more member.Right now - at 4 million members - even the liberals are wary of the NRA. At 8 million they will respect it. At 10 million or more they will be passing legislation that we dictate.

So, why is it that when Republicans win, it's voter fraud and election irregularities, but when Democrats win, it's a mandate or a popular protest against the administration? Odd...

" The next time you meet one of those flaming liberal buttholes (notice Dave, I did not swear), resist the urge to prove your superiority. Take the time to engage them in conversation. Gently steer them in the direction of the truth. "Stop acting like you are the only possessors of the truth, that everyone that believes something different is a child to be reformed. Arrogant dicketry is the best way to shut off others to understanding a different viewpoint. You don't have to agree with a different viewpoint to respect that others sincerely believe in something different.That you would call another person a "flaming liberal butthole" means you are not the solution, you are the problem. I have no reason to give an ounce of consideration to anything you say when the first words out of your mouth show how utterly intolerant you are.

Dave, please post about a gun in your collection or something, I think we've had enough politics for a bit. Oh and if the gun would happen to be left handed I would not complain in the slightest.

Dear Nicolette,I enjoyed watching you wash your car on "Desperate Housewives." Might I suggest you make a video wearing similar attire while you caribou hunt, ala Cindy Garrison? (hehe)

Why does it have to be RKBA=GOP=Conservative? RKBA should cut across party lines. Discard the idea that everybody has to share your entire set of beliefs and we'll start to make some real progress on rolling back the existing gun laws. You should be just as happy every time a liberal or a gay or a soccer mom buys a gun as you are when somebody from your circle of friends buys one. Spread enjoyment of the shooting sports. Educate people_that doesn't mean call them demeaning names_in what guns are all about. Once upon a time in this country, gun laws were a non-issue at the federal level because ownership was so widespread one party couldn't calim to represent the interests of gun owners. We should be working on making it that way again instead of setting ourselves up to lose a bit more every time the GOP gets hammered in an election...'cause you know what guys? They are periodically going to get hammered.

Pray Bush vetoes any gun control measures. With Pelosi and the rest- Conyers who might become chairman of the Judiciary, etc- expect some really idiotic bills to come down the pike. Wanna bet those pinheads will declare my Ruger 10/22 to be an assault weapon? How about claiming that my Brownings- a BAR Safari and a Gold- will be labeled as such too?

Okay, I'm in...Nancy Pelosi, as Speaker of the House, wields enormous power. She will decide which bills come before Congress on a daily basis and how they are sent to committee. She is also onehundred-ten percent anti gun. She has an anti gun voting record that Diane Feinstein would be proud to claim.If the hunting/gun owning community fails to organize a strong grass-roots campaign immediately, we are in for some hard times indeed. That isn't being "Chicken Little", that's just good politics.The GOP lost this round because of how they have handled Katrina, the border, the war, education, healthcare... everything that matters to low income and minority voters. The Dems look more promising to a (slim) majority of people right now, and gun owners are going to take part of the fall for that. It aint right, but that's how it goes sometimes.Now, before anyone starts slinging mud my way;1. I'm a Libertarian and have been for over twenty years.2. I think Teddy Roosevelt was the greatest president America has ever known.3. I hunt, fish, and build my own guns (muzzle-loaders).4. I served in the Navy, and have never rescinded my oath.That's where my stick floats.

Why not wait until the Democrats actually propose something rather than run around with Chicken Little routine? I haven't heard anyone say anything about gun control, mainly because there are countless things that need addressing first.

The blog opinion and most of the comments are the same old crapola:Doom and gloom forecast. Do your best to coach the expectations. Be a jerk and say something snyde about liberals. Find some lame-assed way to caste an obvious defeat as a victory.I'll give you an alternative forecast.1. The only pols who will be advancing a gun control agenda for two years will be local jurisdictions (read: big cities).2. No anti-gun legislation will make it out of any U.S. house or senate committee.Call me an optimist, maybe, for thinking the Dems won't be so stupid this time around.3. The only national politos even talking about it much will be Republicans engaged in *pre-emptive retaliatory WHINING.*

There is one important caveat that we should all be cogniscent of - the dems taking the house and the senate was a protest of the current administration by voters.Constituents sent the president a clear message in these mid-terms that the war and policies (particularly foreign) don't align with the public/voters. With that said, there are democrats who were elected in districts that are usually republican strongholds (VA Senate race for example.)To remain in power, the dems elected in republican districts will have to more accurately reflect their constituent interests or in the next cycle - those seats will return to Republicans.

Politicians have a vested interest in being popular; popularity gets them votes. They want to stay in power. It is not an uncommon malady to want to gain and hold power. I trust neither party for that reason. To really effect change we must change the perception of hunters/shooters by the larger society. Stupid hunting accidents, hunting videos where the hunter whoops and hollers like a friggin' idiot because he just killed an animal, hunters sitting around the local coffee shop talking and laughing about the deer they had to shoot 5 times or the one that they hit but couldn't find (grrrrr!!!), firing range mishaps caused by carelessness and stupidity - these hurt the public perception of the hunter. Involvement in conservation programs (if nothing else, getting your hunting club to get out and pick up trash), promoting firearm safety programs with women and kids - these will help us. When it becomes more popular to own a firearm and use it responsibly, politicians of both parties will warm to the pro-gun public.

Ever since Klobuchar got voted to Senate, the only thing I could think of was her wanting me to register my awesome 10/22. Life will suck in Minnesota

I agree with part of what Mark pointed out, if you pay attention to positions that some of the newly elected Democrats have taken on issues that relate to hunting and gun-ownerhsip, there is reason to be optimistic.I think it is healthy for the party to hear the voices of individuals such as Heath Schuler, Bob Casey Jr., and Jim Webb.They may ultimately move the debate within the Democratic party in a more positive direction.

GUNNUTS,Time to get your heads out of your posteriors! You all would be wiser to read the NEW blog by Bob Marshall for Field &Stream, called the GREEN SPORTSMAN. Time to be more than a 1 issue voter. Democrats are not going to ban guns anymore than Republicans are or should I say were going to ban abortion.Both parties have had more than enough chances to do either.For ones that don't understand they are called wedge issues. Used to shore up their respective political bases. But, the issue of gun control has been one heck of a money maker for the NRA. Wake-up my brother sportsmen!

Gun control with Democrats is a truism. The Party believes its a voter issue as some Baptists believe in total immersion. Oddly, I see congressional politicians becoming overall more conservative. Many of the Democrats voted in last night aren’t very liberal. I think Nancy P. will have her hands full keeping a Democratic House all in line.I would like to believe more will be done for the shooting sports in access with Democrats running Congress. GOP wasn’t a friend to hunters and anglers. For Democrats to be against hunting and fishing access is like being against Mom and apple pie. Even Schumer and Hillary claim to signed on to The 2005 Open Fields Bill.For us shooters in NY, we got Spitzer as Gov and Andy Cuomo as NYS-AG in office: Twiddle-Dee and Twiddle-Dum. No telling what mischief those two characters will do.See you on Campus!