These threads annoy me, because they're so predictable. I suppose the biggest part of the annoyance is that I once would have been one of those posting from an arrogant ignorance. Peg annoyed me with her "Ad Hominum" attack on "Guest" telling him to go to Idaho with the rest of his "White Supremecist Friends". When "Guest" mildly said she'd misread his posting of alternative statistical evidence, she repeated her attack, saying he ought to go find other's who want to "take America back". I understand "Guest's" reasons for desiring anonimity, because he might well have his e-mail clogged by flaming attacks.   

I once was pro-guncontrol. I'd have voted for any proposed law to reduce or ban guns for other than the mildest of hunting and target shooting. I thought my brother's interest in "survivalism" was over the edge. I spent ten years rethinking that position, and reading the evidence offered by both sides; reading the NRA books, and the anti-NRA books. After careful, thoughtful consideration I now have a carry permit, and for ten years now, have carried all the time. I deliberately avoid possible places of trouble, avoiding bars and gatherings of the beligerant. The motivation underlying my decision to carry is a refusal to be a helpless victim. Lately I've decided I ought to go beyond personal self protection, and "Give Back" something, by getting certified as a Firearms Safety Instructor and teaching beginners.

If you want, I can list the news events from central Florida that were part of the decision process, and the books I own that have the statistical data that supports my belief that Carry Permit Holders are from the most honest, law abiding, safe segment of society. I could explain why I feel that the evidence offered by the "Loud" anti-gunners is biased by their fears.   

I didn't even begin examining the idea of carrying until I spent five years shoulder to shoulder with parolee's on the job. I've been foreman to ex-cons who were going straight, who'm I'd trust with anything I own, and others like the guy (proud of his success at "Thug Life") who still owes me the $80 I gave him to bail out his "Lady" from her DUI arrest. Talking morality in the lunch room with guy's who were comfortable with the idea of taking anything they were strong enough to steal, lead me to reconsider some of my "sanctity of life" issues. I've got several years of bible reading and theological agonizing invested in the idea that someone might attack me, and cause me to use deadly force in self defense; either with my bare hands or using a utensil of some kind.      

The matter I find most disturbing in these "Hot Button" threads is the immediate assumption by so many people that the only reason why someone might hold a differing view, is because of evil intent. Why should the decision to own a gun forever brand one as a "Red Neck Bubba" who hates minorities. About 1/3 of my class mates in my Carry Permit classes were people of color; who, like me, didn't want to be victims.

I've been trying to play peacemaker over on the Woodenboat Boatbuilder's Forum, between the "Loud Liberals" and the "Loud Conservatives" who both seem to find it difficult to believe that honorable men might differ on a "hot button" subject. Like here, there's a tendancy to assume ignoble or evil intent whenever a party line isn't followed.   I prefer to assume that anyone who disagree's with me hasn't done the research I have.

Several of those I disagree with, clearly have done even MORE research that I have, and as honorable men, have reached different conclusions from mine. I regard them as friends, and we have long exchanges of e-mails on the subject of a moral person's approach to life.

I remain open to the possibility I may be wrong about any subject I have opinions about. After all, I've been wrong before ;^)

Jeff Smith