Opposed to Glamourizing Gun Ownership

[lp_junkie]

BB- don't stop him, when he gets to the part about the Germans bombing Pearl Harbor then we can reel him in..........

[River]

Originally Posted by KSG_Standard

<snip>Furthermore, IMHO, the speech about the Presidents and Presidential candidates from the 18th and 19th centuries was at least as, if not more angry and hateful as it is today.<snip>

I would go with "more".

[Geetarguy]

Originally Posted by b-squared

Brian--no, that's not what I'm saying.

I'm just pointing out that when people say ...'the 2nd amendment was written in the 18th century, so it only allows you to own a blunderbuss...' I can counter with '...well the first amendment only covers the printing press, right?...'

GOD BLESS THE USA AND GOD BLESS TED NUGENT
District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[geochem1st]

Originally Posted by River

I would go with "more".

1864 - John Bright shakes hands with President Abraham Lincoln, who appears as a militaristic half-wit stepping on the U.S. Constitution. Bright was a Liberal member of parliament and leading reformer whose Quaker religious beliefs (note his Quaker hat) provoked his intense aversion to slavery. During the American Civil War, he was an outspoken supporter of the Lincoln administration and the Union cause, although his pacifism prevented him from calling for British military intervention on the side of the Union. The fallen man in the cartoon’s background may be Confederate President Jefferson Davis or Uncle Sam.

[Brian Butler]

Originally Posted by lp_junkie

Bobbo- the original title was a troll post and you know it. I agree with the premise of not glamoizing guns though.

IMHO- Trolling is ok. Just keep it civil.