BrokenArrow

American Homebrewers Association. Beer kills too doncha know?

Most hunters don't belong to the NRA for the same reason most folks don't belong to the ACLU; they like what they do, but don't want to pay the dues.

We will all be safest when all the guns are gone, and that means hunting guns too. Nobody needs to kill to eat. Add it all up, it's cheaper, and safer for you and everybody else outdoors, to buy your meat at the store. If you need the thrill and challenge, use a bow and bounce rubber arrows off the game.

The NRA would like to have you Nimrods and your money, but they do not need you as much as you think. There are 80 million gun owners, and only 14 million hunters. More than two out of three, about 54 million, say they own guns primarily for protection, not hunting.

The Mother Jones "study" is BS. If a shooter was stopped before they killed enough victims for the incident to qualify as a "mass" shooting they don't count it, and they should. They missed more than a few anyway. The man and woman who stopped shootings at their churches, the teacher who stopped a shooting at his school, and the janitor who stopped a shooting at an abortion clinic come to mind among many others.

The other studies are BS too. They all fail to control for criminals or illicit drug use. From 65-90% of the shooters and their victims are crooks depending on what years and what cities you look at, not gun owners like you. You would be a crook if hunting was the crime it should be.

You didn't even report the BS accurately. The CDC has reported that people use guns to scare off intruders about 498,000 times a year, well over the 100,000 shot for any reason, including hunting accidents.

Any way you slice it, owning a gun for self defense makes more sense than owning it for killing animals you don't have to. You don't really need a gun for self defense either. In most cases guns "used" in defense are never fired, and when they are it's just 2 shots at less than 15 ft. That's chem spray and Taser territory.

Bottom line, nobody but the cops and military needs a gun, and hunters need them less than most gun owners.

Who will watch the watchmen?

Or mebbe a more colloquial who's gonna ride heard on them there cowpokes in Arizona?

Somebody mosey over to the local Code Pink ranch and tell 'em to saddle up!

You lost that argument back in 2008 in Heller v DC. It guarantees an individual and collective right; they are mutually inclusive, not exclusive.

The Left used emanations and penumbras to find a right of "the people" to privacy and abortion in the Fourth Amendment, the Right did pretty much the same thing w the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense in the Second Amendment. What the Right did is less of a stretch.

So the Second Amendment says whatever five justices say it does, until five say something else. I suspect Heller has a short run; somebody on the court will change their mind, or the make up of the court will change.

Mission creep will inevitably take that to the point that when somebody says doc, I feel depressed or angry sometimes, they get referred to the data base and denied the right to keep and bear arms. Which is probably what some had in mind all along?