But yes, our filters are set differently.

You saw this, and IMMEDIATELY launched on a screed against the "Evil, Lying" NRA. (nevermind they didn't have a thing to do with this). And the "fact" that only when the AMA attacked guns did the figures of malpracticing doctors come out. Nevermind that without some context, there's nothing really to comment on.

*You* saw "guns" and immediately started spewing about the NRA, and anything they say is a lie, and guns are bad, and how horrible Murica is and everybody shoots everybody.

That's not satire, its ludicrious.

Meanwhile I read this and said "that's asinine for the AMA President to do that, and I wonder if he'll bother to address the nasty facts, bet he won't".

Now, let me repeat, yet again: Your "filters" are set to reject facts you don't like. And set to immediately denigrate and berate and belittle. This is not my idea of a "good" society. I think its rather distasteful, myself, where when someone says something you don't like, and you attack them.

So yes, we differ. I agree with you.

And it is about: direction not, where we are today.

It is both. Where we are today. And where we're going.

Again, to put things back into perspective: the President of the professional association of doctors, who annually have inept members killing and maiming 3 times MORE people than guns do. And he spends his first address calling for controls on the guns - which are less deadly than his (inept) members.

And he totally ignores the effects of controlling guns. That historically crime goes *up*, assaults go *up*. More people are hurt. That an estimated 2.4 million crimes are *averted* due to private ownerships of weaponry.

And yes, he's supposed to be looking into those things. Would you want a doctor prescribing you a medicine without him having paid attention to the side effects, the contraindicated medications...? Surely not.

But its what you're advocating here.

if just every Good Citizen were armed: "we'd be more polite".

I started to say I haven't said that.. but you know.... Yes, I *do* believe that if every good citizen were armed, we'd be more polite, and we'd not have much crime. I do not believe everyone should be forced to be armed. But I'd like to see the criminal who'd attempt to victimize the average citizen. I think there are a lot more good guys than bad guys.

Which BTW I do not argue with at all - but it would be the 'politeness ' of two pit-bulls,

Bullshit.

Its the politeness of equals. Of people who know that actions have consequences. If you were right - there would be gunfights in every gunstore, daily.

I've got a *FAR* higher respect for my fellow man than you, apparently.

And a lot more experience being in places where everyone is armed. (are you saying our Armed Forces are like this, constantly battling each other?)I've *NEVER* seen this behavior between armed adults. And I've been around a lot of them.

Ashton: its *ridicolous* for you to keep spouting lies like this.

And *my* filters flag it, and say "Addison, go over there and counter those Big Lies".

Now tell me which of us is the more cynical about homo-sap possibly.. growing up some day (with a little help from the inmates).

You.

I'm willing to trust my fellow man with weaponry, the equality. Because there's NOTHING more equal than a weapon. It puts the smallest woman, the least strong man, equal with the strongest man. Its you who says that people must trust a government to protect them from their fellow man.

You're not willing to trust them. You're not willing to extend them true equality. And you twist any mention of weaponry in this distrust of yours.

Addison