I don't see any problem with attacking someone else's posts if it's a matter of opinion. Or of debating matters of fact....
....I expect, when push comes to shove, we're all on some variation of the same side where guns are concerned. We are, however, too small a constituency to reject the "big tent" philosophy. When you're outnumbered, not a good idea to do the opposition's work and further divide ourselves so we can be more easily conquered.
Would you say that if all legal firearm owners and users were to unite under Hillary's big tent through the voting booth, that all gun control concerns would go away? If not, would you have a thought or two on how the big tent strategy works?
Craig, here's political reality: There are two big tents in our country....
As for your suggestion concerning all gun owners ending up in Hillary's tent . . . not worth addressing....
Thank you Larry for specifically addressing my Hillary big tent question. We may be of a similar mindset that it is 'worth it' to note that the opposition is one of the two tents.
I don't understand why it's so difficult to go directly to the reality that there're two 'tents'. I don't understand why one of the tents is always described as a fringe and a small constituency, unless of course, if there're some that say they're in one tent, but vote in the other. No, it isn't lost on me that there're many other non firearm related issues that're covered under each tent.
