I heard that Gun for Hire is now the nation's busiest indoor range, now surpassing the NRA range in Virginia.

 

All ranges on the weekends I have went to have been busy.

 

So this seems to indicate a lot of gun owners in NJ.

 

But it seems as though we are fighting off threats to the 2A every so often, more so than other states.

 

For a state that shoots so much, why are we so weak politically when it comes to gun rights?

 

I'm looking for an honest answer.

Liberals

NJ is the most densely populated state (and GFH is probly about in the densest of that)  so its only logical a handfull of ranges will get slammed on weekends. Dont let that range attendence trick you into thinking our state has any semblance of a gun culture. The rest is simple politics.

I heard that Gun for Hire is now the nation's busiest indoor range, now surpassing the NRA range in Virginia.

 

I absolutely love GFH, but where did you hear that? 

Weekends may be busy (at every range), but I go to GFH during the day on weekdays, and I'm very often one of only very few shooters (and occasionally the only shooter) on site at times. 

 

Plus, "busy" is subjective, since that depends as much on the number of ports as it does on the demand for those ports. 

 

The answer to your question regarding why NJ is so politically weak when it comes to 2A could be answered by re-examining your hypothesis that NJ shooters are as prevalent as you claim. Otherwise why would elected officials defy such a robust number of citizens who are shooters. It defies logic. 

I absolutely love GFH, but where did you hear that? 

 

 

 

I think it was Massad Ayoob's ProArms podcast.

 

 

 

The answer to your question regarding why NJ is so politically weak when it comes to 2A could be answered by re-examining your hypothesis that NJ shooters are as prevalent as you claim. Otherwise why would elected officials defy such a robust number of citizens who are shooters. It defies logic.

 

I see a lot of ANJRPC stickers, plus a lot more NRA stickers on cars.

 

A lot of people I talk to and known for years I never even knew they were into guns or shooting. In fact tonight at my ham radio club meeting we had a tribute kind of picture frame to a member who had just passed away. It had a number of radio related items but also a NRA keychain in it. I was quite surprised. He didn't seem like a "gun" guy, but lo and behold he apparently was.

 

Maybe we are not Utah or Texas but we seem to have a decent number of gun owners. 

Well, although the density argument is somewhat valid, there are many closeted gun owners in this state. Even, horror of horrors, liberals. Our lack of political clout stems from a bit of apathy and a significant number of hunters that couldn't be bothered with 2nd amendment issues. They dislike black guns and pistols and sit on their hands or worse yet, vote for enemies of our rights.

 

We don't do ourselves any favors with the social conservatism that comes with our constitutional conservatives. If we could field a candidate that was vehemently pro 2a and yet open to things, that sell on the coasts, like gay marriage, women's rights and more secular beliefs, we wouldn't be in this position. Our inability to prioritize our liberties above all else gets us beaten by the likes of that idiot Cory Booker.

 

Furthermore we lambast the Supreme Court for roe v wade yet petition the same body for relief from over reaching gun laws. It is the height of hypocrisy. And indefensible. IMHO.

 

Add to that that we have done a piss poor job of widening the demographic of our "culture," we are a mere caricature to our opponents. A caricature that a certain type keeps confirming. Since we are a bunch of old white guys(some in camo) that show up to testify at senate hearings, they get away with things like posting armed troopers. Imagine if the attendees were more diverse. Comprised of black, Latino, female, LGBT and the handicapped in wheelchairs-- they couldn't marginalize us. They wouldn't dare.

 

Let me ask our members of color; if you were at a senate hearing about a minority issue and they posted armed guards, how would you feel? Yet we gun owners are marginalized at every turn. Unless we come to this understanding, we are doomed.

 

The latest Supreme Court FU underscores our future.

 

 

Progressive zombie sheep and their corrupt politician masters have infiltrated the garden state.  They breed more of the walking dead and graze for free and the corrupt, statist community herding politicians practice controlling the sheep. 

Well, although the density argument is somewhat valid, there are many closeted gun owners in this state. Even, horror of horrors, liberals. Our lack of political clout stems from a bit of apathy and a significant number of hunters that couldn't be bothered with 2nd amendment issues. They dislike black guns and pistols and sit on their hands or worse yet, vote for enemies of our rights.

 

We don't do ourselves any favors with the social conservatism that comes with our constitutional conservatives. If we could field a candidate that was vehemently pro 2a and yet open to things, that sell on the coasts, like gay marriage, women's rights and more secular beliefs, we wouldn't be in this position. Our inability to prioritize our liberties above all else gets us beaten by the likes of that idiot Cory Booker.

 

Furthermore we lambast the Supreme Court for roe v wade yet petition the same body for relief from over reaching gun laws. It is the height of hypocrisy. And indefensible. IMHO.

 

Add to that that we have done a piss poor job of widening the demographic of our "culture," we are a mere caricature to our opponents. A caricature that a certain type keeps confirming. Since we are a bunch of old white guys(some in camo) that show up to testify at senate hearings, they get away with things like posting armed troopers. Imagine if the attendees were more diverse. Comprised of black, Latino, female, LGBT and the handicapped in wheelchairs-- they couldn't marginalize us. They wouldn't dare.

 

Let me ask our members of color; if you were at a senate hearing about a minority issue and they posted armed guards, how would you feel? Yet we gun owners are marginalized at every turn. Unless we come to this understanding, we are doomed.

 

The latest Supreme Court FU underscores our future.

Walt, this was very well articulated. As someone of the "gen x" group I agree the only way to make a difference is to appeal to the broadest group possible. IMO a "this makes sense" approach is the best attack. People should be free to do as they wish is my philosophy. Want to carry a firearm and you have passed nics, good on you criminals will think twice about robbing you. Want to marry your same sex partner, hope you have a great wedding! Are you an immigrant trying your best to get citizenship and pay taxes, welcome to the USA.

 

If as a group politicians would stop trying to make themselves look better and pass common sense legislation we would be far better off.

a significant number of hunters that couldn't be bothered with 2nd amendment issues. They dislike black guns and pistols and sit on their hands or worse yet, vote for enemies of our rights.

 

Yeah. There are gun owners and there are people who actually care about gun rights.

 

I was at a "gun store" a couple of days of ago and overhead the elderly Fudd behind the counter proudly state that he hasn't applied for a P2P in over 30 years.

 

I also know a guy who has a 1911 for "home defense". He shoots maybe once a year and the other 364 days the gun is in a locked case in the back of a first floor closet. Seriously.

 

Last horror story:

I was talking to a guy at a range once about restrictive gun laws and mentioned that (with some exceptions like inheritance) people in Puerto Rico are only allowed to own a maximum of two firearms. He says "Why would you need more than that?"

 

 

There may a million gun owners in NJ, but most of them are clueless, apathetic or both.

I heard that Gun for Hire is now the nation's busiest indoor range, now surpassing the NRA range in Virginia.

 

All ranges on the weekends I have went to have been busy.

 

So this seems to indicate a lot of gun owners in NJ.

 

But it seems as though we are fighting off threats to the 2A every so often, more so than other states.

 

For a state that shoots so much, why are we so weak politically when it comes to gun rights?

 

I'm looking for an honest answer.

We don't vote. If all gun owners and family members voted, we could take back both houses of the legislature. 

 

The (very conservative) math: 1 million gun owners with an average of 0.3 significant other = 1.3 million votes. I say 1.3 because not all our spouses are pro-gun. 

 

30% participation rate means there are 1.3 million - 390,000 = about 900,000 uncast ballots among pro-gun citizens. If even two-thirds of those reside in already pro-gun territory (e.g. Sussex Cty) there are still 300,000 votes in la-la districts. Spread those out over the 8-9 competitive races and we are talking near-landslides for pro-gun candidates.

 

In reality there are probably more like half a million wasted and unused pro-gun votes out there.

 

We got to where we are because instead of voting we waste time kvetching in these forums and sending emails to these three idiots. 

 

News flash: Anti-gun legislators, particularly those three fossils, don't read pro-gun emails. They don't care what you have to say. They are not swayed by facts. All you're accomplishing is to give their staffers a good hearty laugh. "Hey Loretta, we got 150 emails today from gun nuts who say that Jesus wants them to have guns! Har har har!"

We don't vote. If all gun owners and family members voted, we could take back both houses of the legislature.

Bingo

Unlike lots of other states, in NJ guns are a toy you take out occasionally and take to the range.  In a few parts of our state (including mine) guns are part of our way of life.  I use mine at home constantly for nuisance animals and hunting and I get together with family and friends fairly often to shoot skeet or just try out somebody's new firearm purchase.  This is the way it is for many, many more people in less populated states. This is the rare exception in NJ.

 

Fewer people, even gun owners, have that much interest in guns largely because there are few opportunities to use them.  Gun culture in NJ is mostly dead, even among gun owners.

We don't vote. If all gun owners and family members voted, we could take back both houses of the legislature. 

...

In reality there are probably more like half a million wasted and unused pro-gun votes out there.

 

One of the frustrations I have, as a voter, is actually being in a strongly pro-gun district with pro-gun reps (24th). If I go vote, it won't make much difference in my district, as my reps will almost always win. Yet, still, I vote, to help ensure that.  Likewise, in very strong anti-gun districts, their victories are almost always guaranteed (Ms. Weinberg, for example), because there simply aren't enough pro-gun folks living there to get them voted out of office.

 

Perhaps. if we could focus on some very close districts that might be "flippable," we could make a very strong statement that just might get the "Sweeney/Weinbergs" of our state to pay attention.  Do we know which districts are "in play" at this point?

Everything said above rings true. The marginalization, the need to be more inclusive, the gun owners among our ranks who think that these laws won't affect them, etc, etc. For every politically active, one-issue voter gun owner, there is a counterpart on the anti side.

 

What hasn't been taken into account are the Great Unwashed Masses (GUM). These are the voters who just don't care about the firearms issues. They may be one-issue voters also - but it's an issue other than guns. They vote the way they do for several reasons: Prior party affiliation, habit and here's the topper - influenced by political ads. The anti's have been known to run some pretty scary political ads using all the buzz words: "Assault Weapon", "High Capacity Magazine", "Keep our children safe". Now we know that these ads are fraught with misinformation and, in most cases, downright lies. The GUM don't know that and don't care enough about the issue to find out.

 

We can advertise our behinds off to counter this "technique" but in order to understand our fact-based, logical arguments requires an understanding of the law and firearms and the willingness of the GUM to want to be educated. Not going to happen.

 

So the antis and pros pretty much cancel each other out - politically. Which leaves the GUM's as the decisive factor. We lose. I honestly cannot see a way around this. We live in a state where there are large urban population centers that are often dependent on the government for their every waking need and could care less about our plight. Of the suburbanites we come to having to overcome their apathy and unwillingness to become educated on an issue that interests them not in the least.

 

That's my take on things - sorry for the pessimism.

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

One of the frustrations I have, as a voter, is actually being in a strongly pro-gun district with pro-gun reps (24th). If I go vote, it won't make much difference in my district, as my reps will almost always win. Yet, still, I vote, to help ensure that.  Likewise, in very strong anti-gun districts, their victories are almost always guaranteed (Ms. Weinberg, for example), because there simply aren't enough pro-gun folks living there to get them voted out of office.

 

Perhaps. if we could focus on some very close districts that might be "flippable," we could make a very strong statement that just might get the "Sweeney/Weinbergs" of our state to pay attention.  Do we know which districts are "in play" at this point?

We're in exactly the same situation. I emailed my senator and legislator during the last crisis, and they sent me a wonderful letter in return. 

 

You hit it on the head. We must identify districts where the Ds are vulnerable, and work on those. Maybe set up some sort of volunteer event where we visit gun shops and give them "get out the vote" literature.

 

That would be infinitely more productive than going down to Trenton and getting agida.

What hasn't been taken into account are the Great Unwashed Masses (GUM). These are the voters who just don't care about the firearms issues. They may be one-issue voters also - but it's an issue other than guns. They vote the way they do for several reasons: Prior party affiliation, habit and here's the topper - influenced by political ads. The anti's have been known to run some pretty scary political ads using all the buzz words: "Assault Weapon", "High Capacity Magazine", "Keep our children safe". Now we know that these ads are fraught with misinformation and, in most cases, downright lies. The GUM don't know that and don't care enough about the issue to find out.

 

We can advertise our behinds off to counter this "technique" but in order to understand our fact-based, logical arguments requires an understanding of the law and firearms and the willingness of the GUM to want to be educated. Not going to happen.

 

 

The biggest problem, I think, is the vice-grip the national MSM has over the GUM (I call them the  "sheeples") . If we were able to finance our own MSM TV channel  (not Cable, not streaming video, not Internet - we're already there.... but the GUM aren't...), and reach the GUM/sheeples, things might improve a bit. There's no way the MSM is going to let any pro-2A or pro-gun content get broadcast over their airwaves. Same thing with Hollyweird. Except for a few actors that we know are pro-gun, most of them are very anti (or pro-govt). And the one's that hold the casting and financial power over all of the industry are anti. So, even if the pro-gun people wanted to make a movie, or even a PSA, they'd get never get the financing they need, and they might get blacklisted from future acting jobs.

 

I think our best bet, presently, is to try and work with Fox to get some pro-gun, pro-2A content on board.  Lot's of luck with the "big 3" networks.  Then again, even if we were to get some traction with Fox, how long would it take for the FCC to interfere???  

There are many fronts. And like a war we need to fight the battles that are winnable. Bob brings up the great unwashed, low information voters. We are up against a shrill, no-integrity manipulative opponent that has a pass, for some reason, on truth, logic, historical accuracy and even grammar. We, on the other hand, have to be respectful, low-key and always considerate of offending anyone. Our opponents make fun of us, marginalize and generalize overtly with ZERO comment from anyone. We lose. Pretty much every time.

 

When we start talking about historical rights, going to work on Friday, range on Saturday and church on Sunday, we lose the new blood immediately. Watch anyone under 40 glaze over when candidates talk about common core or other complex laws or positions that "our candidates" feel a need to discuss. Mean while, the "millennials" are clapping like crazy when The Amateur says so-and-so "iz in da house!" When in the glorious history of this country has the chief executive EVER said that. But I digress.

 

We are all old fudds. Until a new libertarian-ish, charismatic and inclusive group of well funded candidates become a reality, we ain't making it with what passes as our candidates. Supposed bastions of our second amendment freedoms.

 

So let us remember that all freedoms rest on the strength of one freedom; The freedom to be well armed in case of a tyrannical government. In case of taxation without representation. In case of an intrenched monarchy that consolidates power in the few.

 

All those things are creeping enslavement. And like the proverbial frog in the slowly heated water, we won't realize what is happening. Well maybe when they come for the shotguns. But it'll be too late.

 

As the great bumper sticker I saw the other day said:

 

"Our forefathers would be shooting by now"

 

 

 

 

 

We are where we are because the people of this state have lost their way.  Republicans and Democrats in this state no longer value the sovereignty of the individual and expect the solution to every problem comes from government money or a new law.  Yes, it's the people.

 

Do you realize the biggest mistake that the anti gun crowd makes?  It's their obsession with the NRA and the "gun lobby" as some type of mind control boogeyman nefariously working against the wishes of the people.  They don't see that the NRA is made up of millions of individuals who all care about gun rights and mail their $35 each year, and the millions others who share the same views but just don't join.

 

They make this mistake because gun rights don't make sense to them, so the only explanation, combined with wishful thinking, has to be that if the NRA can be defeated the rest of the world will wake up and see their truth.

 

I am sorry to say that in the upside down world of NJ, it's the gun owners who are obsessed with boogeymen rather than facing the sad truth: the people of this state don't like guns.  They hate guns and the people who own them.  If you hang around at the range or this forum confirmation bias sets in and you start to think this little gun rights community is more representative of the general NJ population than it really is. 

 

Who are those boogeymen?  The usual suspects who are blamed in this thread and others on this forum.  Politicians.  Main stream Media.  Bloomberg.  This is comforting because if the problem is limited to any of those, then there is hope to change it.  But that is false comfort that distracts from the real problem.  If you want to make real progress for gun rights in this state, you will need to fundamentally change the world view of millions and millions of people.  That's much less achievable than marshaling a campaign to get out the vote, or writing a letter to the editor. 

 

I'm sorry that this state is lost, but it is.  It's a sinking ship beyond saving and you can either find a way to abandon ship or go down with it. 

I'm sorry that this state is lost, but it is.  It's a sinking ship beyond saving and you can either find a way to abandon ship or go down with it. 

 

From the above post for those who may have missed it, worth mentioning again. And thats not specific to 2A matters either. This state is/has become a place I cant believe in anymore. I want to enjoy my hard earned retirement, not spend wasted time fighting for issues that wont be resolved in my lifetime-if ever. Will be gone by the time a new gov is sitting.

 

I'm sorry that this state is lost, but it is.  It's a sinking ship beyond saving and you can either find a way to abandon ship or go down with it. 

 

From the above post for those who may have missed it, worth mentioning again. And thats not specific to 2A matters either. This state is/has become a place I cant believe in anymore. I want to enjoy my hard earned retirement, not spend wasted time fighting for issues that wont be resolved in my lifetime-if ever. Will be gone by the time a new gov is sitting.

 

 

DITTO

 

Can't expect that my vote will ever be represented in this state, so it's time to vote with my feet. 

Well, although the density argument is somewhat valid, there are many closeted gun owners in this state. Even, horror of horrors, liberals. Our lack of political clout stems from a bit of apathy and a significant number of hunters that couldn't be bothered with 2nd amendment issues. They dislike black guns and pistols and sit on their hands or worse yet, vote for enemies of our rights.

 

I don't think it's just hunters. There are extremely liberal pistol shooters I know as well. They just like statism more than they like guns.

 

 

We don't do ourselves any favors with the social conservatism that comes with our constitutional conservatives. If we could field a candidate that was vehemently pro 2a and yet open to things, that sell on the coasts, like gay marriage, women's rights and more secular beliefs, we wouldn't be in this position. Our inability to prioritize our liberties above all else gets us beaten by the likes of that idiot Cory Booker.

 

Furthermore we lambast the Supreme Court for roe v wade yet petition the same body for relief from over reaching gun laws. It is the height of hypocrisy. And indefensible. IMHO.

 

I think most people in NJ liked the Roe v Wade decision, not the other way around. Nevertheless, I haven't heard much from the pro gun side on abortion these days anyway.

 

Add to that that we have done a piss poor job of widening the demographic of our "culture," we are a mere caricature to our opponents. A caricature that a certain type keeps confirming. Since we are a bunch of old white guys(some in camo) that show up to testify at senate hearings, they get away with things like posting armed troopers. Imagine if the attendees were more diverse. Comprised of black, Latino, female, LGBT and the handicapped in wheelchairs-- they couldn't marginalize us. They wouldn't dare.

 

I am not an old white guy. I'm a guy, but that's about it. Old and white? No. There are lots like me. Just gotta get them enthusiastic for the cause.

 

 

 

Let me ask our members of color; if you were at a senate hearing about a minority issue and they posted armed guards, how would you feel? Yet we gun owners are marginalized at every turn. Unless we come to this understanding, we are doomed.

 

The latest Supreme Court FU underscores our future.

 

I feel offended every time the state feels that it must virtually point guns to our faces because they are afraid of us.

Why we are where we are?

 

It's simple. Because we have Newark, Camden, and Paterson.

 

Everything social, political, and economical in this state is impacted by the above three.

Why we are where we are?

 

It's simple. Because we have Newark, Camden, and Paterson.

 

Everything social, political, and economical in this state is impacted by the above three.

 

While that may be true, it does not explain Bergen County. 

And in Bergen County there is an obscene amount of money that supports every one of the state's "agendas" (which some might call "ills"). 

So if you want to talk about hard-core impact, you need to look no further than that. As the saying goes, "follow the money".

 

I'll stick with what LorenzoS said, "I'm sorry that this state is lost, but it is".

While that may be true, it does not explain Bergen County.

 

Well, it explains it a little.   Hackensack (for those that don't know - the largest city and the county seat), Englewood (2nd largest city and where I grew up). Two smaller versions of Newark, Paterson and Camden, etc. but large enough to make the difference in re: the county. There are also several other forces at play in Bergen. Loretta Weinberg, herself, is from Teaneck (located right in between Hackensack and Englewood), and is very representitive of a lot of the population in lower Bergen. Now, go a little north (north of Paramus), and I agree with you. Witness Saddle River, Upper Saddle River, Ramsey, Mahwah, Woodcliffe Lake, Montavle, etc., a whole lot more ($$$) and a lot more conservative.  Richard Nixon himself lived in Saddle River after leaving the WH, and in Park Ridge, just before his death.

Well, it explains it a little.   Hackensack (for those that don't know - the largest city and the county seat), Englewood (2nd largest city and where I grew up). Two smaller versions of Newark, Paterson and Camden, etc. but large enough to make the difference in re: the county. There are also several other forces at play in Bergen. Loretta Weinberg, herself, is from Teaneck (located right in between Hackensack and Englewood), and is very representitive of a lot of the population in lower Bergen. Now, go a little north (north of Paramus), and I agree with you. Witness Saddle River, Upper Saddle River, Ramsey, Mahwah, Woodcliffe Lake, Montavle, etc., a whole lot more ($$$) and a lot more conservative.  Richard Nixon himself lived in Saddle River after leaving the WH, and in Park Ridge, just before his death.

 

Don't be fooled by the (limited) "conservative" influence of Bergen. I worked at a not-for-profit organization (aka: a very affluent hospital) and the philanthropic money flows towards liberal causes... because to do otherwise is an invitation to deal with the wrath of the left. 

Wealthy people in this area (meaning GROSSLY wealthy people) all hang out in the same circles, so no one wants to be considered a social pariah. That pressure results in BIG money donations to "the right" causes (which means LEFT causes).

ALWAYS follow the money... and it RARELY follows individual political ideology. It follows social pressures that follow a "go along to get along" mentality. 

 

Yup.... I totally give up on this SH!T of a state. It's not my native state, and therefore I have no emotional attachment to it. I judge it strictly on how it "rules" it's citizens, and I look forward to the moment when I can flip it the bird - for the very last time - as I pay that last final toll on my way out of it. 

 

God Bless America (whatever is left of it) and F \/ C K New Jersey and the socialist government it has inflicted on it's inhabitants.

While it is ok to leave and declare this state a lost cause. We must understand that what happens in this state never stays in this state.

 

We are most definitely behind enemy lines. Like soldiers fighting behind enemy lines, you fight for the people on the other side of the lines. To keep whatever evil down so it does not spread.

 

This denying of civil rights to gun owners is a cancer. However it has metastasized and spread all over this country. Those that would enslave us use NJ as a breeding ground to see what will stick. Even some of our states in so called free America are doing some things that started in NJ. We have AGs ending carry reciprocity via memo, mag limits and other creeping infringements to the 2nd amendment. Where did that begin?

 

Our chief export is progressivism, socialism and leftist candidates to the senate and congress.

 

Run if you want, but our politics will carch you sooner or later.

For a state that shoots so much, why are we so weak politically when it comes to gun rights?

 

I'm looking for an honest answer.

I will give you an honest answer. Inner city minorites who vote for Democrats who promise them entitlements far out number us that do not live in the big, inner cities. Kids having kids, having kids, that do not teach their children right from wrong. That "gangsta life" instead of a good education will get you 'paper'. They figure they have no future and most won't make it past the age of 25 without being killed or in jail. Why is every major city in this state run by Democrats? Every city is a cesspool of crime and corruption.

 

Also, suburban "soccer mom's" who think guns are evil and dangerous. Unless you grew up in the country, rural parts of this state with a family member responsible enough to teach you that guns are not toys, they think we are "gun nuts". Growing up in the rural part of this state hunting and shooting was a way of life.

 

Lack of education. I went to a high school that you could bring your shotgun to school to go hunting after school. Instead of teaching that guns are "evil and dangerous", try instead educating children that they are not toys, and teach them how to be responsible for their actions. Educate parents and students just like we "say no to drugs" or "use a condom for sex".

Don't be fooled by the (limited) "conservative" influence of Bergen. I worked at a not-for-profit organization (aka: a very affluent hospital) and the philanthropic money flows towards liberal causes... because to do otherwise is an invitation to deal with the wrath of the left.

I certainly agree it is far less "influential" than it used to be.

 

Wealthy people in this area (meaning GROSSLY wealthy people) all hang out in the same circles, so no one wants to be considered a social pariah. That pressure results in BIG money donations to "the right" causes (which means LEFT causes). ALWAYS follow the money... and it RARELY follows individual political ideology. It follows social pressures that follow a "go along to get along" mentality.

 

Yes, it does. But, for example, the "Booker" election was a lot closer in Bergen than I thought it might be. With the right amount of campaigning to the right constituency, it just might be flippable, at some point. Money, I can understand. It *is* "followable." But not individual votes. I think some of those folks did vote their true conscience.

 

Yup.... I totally give up on this SH!T of a state. It's not my native state, and therefore I have no emotional attachment to it.

It's not mine either... not "technically." I was born elsewhere, but raised there since the age of 5. And I returned after graduating college and working for a few years after that. But I hold no loyalties either. And, I will leave, eventually. How quickly depends on how nastier the laws get.

 

Please avoid the term "common sense".  It has different meaning to both sides and is confusing.

For a state that shoots so much, why are we so weak politically when it comes to gun rights?

 

I'm looking for an honest answer.

not picking on you but are you dense?

 

WE DON'T VOTE IN THE LEGISLATIVE ELECTIONS. OUR WIVES DON'T VOTE IN LEGISLATIVE ELECTIONS.

 

PERIOD.

 

End of story.