data about the danger of gun ownership as “just lies"

Lets focus on one thing here; PSMorganJr’s posting of the training accident for the betterment of the MMMs is wrong.

He will never have any solutions that will work in the REAL world. Please join us in the streets some time. I will be waiting.

Lets focus on one thing here; PSMorganJr’s posting of the training accident for the betterment of the MMMs is wrong.

He will never have any solutions that will work in the REAL world. Please join us in the streets some time. I will be waiting.

I think Mr. Morgan's post is good evidence that training does not necessarily prevent gun accidents. (BTW, there are more news clips to document this than just this one example.)

The fact remains that a needless death or injury is still a needless death or injury, regardless of whether it's an accident or a result of a criminal act. Our goal is to prevent what can be prevented.

Many gun accidents could be prevented with better product design. The MMM believes that guns are underregulated from a product safety standpoint and we actively lobby for better regulation.

"Many gun accidents could be prevented with better product design. The MMM believes that guns are underregulated from a product safety standpoint and we actively lobby for better regulation."

This is the FUD from the lawyers and groups who want to make $$$ on the pain of others.

You have to scare people to make the money.

Dive in to the system and understand it.

I have to laugh at the "black is white, white is black" circle of twisted postulating.

"clearvision," "bradylies," LaPierre . . . whoever you are apparently wants to maintain the status quo (an intransigent position) and any dissent on this forum that he (or she) finds contrary is not a constructive view point. It's the typical patriarchal mindset that I have referred to in the past. This is the USA . . . bla . . . bla . . . bla . . . and nothing's going to change . . . bla . . . bla . . . bla . . . from my cold dead hands . . . bla . . . bla . . . bla . . .

The 30,000 firearms fatalities don't seem to get much of a rise but when one experienced safety trainer, with a name, is exposed and illustrates clearly that guns kill people and everyone is a potential victim with a loaded gun in the room, I have somehow crossed the line of acceptable dialogue and am a lower life form.

We, who advocate for the families of 100,000 (plus or minus) firearms incidents, are negative . . . and it is you (whoever you are, anointed by prior white fathers) who feels inclined to dictate what is acceptable content.

You are intent in effecting the direction of our discussion and then challenge that direction. Clearly your involvement here has a dynamic relevance to the direction.

Sorry to affront your sensibilities but your posture is part of the problem and if you are the "bradylies" of old, your obsession with co-mingling with the other side over two years now is really making me double over.

(Oh, that's right, I'm supposed to address your question so you can rant on . . . . )

"Many gun accidents could be prevented with better product design. The MMM believes that guns are underregulated from a product safety standpoint and we actively lobby for better regulation."

This is the FUD from the lawyers and groups who want to make $$$ on the pain of others.

You have to scare people to make the money.

Dive in to the system and understand it.

Read case #20 (Nick) on the website www.woundedinamerica.org.

Then read the home page of www.brandonsarms.org.

You don't think better gun designs could have prevented these tragedies? Highway deaths decreased after the car manufacturing industry came under federal safety regulation. Why should we treat guns differently?

I have to laugh at the "black is white, white is black" circle of twisted postulating.

"clearvision," "bradylies," LaPierre . . . whoever you are apparently wants to maintain the status quo (an intransigent position) and any dissent on this forum that he (or she) finds contrary is not a constructive view point. It's the typical patriarchal mindset that I have referred to in the past. This is the USA . . . bla . . . bla . . . bla . . . and nothing's going to change . . . bla . . . bla . . . bla . . . from my cold dead hands . . . bla . . . bla . . . bla . . .

The 30,000 firearms fatalities don't seem to get much of a rise but when one experienced safety trainer, with a name, is exposed and illustrates clearly that guns kill people and everyone is a potential victim with a loaded gun in the room, I have somehow crossed the line of acceptable dialogue and am a lower life form.

We, who advocate for the families of 100,000 (plus or minus) firearms incidents, are negative . . . and it is you (whoever you are, anointed by prior white fathers) who feels inclined to dictate what is acceptable content.

You are intent in effecting the direction of our discussion and then challenge that direction. Clearly your involvement here has a dynamic relevance to the direction.

Sorry to affront your sensibilities but your posture is part of the problem and if you are the "bradylies" of old, your obsession with co-mingling with the other side over two years now is really making me double over.

(Oh, that's right, I'm supposed to address your question so you can rant on . . . . )

I agree with Mr .Morgan. Please accept that your viewpoints are already thoroughly detailed in numerous "gun rights" websites. (We read these too, BTW--on our own, believe it or not.) There is no need for you to repeat them here for the sake of publication. If your intent instead is simply to badger us (as we strongly suspect it is), then that is an abuse of this forum.

The focus of this forum is the reduction in gun violence.

Your posting is most fitting for the Michael Moore or Al Sharpton forums.

I post on no other forums but the private one.

"If your intent instead is simply to badger us (as we strongly suspect it is), then that is an abuse of this forum."

It looks like you want to be King and Queen of the forum and its your way or the highway. That is abuse of the forum. You are not even willing to pay the monthly fees to use this service.

So prove your statements, I’m standing on the high ground here, you are not.

The focus of this forum is the reduction in gun violence.

Your posting is most fitting for the Michael Moore or Al Sharpton forums.

I post on no other forums but the private one.

"If your intent instead is simply to badger us (as we strongly suspect it is), then that is an abuse of this forum."

It looks like you want to be King and Queen of the forum and its your way or the highway. That is abuse of the forum. You are not even willing to pay the monthly fees to use this service.

So prove your statements, I’m standing on the high ground here, you are not.

Now we don't really have to address these distractions but I want to point out the duplicity in your high moral stand.

For some reason I am faulted for not paying the MeetUp organizer fee. (Yet you also subscribe to the service don't feel compelled to organize your group in Spencerport.)

MeetUp offered the monthly group fee as an option. I supported an individual subscription so as not to have to subsidize those, such as yourself, who intend to be disruptive. (Contrary to your unfounded assertion that I do not want to pay fees.)

MeetUp chose to reduce MillionMoms to one group in Boston, with which we all might participate. You have no problem with "joining" groups outside your geographic area; so where is my failure?


MeetUp.com is not the only forum in which I participate, nor does it consume all my energies. (Refer to my profile.) The Million Mom March has its own website and groups independent of MeetUp. The Peace Alliance, which I believe I mentioned in a previous post here some time ago, is an advocacy for cultural change in this country to which I'm committed (no need to update you as you have been a forum expert so long, but for the benefit of others who are not so devoted). I'm off to D.C. next weekend to attempt to alter the violent focus of our hijacked government (as I failed in a January 2003 attempt, prior to the invasion of Iraq). The Peace Alliance will take a weekend next month as the legislative initiative is a focus here in Georgia.

Unfortunately, those of us interested in change are portrayed as lower life forms by the establishment. I can live with that . . . considering the source.

See you in Boston . . . .

"MeetUp chose to reduce MillionMoms to one group in Boston, with which we all might participate. "

Please post more details on this.

I’m in the Boston area very often for training and fun.

The information posted about the Boston group is:

User ID: Nancy-Lynn
Location: Newton Center, MA
• Meetup member since February 7, 2005
• Group member since February 7, 2005
• Organizer since February 7, 2005
• Last visited over two months ago

I have no problems meeting in Boston. Send me more information. Will you be there?

The focus of this forum is the reduction of gun violence.

PSMorganJr your posting below shows your REAL focus here.

Debora Belle, your presumption that you need a gun for all occasions is analogous to having a hammer for any likely home improvement (plumbing, electrical or landscaping). While the forum is focused on the restriction of firearms, I hope we recognize that law enforcement utilizes a range of force from verbal to lethal (and they are far less likely to draw a pistol than use the others). I?d like to suggest Oleoresin Capsicum (O.C.) spray or alternatives that will be suitable for most situations. Handbooks such as 'Tactical use of Defense Sprays' by Doug Lamb provide useful insight.

I have not found data to substantiate my opinion, but I believe there are women who live long productive lives without the violations you fear who do not carry guns (and the associated baggage) with them wherever they are.

-- Peter S. Morgan, Jr.,

http://www.ajc.com/op...

busted