If you look at leftist websites, you’ll see that the left, in general, doesn’t debate facts. Rather, most sites are principally concerned with political tactics. In some cases, the issue demands a popular mobilizing, which they are quite efficient at, in others it is based on finding sympathetic legislators and judges. There aren’t really any facts, as far as leftists are concerned, only talking points an rhetorical structures to be manipulated to achieve a political end.

In the case of guns, the left is well aware that the US culture is fundamentally pro-gun and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Every effort at gun control has thus centered around swaying ignorant pols and judges. Most gun control debates are merely designed to throw uncertainty and doubt about the trustworthiness of your neighbors, and to exaggerate the destructive power of weapons.

The fundamental problem the pro-gun movement faces is that once the state takes away the RTKBA, it won’t give it back, as every nation that has banned it has learned. The anti-gun movement obviously also realizes this and is quite patient and deliberate. Patience simply doesn’t require a great deal of debate, and I’m sure that if a suitable climate of fear and suspicion arose you would see many gun control websites materialize.

I was at the very first online debate between Sarah Brady & Tayna Metaska on Compuserve back in ’95. Sarah lasted about 10 minutes and signed off without a word. This scenario was basically repeated during their second debate on AOL and they canceled the third proposed debate because there weren’t any antis showing up. That was 13 years ago. The antis have never had a serious online presence and never will. It hasn’t slowed them down one bit.

So no huge outcry for gun control beyond symbolism, like the banning of “assault weapons”. Everyone knows being shot and killed by a Weatherby is totally different from an AK-47 or M-16.

Yeah, if it is your average large bore Weatherby magnum, you’ll be deader quicker and from further away than from those “high-powered” assault weapons.(sic)

Jacob, your attempt to hijack the thread is rather transparent, and your political leanings are obvious from the tone of your post. Eric Hoffer mentioned that true believers tend to sound childish, and that describes you very well.

“HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That’s a good one. If it were true we wouldn’t be paying $4/gallon for gas.”

Oh please. If it weren’t true we’d have been paying euro prices for decades.

Professional politicians work long and hard to get to where they are, especially those higher up the food chain. They know jolly good and well what their own views on the issues are and are not about to govern based upon a temporary public whim. They run for office to advance their agenda, not someone else’s. They are elected with the monetary and manpower support of various special interests who determine in advance where the candidate stands on their pet issue. They aren’t going to pay much attention to someone else’s opinion unless that person or organization is able to translate their ideas into political power at election time.