• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Anti's have hinted before, now they say it flat out:

Baked on Grease

Regular Member
Jul 4, 2011
Sterling, Va.
Warning, if you have a heart condition, sit down and be prepared to call for help before reading. It's rather short.


Pull quote:
"But in our country, not only do criminals have all the guns they want*, but so do the law-abiding citizens.

There is only one explanation for these facts: It is the law-abiding citizens with guns, not the criminals, who are committing the majority of the gun homicides."

I've heard them beat around the bush for quite a while, but this is the first time I have seen it written flat out like this, shameful. They use the same nit picking of facts I usually see. What they purposefully leave out is that while England has very few gun-releated homicides, knife wielding thugs are at an all time high. The article is full of so many flaws in logic that it boggles the mind. So how can law-abiding citizens commit homicide and still be law-abiding and not a criminal? :banghead:

"Over 50% of U.S. gun homicides are due to arguments not criminals." So, people who commit homicide are not criminals? And who is an argument? I've never heard of this type of person that apparently is not a criminal. What a way to twist the facts. I like how the writer is NGAC..... so no single person can have a face to associate with the words. And they can always claim it was someone who's "no longer with us" that wrote such a blatantly false article to cover their arse. I know this is just par for the course for these people, and that many of you have seen this sort of thing many times before, (I am relatively new to the political side of the guns issues) but I just can't wrap my head around it.:banghead: