Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumSuggested New Years Resolutions for the NRA by kpete (Locked on GD-cut and pasted here)
I thought this caused some good discussion in the comments section, but it was locked on GD.
Link to original, written by kpete:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6035470
Suggested New Year's Resolutions For The NRA
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by aikoaiko (a host of the General Discussion forum).
1. We will stop referring to ourselves as a “civil rights” organization that defends “human rights.” It is a sacrilege to people actually killed or harmed by civil and human rights abuses.
2. We will stop pointing at Chicago and saying gun laws don’t work. We will admit the majority of Chicago crime guns are trafficked from states and counties with loose laws.
3. We will stop saying “the government is going to take your guns” to block federal laws. The confiscation we announced 7 years ago never happened.
4. We will stop blaming “mental health” problems for U.S. gun violence. We admit every country in the world has mental health problems but they don’t have Newtowns and Virginia Techs.
5. We admit fighting universal background checks arms criminals and that “armed criminals” sells more guns to “good guys.” Ka-ching.
6. We acknowledge that “outlaws” don’t have guns in the 28 EU countries, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Japan and other countries with strict gun regulations. We also admit, grudgingly, they are not “tyrannies.”
7. We will stop our insulting comparison of guns to knives, hammers, cars and swimming pools–none of which kill when used as directed. On the same day as the Sandy Hook massacre, 20 Chinese school children were attacked with a knife and none died.
8. We accept responsibility for the armed vigilante movement popularized by George Zimmerman and Michael Dunn. We admit “carry” laws are the biggest revenue infusion since “Obama is going to take your guns.”
9. We will stop defending sales to civilians of non-defensive weapons like TrackingPoint’s “can’t miss” sniper rifle. We admit they are ready-made for insurrectionists, terrorists and hate groups.
10. We regret our work to help suspected domestic abusers keep their guns while under orders of protection. We admit this costs many women’s lives and that our sleazy sales pitch to tell women to arm themselves too just makes things worse.
By: kpete
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
kioa
(295 posts)1) "Civil Rights (pl) (n) -
Personal liberties that belong to an individual, owing to his or her status as a citizen or resident of a particular country or community."
A citizen of the USA has a liberty to keep and bear arms. Thus RKBA is a civil right.
2) You mean that criminals will create a black market when faced with prohibition?
Good point, but I have no idea how you think this bolsters the argument for gun control.
3) "Assault Weapons BAN" It's a difficult sell to try to claim that you don't want to ban guns while supporting a gun ban
4) You don't think the US should improve it's abysmal mental health care?
I disagree.
5) Odd accusation. Any supporting links?
6) None of those countries can choose their own Head of State either.
I prefer the greater personal liberties the USA has.
7) Guns when "used as directed" don't commit murder. Thus the law against murder.
If your problem is with mass casualties: the 3 biggest mass killings in US history is 9/11, OKC bombing & Happy Land Fire; none of which used a firearm.
8) CCL holders are less likely to commit crimes than the general public or police officers.
Zimmerman should been found guilty & put in prison; are you going to support doing away with the right of a fair trial as well?
9) The sniper rifles used by the police & military are the Winchester M70 & Remington M700.
Both rifles are Bolt Action and would be considered stereotypical hunting rifles.
Tell me again how you aren't going to 'take people's guns away'.
10) People convicted of Domestic Abuse are felons. Felons lose the RKBA
Sick_of_TP
(21 posts)IMO Mental health is a major issue in the US, especially in those shootings. The mentally ill can easily be pushed over the edge if addicted to the hate and anger pushed on Fox.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)did not really agree with it. You can tell by how the discussion was going and was devolving into lies and misstatements by the controller side.
I am sure they are more than welcome to discuss it here more. Kind of hard to do the same thing over in "bansalot"
kioa
(295 posts)then it is a remarkably terrible position to have.
It seems that far too many supporters of gun control have yet to learn this.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)name calling, falsehoods and sexual references that make me sad. You should be able to make a strong case without having to sink to that level.
I still have not had an apology or PM from the DU member accusing of things inaccurately. He did update one post to remove a portion quietly but it would have been polite to apologize.
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)but there are more that do nothing more than hurl insult after insult at those that are pro 2A, which does nothing more than show they have no desire to try to find common ground.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)great credit. I may disagree but at least we can be civil about it. Just look at the number of blocks in the two gun groups and you can see which side is afraid to debate.
Veganstein
(32 posts)To logically defend gun control, at least to an extent. It frustrates me when it's perfectly possible to have a reasoned debate, but when instead it devolves into what we often see here. I want to share ideas, hone my arguments, and maybe find a solution that works better than our current options.
Shamash
(597 posts)The entire list is cringe-worthy, but since my time is limited, we'll just deal with one of them.
The "Chicago" comment would make sense if the areas the guns were brought in from (and where they are by definition easier to acquire) had higher firearm crime rates. But they do not. The "loose laws" where the guns are available do not show up as a higher incidence of firearm crime in these states and counties.
For instance, this Chicago news outlet talks about guns coming from Mississippi. Well:
firearm homicide rate, Mississippi(2010): 5.6 per 100,000
firearm homicide rate, Chicago(2010): 8.1 per 100,000
Similarly, in June 2010 the Supreme Court struck down some of Chicago's restrictive gun laws. In the following year, the January-June 2011 firearm homicide numbers were 14% lower than for January-June 2010.
So, the "Chicago" item has a ways to go before it can reach the level of merely being wrong.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)1. We will stop referring to ourselves as a “civil rights” organization that defends “human rights.” It is a sacrilege to people actually killed or harmed by civil and human rights abuses.
- - - - - If they did that, it was the right thing to do. Self-defense is most assuredly a Civil Right. Even in California's constitution.
2. We will stop pointing at Chicago and saying gun laws don’t work. We will admit the majority of Chicago crime guns are trafficked from states and counties with loose laws.
- - - - - Have they been doing that? I hadn't noticed. Oh well.
3. We will stop saying “the government is going to take your guns” to block federal laws. The confiscation we announced 7 years ago never happened.
- - - - - Good thing it never happened. Will it ever happen, can it ever happen? Let's make sure it doesn't.
4. We will stop blaming “mental health” problems for U.S. gun violence. We admit every country in the world has mental health problems but they don’t have Newtowns and Virginia Techs.
- - - - - Anyone who proposes that "mental health" and gun violence aren't related issues needs a check up.
5. We admit fighting universal background checks arms criminals and that “armed criminals” sells more guns to “good guys.” Ka-ching.
- - - - - I don't quite get this one, but then I'm not a member of the NRA.
6. We acknowledge that “outlaws” don’t have guns in the 28 EU countries, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Japan and other countries with strict gun regulations. We also admit, grudgingly, they are not “tyrannies.”
- - - - - Actually, just look at Australia for outlaws having guns. Next?
7. We will stop our insulting comparison of guns to knives, hammers, cars and swimming pools–none of which kill when used as directed. On the same day as the Sandy Hook massacre, 20 Chinese school children were attacked with a knife and none died.
- - - - - I haven't actually seen this but if the author wants to cite statistics in other countries, let them explain suicide rates in Japan.
8. We accept responsibility for the armed vigilante movement popularized by George Zimmerman and Michael Dunn. We admit “carry” laws are the biggest revenue infusion since “Obama is going to take your guns.”
- - - - - I wonder if the Gun Control camp is willing to accept any blame for increased sales of guns and ammo whenever they try to pass stupid laws. NB: not all proposed laws are stupid, but most are.
9. We will stop defending sales to civilians of non-defensive weapons like TrackingPoint’s “can’t miss” sniper rifle. We admit they are ready-made for insurrectionists, terrorists and hate groups.
- - - - - I don't know if they do that but if they are a lobbying arm of the industry then that's their job. No big deal to me.
10. We regret our work to help suspected domestic abusers keep their guns while under orders of protection. We admit this costs many women’s lives and that our sleazy sales pitch to tell women to arm themselves too just makes things worse.
- - - - - Again, I don't know if they've done that. Gun owners probably overwhelmingly do not support this sort of thing.
Gun owners are not the NRA, and the NRA is not the spokesmember for all gun owners.
virginia mountainman
(5,046 posts)Shows just how much willful ignorance their is out their.. Not only that but just how proud some are of their ignorance.
sad really.
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)Taken from another site. don't know who wrote it.
1. We will stop referring ourselves as "gun safety" advocates. We teach nothing concerning safe handling of firearms nor even provide low-cost trigger locks while simultaneously demanding laws are passed that mandate their usage. It will be a cold day in Hell before we even as much as raffle off a firearms safe while preaching about "gun safety".
2. We will stop blaming inanimate objects for a cause of death.
3. We will be honest with ourselves in that some sort of confiscation and prevention of civilian ownership of firearms we deem unsuitable because of cosmetic features unrelated to function is a terminal goal.
4. We will stop attempting to deflect attention away from Chicago, DC, Los Angeles, and other cities where strict gun control laws have proven resounding failures even though these laws were touted as being crucial for public safety when they were drafted.
5. We will stop pretending that so-called "smart gun" technology is anything other than a tool to reduce the civilian supply of handguns.
6. We will admit microstamping and microengraving of ammunition and firearms is nothing but a costly and fruitless exercise we push as a feel-good measure.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)11. We will finally admit we don't really care about dead people and dead kids. Dead kids are collateral damage and blood for the tree of liberty and all that.
12. We don't really want you to know that the rest of the 1st world has really strict gun control and they are not oppressed. In fact, they are actually freer because they don't have to worry about getting shot all the time.
13. Yes, we'll admit, we're the ones who put that propaganda out that there that made you actually think you could win a Revolutionary-style war again so you would spend all your money on arsenals. Haha, yeah...we always chuckle about that one. Suckers.
But seriously people, scared people buy guns, so we want to make you good and scared. Dead kids do the trick. But so do dead wives, dead girlfriends, dead black people, dead anything. So go out and buy more guns and carry them everywhere you go!
Boo!
kioa
(295 posts)fears.
You flat-out state in your comment that you worry about getting shot all the time.
Bloomberg's fear-mongering has taken advantage of your abject ignorance.
Get out more. Learn something.
Life in the USA isn't scary.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)They depend on manufactured outrage and fear.
What a joke.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)The arguments are set-up as "typical NRA talking points" so anyone making/defending them can be accused of peddling "typical NRA talking points."
kioa
(295 posts)And there isn't any way to justify taking rights from innocent people without demonizing something.
jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)nra faux NY 'resolution': 3. We will stop saying “the government is going to take your guns” to block federal laws. The confiscation we announced 7 years ago never happened.
kioa: 3)"Assault Weapons BAN" It's a difficult sell to try to claim that you don't want to ban guns while supporting a gun ban
.. the nra never says 'assault weapons ban' in predominance of it's propaganda, it just says 'gun ban'. You lose. Nra intentionally tries to mislead with 'gun ban' meaning large scale gun bans, rather than the 2% national gunstock banning of assault rifles, which even rightwing demagogue scalia in his heller ruling contends are not protected by 2ndA.
'nra resolution': . We will stop blaming “mental health” problems for U.S. gun violence. We admit every country in the world has mental health problems but they don’t have Newtowns and Virginia Techs.
kioa: 4) You don't think the US should improve it's abysmal mental health care? I disagree.
You created a false premise from what was said in the faux resolution. You lose. How did you get from the faux resolution to a reduction in mental health care? non sequitur.
faux res: 6. We acknowledge that “outlaws” don’t have guns in the 28 EU countries, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Japan and other countries with strict gun regulations. We also admit, grudgingly, they are not “tyrannies.”
kioa: 6) None of those countries can choose their own Head of State either..
Evidently neither can americans, see bush v gore where gore rec'd half a million more votes than gwbush. Canada has an electoral process not totally dissimilar to our electoral college; but I give you a push on this one: [prime minister appt'd] the viceroy will call to form a government [,] the individual most likely to receive the support, or confidence, of a majority of the directly-elected House of Commons;[7] as a practical matter, this is often the leader of a party whose members form a majority, or a very large plurality
res: 7. We will stop our insulting comparison of guns to knives, hammers, cars and swimming pools–none of which kill when used as directed.
kioa: 7) Guns when "used as directed" don't commit murder. Thus the law against murder.
Res didn't say murder. When used as directed, guns kill (see also, hunting, accidental firearm deaths, military history).
res 8: We accept responsibility for the armed vigilante movement popularized by George Zimmerman and Michael Dunn. We admit “carry” laws are the biggest revenue infusion since “Obama is going to take your guns.”
kioa: 8) CCL holders are less likely to commit crimes than the general public or police officers. Zimmerman should been found guilty & put in prison; are you going to support doing away with the right of a fair trial as well?
Again you create a false premise from what was given, which was simply armed vigilanteism, astride shall issue ccw as motivated by nra & gun industry profit. Then you toss in a red herring about concomitant elimination of due process.
res: 10. We regret our work to help suspected domestic abusers keep their guns while under orders of protection.
kioa: 10) People convicted of Domestic Abuse are felons. Felons lose the RKBA
Funny, your argument in reverse proved the catalyst to 2ndA being subverted to become an individual RKBA: Defendant, Timothy Emerson (Defendant), moved to dismiss his indictment for possession of a firearm while being under a restraining order ... Facts. During his divorce proceeding, a restraining order was placed on Defendant. Defendant was indicted for possession of a firearm while under that order, in violation.. Defendant claims that the statute is unconstitutional, as it abridges his right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by [2ndA]..
As far as felons losing their RKBA, that's overall a falsehood. Convicted violent felons do, but not necessarily, due to nra backed fopa1986: Under federal law, people with felony convictions forfeit their right to bear arms. Yet every year, thousands of felons across the country have those rights reinstated, often with little or no review. In several states, they include people convicted of violent crimes, including first-degree murder and manslaughter ... While previously a small number of felons were able to reclaim their gun rights, the process became commonplace in many states in the late 1980s, after Congress started allowing state laws to dictate these reinstatements — part of an overhaul of federal gun laws orchestrated by the [NRA].
A crowning achievement was the [FOPA] Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, which significantly loosened federal gun laws. When it came to felons’ gun rights, the legislation essentially left the matter up to states. The federal gun restrictions would no longer apply if a state had restored a felon’s civil rights — to vote, sit on a jury and hold public office — and the individual faced no other firearms prohibitions. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/us/felons-finding-it-easy-to-regain-gun-rights.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
beevul
(12,194 posts)It sounds to me like you're saying some gun bans are more acceptable than others.
As directed by whom, Jimmy?
Everything that was dumb is...dumb again. I love it when doctrinaire gun control advocates ramble on about the "gun industry". Civilian legal firearms manufacturing is one of the smallest industries there is in America, and it makes me smile to see people like you characterize it as "big evil gun" like you guys used to 10 years ago.
Digging so deep, reeks of desperation.
jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)beevul: It sounds to me like you're saying some gun bans are more acceptable than others.
Certainly, for over a decade; see sarisataka's poll.
"When used as directed, guns kill"
beevul: As directed by whom, Jimmy?
Typically Gun Owners, whether criminal, hunters, poachers, law abiding etc.... but excepting toddlers & children at sub-machine gun ranges or hunting with daddy.
beevul: I love it when doctrinaire gun control advocates ramble on about the "gun industry". Civilian legal firearms manufacturing is one of the smallest industries there is in America, and it makes me smile to see people like you characterize it as "big evil gun"..
I believe civilian firearms mftr'g comprises ~60% of overall firearm sales, 40% to law enf & military. But how does being in the lesser half of overall industrial giants who generally appeal to more people, dismiss the profit motive to you?
.. even a rough patch can't change the fact that the guns and ammunition industry continues to thrive in {USA}. This year, the industry is expected to rack up a steady $11.7 billion in sales and $993 million in profits {= 1 billion}... Sept. 11 hit. Thanks to new counter-terrorism measures, law enforcement agencies [and] military started buying up weapons at a faster pace, reviving the industry. Today, government agencies make up 40% of industry revenues.... Ammunition is an enormous portion of the gun industry's revenues: Here's how one gun lobbyist put it: "You make a product for $300, and somebody could buy this revolver and, by the time they are 80, they'll have fired $10,000 worth of ammunition through it." In 2012, the industry made nearly as much on small arms ammunition as it did on small arms. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/19/seven-facts-about-the-u-s-gun-industry/
fortune500: While dwarfed by mega-companies like ExxonMobil, which generated more than $450 billion in revenue last year, the sporting firearms industry’s revenue {~approx. 1 billion profits 2012} is on par with other members of the Fortune 500, including Hershey, Ryder and Avis.
beevul
(12,194 posts)beevul: As directed by whom, Jimmy?
Jimmy: Typically Gun Owners...
One minor problem with that Jimmy.
There are 300+ million guns owned 80+ million people, and yet there are 10 thousandish homicides.
So "typical" gun owners, are NOT directing their firearms as you claim.
So bzzt, thanks for playing.
"beevul: I love it when doctrinaire gun control advocates ramble on about the "gun industry". Civilian legal firearms manufacturing is one of the smallest industries there is in America, and it makes me smile to see people like you characterize it as "big evil gun"..
Jimmy: I believe civilian firearms mftr'g comprises ~60% of overall firearm sales, 40% to law enf & military. But how does being in the lesser half of overall industrial giants who generally appeal to more people, dismiss the profit motive to you?
And then you go on to quote unfiltered numbers as if they are representative of domestic sales.
I'm unsurprised.
And hey, what I said, stands. MFG of firearms and ammunition for domestic sales and ownership is a drop in the bucket of just about every other industry. though I'm not sure it even counts to count ammunition, since guns have ALWAYS been legal and sold in America and people would prefer ammunition in their guns to fire them.
jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)Jimmy: Typically Gun Owners...
beevul: One minor problem with that Jimmy. There are 300+ million guns owned 80+ million people, and yet there are 10 thousandish homicides.... So "typical" gun owners, are NOT directing their firearms as you claim.
No problem with my reasoning, the problem is with you, you create a false dilemma; You asked me who directed guns to kill people & other living things & I answered typically gun owners (a big fat DUH here). I did not contend that most gun owners killed people with their guns.
beevul: And then you go on to quote unfiltered numbers as if they are representative of domestic sales. I'm unsurprised.
Well then filter those numbers, don't just stand there & think you've rebutted successfully. What's your point? firearm industry profits about 30 billion dollars per year, 1b profit, not chump change. What is your point about domestic sales? don't exports also count to the profit & revenue?
beevul: MFG of firearms and ammunition for domestic sales and ownership is a drop in the bucket of just about every other industry.
Inapt metaphor, if firearm industry is a drop in a bucket then all those industries are drops in a bucket; comparing to higher end exxon oil (a portion of US oil industry), 30 billion overall gunsales to 438b, 438 drops makes less than an ounce: Amount: 1 fluid ounce US (fl oz) in volume Equals: 591 drops of water
So it's more like the gun industry is 30 drops in an exxon thimble, eh? but you were just transmogrifying for affect.
How would you compare overall gun industry with Ford motor tho, in a recent year? two peas in a pod????? : Sep 13, 2013 | The ammunition and firearms industry pulled in about $32 billion each year and employed 98,000 people. That’s $10 billion more than Ford made in the same year and five times more employees than Google. And the gun industry isn’t weakening – since 2004, major gun manufacturing company Sturm Ruger’s alone saw their revenue increase $183 million.http://www.publiusforum.com/category/guns/page/3/
Through it all, however, the number of firearms manufacturers kept growing, reflecting the strength of consumer demand. After expanding by a hundred or more businesses each year for most of the past three decades, the number of licensed firearms manufacturers shot up in recent years to 5,441 in 2011 from 2,959 in 2009 and 2,144 in 2004..http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/26/nr-draft-how-important-are-guns-to-the-u-s-economy-for-starters-the-firearms-industry-employs-twice-as-many-americans-as-bailed-out-gm/
beevul
(12,194 posts)1 :generally or normally — used to say what normally happens
2:in the usual way — used to describe what is normal or expected of a certain place, person, situation, etc.
http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/typically
The problem for you, jimmy, is that gun owners do NOT typically direct their guns to kill, according to the definitions above.
Next time, make sure you understand the meanings of the larger words, before you use them.
jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)beevul: The problem for you, jimmy, is that gun owners do NOT typically direct their guns to kill, according to the definitions above.
I'm getting really annoyed having to spoonfeed some childish biased mentality about the meanings of words, & having to listen to insidious misunderstandings & subsequent twistings of what I write.
To quickly rebut your persistent pretentious babbling, the text sequence:
Jimmy wrote: When used as directed, guns kill (see also, hunting, accidental firearm deaths, military history).
beevul: As directed by whom, Jimmy? {ie, in context: who 'directs' those guns to kill, when they do kill}
Jimmy: Typically Gun Owners...
beevul: There are 300+ million guns owned 80+ million people, and yet there are 10 thousandish homicides.... So "typical" gun owners, are NOT directing their firearms as you claim
So you see, JA, that I never contended that typical gun owners en masse are doing mass killings; rather I said, to your concern who directs those guns that do kill, to kill, are typically gun owners. Which is a big fat DUH. Somewhen they kill, non-gun owners generally do not kill with guns, but with other weapons.
beevul: typically -1 :generally or normally — used to say what normally happens
2:in the usual way — used to describe what is normal or expected of a certain place, person, situation, etc.
beevul: Next time, make sure you understand the meanings of the larger words, before you use them.
transparent smoke screen, juvenile ad hominem. When used as directed, guns kill, & when they do kill they are typically (generally) directed by gun owners, whether criminal, hunters, or law abiding.
beevul
(12,194 posts)Says the poster that called me, "childish biased mentality".
First, convicted criminals by law, can not OWN a gun. So strike that from your little list there. We both know you weren't referring to those who have been pardoned when you said "criminals", so just save it mkay?
Second, no matter the words you use or the order you use them in, this simple fact remains true and unassailable by you or your dishonest cronies:
The majority of gun owners do not direct their guns to kill. And when I say majority I mean 99 percent plus Jimmy.
You define "as directed" in a way that ignores how most gun owners are doing the "directing". You know you did, I know you did, and everyone here knows you did.
But hey, two can play the equivocation game:
Gun control, when applied as directed, bans guns and infringes on the second amendment.
Oh, btw, there are questions pending here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172104844#post13
jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)beevul: First, convicted criminals by law, can not OWN a gun. So strike that from your little list there. We both know you weren't referring to those who have been pardoned when you said "criminals", so just save it mkay?
To own something does not necessarily mean you are the legal owner; - how I used the term 'owner' was simply possessive, and the author of the post in question has the final say, within reason, as to what he intended his word usage to mean & connote.
own•er —n. a person who owns; possessor; proprietor
http://dictionary.infoplease.com/owner#ixzz3P0sZuJfi
Possessor: Law A person who takes, occupies, or holds something without necessarily having ownership, or as distinguished from the owner. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/possessor
Ergo, a gun 'owner' in that post is someone who possesses a gun, whether legal or illegal (tho I excluded young children due non compos mentis) which is why & how I could validly say a criminal gun owner. So go jump in a lake & soak your obnoxious head.
beevul
(12,194 posts)beevul
(12,194 posts)Since we all know that when we talk about ownership in THIS forum, we are referring to the legal construct of "ownership" of a gun rather than the "possession is 9/10 of the law" version, which you use so "creatively".
jimmy the one
(2,708 posts)beevul: Since we all know that when we talk about ownership in THIS forum, we are referring to the legal construct of "ownership" of a gun rather than the "possession is 9/10 of the law" version, which you use so "creatively".
That's certainly an accepted way to interpret it, but not the only way & not the way I obviously intended, which included your latter above. So it was actually both of what you say above:
...what I wrote: Typically Gun Owners, whether criminal, hunters, poachers, law abiding etc.... but excepting toddlers & children at sub-machine gun ranges or hunting with daddy.
A thief who steals a gun from a law abiding cit, holds on to it for years, can to said to be the new 'gun owner', due the possessive interpretation of 'owner' - see previous post.
If I had to explain every usage of synonymous words I'd be here forever & readers would complain of excessive wordiness, & be justified, rather than just 'word salad' ad hominems.
Unbiased readers understand what I wrote.
