Yeah, good thing that January 15 event corrected that.

I would call the results of the action depicted in the picture above a bit of a damned hitch.

Did he go to federal court to invoke the state constitution? The lawsuit challenges the constitutional vagueness of the law, and challenges it on 2A grounds.

No Dave, How about you tell us. You've got the straight dope right? Or is going to be the "trust me, i know what I'm doing" line?

I'm really amazed by a guy that write entire articles regularly, is Senior Editor, yet can't do better than a one liner.

You are very good preaching to the choir. You can't handle the odd apostate? You require a friendly audience?[/quote]


A-P-O-S-T-A-T-E. Is that how they spell it? I'll be darned.

You are really hostile about this, aren't you? I don't require a friendly audience. But you seem intent on creating an unfriendly one. Why is that? You get off on conflict? What's your real motive for being in here?

You've come in here with an attitude, criticizing others, engaging in keyboard demagoguery and accusing others of doing that as justification for your tactics. It's fourth grade schoolyard bully.

Let's see YOUR strategy to fight I-594, and I mean specifics, not some pontification about "I will not comply" nullifying the law. That is so much bushwa. The law is still on the books, and eventually, somebody is going to wind up a test case. You want to be first in line?


Oh, and BTW....I write stuff under MY OWN NAME. Here and elsewhere. I don't go by some internet nickname. I'm tired of your insults and insinuations, as if my writing about stuff is some kind of sinister plot to lull people. You seem to think you're the only one whose opinion counts here. News flash, it's not.

If you'll look at the top of this page, and the board index, you'll see that this is "Workman's corner" and check above. I'm one of the mods, along with Bill Starks (shout out for the sound man!).

Nice try at turning the argument Dave, But Alan started it with his slaps at the Dec 13th rally. Both of you have chosen to continue it, and intensify it. You keep posting the articles, yet you want no debate. Nobody is required to agree with you on everything.

Fancy that. A writer that doesn't appreciate someone else's vocabulary.

Hostile? No. Not yet anyway.

Getting off on conflict? No so much as I get off on destroying invalid arguments. As to unfriendliness, I only respond in kind. When you or anybody tries to deflect a question, or give a bogus answer, I'm going to press you on it. That may seem unfriendly, but hey, it is what it is.

So here you are with the very tired old tactics that would get you kicked off the high school debate team: Answering a question with a question. And it's a question I have already responded to multiple times. It keeps getting asked as some sort of outhouse lawyer trick to try and discredit my arguments. If you want an answer, go back and re-read the thread.

As to your moderator powers, yeah sure, threaten me with them. Do your worst. I could care less, It's doesn't make you right. If you want to do it, I'll understand it, because I understand people who can't take a little heat now and then.

Your all torqued at me, seemingly unable to handle what I say, yet you are somehow supposed to bear up under the nastiest rhetoric the anti-gunners can muster?

And if you want to play the name game, fine.

My Name is Stephen J. Ramsey, I reside in Graham Washington, 98338. My name is on some of those checks sent to SAF and CCRKBA. You know, the ones whose funds are handled by Merril, who databases the names, addresses, phone numbers, and e-mail addresses to spammers worldwide?

Vitamin R, I admire your tenacity, but I am beginning to suspect that you are off your meds.

Do you think that you are going to have a positive influence in this thread?

As XDM9 mentioned earlier- why not take this great energy and devote it to making a good difference somewhere? About 1.5 years ago I had a few words with Mr Workman, and I can assure you that he's just as damned stubborn as you are.

So why beat these two bulldozers against each other? You're not going to remind Mr Workman that he is wrong, and he's not going to get you to feel the way he does.

Direct that energy at the vast swath of virgin forest that is the uneducated public. Take a liberal shooting. Convert. You cannot destroy here with words, other than the tattered remains of good will.

$.02

I'm not out to have any influence at all. I'm here to get at the truth. Dave is an expert at avoiding the release of the facts, but he screwed up when he called me out on Alan's statement. I caught him on it and his then cavalierly dismisses it. Do I blame him for that, on one hand, no. He knows who his boss is, and in that context, what his job is.

On the other, his wise old uncle image has taken a hit with me, just like the disarming nature of Alan Gottleib's bow tie.

I just don't think we are getting the full story here, even with the need for confidential strategies.

I always forgave Alan his errors in the past. Right up until his slap at the DEC 13th rally.

That caused me to do some digging. Get some other opinions. And the deeper I dig, the more I see that causes me to lose confidence in SAF and CCRKBA, WAFLAG and POGR, and whatever acronym Allan comse up with as a new front organization and means of raising cash.

So workman is here. He wants to argue? Ok, I'm in.

If he and Alan want to stop slamming other gun owners, I'll fade away, though my personal opinions probably won't change. I know too much now.

at least be honest.. you're here to pick a fight...

it's getting old honestly... kinda like a child with a tantrum...


while I had fun with you yesterday, today was a very busy day at work and I'm too exhausted to play along...

but I admire your energy... go do something good with it... if only you spent some of that energy getting things done, you'd already have overturned the brady campaign...

...and he called me a troll.

You men are at 13 pages and no one has given in yet and agreed with each other. While it has remained civil, do you really hope to get the other to agree with you? At some point you need to call it a draw and walk away. This has gone on long enough.