I'll bite.

[ellisonz]

You'll get only one post in answer.

1. Jury disagreed 5-1.

2. "Facts not in evidence." - The idea that there are tens of millions of educated Americans who support gun control is plain obvious.

3. I haven't denied the right to carry or to self-defense, I've just said there are limits.

4. "Nobody here in this forum denies the significance of the effect of gun violence upon victims and their family. Whats being denied, is the ability of people with beliefs and intent such as you have demonstrated on this issue, do do certain things about it. That doesn't mean NOTHING can be done about it. It just means certain avenues are unavailable. Those unfortunately, seem to be the only avenues you are interested in." - That would be your opinion on the availability of "certain avenues" and nothing more. The Court by no means slammed the door on an AWB in Heller.

5. "Why is it, that you and the few that make up the "anti-gun-violence" lobby are not interested in any of the avenues which gun rights proponents do not oppose, and are only interested in the avenues which we DO oppose?" - That's not true, in numerous posts that I have no desire to go digging for pro-gun members and I have found agreement on closing the private sale loophole (more accurate term), on strengthening the NCIS, and on requiring reasonable safety efforts to keep guns from children.

I'm a very reasonable poster, whats unreasonable often in this forum is the willingness to accept that gun control proponents have a seat at the table and to be heard.

That's it, nothing more.