There is a difference between guns used in war and rampant gun violence among the citizenry. Guns are good for the military, not so good for the population at large. The gun culture in this country isn't a good thing. Ever seen the gun violence and murder rates of the U.S. as compared to Western Europe? It is cringeworthy to say the least.

This is a great country. But we have some problems. Guns are one of them.

"rampant gun violence" Like the gun violence in Japan, Russia? and so you would rather live in Western Europe Sally? I got the plane ticket for ya. We do have our problems some of them are people like you.

I said Western Europe. Russia is still nearly a third world country. And if you've got the numbers on the "rampant gun violence" in Japan and how it is worse than in the U.S., please share. You'll find that the gun violence in the U.S. is much worse.

No, I would rather live here in my country, which, as I said is a great country. It just has some problems. Don't you feel the same way? Don't you also think that America is great, but that it has some problems which you think need to be fixed? Thought so.

Classic example of a liberal, emotional, knee-jerk reaction... Blame the gun before you blame the criminal.

CD, like the VaTech incident last week. Assholes were all over the administration, campus police and others for botching it. Well seemed to me the gook was the problem, not all the others mentioned. When are libs going to attack the guilty party instead of trying to find some one to blame for that guilty parties reasons for doing what they did. Absolutely disgusting. Now if Denny want's to start a thread about the "pussification" of the American Man that I heard Savage pontificating about, that would be interesting. Seems like the only "brave" person that was discussed was the RA senior from Georgia and that poor man who survived the Holocaust, only to be killed by this ass wipe.

Sally, Japan has the some of the strictest gun laws anywhere. But somehow the mayor of Nagasaki was gunned down 4 days ago! Wow imagine that, a person with ill intent in mind somehow found a gun in a country where they are strictly controlled and used it to murder someone! Sally when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070420/wl_asia_afp/japancrimepolitics_070420105549

Is the 2nd Amendment a problem? Is your solution more gun laws? So all people who legally own guns are the problem? As for gun culture well I guess I'm part of that 4 yrs in the Military, 25 yrs as a cop in Detroit I still own many firearms including my Department issued S&W .38 cal six shooter. What do you suggest? Take the guns away from the people? Sounds a little Like a takeover plan to me. What's your plan Sally?

kerrcarto, no gun laws will ever end all gun crime. If your point is that even with strict gun laws, there will still be some gun violence, then I agree. However, there is much less gun violence in Japan and throughout western Europe than in the U.S., where the gun culture reigns supreme.

Is the 2nd Amendment a problem?

No. Properly interpreted, it is a wonderful amendment. By the way, are you part of a militia?

Is your solution more gun laws?

More and better gun laws should be part of any sane, reasonable and effective plan to decrease gun violence.

So all people who legally own guns are the problem?

No.

Take the guns away from the people?

No, I wouldn't call for taking away all guns from all people. In fact, nothing even close to that.

What's your plan Sally?

I'll give you some highlights: illegalize assault weapons, illegalize the sale, purchase and manufacture of high-capacity magazines, utilize a good, thorough national database for background checks on all gun sales (including at gun shows). There are lots of good hunting guns out there. There are also guns which are only really good for hunting down humans. It would make sense to illegalize the manufacture and sale of the guns, magazines and ammo which maximize human body counts.

Sally - Yep! America does have problems. They're called liberal Dimocrats. Didja know that in Switzerland everyone has a gun? No gun violence. Why is that? Australia has banned guns. Violent crime has increased. The same thing in England. The same thing in Canada. Gun control takes the guns from law abiding citizens not the criminals. Where is the most gun violence? In cities that are run by whom? Dimocrats. Our social welfare state has created a permanent lawless underclass. The Republicans share the blame with their senseless War on (Some) Drugs that is responsible for the drug gangs.

Look at the statistics. The places with the most restrictive gun laws (like Washington DC), have the highest rates of gun violence. Did the Gun Free Zone sign at VT keep guns off campus? Yep! It kept the guns owned by responsible people who could have stopped this dude before he killed 32 people.

Sally, you should educate yourself first; reading the lines at the Brady Bunch website is not an education, it is a fraud. Nobody is committing crimes with "assault weapons", "large capacity magazines" have nothing to do with cutting down gun violence, and the only use of a database is to know whose door to knock on when they take the firearms away from private citizens.

Sally Posted

"No. Properly interpreted, it is a wonderful amendment. By the way, are you part of a militia?"

I'm not quite sure let's consult the Founding Fathers on this.

George Mason:

"I ask, Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."

Or Perhaps James Madison:

"To these (federal troops attempting to impose tyranny) would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands."

(Given the population of the good old United States at the time, I do not believe he was referring to the National Guard)

Maybe Al Hamilton would have a say:

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all forms of positive government."

Or Maybe Mr. Coxe:

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People."

Remember that evil is a minority, a well armed population are a deterrent to violent crime, not the cause.

The root problem is the judicial system that coddles criminals (How many times was Mr. Cho under the watchful gaze of our authorities?)

So Sally, As for the Militia, I guess I am

Real courage is found, not in the willingness to risk death, but in the willingness to stand, alone if necessary, against the ignorant and disapproving herd. — Jon Roland, 1976

Damn Sally, I'd like to ban suicide bombers and airplanes flying into buildings but it ain't gonna happen. The Libs would love to ban guns but won't even attempt to offer a constitutional amendment. They want some judge in a flowery dress to do it by caveat because they know that a constitutional amendment would never pass muster and would make them look like buffoons in which they are. That's only one reason that it is so important for Republican (conservative) judges be appointed. Interpret the constitution, not re-write it!

/ before sally disappears again.

Denny, don't give the democrats any facts about countries that have disarmed the population and became a population of victims. One fact added to the fact they are too stupid to understand facts would cause their head to explode. I've picked up enough bodies in my day. I don't want to be sweeping up exploded brains. It would be worse than the mess it makes when a liberal sticks a 12 Ga shotgun under their chin and pulls the trigger. Picking skull fragments out of the ceiling is not my idea of a fun day. If you must do it go out in the woods. The skunks and opossums will take care of the dirty work.

Sally
I have several guns in my home. Each and every one of them is to kill people. Why the hell would I want to hunt? My whole family prefers beef to any other meat.
Do not want to kill people either, however the first time some crack head tries to penetrate my home. Without the slightest hesitation, said crack head will be meeting his maker.
And the more time we spend with dimocrats running this good old USA, the more I feel the need to be part of the Militia.

Sally- Cringeworthy? What gummint school taught you that non-existent word?

How about getting a clue, moron?

When guns are banned, who turns in the guns? Law-abiding people, NOT criminals.

You liberals are so fuckin' ignorant, which is why it amazes most of us here...

Sally,
Gun free zones are interpreted by angry people as target rich environments. In EVERY school shooting incident in recent years, there has been NO ONE to oppose them. At Columbine, and at VT, the Cops cowered outside while the murderers did their deeds. Thats why so many of these end with the perp's suicide. When I was a kid, we ALL took guns to school. Every pick up in the parking lot had a gun rack in the back window, and come pheseant season, even the Principals went hunting at lunch time. Ever see a math teacher in a camo suit with a camo tie? I have.
Heck I even went hunting a few times with kids I'd regularly fight with. Once it even came to blows in the field. we both tossed our shotguns and duked it out. Looking back, I guess we could have shot it out, but the thought never occured to either of us. It wasn't until drug gangs came to town that guns were ever turned on citizens. I've been shot at a few times by the druggies. Thankfully they are not trained in how to shoot.
Large capacity magazines don't make much of a diffrence. I can shoot acurately with my single shot and effectively.
Neither Chos Glock, nor his .22 were assault weapons, but incidentally the assault weapons are what the constitution PROTECTS, and you want to take away.
I favor some gun laws. I would require ALL citizens to qualify with a gun every year, or familiarize every month. The only exception I would allow are Convicted felons, and the mentally unstable.
More gun laws are not the answer. The laws we had in place could have prevented Cho from legally obtaining a gun had a few people done their JOBS!
As it were, the gun laws made his victims helpless. People need to rationalize this and realize that gun laws only disarm the law biding citizens.
For the honest man no law is necessary, for the dishonest man, no law will sufice.

Sally, It's not the gun culture that I am worried about. It is the culture of death and degradation that is preached through violent rap and the "I hate everyone attitude" that has become main stream "rock". That is what is polluting these kids minds. They have no respect for themselves or anyone around them. RESPECT for others that deserve it and the shunning of those who don't. That is what will fix America not more laws.

I'm back from the fly-in.

Sally, do I need to actually point out how factually incorrect/wishful thinking/impractical your liberal fantasy is, or is just me being back enough to get you to run off?

Just checking, before I spend a lot of time, to have you run off and abandon yet another thread.

I had no idea that everyone in Switzerland packs a gun. All I know is that Cho bought his friggin ammo off of EBay and wish that my cop son didn't have to worry about someone pulling a 9mm on him when he pulls someone over for reckless driving.

Rob-
Don't even waste your time with Windbag Sally. I have a feeling that she just comes here and comments to get a rise out of people. I mean, she only comments on posts that that she disagrees with, and are political in nature. Being a flaming liberal, she probably doesn't agree with much of anything here.

Liberal Stance #1:
"Guns are good for the military, not so good for the population at large."
-She couldn't be more wrong. The LAW-ABIDING "population at large" isn't in question here, or there would be rampages and blood bath's on a daily basis. Hence, the LAW-ABIDING, gun owning citizens in this country (and there are LOTS of us) aren't the ones causing the problem.

Liberal Stance #2:
"The gun culture in this country isn't a good thing."
(Insert game-show buzzer here...)
-Again, wrong. The "gun culture" in this country is a great thing! We are a multi-cultural society are we not? The liberals are always barfing about how we need more cultural understanding, so what makes this one different? Oh yeah...that's because most liberals have never even fired a weapon and know nothing about them. They swallow what's spoon-fed to them on the nightly local news and other liberal garbage.

Remember when the Rodney King riots when down, and all the L.A. liberals were soiling themselves?? They just couldn't BELIEVE that in their time of need, they had to wait (OMG) 10 DAYS before they could defend themselves. Those same assholes undoubtedly voted for that legislation, and the rest of us "gun-toting rednecks" were already prepared. That's poetic justice if you ask me.

Liberal Insanity #3:
"More and better gun laws should be part of any sane, reasonable and effective plan to decrease gun violence."
-Ah yes... The liberal answer to every problem is "MORE" gun laws. How about the good 'ol Clintoon "Assault Weapon Ban" of '94? The LAW ABIDING American couldn't get one(unless they wanted to risk being a "criminal" themselves for having one), yet the scumbag REAL criminal still did. Go figure... Oh wait, there's more... The number of murders didn't go down like predicted.

Liberal Barfing Point #4
"I'll give you some highlights: illegalize assault weapons, illegalize the sale, purchase and manufacture of high-capacity magazines, utilize a good, thorough national database for background checks on all gun sales (including at gun shows)."
-This one really made me laugh. BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Sally almost pulled the wool over my eyes and had me actually thinking that she did some research before spewing that one. I would guarantee she has never even been to a gun show! Oh man, that was rich with laughter!

Ignorance Talking Point #5:
"There are also guns which are only really good for hunting down humans."
-WTF? Did I just read that right? "...only really good for hunting down humans?" BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh man, my keyboard is soaked after that one. My guess is that she couldn't name ONE gun that was ONLY good for "hunting down humans"! Oh wait... That must be the scawwwy looking one that increased the pucker-factor when she saw it. Yeah, that's the one. Isn't it called the the AK-26 or something?

Why would anyone visit a blog they have nothing in common with only to argue about shit they know nothing about?

(Insert Jeopardy theme song here...)

Don't forget the Pacific as well.

Thanks for that, came in jolly handy having a Marine Division show up when the Japs were going through the place like shit though a goose and our entire adult male population was playing in the sand of North Africa.

Where's Kimdutoit on this one??

Why do all the liberals avoid Switzerland? Heck, even Hitler avoided them like they had the plague. I think its the music. The liberals can't handle yodeling, it drives them sane.
A nation with 100% of their men military trained, armed, and ready.

Liberals can't handle the truth...

Teresa , get a brain from EBay. They may sell them but they don't sell Guns and Ammo. You read that in one of the soon to be gone left wing rags, maybe the NYSlimes. Enpty clips, yes, nothing else.

Everyone should be happy he was able to get a couple of guns. If not he could have easily built several bombs and killed hundreds. Does anyone remember the name McVey? A dumb ass with some fertilizer and diesel fuel wiped out a bunch of people. What could a college punk do?

Thoughts Upon Reading All the Gun Comments:

- When I was 16, every nigger-kid 12 and older, for 2 miles around in every direction had already found a way to have at least two illegal weapons ...-they were positively DROOLING to use them for 'something'.

- When I was around 8, a slingshot was the standoff weapon of choice.

- When I was 19, in Viet Nam, I had occasion to shoot a woman in her face with a .45 M1911A1 pistol.

- The year I turned 30, no less than 6 died that year from drunken gunshots. 4 by their own hand.

- I'm 57 now and have yet to see the "Well-regulated Militia" called upon for anything meaningful.

- You can -and SHOULD!- have all the guns your heart desires.... -if that's what your Heart desires.

- Shoot me, kill me, and I win; Wound me, let my brain continue to function, and again I win.

- And thus we return, full-circle, to the first two points.

It seems to me that you give yourself very little credit for figuring out ways to get out of a tight situation without resorting to your standoff weapon-of-choice.

I believe it was Sgt. Major Dan Daly who said something to the effect of "C'mon you Sons of Bitches! Did you think you were going to live forever?"

Now, before you flame me 20 ways to Sunday, notice that I am not advocating taking your guns away or even regulating them further; I'm simply saying, that from my experience, I haven't got one and don't have a need for one.

We here are not all that afraid of what comes immediately-following any kind of death.

DanS-
I'm not afraid of death, but I will take one out before I am taken out. It's as simple as that.

"Europeans who want Americans to give up their right to bear arms"...
uhh, I think we europeans really don't care. It's an american domestic issue (to be perfectly honnest, it scares us a little to come and visit : don't want to be killed if I insult some guy who don't start quick enough at the traffic light). But as your cousins, we just don't understand some of your ways of life. And what always surprise me, it's your never-ending reference to a 18th century text. It's like communists with marxism, only with a much older reference (or muslim fundamentalists with Koran).

to be perfectly honnest, it scares us a little to come and visit :

Great to know, with that in mind, I'm going to suggest all citizens go get at least one gun to achieve this goal. I wonder if this will help with our illegal Mexican population, our unwanted Muslim population and the other undesirables that keep comeing here trying to change our country to be like theirs (I mean come here for a better life).

Dan, I have no idea what you were trying to say in your post. Can you translate please?

FWIW, I don't own any guns, but don't worry or care that others do. Can't say I see the reason why my neighbor might need an M-16 or some other military weapon in their possesion, but since the Constitution (you folks remember that little rag don't you?) says we have the right to have them, then that's the country we live in. Like it or Leave it.

Prosper-don't come and visit. It won't hurt our feelings at all. And I guarantee you me or none of my family or friends are coming to your Islamicized continent.

Sally-Interesting, but entirely predictable, spin on the gun ownership issue. I and all my brethren and sisters will fight to keep our firearms and defend ourselves, families, and homes with them. So with us, it's a defense of life issue. With you dimocrats, it's a defense of death issue. Why else would you value a baby seal over a baby human? Why else would you defend a woman's right to have a baby's skull crushed and the brains sucked out?

I'll spell it out for you: H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E.

PS: Dan, I can't imagine what you must have gone though. You have my everlasting respect, Sir.

Guns & Reason....

I read Socialist Sally`s Rant about "Are you a member of a militia" & was arranging my response as I perused the comments until I came to "Bob" who quite properly returned to the founders of this nation & responded with their own words as to what a militia was. It should now be obvious to Socialist Sally that yes, all of the people are a part of a militia.Thanks Bob, for your excellant response.

I really doubt though she or any other liberal will accept this fact as they always say the founders did not really mean that ...after all they were nothing but boobs & hayseeds, besides they changed the interpretation of the definition of a militia long ago so that changes the interpretation of the second amendment.

Sally would argue with the establishment of the National Guard , this too supercedes any individual right. She would also revert back to the liberal talking point that while it is OK to have certain types of guns for hunting , other kinds are not for the average citizen,the problem is when a criminal decides to commit a crime or murder someone they do not consult the liberals as to which gun is allowable.

Socialist Sally will always deny the inherent right as enumerated in our Bill of Rights to keep & bear Arms,,she will always argue this was not the real intent of our founding fathers, she will state if they only knew what society was going to evolve to & the technology advancements for weapons, the second amendment would never have been placed in the Bill of rights.

Socialist Sally can conjure up all the liberal ideas for registration , ammo restrictions, waiting periods , age requirements,etc,etc ...right up until some dirtbag sticks a gun in her face, a knife at her throat or throws her down & rips her clothes off .....When she yells "Help Me Somebody Please" & is really lucky someone will run out with a gun & shoot the bastard, if this occurs in her dream of a liberal utopia, someone will come out with pen & pencil to interview him.

Socialist Sally posted once or twice she was an attorney......obvioiusly while in law school she concentrated on the portion of the curriculum which pertained how to manipulate or subvert the law to get a defendant off & skimmed over what the constitution was , how it came to be & that the bill of rights which enumerated certain rights granted to you by our creator prohibited government from abridging them.

Maybe she like the liberal environmentalists who feel God made a mistake with giving man dominion over the animals & are attempting to correct that error feels God made a mistake in allowing the Bill of Rights to have been written & is attempting to correct that error as well.

I am a believer in the constitution of this country & the Bill of Rights which enumerates our individual rights, Sally is not. Were she to correctly point out that society today is permissive to excess without responsibility I could agree, were she to say that after review of the shooting at VT it is obvious that the School & existing law failed to protect the students, I could agree. The instructor of the class warned the administation of the potential for danger with the shooter, students were dropping out of the class because of their fear of him & he was under professional care.He certainly should not ever have been permitted to purchase a weapon of any type.

Unfortunately the college administration did not respond or take the threat seriously, the law protected the shooter & not the students & there apparently is no provision in Virginia law to restrict those with serious mental problems from purchasing, owning or using firearms. In my state those with mental problems can be prohibited from gun purchases & ownership.... why not Virginia?

Socialist Sally , if you want to take part in solving a problem instead of being an instrument manipulated by liberal hysteria, why not use you expertise with the law to work for change to restrict those with mental disorder that is a danger to society at large rather then to restrict individual freedom of those who pose no threat to society.

@Sally: "By the way, are you part of a militia?"

I am. Try reading 10 USC 311 sometime, dearie.

Sorry for my last lonnnng post....

DanS ....Imus can`t so "Ho" what makes you think you can post "NIGGER"... Rev`d Jackson &* Honest Al gonna be after you.

Prosper.....Just can`t keep your nose clean can you?
1. Ask the English where & who they got the guns for home defense from when faced with an attack from Germany....Unlike the French surrender was not an option.
2.Whats wrong with an 18th century text as long s it pertains to ones godgiven individual rights & prohibits the goverment from infringing on them.
3. Sometime take your family for a drive & picnic to a WW2 military cemetary, go to the section with all the American Soldiers resting there & tell them they should have stayed home....you did not need them. Despite your posting`s to the contrary I do not believe you can.

Dudley1.... who still has hope for you

dudley, you really should READ my posts. The connection between your second amendment and WWII is beyond me...

Prosper:

The connection between your second amendment and WWII is beyond me...

Which is exactly why we had to come save your asses (from a problem you created) again.

Wouaouh! Your second amendment can stop an outnumbering invading force! Unix-Jedi, you laid the biggest bullshit of the week!

Calm down Prosper. Harry Reid lay the biggest bullshit this week.

"Wouaouh! Your second amendment can stop an outnumbering invading force! Unix-Jedi, you laid the biggest bullshit of the week!"

Amazing, that you can't see it. If the people can bear arms and are trained in their use, no invading force can ultimately defeat them. Look at the Swiss. Notice how the Germans didn't bother to invade. Ask yourself why. Research it. Look at your own history. How a few members of the Resistance were able to give the occupying Germans fits.

BTW Prosper, do you even know what the Second Amendment says? It is very, very radical. It gives the people the right to own and bear arms. Most governments are very uncomfortable with this. But how can the people ever be truly free if they do not have this right?

"It gives the people the right to own and bear arms."
I should say that the 2nd Amendment points out the inherent right of the people to own and bear arms. We are born with this right, whether we chose to accept it or not.

This article sums the issue up well. I was surprised to see it from ABC news...

Yosemite Sam, are you saying that Germans were more afraid to invade Swiss than USSSR? You are right vetfromhell, this biggest bullshit thing in still on the table...

Prosper:

Germans were more afraid to invade Swiss than USSSR?

Which did they attack?

Your second amendment can stop an outnumbering invading force! Unix-Jedi, you laid the biggest bullshit of the week!

No, Prosper.

The fact that you cannot understand the linkage and relationship (nor most of your countrymen) of a culture of self-reliance, do-it-yourself, and not depending on a corrupt, overbearing government to run your life and "protect" you is why we had to save your ass. (From a numerically inferior force, with less armor, airplanes, and advanced weapons systems than the French in 1940)

And it looks like we'll need to do it at least once more, soon. But don't worry, Prosper. I'll fight it hard from this end, I think we need to stop "helping" you so much.

By the way, Denny?

The first time I ever saw that phrase - the "Half we saved, or the half who's asses we kicked?"

Was on IRC (Internet Relay Chat). About 10 or so years ago. And it was spoken by - pdb.

Sorry, guys. Guess me being back in town has Sally in a bad mood.

On the plus side, it was a hellvua fly-in, and I had a great time.

"Yosemite Sam, are you saying that Germans were more afraid to invade Swiss than USSSR?"

I'm amazed you would even say that. As Unix-Jedi pointed out, did they invade Switzerland? In fact the Germans did not want to invade Switzerland because they were daunted by the task of fighting from mountain village to mountain village where every family has and had a military weapon and the training to use it. The Germans would of been slaughtered and they knew it.

So they feared swiss more than russians and so they decided to invade USSSR...
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

"BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH"

Please elaborate. Did the Germans invade Switzerland?

Read this for a start:

Target Switzerland Review

From the above link:

" Target Switzerland includes the maps of the evolving Germans invasion plans for "Case Switzerland." Yet although the Germans several times massed troops on the Swiss border for an invasion, the invasion never went forward. With so many reasons to invade Switzerland, why did the Nazis desist?

The Nazis could have eventually have conquered Switzerland, but at a fearful price. The Wehrmacht expected 200,000 German casualties; it would have taken a very long time to remove the Swiss military from the Alpine “Reduit” to which they planned to make a stand."

As far as fearing the Russians more than the Swiss, Hitler held the Russians in contempt. He though that he would easily conquer the Soviets.

"So they feared swiss more than russians and so they decided to invade USSSR."

and actually, I never stated that the Germans feared the Swiss more than the Russians. You said that. Please read what I have written. I simply state that the presence of the Swiss militia made the invasion of Switzerland too costly and thus the Germans decided it was not worth it to invade Switzerland. Thus, the presence of an armed and well trained militia as envisioned by the founders of the United States, was an effective deterrent to invasion and armed aggression.

Prosper:

So they feared swiss more than russians and so they decided to invade USSSR...
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

This is more of the reason why you fail, and why given this level of "thinking", France is doomed. (Also, why I fight so hard to get your chowdaheaded way of thinking out of the public discourse here.)

We were discussing thought processes, and what people think. You laughed that Germany was afraid to invade Switzerland compared to the Soviet Union.

But, that's exactly what did happen. So you don't understand (or even know) the history of which you're using to back yourself up (Much like Sally.)

Now you laugh because the invasion of the USSR ended up being a failure. (it was a collassal success (For some reason, the French never can appreciate military victories) initially. Hitler's failure to allow his generals to consolidate their gains, protect their supply lines, and fortify for the winter was what doomed it the first winter.)

So yes, the Germans were demonstrably more afraid of invading Switzerland than Russia.

Which puts paid to your point (as usual), so now you're just... well, randomly tossing comments around.

Shorter Prosper: "Now, go ahwahay, or Ieeeee Shall say someting ooooooooooourrrraaaaageous and oooooofffff-tooooopic AGAIN!

One reason the Japanese never planned invading the US is because they were afraid of all the people who would be shooting at them after they landed.

Prosper......

When the light from the lamp of knowledge shines on you through the window, that is not the time to pull down the shades. As so many people have posted to you there is a connection to WW2 & the right to keep & bear arms. It is the reason we were able to furnish so many weapons from private American citizens to the British home guard to allow them to defend the country from invasion. Thanks so very much for the help people , you are all true patriots

Why do you think they call the USA the arsenal of freedom......Do you think maybe because we alone among the Nations of the west who fought actually had the arms available in the first place to give to our allies & the ability to keep that assistance coming?

That is why I stated you should go to a military cemetary , First to reflect on the sacrifices we the United States made,Second to allow for reality to sink in, Third To allow for you to privately thank those who gave so much.

Even though you are a trained liberal,I`m still betting you cannot go there & tell them they should have stayed home because you did not need them. I think you are an intelligent person despite the liberal bias instilled into you & Yes, I still have hope for you.

For what it is worth ,Germany could certainly have defeated Switzerland..........but the Germans knew what the cost would be & did not choose to accept that expenditure for men, cost, material & time plus the on-going occupation.When I was last in Switzerland as the guest of a Swiss company , it was my privilege to have spent almost a week with two gentlemen from that company who were officers in the Swiss armed forces & explained to me in the event of an attack by the Soviet Union they had enough supplies to take the entire Army underground & fight for at least a full year. They believed as did their predecessors, the cost to defeat the Swiss & hold them in subjugation was a price that even the Russians would not make.

Dudley1

Where do you think our weapons came from during the Revolutionary War? Many of them were owned by the volunteers.

Good for PDB for coining that phrase!

Believe it or not, I have a picture of Prosper and his children at Normandy.

UJ - Where was the fly in?

Denny:

Lakeland, Fl. Sun N Fun.

They had the Titan T-51 there (7/8's replica of the P-51) with the "Mini-Merlin" Suzuki conversion..... Ok, they overstated how much it sounds like a real Merlin - but it sounds *really good*. I'm still drooling.

Bobg:
I read an interview with a Japanese General or similar in which he stated that the Japanese were afraid to face the armed civilians in the United States of America and I can't find the article. Do you know the name of the Japanese or remember any other info about it?

Mark-
Rivrdog puts it nicely here...

http://rivrdog.typepad.com/rivrdog/2005/04/gun_control_sta.html

CD:
Thank you.

Yamamoto's position on this subject, at the end of July of 1941 : "If we fight both Britain and America we will be defeated… . If war comes, our only chance is to destroy the fleet at Pearl Harbor and send submarines to the west coast of America."

The way I remember the story is that Yamamoto was asked by a subordinate why they didn't invade the American mainland and he replied that there would be a gun behind every blade of grass.

And in those days, there would have been.

Elizabeth
Imperial Keeper

Prosper:

Because, as we all know, 1930-era submarines were the invasion-carrier of choice across 4000 miles of ocean.

Mark,

http://www.skylighters.org/quotations/quots6.html

Prosper, Japan hoped to make a fast strike, cripple our Pacific fleet, then negotiate a peace. They did not want all out war, but felt we were an obstical to their objectives in the Pacific rim. FDR knew what was in the works. That is why their delegates were delayed in delivering the declaration of war. By doing so, he knew he could raise the ire of the American people.
Knowledge of FDR's action is what causes many liberals to claim that GWB knew in advance of the 9-11 attacks.
Dudley, accept the fact that Sally is an attorney. She is from Miniscrotum fer cryin out loud, a liberal court that makes Massiveclueless look near normal.

Jeremy.......

Yeah!, I know she is an attorney,apparently not a very good one or there is not enough ambulances to chase in Minnesocialista. When Harmon Killebrew was traded away by Cal Griffen & Metrepolitan stadium torn down, I had no more reason to travel to Minneapolis. So now I have to resort to long distance Bitch Slapping for arrogant pinhead pinups from the northwoods.

I don't think I'm going to respond to Sally anymore.

She makes one well-written yet utterly liberal comment, which sets off a flurry of responses--and she doesn't defend her point.

She's a repeat drive-by troll.

Why waste our time on her?

Squidley.....

I am beginning to believe as you do with regard to answering Socialist Sally, it just ain`t worth it for as you say she never defends her point or position.

Would it not be something if we all were being had by one of our own.....What if Socialist Sally was really Ann Coulter measuring just how Conservative we really are?